Canadians Want Media Choice
At this critical moment, we must tell our politicians.
Big media muscles out diversity.
Several major media mergers are threatening to make the Canadian media scene an even more concentrated affair. A few examples: CTVglobemedia has inhaled CHUM (with Rogers taking the spoils), Alliance Atlantis is on the brink of becoming a part of CanWest, and Quebecor Media is poised to take over Osprey Media.
A year ago (June 2006), the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications Report on the Canadian News Media concluded that there are "areas where the concentration of ownership has reached levels that few other countries would consider acceptable." Canadians agree: well before the latest round of mergers, 56 per cent of Canadians said they had less trust in the media because of media consolidation, and fewer than one in five Canadians thought news organizations were independent.
Canadians understand very clearly the effects of media consolidation on media choice. For example, CanWest will now own the IFC (Independent Film Channel). Since CanWest is known for its conservative editorial stances, this change indicates that the Independent Film Channel is now anything but Independent.
Or again: as a result of CTVglobemedia's purchase of CHUM, the same company now owns MTV Canada and MuchMusic. One of these channels will likely face considerable divestment. It just wouldn't make good business sense to keep aggressively investing in both. Both of these two channels have become crucial spaces for the development of youth culture, and important sites of exposition for Canadian artists, as well as favourites among media consumers.
Fear in the newsrooms
The Canadian Energy, Communications and Paperworkers (CEP) union recently published a landmark study focusing on Canadian journalists, titled Voices From the Newsroom. The study suggests that journalists and news consumers are already feeling the brunt of big media domination.
Only 9.5 per cent of journalists indicated that they believe the corporate owners of their news outlet valued good journalism over profit. This perspective perhaps reflects the bookkeepers' view of employees as liabilities -- a management approach that is only exacerbated when big media get bigger.
CHUM laid off 281 people and cancelled news broadcasts across the country just hours before CTVglobemedia announced its intention to take over CHUM.
Quebecor -- another big media enterprise looking to get bigger -- has locked out the office and editorial staff of the Journal de Québec since April 22, 2007. Journalists tried to restart the negotiation process in mid-June, only to have Quebecor negotiators reject their efforts, sticking to their original demands from December 2006.
With this kind of treatment, it is not surprising that 44 per cent of journalists in the CEP study report a decreasing desire to stay in journalism.
With the recent and likely continuing big media centralization of media, we can only expect news and journalism to suffer more as economic imperatives drive operations. We can look forward to more unemployed or dissatisfied journalists, and more media consumers left wanting the penetrating journalism that used to be more prevalent in Canada.
Internet to the rescue?
Some people point to the Internet as the medium that will save us all from concentrated print and broadcast uniformity. Unfortunately, a high level of media consolidation also means that we are in danger of losing the open Internet in Canada and the ability to chose which websites we go to. For the most part, the media conglomerates that dominate conventional media also dominate web traffic. Independent media are pressed to compete with the vast holdings and promotional clout wielded by national big media conglomerates.
As big media increasingly merge with Internet service providers like Rogers, BCE and Telus, we risk unwittingly trading our open Internet for a closed system. In such a system, Internet (and cell phone) service providers can push traffic to their own content and that of their partners, while traffic to other more diverse media sites is slowed or blocked.
During the Telus strike in 2005, the corporation blocked access to a website run by striking Telus employees called "Voices for Change." There are many more examples of non-neutral Internet service-provider behaviour. A lone blogger or independent news website is hard-pressed to compete with the vast holdings and promotional clout wielded by national media conglomerates.
The Canadian Radio and Television Commission (CRTC) recently called for public input for their Diversity of Voices proceeding in order to review issues relating to the ownership of Canadian broadcasting companies. The main focus is on the impact that ownership trends have on the diversity of voices provided by Canadian broadcasters.
Until July 18, Canadians have an opportunity to submit comments about media ownership regulations, and the effect of concentrated ownership on free and vigorous debate about important public issues. The Diversity of Voices proceeding could result in drastic changes to the rules that govern Canadian media and communications.
How to take action
Canadians have historically supported media diversity. Many government reports have called for strict limits on media concentration. In 2002, an Ipsos-Reid poll reported that 86 per cent of Canadians believed the federal government should do something to alleviate Canadians' concerns about media concentration.
However, there is a new factor now. Canadians from across the country are speaking out loudly and clearly, asking for media choice over big media domination. They are urging the CRTC to maintain media diversity and public access to our national and regional communication platforms. The question is, will the CRTC take the lead from the Canadian public? With a clear indication that Canadians want a more diverse media system with more media choice, will the CRTC live up to its mandate to regulate media in the public interest?
