|
Point of View with Barb
Sumner Burstyn - December 1 2003
Time to worry when media censor themselves
TV3 boss Brent Impey says media freedom and political comment are
being restricted by the Broadcasting Standards Authority. He was
criticising the authority's decision on John Campbell's interview
with Prime Minister Helen Clark, in which he alleged the Government
had covered up a genetically modified corn release.
The authority said Campbell's interview breached standards of balance,
accuracy and fairness.
I'm with John Campbell on this one and I applaud both the interview
and Mr Impey's tirade against the decision.
But before we get too fulsome in our praise, just between you and
me, Mr Impey, don't you think it's a little like the pot calling
the kettle black?
After all, your company, CanWest, is infamous in Canada for limiting
the scope and comment of its journalists, for controlling print
editorials across the nation, for pulling articles that criticise
the corporation or that simply fail to toe its line, and for removing
non-complying journalists from its ranks.
In the 1976 film Network, the crusty head of the news department,
played by William Holden, railed against the control the channel's
new corporate owners exert over the news and its subsequent corruption.
It proved to be a prescient movie.
When CanWest bought 13 daily newspapers in Canada, journalists
quickly became so disillusioned with the new owner that they removed
their bylines from stories and began to talk to outside media about
censorship at their newspapers.
The company responded by slapping gag orders on all reporters in
the CanWest chain, including its Global TV operations across the
country.
They suspended four writers for five days at their paper in Regina
for talking to outside media, while others were given letters of
reprimand. Other reporters claim the newspaper is regularly pulling
articles by columnists who express views the company doesn't like.
But perhaps the biggest issue is CanWest's national editorial policy.
Not only does the company supply editorial to the newspapers from
its head office once a week but, as one reporter said, "We quickly
began to understand that all editorial was being controlled. Not
necessarily overtly, but with subtle pressures on board members
to only print the party line."
Editorial boards at newspapers exist to debate public policy issues,
reach a consensus and then present the reasoning to the public.
They are designed to be largely free of corporate interests.
In Canada, according to numerous journalists, this crucial process
of journalistic debate is severely undermined at CanWest. At the
Montreal Gazette, reporters were instructed to heed the company's
definition of the boundary between their beliefs and obligations.
Many reporters also see it as sinister that CanWest executives
are twisting things like the gag order, declaring that rather than
attempting to chill dissent they are simply clarifying conditions
under which debate can occur.
Murdoch Davis, who recently resigned as editorial vice-president
of CanWest Global Communications, said the dispute was based on
a misunderstanding of the difference between editing and censorship.
But the sense that journalistic freedom is being muzzled in Canada
is so pervasive that the world's largest journalists' group, the
International Federation of Journalists, representing 500,000 journalists
in 103 countries, says CanWest's vision of modern media is one in
which the twisted values of the media market always come first and
where there is contempt for traditional journalism.
Aiden White, of the federation, went on to say that if the gag
orders and censorship had happened in Eastern Europe 15 years ago,
there would have been widespread protests from media owners and
journalists' groups. White says the difference today is that the
threat comes from within the media community itself.
In New Zealand, CanWest owns the TV3 network, new music channel
C4, and about half the country's radio stations. That's a significant
media presence. One well-known Canadian journalist calls CanWest
a cannibal and says New Zealand could wake up one morning and find
itself without a valid voice.
It would be comforting to believe that CanWest's corporate culture
has not made it as far as the antipodes. But when the most frequent
form of censorship is the self-censorship of journalists deciding
not to pursue certain stories they know will be unpopular with the
boss, we may never know.
While governments almost always have an interest in controlling
the free flow of information, and official censorship is something
that must be constantly guarded against, large corporations are
a more common source of censorship in our society.
And given CanWest's Canadian record, I'm a little cynical of Mr
Impey's call to abolish the authority and let the television industry
become self-regulating.
Perhaps I'm completely wrong and the New Zealand employees of
CanWest are operating in a climate that allows an open flow of information.
But I suspect that like my fellow columnists in Canada who've dared
to criticise the CanWest monopoly, my chances of ever being hired
by it just went down the drain.
Let's hope intrepid interviewer John Campbell, at least, continues
to ask the hard questions, irrespective of the authority's decision
against him and irrespective of the experiences of his fellow journalists
working for his company in Canada.
ENDS
© Barbara Sumner Burstyn, 2003
Send your comments to:
Barbara Sumner
Burstyn.
|
