Canadian Heritage Committee on March 14th, 2007

[Dr. Catherine Murray]

Yes, I have Ms. Fry. I've tried to make it available in the form I presented today. Furthermore, I've undertaken to provide footnoted, appropriately cited comments later.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Okay, good. Thanks. I was very interested in all of the things you had to say.

I am as concerned as you about the almost monolithic private media. They're all beginning to merge to the extent that they're now one medium. Of course, that's not good for journalistic reporting or for any form of information that is democratic or relevant.

I'm saying this here, but I'm sure I'm going to get heck for it. The fact that CHUM is now merging with Global and CTV concerns me. At least we knew that CHUM had a huge strength of Canadian content and culture. It did in fact present a very distinct type of programming. That's of concern to me.

The more and more this happens, you're absolutely right, the more and more CBC must survive. CBC must therefore take on this unique role.

I've heard everyone talk about a new governance model. That makes a lot of sense. I think you're absolutely right about all of those things.

There was something that Mr. Mora said. I read your thing, and I'm sorry I was out of the room when you did most of it. You're the second person today to talk about this interactive concept, based on digital media, of the CBC opening itself up to others feeding into that kind of programming. That sounds great. I would think that is how the whole of broadcasting should move forward.

My question is, who would look at standards for that? Should there be standards, and if so, who would look at it? What are the ethics of that?

We have seen that the Internet.... I mean, I read the article recently about how the guy who's head of Wikipedia suddenly found out on Wikipedia that he liked chess when he didn't even play chess. So the accuracy of reporting...the fact that you can at least see it and know it has been well researched and accurate is a concern in terms of that kind of interactivity, plus ethical standards and various other standards with regard to programming.

I would like to know how you could do that. How would one do that and have the CBC...? The CBC would have branded those things, as we heard some talk earlier. If the CBC's going to become a brander and open up channel three and channel four and channel five, and if we will now be in the digital world, how do you do that? That's something that is really baffling me at the moment, and I'd like to hear about it.

[Pedro Mora]

They already exist. I've been doing community programming for the past twenty years through Rogers Cable, and now through Shaw cable. Shaw cable has a list of criteria taken from the CRTC, and they won't broadcast something that is not within those criteria. They are more strict than the CBC right now. For instance, if I'm reporting a rally where there are some abusive signs, sometimes with my camera I just take the whole crowd, and I don't even notice what the signs say. But Shaw cable will censor that and say, “You have to cover that sign because it's not acceptable.”

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

But Mr. Mora, that's traditional television broadcasting. My thing about the Internet as an interactive forum--and I know Catherine is dying to answer this--will make it far more difficult to set those standards. Am I wrong?

[Pedro Mora]

You can always put some criteria or some framework people have to abide by, but it gives more access to everyone to participate. It doesn't come in the hierarchical way of “I am the news reporter and this is what happened in the world today”--there are a hundred topics out there, but just a few elite reporters choose the topic. So by having this interactive, having access to community television--

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

I understand the rationale for it; I was just concerned about the standards.

Catherine, you were dying to speak.

[Dr. Catherine Murray]

I think it's a very exciting question, actually. I think the CBC is already experimenting somewhat in this regard. It always invites comments from its listeners and posts them on the web. It has a minimal policy of editorial interference with those posted comments. The problem is that they're not then interactive in a fundamental way. But it's designed its Canada.ca so that you can go out into another zone and then return back, so you identify different spaces where different rules are in play.

I would simply state that Mr. Stephen Ward, at the University of British Columbia's Sing Tao School of Journalism, has been fascinated by the blogging world and the new standards that are evolving in social communities. It seems to me that we aren't completely there yet, but there seem to be evolving protocols, much like the protocol in Wikipedia, where instead of objectivity, there are protocols with respect to balance and fairness in representation of views that seem to be emerging. Certainly my point would be that the CBC is one of these news organizations in a dialogue with its citizens, so it needs to be on the front line of researching and articulating what these evolving social standards are and when they are offended, so that we have a better system of ethical regulation in this country, more responsive to our needs as citizens.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you.

Ms. Bourgeois.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Good morning, madam, gentlemen.

I have some questions for each one of you. I'd like to take this opportunity to pass along a message to our chair. Since there are so few of us in attendance, perhaps we will have more time to ask questions.

I'd like you to come back again, Ms. Murray. I also would have liked to get a copy of your submission. If I understood correctly, you worked on the Juneau Committee. You also mentioned the Lincoln Committee. I'd like our researchers to obtain for us any and all information connected with these committees. Your expertise is rather unique.

You have piqued my curiosity. Why was the famous Juneau Committee set up in 1996 following the Quebec referendum? Can you tell us about the Juneau Committee and what connection it bears with the referendum crisis in Quebec? What was going on at the time?

[Dr. Catherine Murray]

We were writing the final chapter of the report and the recommendation about the time the referendum was held. We released the report in January; I believe the referendum was in November. In the report, we made the recommendation to close down Ottawa and move the CBC to Montreal. In particular, we argued for a much more robust bilingual set of program exchanges and development of new types of content, culturally, in news, in documentary production, and so on. We argued for a special envelope to be set aside. My understanding is that the CBC has not been able to pursue its exercise in bilingual television reporting.

