admin
The Republican National Committee pulled press credentials for CBC/Radio‑Canada from its midterm convention in Dallas after a leaked internal memo about how reporters should describe the Sept. 11 attacks. The move turned a newsroom style debate into a diplomatic incident — and it is worth asking who should get to decide which outlets cover major American political events.
RNC revokes CBC credentials — the short version
The RNC said it withdrew previously approved credentials for CBC and Radio‑Canada for the Sept. 9–10 convention in Dallas. The committee pointed to a leaked memo that told CBC staff not to call the Sept. 11 attacks “terrorist attacks” without attribution. After critics pushed back, CBC’s senior editor Basem Boshra published a blog post changing the guidance to allow calling 9/11 terrorism without direct attribution. Still, the RNC described allowing the broadcaster into the convention as an “insult” to victims. CBC confirmed the revocation and said it was reviewing options. Chuck Thompson, CBC’s head of public affairs, called the decision “disappointing.”
Words matter — and so do decisions about who reports from our events
Journalists often debate labels and attributions. That’s fine in a newsroom. It is not fine when a public broadcaster’s memo reads like a delay in offering plain respect to victims of the worst attack on U.S. soil. Saying “we will avoid calling 9/11 terrorism without attribution” was a tone‑deaf choice that invited outrage. CBC rightly clarified the guidance, but clearing up a mess after a leak is not the same as earning trust. The RNC is within its rights to decide who covers its party events, especially when it believes an outlet’s internal guidance disrespects victims.
What this fight really shows about media trust and credentialing
This episode is about more than a single memo. It highlights how media outlets, especially taxpayer‑funded ones, can appear out of touch with common sense and common decency. Credentialing is a tool event hosts use to protect their audience and message. If a public broadcaster gives guidance that minimizes widely understood facts, hosts will notice. The RNC’s move will be painted by opponents as “squelching the press,” but credentialing has always been selective. CBC can either accept the consequences or make a clear, formal apology and request reinstatement.
The RNC pulled CBC’s access because words matter and so does accountability. CBC’s internal debate over a single word became an international story and cost them their spot on the convention floor. If CBC wants back in, it should show it understands why millions of Americans — and victims’ families — found that guidance unacceptable. Until then, the committee was right to put victims and the integrity of its event first. Journalists can keep fine‑tuning style guides; voters will keep remembering who stood up for basic respect.
