You think that lack of public trust is caused by a lack of viewpoints because, like you said, you have these so-called pundits who are so-called reflective of Canadian viewpoints on a wide variety of the spectrum, but they're not reflected. Canadians feel like their viewpoints aren't represented in the public because of these biased panels that have a certain political skew; that's the term you used.
What's the effect of that? Does that create more polarization amongst Canadians and amongst our academic researchers? Does it also have the effect of radicalizing Canadians?