The media and freedom of the press. (Editor).

Over the last few months much has been written about the editorial control which the Asper family of Winnipeg exercises over its national chain of newspapers, including the National Post. Control of editorial policy means control over journalists, some of whom are none too happy and one can see why. Another issue is the concentration of the media into fewer hands.

On January 5, journalist Stephen Kimber stopped writing a column for the Halifax Daily News because of editorial interference from the paper's owners, Can West Global Communications of Winnipeg, in other words the Asper family. Can West owns Global TV, the National Post, and the former Southam chain of fourteen big city papers across Canada. Recently it has required its papers to run a series of national editorials written in Winnipeg three times a week.

Journalists from the Montreal Gazette also objected; for two days they removed their names from the stories they had written and they published an open letter saying that CanWest was threatening press freedom.

In December 2001, Izzy Asper had directed his papers to print nothing critical of Israel, just as earlier in the year he had proscribed criticism of Jean Chretien; so in January of this year, his two Saskatchewan Southam papers in Regina and Saskatoon rejected a column by ten-year veteran Native writer Doug Cutband which sympathized with the Palestinians' loss of their lands.

Defending his national editorials in a column published in the Toronto Star, David Asper ridiculed the "professional whiners" who were trying to set his family up as some kind of bogeyman. If you believe the nonsense uttered by our competitors, he said, you must believe that the owners have no right to express a view in a newspaper.

By distributing these editorials, he contended, CanWest is trying to express a western point of view, promote understanding among the various regions of Canada, and express a national view independent of purely regional interests. He ridiculed the Gazette reporters who seemed to think that their right to freedom of speech was greater than anyone else's, and concluded by saying, "if you don't like working for us, exercise your freedom to work elsewhere...." Well, in view of his semi-monopoly, this almost amounts to saying, why don't you move to Europe or the United States? With some justice therefore, Graham Fraser of the Star deplored the disharmony which the Aspers have created in their newspapers, claiming that they do not understand newspaper traditions.

Is freedom of the press at issue?

There are two issues here: the rights of the owners; and concentration of the media in the hands of the few. To my mind both threaten freedom of the press but while concentration of the media into fewer hands is new, the owner's right to push his views is not.

When CanWest, a TV and radio conglomerate in Winnipeg bought the National Post of Toronto and the 14 dailies, it was the first time in Canada that all three media--print, audio and visual--were combined into the hands of one corporation. The CanWest move has since been followed by Bell Canada Enterprises of Montreal which bought the CTV network and then acquired the Globe and Mail, Canada's other national newspaper. As it is cheaper to have one editorial policy for both media, the public's spectrum of choices is being reduced. CTV will employ Globe and Mail journalists rather than others and Can West will do the same for its people. It would be useful, therefore, for the government and its licensing agency, the CRTC (Canadian Radio Television Commission), to study this matter and bring in remedial legislation. But what about the Asper editorial bias?

The one thing we should not do is pretend that this is unique or new. As Michael Coren pointed out in his Toronto Sun column "Free speech? Fat chance" of February 2, he lasted fewer than two years as a columnist at the Globe and Mail. His fellow journalists were shocked when in addition to his literary interests he began to write as a "social conservative," i.e., as someone who doesn't think the common good is served by abortion and moral relativism. He was asked to change his column but refused. Soon afterwards he resigned. He then switched to the Financial Post and the same thing happened there. This time he lasted only one year. He found freedom to write as he saw fit only at the Sun.

Some twelve years ago, I did a survey of regular Canadian big city newspaper columnists from coast to coast. I counted 45 of them and after reading their columns, discovered that only three were pro-life, Trevor Lautens, Rory Leishman and Claire Hoy, and they had to tread gingerly. That's one out of fifteen.

So when the Aspers lay down the law about pre-digested editorials and no criticism of Liberals and Israel, they are just a little more brazen about their prejudices than other media. How much more brazen? Try getting social conservatives on panels and forums and talk shows at the CBC! They haven't been allowed in for forty years. So much for freedom of opinion there.

What is important is to know your newspaper's bias. It is the only defence at hand but will only be effective when the reader looks for alternative sources. That's why I think Catholic Insight is worth its subscription price. (+)