The Phoenicians were tall, blue eyed, read haired people. This we know from ancient descriptions of them. The Canaanites were not. Therefore Phoenicians were not Canaanites. If a history text says they were, the history text is wrong, or out of date.
Encyclopedias and legitimate history books are riddled with errors. Much of what is in them is simply repeats of original research done in some past time, usually before new finds and evidence came to light. Very little of the history of the fetile cresent area was based on translation of the Assyrian tablets in the British museum. Why? I have no idea. Just probably laziness. The translations were published in 1930, but were unordered and unorganized.
The historical articles in encyclopedias frequently are not written by historions, but whoever won the commission to write the article. Add to that the unsettled questions that historians argue over even today.
Missing Links is an exhaustive analysis of the Assyrian tablets. The Assyrians tablets were written at the time in question. The analysis includes other manuscripts and inscriptions describing events during the time period. History tests reference prior works by historians, who reference prior works by other historians, much of it out of date, I would reckon.
As an experiment, call up an ancient history department at any good college and ask the director for an opinon on how many disputed theories there are now about ancient history of any kind, and how many conflicting schools of thought. Historical theories are not more settled than archeological theories or geological theories. Basically, you pick the theory that blows your skirt up.
Otherwise, read the book, and make your own judgement. 