Good journalism does more than report that a controversy exists. At its best, it listens carefully to the people affected, examines the available evidence, and is willing to draw clear conclusions when that evidence demands it.

That is precisely what The Globe and Mail did in its August 27 editorial, “The betrayal of Jewish students needs to end.”

The Globe’s editorial board deserves praise for taking seriously what Jewish students across Canada have been saying about their experiences on campus, and for grounding that concern by citing two substantial new reports rather than treating antisemitism as simply another political disagreement surrounding Israel.

The first, the federal government’s recently released Campus Antisemitism and Student Experiences report, surveyed approximately 900 Jewish postsecondary students.

The numbers it records are disturbing.

Among respondents, 84 percent said antisemitism is a serious problem on campus, 68 percent said their campus is not safe and inclusive for Jewish students, 71 percent reported antisemitic vandalism, 54 percent reported intimidation or threats directed at Jews, and 22 percent reported physical violence.

Nearly 72 percent said they limit what they say in class about being Jewish. More than 72 percent reported negative effects on their mental health, while more than 60 per cent said they had lost friendships.

To its credit, the Globe and Mail did not reduce those findings to abstract statistics. It allowed readers to hear what Jewish students themselves described.

One student recounted a professor asking Jewish students in an international law class to identify themselves by raising their hands. Another reported being told by a professor that Jews belong in Poland. Other students described professors pressuring them toward political activity, including petitions and pro-Palestinian demonstrations.

The federal report describes such behaviour as a betrayal of academic norms of fairness, integrity and responsibility. The Globe was right to highlight it front and centre for readers.

The Globe also deserves credit for addressing another subject that Canadian coverage too often struggles to discuss clearly: the relationship between extreme anti-Zionism and antisemitism.

A separate external review commissioned by Toronto Metropolitan University, led by retired Ontario Court of Appeal Justice Mary Lou Benotto, documented an environment in which hostility toward Jewish identity and Zionism could cross into intimidation, dehumanization and antisemitism.

As Justice Benotto wrote, the redefinition of Zionism to incorporate genocide, combined with the insistence that those who refuse to embrace anti-Zionism are themselves culpable, has contributed to “an environment that has enabled antisemitism to flourish.”

That is an important distinction for journalists to make.

Criticism of an Israeli government, prime minister, military decision or public policy is not inherently antisemitic. Nor should criticism of Israel be placed beyond the bounds of vigorous debate.

But treating Jews who believe in Jewish self-determination as morally suspect simply because of that belief is something else entirely. The Globe and Mail understood the difference.

The Globe similarly deserves praise for refusing to let universities hide indefinitely behind process. Justice Benotto’s review contains eight recommendations intended to address problems at TMU, including clearer behavioural expectations, consistent enforcement of university policies, stronger complaint mechanisms, measures addressing intimidation and online harassment, and the adoption of the IHRA working definition of antisemitism as an educational and policy framework.

TMU has since announced an implementation task force chaired by former Canadian ambassador to the United Nations Bob Rae, which is expected to produce an implementation blueprint by March 2027.

The newspaper’s response was refreshingly direct: The university commissioned the report, the problems have been documented and recommendations have been made.

As the editorial put it, what is needed now is not another blueprint, but “a spine.” The debate should no longer be about whether Jewish students are reporting a problem. There is now substantial evidence documenting their experiences.

The question is what Canadian universities intend to do about it and Canadian journalism has a role to play in ensuring those institutions answer.

The Globe and Mail should be commended for showing what responsible coverage of antisemitism can look like: listen to Jewish students, examine the evidence, distinguish legitimate political disagreement from intimidation and discrimination, and hold powerful institutions accountable when they fail to protect members of their own communities.