For example, shows like the very popular Bon Cop, Bad Cop are not being shown on the CBC with subtitles as necessary. We had hoped for a programming zone experimentally set aside for that within the CBC, but not all of this was possible within the time. We also were quite concerned whether there was the perceived editorial independence of the CBC, both in SRC and in CBC English networks, in the coverage of the referendum campaign at the time. Subsequently, my thinking has evolved quite considerably on how you better protect editorial independence and impartiality at the CBC. I have reluctantly come to the idea that the current system of the ombudsperson and their system for monitoring within the corporation is no longer sustainable in today's political environment.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

History later showed that the CBC and the SRC were extremely biased when it came to covering events in Quebec, particularly those related to the referendum. Would you agree with that statement?

I'm not trying to put you on the spot. Nevertheless, how you answer is extremely important, given what Mr. Norman Hill has told us about the CBC's control. I'm interested in hearing your views on this.

At the time, the SRC and the CBC were very particular about the kind of coverage provided to Quebeckers of the Quebec referendum. Would you agree with me? Yes or no.

[Dr. Catherine Murray]

Let me state that I believe that editorial opinion of some of the elite press in Quebec was unanimous that the CBC was biased at the time. Internal studies were conducted, which were rigorous, and found that on balance Quebeckers themselves felt the CBC had done not a bad job, but that is not a good enough standard.

In my view, each public broadcaster in every era will be faced with major political imbroglios that will have allegations of bias, political preference, and so on. This is part of what a public broadcaster does. If it is taking risks in news coverage, we expect this kind of political controversy. We need a system in place where we manage this controversy and debate its coverage, and that cannot be within the corporation only.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Before I get to Mr. Hill, I have another question for Ms. Murray.

You spoke of four requirements: an ombudsman's office outside the CBC, a debate on ethics in the media, reporters... I can't recall the fourth one. My memory isn't as good as yours.

Could you help me out? I believe you listed four requirements. What was it you said exactly about journalists?

[Dr. Catherine Murray]

Mr. Hill.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Was it Mr. Hill who brought this up? I thought it was Ms. Murray.

[Norman Hill]

Sorry. I thought you were asking her.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Ms. Murray, when you spoke earlier, you listed a number of requirements, including an ombudsman's office outside the CBC. You also talked about a debate on ethics in the media.You stated that the CBC should provide better quality reports. Finally, you also mentioned journalists.

What exactly did you have to say about journalists?

[Dr. Catherine Murray]

I believe that reporters and journalists should assess their current press council system. The Canadian Broadcast Standards Council and the regional press councils are not well enough known to Canadians. I think that the manner in which they make their deliberations is hidden and not particularly well communicated to citizens, and that we need a more integrated, rational, and accountable system.

Thank you.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

I have a question for Mr. Hill, but I'll try to keep it short.

Mr. Hill, in point 9 of your submission to the committee, you state the following:

[...] Canadians need the CBC more than ever to inform us about what is really happening across the country, and to provide us with thoughtful, in-depth analysis.

In your opinion, is the CBC biased? Does it lack objectivity?

[Norman Hill]

One thing I've noticed over the years in watching the CBC--and I have been watching it for many years--is that increasingly in recent years the CBC has tended to shy away from controversial topics. It simply hasn't covered them. The example I gave was that of the security and prosperity partnership of North America. It's received barely a mention by the CBC, and this is of huge consequence to the future of Canada. It's about merging us with Mexico and the United States in a North American entity. For something of this magnitude to take place without our national broadcaster's bringing it up for discussion and analysis is, to me, inexcusable.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

My last question, Mr. Chairman, is for Mr. Mora.

Sir, you stated that you would like to see the State radio and television network share the power it enjoys.

Are you saying then that the CBC wields too much control over news and information in Canada?

[Pedro Mora]

Yes, that's correct. I think there's too much power concentrated in the professional reporters and not enough listening for what's important to the public in general. That's why the Internet is so successful: a lot of young people prefer to go to blogs and other websites because they can reply, and in some cases they can add their news. I think the CBC is missing a way for people to express their own interests rather than just being told what is news today.

It is possible, because community television is doing it. If community television, which is basically privately owned, is doing it, why is it that the CBC cannot do it? I have several times brought in my tapes to the CBC. I phone them and they say yes, just drop it at the front desk, direct it to some reporter, and I never hear back from them. I feel disempowered. CBC is like God talking from above.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Hearing that answer, I must say that I am amazed when you talk about calling someone, or putting tapes in at the door, and they say they'll get back to you but they never return your call. Since I've been a member of Parliament, I've phoned many people back. I phone everyone back who requests my phone call, and so many of them say to me, “I didn't expect to hear from you”. I think it's very important. It's courtesy, number one, whether the answer is yes, no, or maybe. It's nice to know where you stand. So I understand that one very well.

I have one question. In 2004 the CBC adopted eight strategic directions to reflect the corporation's mission-related role and responsibility. Do you think that the reporting of the results of CBC is adequate? Could reporting of results be improved, and if so, how?

Who would like to answer that one?