The airwaves belong to the Canadian public, and rules to curb media concentration in Canada are long overdue. CRTC proceedings are usually dominated by big media, so comments from Canadians from across the country will go far to demonstrate the importance of media consolidation to all our lives.
Canadians can submit comments directly to the CRTC through a straightforward comment system on the Canadians for Democratic Media (CDM) website.
As former U.S. federal communications commissioner Nicholas Johnson said, "Whatever is your first priority, whether it's women's rights or civil rights or environmental concerns, your second priority simply has to be media reform. Because with that, the progressive community has a hope, and without it, you don't have a hope."
Related Tyee stories:
- How Black and Asper Plotted to Control Canadian News Biz
Lusting for 'awesome and infinite' deals with Thomson, Rogers, Shaw. - Canada Sleeps Through War to 'Save the Internet'
Digital democracy at risk if telecoms get their way say opponents. - Support the Media You Want
Tyee's drive for new readers (last chance to help!) is part of a grassroots push for news diversity.



village
16-07-2007
At the regional level..., such as a region as the one I live in
Althought NEWSPAPERS are not mentioned in the article above.. I would like to point out that from the GROUND UP.., Newspapers are still the MEDIA that is impacting the most at the ground level of community itself.., and with that in mind ' I would like to make certain comments.., on how their particular mergers and behaviours impact on our sense of place.., sense of belonging and sense of identity..itself.
ergo COMMUNITY..*
There is already a concentration or rather I should say.., a dilution of so called COMMUNITY PAPERS in any given region..... for indeed they rather prefer the REGION WIDE approach to newspaper reporting.., offering up to it's readership.., what I refer to as a SMORGASBORD of COMMUNITIES which in effect dilutes any real meaning any individual CITY might have had as to being a COMMUNITY in it's own right.., ONLY TO BE REPLACED BY THIS IDEA THAT A REGION IS THE COMMUNITY*.. ( wink wink )..
THEREBY JUSTIFYING OR RATHER as in ( RADLER ).., cutting the staff to it's bare bones necessity..., and when you can pass off a region as a COMMUNITY in the place of the individual communities that make up a region then..., WHY NOT .. RIGHT?
WRONG.WRONG , WRONG , WRONG..!
The reason being that the very idea of community is rendered meaningless.., when you can aggregate various CITIES and VILLAGES and pretend they are '' THE COMMUNITY '' by the stroke of a pen.. , well , you know something is wrong.., there..
The bottom line driven ... community identity..( make that region as community folks..).., is what is wrong with our MEDIA these days..,
At the Newspaper level.., this is clearly what is going on.., as to what was - once upon a time - SMALL TOWN NEWSPAPER..who actually championed the very idea of a town, village and City being A COMMUNITY- now gone astray.., by having substited that strategy with another.., and that is that the REGION now is THE COMMUNITY.., and it has to be so RIGHT ?..,because they say so , RIGHT ?..
WRONG..,
ESPECIALLY IN THE URBAN CITIES ... that find and lose themselves in this emerging regional model of identity.. ( totally fabricated by newspapers to serve their bottom line..,
( continued ).
village
16-07-2007
HENCE , my concern.. ( when I think that at much larger scale an
HENCE , my concern.. ( when I think that at much larger scale and scope.., radio and television do the same.. but at a much larger regional template..)*.., hence within provinces themselves.., and the country as a whole.., what is being lost in all of this is the very building blocks of our identity..,
AND that is , how we think of COMMUNITY*..
and neighbourhoods..- which I contend are the very building blocks of a CITY *..,of HUMAN SETTLEMENTS in their very own rights.., be they VILLAGES.., TOWNS , MUNICIPALITIES , OR CITIES.., they all have a history , a heritage passed down and a ', sense of place '' , '' sense of belonging'' and '' sense of identity '' along with an evolving sense of the FUTURE itself.., ( if it ever can have it's hopes , fears and dreams mirrored back to itself again .. ).., as was the role of MEDIA..,from time eternal..
Thus the very idea of a Settlement and it's history and heritage quickly being lost.., through the MEDIA manipulation ,
context , content and form itself.., which is attempting to circumvent the reality on the GROUND*..,
The reality of NEIGHBOURHOODS.., THE REALITY of CITIES themselves.., as HUMAN SETTLEMENTS.. with not only a history and heritage but with an IDENTITY , with a HEART*.., that is quickly being fragmented/broken up.., into pieces..,
(And then to go on lamenting the break up of Society ..- when they - THE MEDIA themselves are the worst perpetrators.. of the BREAK UP *.. )
Be they cognisant of this is neither here or there.., but for the fact that they have now been laid bare .., in front of your eyes..,
THE EMPEROR '' HAS NO CLOTHE'' when it comes to their claims of representing the COMMUNITY*..
