By now you’ve likely seen the Bert - bin Laden poster, perhaps read the explanation for its appearance, but did you know about, as the National Post writes, “Bert’s political beliefs first aroused controversy in 1996”?

Related to the above is the U.S. networks questionable decision to edit bin Laden’s future messages before the U.S. public sees them. Slate’s Chatterbox has a strong explanation on why his messages should be aired.

Journalist always pride themselves on fair and balanced reporting, but how can one be balanced if the available information is censored? It just becomes in another form.

Thankfully, it seems the world is not following the U.S. example in this case.

Addendum: According to Peter Mansbrdige’s nightly email to viewers, the CBC's policy is to vet certain footage:

Our own journalistic policy is clear on the airing of pre-recorded tapes that we didn't shoot and that we don't know who shot or when they were shot. We view them first and then make our decision based on what we as journalists feel is the newsworthiness of the contents. So, our decision yesterday was in fact simply to stick with our policy. Period.

In the rush of the moment earlier this week we, in fact, went against our own policy and aired the tapes immediately … before viewing them. We don't plan to do that again.

Mansbridge also wrote that there was negative viewer feedback to the CBC decision, and this explanation reasoning sounds like a bit of back-peddling and damage control.

Everyone’s walking on eggshells in relation to the events of September 11 not wanting to offend anyone. As genuine as the concern is, it is leading to some bad decisions.