LARRY ZOLF:
Harper's distrust of media not helping him
CBC News Viewpoint | March 28, 2006 | More from Larry Zolf
Veteran journalist and Canadian political expert Larry Zolf is a regular contributor to CBC News Online. Larry has been a critic, reporter, producer and consultant for CBC news and current affairs since he joined the CBC in 1962. Born and raised in North End Winnipeg, the hotbed of general strikes and socialism, Larry has covered stories such as integration in Mississippi and the October Crisis in Quebec. He was one of the hosts of the CBCs flagship current affairs television show "This Hour Has 7 Days." He is now retired.
"PM may hold cabinet meetings in secret," declares a headline on a National Post story, the latest bulletin in Stephen Harper’s war against the media.
Our prime minister has always disliked the media. Especially in his Reform party days, Harper found the media to be lazy and untutored in the ways of Western Canada and free-enterprise government. He saw the press as basically liberal, if not socialist.
He blamed the media for his sudden loss in 2004, believing they had bought into the Martin argument that Harper was an extremist Bush-style right-winger and somehow "dangerous."
Harper lays at least part of the blame for his precarious minority on the media's failure to show how weak and indecisive the Martin Liberals really were. As Harper sees it, the Liberals were propped up by a liberal media that emphasized his pro-Bush, pro-Iraq invasion views and depicted him as a critic of medicare.
Harper also feels it was the liberal media that stopped his momentum and prevented him from getting a majority.
From Harper’s extreme right-wing point of view, the media is indeed the enemy. But looking at the last election from a neutral perspective, Harper has it all wrong. In the 2006 campaign, the media had tired of Martin and hammered his government's record of corruption in the sponsorship scandal and the income-trust controversy.
The media also gave Harper credit for change, praising his policy-a-day campaign as proof positive that he was now a moderate and a progressive and not the "scary" right-winger of his Reform days.
It was the media that made Harper a major contender in Quebec, where the Charest machine gave him a modest 10 seats.
The media also suggested Harper might sweep Quebec in the next election.
With media antipathy to the Martin Liberals, suddenly Harper the former Reformer, the right-winger, was the proper vehicle for the media desire for a change in government.
Next the media grabbed on to Harper’s role in Afghanistan. Harper’s flying mission to Afghanistan to visit the troops made headlines everywhere.
Harper said Canada would stay the course in Afghanistan. Body bags would not deter Canada. Nor would he allow a debate over Afghanistan in Parliament.
Harper still did not trust the media. He handled the Afghanistan visit and foreign affairs all by himself, preferring not to rely on unseasoned Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay to handle Hamas, Israel and the Palestinians.
What Harper got out of frenetic one-man band activity was an extended political honeymoon with the public. Still, the prime minister was furious at the press for its handling of the controversies over the cabinet appointment of floor-crossing Liberal David Emerson and the possible replacement of Ethics Commissioner Bernard Shapiro.
Now it turns out that Harper’s feud with the press gallery over its coverage of his young government may have backfired on him.
Says the National Post, "Stephen Harper’s recent visit to the Canadian troops in Afghanistan failed to boost waning public support for the Afghanistan mission."
This National Post story is based on the latest Ipsos-Reid poll showing a drop in support of 2% nationally for the Afghanistan mission. In Quebec, the poll found, a majority of Quebecers are opposed to the Afghanistan mission and want the troops to come home now.
Harper sees this shift in mood as the work of the wicked media out to get him again.
For Harper, this go-it-alone approach is presenting problems, especially in Quebec with Afghanistan.
But with his total denial of access to the media that backed him in the first place, he isn't doing himself any favours.
Harper’s treatment of the media is that of an ingrate. The media made Harper. The media also first made Trudeau and Mulroney. Later, the media made both Trudeau and Mulroney and their parties suffer at the polls.
A similar fate awaits Harper if he doesn’t change his basic suspicion and hatred of reporters and news commentators.
Right now, the prime minister urgently needs better media relations if he wants to survive minority status and go on to better things in the future.
LETTERS:
Mr. Zolf apparently thinks the media is to be credited for changing Stephen Harper from a 'scary right winger' to a 'moderate'. In fact, the 'scary right winger' was hung on him by the media, and is in no way accurate.
