Canadian Heritage Committee on June 5th, 2007

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

Mr. Burman, representatives of francophone communities outside Quebec that we have met with, complained about a shortage of journalists in their communities, and a lack of adequate and unbiased news coverage. It would seem there are few journalists willing to go to the regions.

I would like to know whether you have made any effort to ensure adequate news coverage? Are there incentives? Do you provide courses and information to journalists with respect to dealing with information on aboriginal or francophone communities outside Quebec? Do they get specific treatment?

[Tony Burman]

I think what we're becoming more and more aware of is the need for us to further decentralize our news and current affairs operation in a way that empowers people to contribute to our various programs and our services and our networks in a way that isn't dependent on larger centres like Toronto or Montreal. So I think in that sense we're trying to expand the breadth and the range of our coverage, and we clearly have to do that through journalists on the ground. There are incentives. We're incredibly aware that we've got to encourage people to cover this country in all of its locations. I think a limitation for us--and this gets back to the awful question of resources--is our resource level. As chief journalists, both Alain and I would easily make arguments for a greater number of journalists in a greater number of communities in this country, but we have our limitation that clearly we have to deal with.

So we do what we can with the resources that are in front of us.

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

Finally, Mr. Burman, I have one last question.

I received an e-mail—and I will name the individual because he's well-known—from Réjean Beaulieu of the Canard Réincarné. This gentleman lodged a complaint with the ombudsman because when we went to Vancouver he was one of three francophones outside Quebec who came to discuss English CBC's services, and his testimony was the only one that was not reported upon by CBC. The CBC did not report on his testimony, which was slightly different from that of the other two people. In fact that was something that I had pointed out.

Are you aware of this complaint? He sent it to Mr. Pierre Guérin who is responsible for these matters, and he doesn't seem to have received a response.

It wouldn't be the first time—

[Tony Burman]

Is this...? Yes.

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

When the committee travelled, we met with at least four people who told us that they rarely receive responses when they complain to the CBC.

Earlier on, I was reading this wonderful small guide entitled "Journalistic Standards and Practises" and I was trying to see what recourse people have or, at the very least, how they can have their voices heard. They have to resort to dealing with the ombudsman, despite the fact that they could be heard in their own community.

[Tony Burman]

It's hard to deal with specifics when I don't know the details of those specifics, but this whole thing perplexes me. We're quite aggressive within CBC and Radio-Canada in providing responses to people who either send inquiries or complaints. In a sense, that's the first line of response, from our program element. I can't remember--I think we have a 14-day requirement within.... I think there's a lot of accountability on that, so clearly in the fullness of time, there are things that slip through the cracks, but often when we are presented with these complaints, we discover that there's an answer to it. So I guess all I can say is let's get the details afterwards and we'll certainly look into it, because we are incredibly conscious of the need for us to respond to Canadians who send inquiries to us, and I think our track record in recent years has been very good on that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you.

Mr. Fast.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to both of you for attending today.

When we got here this morning we were given a copy of the handbook of journalistic standards and practices for CBC and Radio-Canada. I've had a quick chance to review some of the points in there. What jumped out at me was, first of all, on page 99, under personnel standards, where it states, “The CBC must not only be impartial, it must also project an image of impartiality.” So the whole issue of how the public perceives CBC...it's going beyond actual objectivity. It goes right to the root of what do Canadians think of CBC Radio-Canada.

As you know, there are many Canadians who are very supportive of CBC, but there are also many Canadians for whom CBC either has become irrelevant or it no longer reflects their particular values. Quite frankly, I've never bought into the myth that reporters can be completely unbiased. We're all human. We bring a package of values to the table and a package of perspectives that inevitably colour anything we do. I think the best we can hope for is to achieve a standard of objectivity that CBC, for example, would have credibility with the people it's supposed to be serving, which is the Canadian public.

I'd like to ask a couple of questions about hiring and firing policies. You have a pretty comprehensive set of journalistic standards that your staff has to comply with. I hearken back to an unfortunate incident where one of your employees was alleged to have doctored a photograph and enhanced it to make an environmental site look worse than it really was. Do you recall that particular incident?

[Tony Burman]

No.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

It just happened recently. I understand there was the use of filters to project an image that was worse than it really was. Do you recall that incident?

[Tony Burman]

I usually have an incredibly careful memory of these things, but I do not.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

We actually had testimony before us several meetings ago about that very issue.

Let me then take it a further step. Could you describe for the committee the process you go through in hiring reporters to ensure that they're not bringing to the table a bias? When reporters are discovered to have somehow allowed their biases to filter into their reporting, what steps are taken to discipline them and perhaps terminate their employment when it's warranted?

