Journalism, petitions and activism

Like many political/media junkies, I've been watching with fascination this whole, evolving controversy over the Avaaz petition against SunTV. Kady O'Malley at CBC has the best summary of the whole thing and she's not a disinterested observer. 

For those who aren't junkies, a quick recap: Avaaz, an American-based organization, started a hotly worded, online petition against a CRTC licence for SunTV. Margaret Atwood entered the fray, engaging in debate with SunMedia bureau chief David Akin at the first part of the week. But by week's end, the whole thing devolved into a bigger mess. 

Fake names -- including those of some well-known Hill journalists as well as Conservatives and fictional characters -- were added to the petition sometime on Thursday. The head of business development for SunTV wrote a column for Friday's paper, slamming the petition because of the existence of fake names. Problem -- Kory Teneycke seemed to have inside knowledge of the fake names on the petition, and thanks to some dogged inquiry by O'Malley and Avaaz, we learn that these fake names were submitted by one person -- either known by Kory or Kory himself. (Kory did say on TV last night that he didn't do it, but he does seem to know who did.) Conservatives say the issue is the validity of the petition. Avaaz, and those whose names were appended to the petition without their knowledge, say the issue is forgery/fraud. Here are my two cents:

* First, let me say that I find myself in moderate agreement with some of the petition's critics. It baffles me why an American organization, not a Canadian one, is whipping up opposition to SunTV. Worse, the rhetoric in the petition is over the top and the goals scattershot. It asserts that the head of the CRTC is to be replaced, based on a highly speculative Globe and Mail column, and alleges that SunTV will propogate "hate speech." This is the problem about trying to do political activism at a distance, based on newspaper reports. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever right now that the head of the CRTC is going to be replaced and there's even less evidence to connect that to CRTC deliberations over SunTV's licence.  Seems to me that if you're an ordinary citizen against a licence for SunTV, a simple No, said to the cable carriers, would suffice. Why start a petition against what may or may not happen at the CRTC? Why all the personal insults and talk of "hate speech"? 

* On the issue of the fake names, I'm in agreement that the issue here is fraud -- not the validity of the petition. I think there should be an investigation into who submitted the names and the person who did it should be punished. This isn't high school here; we're talking about people's jobs and reputations. 

* Now. On this business of how much Teneycke knew about the fake names before writing his column. In journalism, we try (not always successfully) to draw a distinction between commentary, advocacy and activism. Commentary is the usual business of columnists and many journalists, but advocacy is not unusual either. Some pundits feel passionately about some policy issues (the Afghanistan war, poverty reduction, etc.) and wear their cause on their sleeves.  

What is forbidden, however, is to create news for the purpose of writing about it, or worse, to  promote a cause. That's why we're not allowed to feed questions to the opposition at committees or in Question Period. 

On the road this summer aboard the "Liberal Express", I witnessed  several  occasions where Sun reporters in the regions produced a piece of paper with a question for Michael Ignatieff. They would read this query, sometimes saying they'd been told to ask the question by their bosses.  Funnily enough, the questions mirrored Conservative talking points that were also sent by email to reporters aboard the bus. Then we had stories in the paper the next day saying that Ignatieff's tour was being "derailed" by questions about his candidates. The "derailing" (which was a bit of an overstatement) came from journalists' questions, nothing else. 

This is where journalism strays into activism. We are supposed to be in the business of writing about protests, not instigating them. And this, it seems to me, is where we want to be cautiously observant about SunTV's proposed blend of politics and journalism. Advocacy for a cause or an ideology is fine, even admirable at times. But if the idea is to create news, well, probably we don't want to call that journalism. Entertainment, maybe?   Whatever your issue is with SunTV, I think that's what we want to get sorted out before it gets a licence. 

Comments

[David Akin]

Hi there readers of Susan's blog! Sun Media's Ottawa bureau chief David Akin here. Just want to put a little context on that last point in this very reasonable post from Susan. For the record: Neither I nor my colleagues in the Ottawa bureau were told to ask specific questions of Ignatieff. That said, it is a perfectly normal practice for national news organizations like ours, CTV, CBC, Postmedia and CP to ask a local reporter who may be staffing an event that a national bureau reporter is unable to attend to put a question to a leader for use in a national story. I saw this happen when I was at CTV; at Postmedia (then Canwest) and it's a practice that continues at Sun Media.
Now, if I'm reading between Susan's lines correctly, I suspect she's referring to Ignatieff's tour through southwestern Ontario, particularly Chatham, where the local Liberal candidate faces some serious criminal charges. Asking any leader about a candidate's suitability for office after the candidate is accused of a crime is, it seems to me, not "entertainment" or "advocacy" but quite an appropriate question for any independent journalist to put to any political leader.
Thanks for the chance to respond!

