The
depth and scope of material that was required to be examined for this
article has necessitated a part three for a conclusion which brings
forward direct examples of journalistic mishandling of news and
information. None of the three separate entities looking at the
issues surrounding mainstream journalism today has found a reason to
acknowledge these issues, and the question remains why?
Where
does mainstream journalism stand today? It is a fact that the world
is dramatically changing and audiences have at their disposal a
myriad of choices. If this was the only reason for a shift in how
journalists are now perceived then would it not be logical to simply
reinvent their strategy on how they should deliver the information
and news to the public? Instead the battle lines between bloggers
and journalists appear to be becoming more explosive, and any notion
of a symbiotic relationship only a utopian notion.
In
Texas, however, there exists a fully realised example of this
symbiotic relationship. Since 2009 the Dallas South News has
used traditional journalists together with citizen
journalists, as well as bloggers
to provide news and commentary to its community. Is this simply an
anomaly where journalistic egos have not outgrown their stables, or a
model worthy to emulate?
Canada,
it appears, has taken a different route to come with some form of
solution to its industry's woes. No one can deny that there are
serious issues to address with major newsrooms combining operations,
closing long standing publications, and others deciding to
discontinue hard copy print publications in favour of online
production. Can all of this be conveniently blamed on the
encroaching spread of the internet? Or is there a far more serious
underlying issue that is being ignored, and why?
On
June 12th
2015 a coalition of professional associations, unions and media
organisations, such as UNIFOR, Canadian Association of Journalists
(CA), The Globe and Mail, Toronto Star, Metroland Papers, Postmedia
and others launched an advertising campaign called JournalismIs.
The goal of this coalition is, in their own words, “highlighting
the value and benefits of professional journalism,” proclaiming
that “professional journalism is more important than
ever.”
The
JournalismIs campaign proudly announces that “journalists
are thoroughly trained and deeply committed to their profession, and
you see the results every day in news stories that are interesting,
reliable and always striving for the truth.” Mary Agnes Welch
is a former president of the Canadian Association of Journalists,
reporter for the Winnipeg Free Press, and spokesperson for the
JournalismIs campaign, and with these words has labeled all
journalists in Canada with the same golden attributes.
According to Mary Agnes Welch this
campaign is designed to bring about a wider conversation on the
values that journalists are guided by in their profession. Ten core
principles were identified, and they are as follows:
- An independent voice:In a world of competing interests, journalists are committed to the principle of independence, and the pursuit of accuracy and fairness.
- Essential to democracy:A strong and independent media is the cornerstone of a healthy democracy. Journalists hold officials accountable to the people they are elected to represent, and they help citizens and communities to be informed.
- Relentless
- Committed to the public interest
- Getting answers
- Committed to telling the truth:It's about uncovering and reporting the truth
- Storytelling with a purpose
- Creating a forum for public debate
- Telling the whole story
- A watchdog over the powerful:Journalism asks the hard questions. It plays a vital role as a watchdog over those in positions of power and influence.
JournalismIs,
at
the end of the day, is only an advertising campaign as eloquent as a
polar bear on his shrinking ice cap still needing his bottle of cola,
or truck racing up a dusty hill accompanied by a voice over of a
lion's roar. Unlike most advertising campaigns though it is claimed
that there is a desire in “creating
a forum for public debate, to giving a voice to the voiceless.” An
email was sent to Mary Agnes Welch asking for any comment on an issue
of censorship self-imposed by journalists. Ms. Welch ignored the
email, ignored the issues raised and ensured that any semblance of
'public debate' was just another punchy slogan.
Setting
aside this advertising campaign, one can reach out for a report
titled, Does serious journalism have a future in Canada?,
written as the 2015 Prime Minister's of Canada Fellow at the Public
Policy Forum.
The author of this report is Madelaine Drohan, Canada's
correspondent for The Economist and former columnist for the Globe
and Mail. Here the delivery is more eloquent without any punchy
lines, but this report also prefers to ignore one major issue facing
traditional journalists.
The
Public
Policy Forum is
a not-for-profit organisation which advises government on policy
formation. It is comprised of ex-government staffers, businessmen,
and journalists like Madelaine Drohan. Its President, Ed Greenspon,
was himself a former Globe and Mail editor and reporter. Can such an
organisation show bias in its discussions? How will these
professional individuals see journalists as part of a media industry
which fights for the advertiser's dollar, or will there be any
discussion on the quality and standards of journalism?
Madelaine
Drohan in her report, 'Does
serious journalism have a future in Canada,' opens
with this statement: “Defining
serious journalism proved trickier than I expected. The definition
that I've come to believe now fits the best is about what it is
supposed to do: provide citizens with the information they need to
make the best possible decisions about their lives, their
communities, their societies and their governments. An informed
public is control for good public policy and a well functioning
democracy, which is why freedom of the press is enshrined in the
Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Serious journalism – fair,
accurate and independent of special interests – gives Canadians the
tools they need to hold their government to account.”
This
report took some time to prepare and in an opinion column published
in the Toronto
Star,
“Five things you need to know to save journalism,” only a day
after its release, Ms. Drohan summarised her report into five
headings. She begins with number one as “It's not just
journalism,” pointing to the changes that have hit other industries
like music, accommodation, taxi “and
even porn video.” Heading
number one concludes with “The
point is that powerful, global forces that transcend national borders
are at work.”
After
such an ominous warning those five things we need to know to save
journalism continue with number two as “Direct
subsidies won't work.” Here
most would agree with Madelaine Drohan, why should even a cent of
public money be considered to be handed over to millionaires who made
their money from the public? Number three is “Journalists
are no longer the gatekeepers of information,” somewhat
related to the first of the series, and once again pointing a finger
at the “powerful global forces.” Four is much the same, “The
tech giants are both an opportunity and a threat,” only
now those forces are identified, given a fact though still with
another warning, “Partnering
with tech giants could be their salvation or the beginning of the
end.”