[Tony Burman]

The selection process for the hiring of any staff, including reporters, is quite rigorous. When a position is open we post it, it's publicly known, people compete for it, there are various processes of elimination, and then there's a short list. There's usually a panel of four or five of our senior people who are then empowered to choose the best person.

Generally our hiring would not be at the entry level. We hire people who have experience as reporters. I think in that case we have a track record with these individuals. We're very conscious of whether or not an individual reveals or has revealed in his or her past some sort of bias. I think it's unusual if that is the case. That usually kind of eliminates the person from journalism pretty early on.

I think journalism is a team game. We have editors, we have assignment editors, and we have producers. Part of the safeguards that are inherent in a journalistic policy book like we have here is that we feel there are enough levels that if somebody either malevolently or innocently starts revealing a kind of passion or bias in certain ways, it's caught before it goes on air. I think that's why we're able to control these potential circumstances.

In terms of your second question, we have no patience for people who violate our journalistic policy book. We hold them accountable. There are various ways that we do that. Again, I don't think we have that problem as nearly as often as perhaps your question suggested, in the sense that I think we're blessed with a wide choice of people who want to become CBC journalists. In that sense, the ones who are chosen are really of quite high calibre.

I accept your earlier point that we all have personal views and personal passions in these things. I think what one learns as an experienced journalist is to park those things at the door. I think generally, and certainly with my CBC and Radio-Canada colleagues, is that we do that effectively.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

In your presentation you referred to how you try to ensure that your reporting is balanced. One of the things you referred to was the role of the CBC ombudsman. I believe the CBC, especially English television, is still having trouble reaching out to Canadians. I think there is much more that can be done to make CBC relevant. Have you considered other ways of reaching out to Canadians, making sure that the coverage you have is as objective as possible?

[Tony Burman]

We do that. I made reference to it in my opening remarks. We do this on a continuing basis throughout the year. We certainly do it when we are focused on special events such as elections or a major foreign international crisis like the Iraq situation, for example. We create citizen panels. We create committees of academics or outsiders who are invited to critique our coverage.

There are about two or three different levels of coverage in an election. During an election campaign, which as you know goes for six or seven weeks, my senior team meets every Friday with a group from across the country who have nothing to do with the CBC and who reflect a whole variety of political perspectives. They give us very candid comments on how our coverage is on radio, television, or online.

I think there is a continual effort on our part, as you put it, to reach out to Canadians and to get some sense as to whether what they're getting on air or their Internet sites is acceptable and relevant to them.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you.

Mr. Scarpaleggia.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm not familiar with the incident that Mr. Fast brought up about the doctoring of an image. The most flagrant episode I'm aware of in terms of misleading the public on a news story--and you've probably seen this clip yourself on a U.S. private station--is where the reporter was reporting from a hurricane zone. She was sitting in a boat to show how high the water levels were, and as she was reporting very gravely from her canoe, a cameraman walked by her. Essentially, the water wasn't deep at all.

[Tony Burman]

Oh, God.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

I guess you won't be hiring that reporter at the CBC.

[Tony Burman]

No, and I'll take note of the person's name. Thank you.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

You talked about these panels, especially during election time, to ensure that you're putting out objective news. To your knowledge, do private broadcasters do that?

[Tony Burman]

Not to my knowledge, and certainly not to the extent that we do. Again, the premise of our initiative is that we can't have Canadians rely simply on the judgment of CBC journalists as to whether or not we're doing well. In that sense, we're quite happy to outsource it, so to speak, and to get outside views to how we're doing. It's really very valuable to us.

[Alain Saulnier]

If you'll allow me, I would like to point out that the very fact that we can communicate with people on the Internet and during call-in shows, on blogs etc., means that we can maintain a constant communication with the public. In this regard, we can know what people think of our shows. Listener services, complaints departments, e-mail exchanges, web blogs and phone-in shows give people an opportunity to have their voices heard. The fact that we offer these services is probably unique.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

In terms of bias in reporting, I don't believe there's a systematic bias.

This might not be bias at all, but maybe across the country there's a bit of quirkiness in the sense that reporters might go to the same experts for opinions because it's easier; they have their number in their BlackBerry and they've established a rapport with them.

Once I remember--and again, this was a private broadcaster--watching a news clip about day care on the six o'clock news and I saw a friend of mine. The clip showed them taking their kids to day care. I asked how they got on the news and it turned out so-and-so's brother worked for the station.

How do you guard against reporters or producers getting too comfortable and always going to the same people, and sometimes giving profiles to the same people?