[skdadl]

Why do you keep putting the expression "hate speech," which is a legal category in Canada, in quotation marks when it appears nowhere in the Avaaz petition that I can see?

[Aongasha]

RE Advocacy Journalism. That I believe it a misnomer.
The practice is not journalism.
Can I remind you of a comment by your Press Gallery Pres.?
"It's not for us to make a judgment call on those policies. Our job is to provide factual information so citizens, voters, can make up their minds," said Ms. Buzzetti.
Ottawa press gallery president Hélène Buzzetti.

[Jean-Pierre]

Just want to say that we don't choose the tv canals one by one. There are always 3 or 4 of them on each choice we have to do. So, if Sun tv is among a group I would like to have, I have no other choice to take it.

[Robert Viera]

It will be interesting to see if Canadians have a taste for the caustic political theatre that some Americans like to watch. I personally think we won't. When we have people like Don Newman, why would we want people like Bill O'Reilly?

[Inge Jordan]

Where is Don Newman? Unfortunately retired, out of sight and no longer relevant. Wish it were otherwise.

[John W]

People outside of Ontario may not be aware that almost every local newspaper in Ontario is now owned and operated by Sun Media. These are the old Thompson/Black (I guess)/Osprey/ now Sun papers.
They are carrying the right wing columnist parade plus phony news stories based on polls with slanted questions designed to produce anti Liberal pro Conservative Party results. It's amazing that David Akin would even be associated with all this.
One day the editorial page of my local paper had Ezra Levant down the left side and Michael Coren down the right with a local editorial in the middle, and local letters across the bottom. This what we are facing in terms of media control by a single party. Needless to say Kory Teneycke's diatribe against the petition was carried in the last few days.
There is no independent, fair, unbiased, journalism in these communities anymore.

[PoliticosRKD]

Thank you for this very well balanced and carefully considered column. You make a very interesting distinction between journalism and entertainment. When journalists start making unsubstantiated claims, resort to viscous character assassination, report half truths or put their own spin on something, just for the sake of the headline, then that line gets crossed. It isn't news anymore, it's story telling.In my concise Collins Gem pocket dictionary, that's called "Yellow Journalism. And there may be a little of that from both sides. But I ask you to remember the roots of the Toronto Sun. When it came out, it tried very hard to copy the format of the English tabloids. It succeeded and gained a huge audience. But it was mostly about the entertainment. News articles were approximately one quarter the length of the same story in any other paper. So while it has grown incredibly, I have to wonder how far the Sun has strayed from it's roots, if at all. To me though, this whole "mess" as you put it, is about ethics in politics. And the more this story developed, the more "unethical" it became. And unfortunately, this is a very very sad reflection of out current state of politics in this country. And make no mistake, this is a VERY political story. Oh, and in answer to your question regarding American interest in Canadian TV, the president of Avaaz, Ricken Patel, is Canadian. Might have something to do with it.

[jad]

I think most of the commenters, with the exception of Susan's original post, are obscuring the main issue here - are we in Canada prepared to have an organization registered, located and funded in the US dictating to us what kind of media we should permit in Canada.

As far as Sun TV or whatever it is eventually called, it will sink or swim on its own merits, and M.Peladeau, unlike George Soros, does not have deep enough pockets to fund his own ideology. He's still simply interested in making money, and if the new channel does not turn a profit, it won't survive. What bothers me is the venomous hate being promulgated by the Soros organization before the new channel is even approved in Canada.

As far as the journalists being "signed up" for the petition, it seems to me just as likely a stunt by Avaaz in order to gain publicity for the petition, which has certainly worked.

[Anonymous]

I think people are overestimating the influence of Sun papers. The people who read them and are informed by them are already Conservative voters.

Now, as to the Avaaz hoax, my bet is that it was Ezra Levant, Stephen Taylor, or one of the former PMO operatives that KoryT hired for his new post, acting on Kory's instructions.

Kory will be relevant as long as Mr. Harper is in power. The day he leaves, or if SUNTV doesn't get its license, whichever comes first, Kory will be fired and replaced by Luc Lavoie.

[Darwin O'Connor]

"Just want to say that we don't choose the tv canals one by one. There are always 3 or 4 of them on each choice we have to do. So, if Sun tv is among a group I would like to have, I have no other choice to take it."

While this is true of analog channels, I'm pretty sure digital channels, and Sun TV News will be a digital channel because there is no room for any more analog channels, can be ordered individually. However, it is usually cheaper to order them in packages. Sun TV News will presumably be added to the News package (Which already includes Fox News on Rogers)

[ck]

"...and alleges that SunTV will propogate "hate speech."

