When a major publication confirms that what was sacred has become profane, journalism's reputation is in serious trouble
Suggesting government loot might influence news can get you cancelled. Plus! A Liberal standing O for infidelity, more hiding from Kamloops questions and an epic correction!
There was a lot of talk about ethics last week.
Some of it concerned the profound moral decrepitude of floor-crossers such as Ontario MP Marilyn Gladu, who pretty much assured Prime Minister Mark Carney of a majority in order to satisfy what she fantasized were constituents’ demands for her voice to be heard in the government caucus.
Setting aside for a moment that there is no more unempowered, overpaid, soul-crushing job in the country than that of a backbench Member of Parliament, ethics, a free press and politics are clearly a poor mix. Yes, she was afforded a well-orchestrated, Soviet-style welcome at the Liberal convention on Thursday as the nation’s leaders enthusiastically endorsed her and the culture of infidelity they are promoting. But, as the only out-of-the-closet, pro-life anti-vaxxer in the Liberal caucus, Gladu’s about to become a profoundly unhappy and friendless person - a social chimney sweep in a room full of self-styled Etonians - who has reinvigorated the Alberta separatist movement and forced people to question what, really, is the point in voting at all? Or, as longtime Liberal activist Supriya Dwivedi put it:
Similarly, there was considerable noise on social media concerning Finance Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne and the fact Alto, the Crown corporation responsible for building a $90 billion high speed rail link, hired his spouse/partner/whatever as a vice president last August. Coverage, though, was, uh, spotty. Where it wasn’t, there was much confusion whether this was technically of concern to the Ethics Commission, but little in the press regarding whether it was right, or moral or even if Anne-Marie Gaudet was hired purely because she shares a home with the Finance Minister. Nope, that would be too indelicate for our gang. This is how Ottawa, where morality and politics are increasingly incompatible, works. Many in media seem comfortable with that, regardless of its debilitating impact on trust in the nation’s institutions.
Speaking of trust, there was considerable coverage in francophone media of the plight of Sylvain Charlebois, a Dalhousie University economist also known as The Food Professor. English-language media, though, generally gave the story a pass. After 25 years of writing columns for La Presse, one of the nation’s largest and most heavily subsidized news organizations, Charlebois was cancelled for noting on social media what he thought was a troubling trend in recent years: more journalists leaving out parts of his analyses that conflicted with Liberal government policies.
One of those policies involves, of course, subsidizing media and La Presse was unapologetic: It will not tolerate those who critique media’s economic relationship with those in power.
“Charlebois has publicly and directly attacked the integrity, independence, and rigour of journalists in this country whose work is financially supported by standardized government programs,” La Presse’s Francois Cardinal told Le Journal de Montreal. “La Presse is committed to maintaining a strong bond of trust with the public (but), we cannot accept that one of our contributors undermines the credibility of the Canadian media and, in doing so, erodes the public’s trust in us.”
I spoke with Charlebois, and he’s fine. La Presse had never paid him anyway and he’d already had three offers from other platforms. Many Quebec media were asking for interviews, he had hundreds of supportive emails and, he said, National Post - which has historically silenced criticism of the media/government money arrangement - even suggested he write a column for them about his sacking.
It’s the moral and ethical confusion of La Presse (which turned a $9 million profit last year thanks to subsidies, or what management there call, in an Orwellian twist, “standardized government programs”) that prompts despair. For them, the very real conflict of interest posed by financial dependence on politicians isn’t the issue at all. What it finds offensive is that anyone would point that out or even, as Charlebois did, raise an eyebrow. In doing so, it just proved the point that taking money from the government has an impact upon what its newsroom deems to be “acceptable views.”
Still, La Presse and its funders have all the power to argue that what was, less than a decade ago, sacred is now profane. The Rewrite could be, in the not too distant future, the only place left in the country where a view and a vision of media independence that once proudly dominated journalism will still be permitted.
Drew Wilson of Freezenet.ca brought attention to another punch to the gut of accepted journalism practice when he revealed a jaw-dropping response from CBC after he questioned its handling of a World Happiness Report.
Wilson complained to the CBC Ombudsman about “both the coverage and the contents of that report which blamed social media for a decline in world happiness. The World Happiness Report itself was very sloppily put together and designed more to fool mainstream media outlets into believing some of the most outrageous lies about our digital world.”
This prompted a response from Basem Boshra, Senior Director Journalistic Standards and Public Trust at CBC News:
“Our duty is to fairly and accurately report the conclusions reached by the authors of the study. In this instance, the report’s authors identified a decline in youth happiness in North America and pointed toward social media and increased social isolation as significant contributing factors. These were the findings of the study’s authors, as reported, not conclusions endorsed by CBC News.”
Oh, My. Gawd.
The CBC’s senior director for public trust believes the Mother Corp’s job is to faithfully rewrite a news release even though one of the very basic things young journalists (used to be?) taught is that their first obligation is to The Truth. That means that the first response to a news release is to wonder if what it contains is indeed true and who might have alternative perspectives and explore all of that. This is heartbreaking.
One of the great things - OK, it’s not always great - about the internet is that nothing ever dies. Media’s treatment of one event can therefore be compared with other, similar, events. This one caught my eye.
Some quick bouquets here. First, to a trio of commentators - Postmedia’s Chris Selley and Terry Newman plus The Line’s Matt Gurney - for drawing attention to the fact Toronto had to deploy heavily armed police during Passover and the Easter weekend just in case someone was in the mood to slaughter Jews and Christians. As Newman put it, governments are “pretending they don’t know where the problem is coming from.” Also, to Jamie Sarkonak who was called out by the government sycophants at the Canadian Bar Association, who called her criticism of what she considered to be - with evidence - an activist judge, “a crude effort at undermining public confidence in the judiciary.”
What are journalists supposed to do? Click their heels?
Chief Rosanne Casimir of the Tk’emlups te Secwepemc First Nation appeared last month before a Senate committee where she declared that “Holocaust investigations have continued for more than 75 years …. Truth takes time.”
Since declaring the discovery of 215 children’s bodies at the Kamloops Indian Residential School in 2021 and despite consuming $12 million in federal funding, no bodies have been proven to exist. While Casimir’s comments seem to indicate it will now take generations before the truth of her statements can be established, all of the Senators’ questions reported by Blacklock’s Reporter, indicated they firmly believe 215 bodies are there despite no evidence that is the case.
On X, Blacklock’s Publisher Holly Doan had one question: “No other media covered. Zero. Why?” Any ideas?
Finally, this epic (parental advisory) correction from the Financial Times:
That’s it. I am scheduled to appear before the Commons Heritage Committee on Thursday regarding the “state of media” but am kinda wondering if there’s any point. Also this week, I enjoyed another birthday so feel free to subscribe or buy me a coffee and cheer me up.
(Peter Menzies is a commentator and consultant on media, Macdonald-Laurier Institute Senior Fellow, a past publisher of the Calgary Herald, a former vice chair of the CRTC and a National Newspaper Award winner.)
“The Rewrite could be, in the not too distant future, the only place left in the country where a view and a vision of media independence that once proudly dominated journalism will still be permitted.”
And that is precisely why you will find me here.
Excellent Canadian journalism, Peter.
The Gladu floor crossing changed everything. My wife is a staunch Conservative; she won’t even vote next time. “Why bother.”
Extrapolate that across the Country, and Canada has just created for itself, another serious, and equally unnecessary, problem.
Great column as always Peter and hope you had a happy birthday. Looking forward to the CBC’s indepth coverage of your Heritage committee testimony.