Which Community? Mine ? Yours? ..,
Theirs obviously . (and fabricated at that )..,
How are other regions in BC served by the print media ? It would be nice to hear from the emerging CITIZENS JOURNALIST that are living in various regions of this province.., or for that matter .., in other regions and provinces of CANADA..,
Et vous au QUÉBEC.., quelle sont vos expériences.. par apart au journaux.. qui vous miroire une IDENTITÉ..*
For those who do not comprehend the above paragraph I'm inviting our neighbours from yonder over the mountain also.., from all Provinces of our country..*.. ( and of course I would like to hear - and know - if any readers are from LA BELLE PROVINCE..)by asking what kind of newspaper coverage they are getting at the regional level.., and how well do they ( MEDIA ) mirror their COMMUNITY/IDENTITY*
Take Care,
Village .
gaulois
16-07-2007
La belle province du BC and média concentration
Good reminder from Village on the importance of the community print press even in our Net age.
Don't forget too that the media concentration in the francophone press outside Quebec is huge, i.e. mainly State funded (directly or indirectly). I will let you guess the problem of identité that this leaves us with us dead ducks and reincarnated ones living hors-Québec...
The "social engineering testbed" that we provide to the majority in the ROC and in Quebec should be IMO more of interest for those of you interested in what happens when freedom of press gradually gets eroded in the name of some dogma that everyone is expected to buy in, whatever that dogma is. Very similar situation with First Nations press BTW.
Le Devoir remains a fairly good press in Quebec IMO although often "Quebec-centric" for a francophone living in the ROC. As far as they are concerned, we have pretty much disappeared and/or are of little interest to their readers. The GESCA/Quebecor media conglomerates impact on freedom of press and journalism is however very similar to the Canwest one, i.e. inquiétant.
Chris H
16-07-2007
CRTC
"The question is, will the CRTC take the lead from the Canadian public? With a clear indication that Canadians want a more diverse media system with more media choice, will the CRTC live up to its mandate to regulate media in the public interest?"
My question is whether or not the CRTC has actually been helpful to the Canadian public, or have they been a protective layer for the media in Canada to protect their own turf? Is this in the interest of the Canadian public?
New technologies come out that won't see the light of day for years because we have to "protect" the Canadian industry. It is the consumer who ultimately gets screwed. While AT&T gives their iphone customers UNLIMITED net access for $60 a month, Canadian customers are told by the telecommunication companies here that 5 MB per month is all they need! Imagine reading The Tyee on the bus on your way to work. How many years before Canadians can even buy an iphone?
Media and telecommunications are changing rapidly. You'd think that Canadian companies would be encouraged to stay close to forefront of that change. Maybe we should refocus ourselves on making it easier for others to join the competititive media market instead of protecting those already in it. Perhaps we would see more diversity as a result. It wouldn't be any worse than it is now.
speedo
16-07-2007
who cares
I'm tired of complaints about the media. If you think newspapers are too conservative, don't read them. If TV news is too right wing, don't watch it. If you stumble onto an arch-fascist blog, stumble right off it. If someone you meet at a party is a Liberal or Socred bore, walk away.
Why do people think their particular political hobbyhorses should be high on everyone else's agenda? Only a doofus would be surprised that a news organization, a corporation whose real reason for being is the creation of profit for owners, shareholders and employees, wouldn't betray those sorts of values in its editorials. The real problem with the newsmedia isn't its rightwing bias, it's with its down-and-dumb devotion to fluffy lifestyle clutter like How Paris Hilton is Holding Up in Jail. They can try all they want to Manufacture Consent but all you have to do to jack the system is ignore them and go throw a frisbee instead.
Go to Google News and find the news you want if it matters that much to you. Or better yet, Be the Change You'd Like to See and make your own newsmedium.
Working Memory
16-07-2007
Fractured Market
The internet has fractured the market in a variety of disciplines. The music and movie industries are the most obvious and impacted examples, but the book publishing and public relations industries have also faced, and evolved, through radical changes in the last ten years.
Any business with a communication engine at its core has been affected, especially the mainstream news industry, and because this industry is made up of a substantial number of academics and intellectuals, and because they have the most to lose, the transition has been slower due to resistance.
