Who Speaks for a New Canadian Community? – New Canadian Media – NCM

Good reflections on media and public spokesman for different communities (also applies to groups within the “mainstream”):

When I produce religious and spiritual TV, I can usually locate pious types with an agenda of growth or political advancement, eager to proclaim their messages.  In fact, they find me before I find them. It’s not so easy to find ground-level community types who include women and youths in their productions.  It is harder animating liberal voices.

It’s too easy to mischaracterize a community by who comes forward to speak for it.   Media coverage and official political acknowledgement imparts a sort of legitimacy.  You have to wonder, without media coverage would there have been prominence for such figures and organizations as the Rev. Al Sharpton in the U.S., or the late Dudley Laws in Canada, Canadian Punjabi separatist groups, and the official-sounding, yet marginal, Canadian Islamic Congress?

In all cases, part of their credibility derived from savvy use of the media.  The media are willing participants.  Some lazy reporters and producers choose guests and sources on the basis of who is readily available on a moment’s notice, who’s articulate, or worse yet, who has the most anti-social, outrageous or activist point of view.

It is in our nature to be drawn to radical voices. Many of us love a fight.

Thus the militant voices start to punch far above their weight.  The mainstream starts to accord them special status that they haven’t really earned.

Who Speaks for a New Canadian Community? – New Canadian Media – NCM.

Not all ethnic media outlets keen to pose with PM – Politics – CBC News

Good article by Kady O’Malley on the government’s approach to ethnic media, part of their outreach to ethnic communities. Strong comments by Madeline Zinick, Canadian Ethnic Media Association chair and Omni TV vice-president (one of the main TV stations offering program in numerous languages):

“Generally, those journalists who are aggressive, and who like to do analysis and be challenging to the PM or any politician, more and more, they aren’t enjoying this kind of cattle call gong show approach,” she told CBC News.

According to Zinick, before the holidays Harper, who skipped his annual Christmas reception for the parliamentary press gallery, was the guest of honour at what his office billed as an “intimate family event” in Toronto, to which key “media leaders” were encouraged to bring members of their families in lieu of a TV crew.

“No cameras, no photos, no audio … you can’t report it in any way. Everyone had to wait in the holding area until Harper and his wife [Laureen] appeared, and there were no questions, just individual photos.”

Given those restrictions, Zinick says, “Why go and waste your time?”

Previous governments also courted the ethnic media (as do all political parties). However, previous governments did not spurn the national media to this extent by limiting media access.

Not all ethnic media outlets keen to pose with PM – Politics – CBC News.

Keller vs Greenwald: Why Not Both? « The Dish

A good discussion by Andrew Sullivan on open bias versus hidden bias, and his preference, as practiced by the Dish, for “biased and balanced”. Another illustration of the debate over bias and ideology, this time in the media:

But on the basis of this exchange, I think Glenn has the advantage. And that’s because his idea of journalism is inherently more honest – declaring your biases is always more transparent than concealing them. That’s why, I think, the web has rewarded individual stars who report and write but make no bones about where they are coming from. In the end, they seem more reliable and accountable because of their biases than institutions pretending to be above it all. In the NYT, the hidden biases are pretty obvious: an embedded liberal mindset in choosing what to cover, and how; and a self-understanding as a responsible and deeply connected institution in an American system of governance. These things sometimes coexist easily – as a liberal paper covering the Obama administration, for example, with sympathetic toughness. And sometimes, they don’t – as a liberal paper covering the Bush administration, for example, and becoming implicit with its newspeak.

Keller vs Greenwald: Why Not Both? « The Dish.

Government paid for media monitoring of immigration minister’s image – The Globe and Mail

Government paid for media monitoring of immigration minister’s image – The Globe and Mail.

Canada’s Conservative government: in picture-storybook form | Toronto Star

Canada’s Conservative government: in picture-storybook form | Toronto Star.