Finally
we are taken to the last thing we should know, “The
audience has changed.” Is
there room to disagree with this claim, not at all. Today's audience
does seek convenience that new technology provides, but it has also
changed to questioning those who provide the information. Here the
report claims that “Audiences
want a relationship” and
that an audience has a “desire
to be involved in the creation of journalism in ways that were
imaginable before the advent of the Internet.”
Throughout 'Does serious journalism
have a future in Canada?', whether in this abbreviated forum or in
its original long form, two major themes waffle through the air.
First there is the Internet and the “powerful global forces”
which are either to be seen as harbingers of the end for serious
journalism, or a mistress tempting journalists with an alternative.
Then the attention is turned to trying to explain how the advertising
dollar has been seduced away from traditional media. Nowhere in this
report does the author bring into discussion the one serious and
gravely important issue, the loss of trust by the audience in
“serious journalism.”
So
we started with JournalismIs
its punchy core
principles, or the ten commandments of Mary Agnes Welch. Then a
fellowship, a report, and the five things we need to know to save
serious journalism according to Drohan. Now we find the third amigo
in this troupe, MP Hedy Fry, of the Canadian Heritage Committee.
Apparently the Commons Committee will embark on an expansive study of
“how Canadians and
especially local communities are informed about local and regional
experiences through news, broadcasting, digital and print media,”
in the words of
Committee Chairperson MP Hedy Fry.
The Commons Heritage Committee has
already begun hearings with a total of six roundtable gatherings
planned, where experts are invited to debate journalism's woes.
Media and journalist representatives will be at the head of the line,
followed by business and some government staffers thrown in for the
measure. All of this expertise will be a one sided view from
penthouse windows, and as far as ground floor representation or
comment, don't expect any. When all the debates are finished a final
symposium is planned for this coming Fall when 'the plan' might be
thrashed out.
Once again tax dollars, the
public's money, is being spent and the question remains why? It
matters little which of the three amigos you look at, each has
ignored the major issues, yet this Commons Committee is the biggest
slap in the face of reality. Government itself is one of the major
problems journalism faces.
According to the ten commandments
of Mary Agnes carried on her tablet, the first and second proclaim
the importance of an “independent voice” which is “essential to
democracy.” Yet government's interference with journalism is there
on a daily basis and one of the major reasons why the audience has
lost trust in journalists.
Hedy
Fry's roundtable hearings or debates with invited experts, included
Postmedia's CEO Paul Godfrey. Does Fry know anything about Mr.
Godfrey or would she prefer not to talk about it? Regardless she
should read Bruce Livesey's article, Postmedia empire falters while CEO Paul Godfrey earns millions National
Observer, November 27, 2015. True
this article was not edited or sanitised by friends of Mr. Godfrey
but it cannot be ignored as Godfrey has requested public tax dollars
to prop up his troubled business.
Paul
Godfrey is a very powerful and astute businessman and according to
the author of this article, Bruce Livesey, he has been able to
circumvent Canadian tax law. In Canada tax laws discourage foreign
ownership of Canadian media companies, yet “Godfrey
managed to get around this by issuing separate shares to Canadian
shareholders,” and
had the Conservative Government of Stephen Harper sign off on the
deal. Yet the real control of Postmedia remains in American hands by
way of two hedge funds, Golden Tree Asset Management LP and Silver
Point Capital LP.
Government influence over
mainstream media has polluted true freedom of the press far too long.
Whether through backdoor power politics of Mr. Godfrey who then
influences his newspapers and their editors on the direction of
editorial content, or the equally corrosive political alliance of
Torstar publishers who do the same on the other side of the table,
leaving objective commentary behind and reporting only a farce.
Today,
journalism is not only pushed and pulled by politics. Big business,
which provides the advertising dollars, has increasingly flexed its
muscle of influence over media. Whether you are to believe the
allegations surrounding Dan Murphy, a longtime staff cartoonist for
the Province newspaper, and his skirmish with Enbridge Inc., big
business today translates a big influence. Former National Post
editor Ken Whyte had said that it is commonplace for advertisers to
demand favourable editorial content for their money. “Before
newspapers might have stood up and said we will let that million
dollars go, we won't prostitute ourselves. Now they'll see they will
be way short on their budget and need the money.” (Bruce Livesey,
Postmedia empire falters while CEO Paul Godfrey earns millions,
nationalobserver.com, November 27, 2015)
Journalism
has succumbed to influence from both politics and business years ago
and any discussions about journalistic woes without acknowledging
this becomes a farce. Today's audience has few illusions and
therefore its trust is shaken dramatically. JournalismIs,
the Canadian Heritage Committee, and Madelaine Drohan's report all
speak of community
news as one of the pillars of democracy. So what happens to all the
journalistic integrity, those ten commandments, or those five things
we simply must know, when intentional censorship becomes the issue?
This is not Paul Godfrey demanding obedience and favourable
editorials for his chosen political party. Nor is it an oil company
versus climate change and the idea of millions in advertising
dollars.
A
free press is an essential component of democracy. This concept has
been enshrined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, in the
US Constitution and in every free and democratic nation. It is the
right of the public to be informed of issues relating to elected
government and daily occurrences in their communities. Censorship of
the press is an unthinkable possibility in any democratic nation, as
far as self-imposed censorship by the press, that cannot be
permitted. That being said, it is impossible to fathom any reason
why these three: Mary Anges Welch of JournalismIs,
Madelaine Drohan of
Public Policy Forum and
MP Hedy Fry heading the Canadian
Heritage Committee had
decided to ignore such a crucial issue.
No comments:
Post a Comment