"Owners" of mainstream news companies recognized the threat early and started way back in the mid 90's to lead their customers to believe that the internet would not change the news business. Newspapers were the most vocal and unethical in this manner. They impeded progress to protect their profits, and they did what they could to keep their model intact. A fractured market is not good for mainstream news profits.
Here's why: Fracturing the news market separates the very large less-sophisticated gullible group, from the smaller group that values intellect over emotion. The internet makes it possible for smarter people to separate themselves from the common denominator masses.
Owners of mainstream news companies rely on crowd emotion to sway political and commercial agenda. Basically, news media convince this large, less-sophisticated group to follow their path by spreading misinformation and half-truths. It's referred to in the industry as "necessary illusion" and "checkbook journalism."
When this large, but less-educated lower income group buy into an ideology, they reluctantly drag the smaller group, which has a better understanding of issues, along for the ride. (On the outside chance someone from the larger group is reading this post, which is unlikely, here is a translation: Smart news publishers use stupid people as a megaphone to channel their message through to the masses. Polls are one of their tools.)
continued ...
Working Memory
16-07-2007
Fractured Market cont'd
Thankfully, we live in an era where owners of mainstream news companies can no longer so-easily use the larger less-sophisticated crowd to overwhelm and inevitably influence the smaller smarter group.
Mainstream news publishing companies are being forced to appeal directly to this smaller smarter group even though it is lowering their profits. Publishers can no longer ignore this smaller group because average citizens now also have access to the masses through the internet, plus they can push their message around the world.
A good real-time example of this manipulation can be observed by watching how newspapers report news about the 2010 Olympics. In July of 2007, the Vancouver Sun finally announced that they had become an "official" Olympic booster, and that VANOC would hire them to promote the Games.
Basically, the newspaper will use the emotion of the gullible masses to "overwhelm" the smaller intellectual group, and in doing so will force the will of the IOC on our region.
Now that CanWest and CTV (bitter rivals) are "both" the "official voices" of the 2010 Olympics, citizens in our Olympic region have only independent internet news sources to rely on for accurate and non-partisan information.
Nothing coming from mainstream news media regarding the 2010 Olympics can be trusted because VANOC and the IOC are now paying "all" the big mainstream news companies to tell the Olympics version of the Olympics story. This includes information about the homeless, taxes, real estate, budgets and costs, volunteering for the 2010 Games, etc.
Maurice Cardinal
Editor: OlyBLOG.com
Author: LeverageOlympicMomentum.com
Working Memory
16-07-2007
Who Cares - speedo
You make great points speedo, but when you state "Who Cares," that is exactly what mainstream news companies want smart people like you to think. They want you to give up so they can have free rein to abuse the less-smart public.
If you see someone abusing a child and you walk away saying "who cares" it sends a message that it is fine to abuse kids.
The IOC used local news media to convince our 2010 Host region that the Games would be good for our community.
Local newspapers and television spread "feel good" stores throughout our region, while they concurrently created a feeding frenzy for the real estate industry so they could make a killing artificially boosting house prices, which also boosted taxes so you could pay for the 2010 Games. Newspapers make a fortune selling advertising to the real estate industry. It happens like this in all Olympics regions, and Vancouver is no exception.
Who cares? You should care, because you're paying for it and local newspapers got your neighbors to vote against you.
Who is smarter now? More importantly, who will be the smartest in 2011 when your 2010 tax bill arrives?
BC Mary
16-07-2007
Voices from the Newsroom ...
Voices from the Newsroom found that:
9.5 per cent of journalists indicated that they believe the corporate owners of their news outlet valued good journalism over profit. This perspective perhaps reflects the bookkeepers' view of employees as liabilities -- a management approach that is only exacerbated when big media get bigger.
That's about how I figured it.
What will people do, now and increasingly in the future, when they want to blame the journalists for not creating a better, wiser, truer kind of journalism? There won't be enough of them left to blame.
I've seen what big media can do to small media, in a situation where a small weekly posed no real threat to the big Southam daily. Seems the big media just can't stand sharing.
So Big Media isn't a net benefit to the public interest, in my view.
Working Memory
16-07-2007
Fight back
Options are available if you look.
For example, take this story and its comments, or any other appropriate story on The Tyee that turns your crank, and email it to writers and editors at your local newspaper or television company and demand that they address news media issues. If they don't respond, report that they didn't respond. Silence speaks volumes.
Maybe The Tyee can help out in this respect by keeping an "open" mainstream news media article with a perpetual "comments" section to address this issue. Casual sniping that happens all too often here accomplishes little if there is no follow up, and especially when mainstream media knows it's just hot air that will dissipate.