I think that column that advocated "lock and load" of Tamil Refugee ship is pretty much a good indication of what viewers of Sun Tv have to look forward to.

[Marzipan]

It should not baffle you why an American organization, not a Canadian one, is whipping up opposition to SunTV. Good Lord Almighty, someone, somewhere has to whip up opposition to this. And answer the question up above, specifically:

Why do you keep putting the expression "hate speech," which is a legal category in Canada, in quotation marks when it appears nowhere in the Avaaz petition that I can see?

Posted by: skdadl | September 04, 2010 at 09:44 AM

This is important and Kory/Harper have already had secret meetings, sheesh, who do you expect me to believe?

[Holly Stick]

To jad, I've been registered with Avaaz for years and regularly get their emails which are not hate-filled, but which are about issues of democracy, peace, justice, helping the poor, and environmental responsibility. There is no hatred there, and you should not believe what the Conservative smearers say. After all, didn't Teneycke basically accuse Atwood of treason, and who would believe that libel?

Ricken Patel, who is Canadian, said Avaaz has over 400,000 Canadians members and I believe he was telling the truth.

Meanwhile, there is news that Harper did receive briefing notes about Sun TV - would that be unusual?

http://www.cyberpresse.ca/actualites/quebec-canada/politique-canadienne/201009/03/01-4312616-harper-sinteresse-a-sun-tv-news.php?utm_categorieinterne=trafficdrivers&utm_contenuinterne=cyberpresse_B13b_politique-canadienne_560_section_POS1

[geo]

Freedom of speech...not available at the Toronto Star or at CBC.

In respect to the people who make comments on all these comment areas of this newspaper and at the CBC it's not monitored,it's edited out or in,no monitoring involved.

Each of these two organizations does not allow people to make comments without first the editor deciding if the comment is "suitable" to print.

In other words someone decides if they want to allow it to be printed for all to see.
On the other hand at Sun media and the Globe and Mail,the comments are printed FIRST,then the people reading it decide if the comment is offensive or
inappropriate.And if it is ,it is removed by the monitor.

There is some dishonesty in having a comment that is on topic and not offensive rejected because someone at these organization doesn't agree with the statement or feels they don't want it displayed.

Freedom of speech at the Star or CBC? not a chance for the general public,
someone's decision over you comment comes first.
That's not freedom of speech.

[Ontario Voter]

Susan: With due respect, I think you might have misunderstood some things about Avaaz. Avaaz, as I understand, is a global advocacy community with over 5M members worldwide interested in global affairs. So why should it not be interested in what is happening in Canada? Avaaz has apparently been praised by journals with international reputations such as The Economist (incidentally, the same one which suggested the Harper government cannot walk and chew gum simultaneously, so some might say they are biased, I suppose, lol). Patel claimed in his exchange with Teneycke at P&P that the petition did not cite "hate speech", This is easily verifiable and I do believe Patel was quite correct in that claim.

IMHO, Teneycke is as justified as Avaaz is of expressing their opinions/accusations of each other's actions. That is not the point. The point here, IMHO, and, as others including yourself have poined out is that the names of real people have apparently been attached to the Avaaz petition without their approval. There are both legal and ethical issues associated with this action.

More important, however, I think is the issue of the ethics of any sitting PM and his previous close associate being closely associated with, or being perceived to be strongly promoting, a particular network.

[Gabby in QC]

Some commenters, perhaps even some professional commentators and journalists, have already made up their mind as to who actually signed the names of journalists and fictional characters to the Avaaz petition. I'll withhold judgment until more facts come out.

What I wonder about is the following: why are these social media -- Twitter, Facebook, and online petitions -- NOW given such weight and credibility, as is now being given to Avaaz, and previously to the anti-prorogation Facebook group?

I remember the derision aimed at then Canadian Alliance leader Stockwell Day for his “direct democracy proposals, which would have required a referendum on any proposal supported by a petition signed by 3% of Canadian voters …” [from Wiki].

What is known about Ricken Patel that makes him such a credible activist? Why are people willing to support a foreign-based organization in its anti-Harper campaign, one that perhaps may even have contravened Canadian electoral laws about 3rd party advertising/participation in the 2008 election?

Yet when a Conservative prime-ministerial hopeful, Day, proposed actual participatory activism FOR Canadians BY Canadians, it was laughed off as a joke?

[Holly Stick]

About Ricken Patel and Avaaz:

http://webofchange.com/blog/ricken-patels-stt-keynote-address-highlights

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/huffpost-game-changers-yo_b_363624.html

Avaaz has rightly criticized the Harper Government for various bad policies:

http://www2.macleans.ca/tag/avaaz/