Any person outside of Canada's incestuous media frog pond would know that Harper's policies would be considered moderate in any part of Western Europe, and in the Great Satan, America, Harper would be considered a LEFT wing candidate.
Far from being an ingrate, Harper has nothing to be grateful for. The media consistently misrepresents his views, gleefully jumps on any hint of controversy, and continues to hint darkly at a 'secret agenda'. This wouldn't be so bothersome if the same media hadn't spent the last twelve years ignoring Liberal corruption until it couldn't be avoided.
Small wonder I prefer to get my news from other sources than the Canadian media.
—Kevin Bertsch | Richmond Hill, Ont.
While the majority of your column is bang on, one has to wonder whether the 'father knows best' mentality which most attribute to those who govern in Ottawa has not effected your views.
While no-one would dispute the role of the media in assisting the creation of movements across this land, I would venture a guess that most would say that the media does not 'make' anyone. I would further venture a guess that it is exactly this kind of view - the power of the media to 'make' someone or something important - that will cause the hair on the back of those right wing thinkers in this country to rise.
—Ian McTavish | Canoe, B.C.
Larry Zolf's article, in a nutshell, is what's wrong with Canada today--and what's wrong with our media.
The media "made" Stephen Harper? That would be news to him and the electorate who voted for him. The media, aside from throwing Harper a few kudos because, after all, he ran a much better campaign than the Liberals, NDP, and the BQ--a very competent campaign, period--have acted like the official opposition, and unelected at that.
Larry Zolf is wearing blinkers if he can't see how self-interested he and all of the other pundits are. Stephen Harper owes the media exactly nothing--and many of us who have watched with amazement and not a little consternation as the CBC, the Toronto Star, the Parliamentary Press Gallery, etc., have acted like they run the country, are quite delighted to see him setting his own agenda.
—J Hodgkins
It must be very difficult for many media people to see themselves reduced to merely reporting events as they happen. After all, they have received advance notice and leaked details of virtually every government action and announcements in recent history. Now they just get to learn stuff at the same time as us unwashed masses. Pull up a chair Mr. Zolf.
There's no more special media bread left on the government serving tray, so I guess you will have to settle for some cake, just like the rest of us. If you feel really indignant, just scream louder about "Harpers extreme right-wing pont of view". Whatever that means. It won't help you be more important. But it'll probably make you feel more important.
—Ron Laffin | Toronto
Up until today I have not agreed with Prime Minister Harpers handling of the press. After reading Larry Zolf's viewpoint I may have just been ppersuadedto change my mind.
—Jeff Davis | Brandon, Man.
This is quite arrogant and unbelievable of Larry Zolf to surmise that the media elects Parliamentarians and Prime Ministers are mere puppets of these King makers, who will suffer an inglorious fate if the media decide to make it so.
Last time I checked, I the Citizen of this country elect a citizen of this country to be a parliamentarian and in turn to be the PRIME MINISTER. Since when have we surrendered our right to vote to you arrogant clowns in the liberal mass media
?
—Ron Adriano | Ottawa
While not directly related to the topic of Mr. Zolf's article, the following caught my attention:
"Harper’s treatment of the media is that of an ingrate. The media made Harper. The media also first made Trudeau and Mulroney. Later, the media made both Trudeau and Mulroney and their parties suffer at the polls.
A similar fate awaits Harper if he doesn’t change his basic suspicion and hatred of reporters and news commentators."
Is it any wonder the Canadian public holds the profession of journalism in such low regard? Such a confession as the one above reinforces the belief of the growing number of Canadians that the mainstream media spins the news instead of reporting it.
The media seems to have moved from being a purveyor of facts to some sort of public policy centre set on telling us what the "Canadian" perspective must be on any given topic - including who we must vote for. Facts rarely seem to get in the way of a good story about political or social issues any more.
This attitude seems to permeate our national news organizations and is driving many of us to alternate news services, most notably internet based services. We want to know the facts on serious issues, but all we get is told is what we should be thinking or how things should be according to those who believe they are more capable of knowing what is right - the mainstream media.
While the online alternatives may not be perfect in this area, at least they are open about their biases and intentions in their reports.
—Denis Moorhead | Calgary
^TOP