Demand that local news media companies incorporate "Comments" sections on their properties.
Or as "speedo" suggested, start your own blog.
You can also post news on NowPublic.com - it's Vancouver-based and has global reach.
Don't simply whine and complain - act!!
The CRTC won't help you unless you help yourself. The CRTC is so far behind the times that they don't get it. In most cases it would be more beneficial if they simply got out of the way.
BTW, if you're so concerned about this issue why haven't more people voiced an opinion about the "censoring" of amateur athletes in a recent Tyee article. I was the only person to make a comment on this critical media topic.
It's important to connect the dots if you expect to understand how insidious local mainstream media really is.
gaulois
16-07-2007
Let's not forget the Media Carta initiative
The adbusters.org campaign called Media Carta seems most relevant to this story. I am always amazed at the ability of small groups to not better unite themselves when fighting the biggies.
It would also been useful to point out under "How to take action" that the site redirected to an AFL-CIO web site. Nothing wrong with this, although not mentionning it seems reminiscent of big media questionable practices of restricting media choices...
speedo
16-07-2007
OK, I get it. People are so
OK, I get it. People are so stupid- well not Working Memory and everyone else posting here- that they aren't sophisticated enough to realize when they're being duped, so we, The Vanguard, have a duty to protect them from such hideously contemptible things as CanWest Global. Patronizing compassion for the masses from the left is just as unpalatable than rightist contempt.
I'm on the side of Everyman and Everywoman because I think they're smarter than people like you are giving them credit for.
snert
16-07-2007
village
Maybe we should just make sure that we have a courses on Critical Thinking in our schools.
Learning how to judge ideas on their own merit, what an odd concept.
That would pull the teeth of global media.
FWIW You may want to define 'region' and 'community' as you use them in your arguments.
Everybody has issues with something. Just how fine do you think we should split hairs?
Betty
16-07-2007
Don't forget...
...that the 40-year-old, independent newsweekly The Georgia Straight still exists and should, I feel, be mentioned in any story challenging big media consolidation. It's holding firm and long may it continue.
BC Mary
17-07-2007
Three news sites
working memory:
I followed your advice on both counts:
... start your own blog
You can also post news on NowPublic.com - it's Vancouver-based and has global reach.
and can report as follows:
* It's a lot of work to sustain a good, newsworthy blog. Mine is The Legislature Raids and has produced 335 specific news items over its 14-month life. Somebody has to really, really care about the topic. To visit, the URL is: http://bctrialofbasi-virk.blogspot.com/
* The site you recommended (NowPublic.com) is awful. Might as well look at CNN. I'd say Public Eye OnLine, or Salt Spring News, or Vive le Canada are more satisfying choices for Canadian readers.
SharingIsGood
17-07-2007
One pagers bring some democracy
Over the past 15 years, there have been several black on white bond one-page papers supported with advertising and sent to all the local retail restaurants and businesses for free distribution. These one pagers are good at getting much of the real local news out, but occassionally they touch on provincial matters. As most of the heaviest suporters are Liberals, the oe pagers are careful not to get to anti-Liberal, but there seems to be more freedom in what they say than can be found in the community bird cage liners and the Lower Mainland fish wraps.
I would like to see these grow stronger province-wide. I would like to see these daily handbills being pumped out by people who are looking for truth - and not a truth from any political perspective. If the truth gets printed and passed around, the politicians doing evil and (equally evil) those doing nothing but sitting on their hands while tabled at the provincial trough will become evident.
iamcur
17-07-2007
Media Choice?
It is impossible, no matter how smart we think we are, to make good decisions when we do not have accurate information. If a few corporations control access to information and also choose what information is distributed to the public, they also control the political, social, economic and scientific policies that derive from this.
It is already true that public relations firms spend multiples of money so that media can use their biased information to pass off to the rest of us as "news". News media that spend little on investigative journalists are then forced to use PR packages to fill dead air and print space. That is why current TV and Radio, as well as newspapers run the SAME stories- even if the media are owned by different companies.
It is also true that newspaper, radio and tv owners are making agreements with Internet providers to narrow choice there too. And internet providers CAN block access to the Tyee and other sources of independent information- China does it politically and the US and Canada will do it economically [see Telus, Yahoo, etc].
We are all in deep shit. Suppose the same guys control political, media, and energy decisions- we could be invading other nations, destroying our planet's environment and concentrating wealth and power in only a few hands- and the rest of us will applaud this enthusiastically