Volume 7, Number 6

THE CRISIS IN THE ATLANTIC FISHERY

IN 1992 THE NATIONAL MEDIA ARCHIVE FOUND that television news gave the fishing industry disproportionate coverage relative to its contribution to the GDP over the previous four years. Although fishing and logging comprise less than one percent of Canada's GDP, they received 16 percent of CBC and 21 percent of CTV coverage during the period from 1988 to 1992.

Recently, the National Media Archive completed an exhaustive update on that study and found that in 1993, fishing continued to dominate television's attention to the economy. Consistent with that result was the finding that the Maritime provinces themselves also received disproportionate attention relative to their contribution to the country's GDP.

As is illustrated in figure A, coverage of the fisheries comprised 17 percent of CBC and 17 percent of CTV attention to the various sectors of the economy. In contrast, in terms of their contribution to the Canadian economy, fishing and forestry combined comprise less than one percent of Canadian GDP.

Click here to view Figure A: Network's Attention to the Economy Compared to GDP

Atlantic Canada overemphasized in economic coverage

The media's emphasis on fishing creates a concomitant emphasis on Atlantic Canada. Of the coverage on the fisheries, 97 percent of CBC and 83 percent of CTV coverage focused on the Atlantic provinces. In all stories aired in 1993 on Canadian economics, forty-two percent of CBC and thirty-nine percent of CTV were national in origin. However, of the stories that addressed the economic situation or events in a specific region, 20 percent of CBC, and 18 percent of CTV focused on the Atlantic provinces.

Of the coverage of the Atlantic provinces, 64 percent of CBC's attention focused on Newfoundland alone. On the other hand, just 41 percent of CTV's attention was devoted solely to that province. Many may argue that the demise of the fishery in Newfoundland is so far reaching that it warrants this intense scrutiny. CBC emphasized that a way of life was ending. For example, on 31 August Pamela Wallin began the third story of the night: "And to other Canadian news now, cod fishing as a way of life all but ended today in Atlantic Canada. As expected, the federal government extended a moratorium shutting down a huge chunk of the east coast fishery. The original moratorium idled at least 20,000 fish industry workers in Newfoundland. Today's extension adds another 12,000 to that list, people from all parts of Atlantic Canada. Ottawa is promising short-term aid, but as Kas Roussy reports, the future has never looked so bleak."

The emphasis on the fisheries created the erroneous image that fishing was the dominant industry in the province, and more important, that fishing was the core of the island's economy. Both networks reported on the moratorium and exhaustively recounted the fate of those forced to accept the government's compensation package. Most significantly, the networks fostered the myth that fishing was the central way of life on the island. For example, on 6 July 1993, CTV's Colin Gray ended his story on declining cod stocks lamenting a way of life: "The fishery was something that once helped to define Atlantic Canada. If all else failed, you could always make a living from the sea. That is no longer true for everyone. It may soon be true for almost no one."

The networks' sympathy for the plight of Newfoundlanders in highlighting the declining cod stocks may have actually worsened the situation for Atlantic Canada. According to Doug House, the head of the Economic Recovery Commission for Newfoundland, the fishery accounts for just six percent of its economy. This argument was raised when Mr. House went on a cross-country tour in an effort to assuage people's fears about the health of the Newfoundland economy. House had the unenviable job of trying to persuade Canadians that Newfoundland is actually in pretty good economic condition and is still an attractive place for investment.

That he had to engage in such a promotional campaign underlines the power of the media. By over-emphasizing the problems in the cod fishery, the media presented to Canadians outside of Newfoundland a warped image of that province's economic destitution and devastation.

Summary of Fisheries

Coverage of the fisheries comprised 17 percent of CBC and 17 percent of CTV attention to the various sectors of the economy. In contrast, in terms of their contribution to the Canadian economy, fishing and forestry combined comprise less than one percent of Canadian GDP.

Atlantic Canada has continued to be overemphasized in economic coverage. Of the coverage on the fisheries, 97 percent of CBC and 83 percent of CTV focused on the Atlantic provinces.

National English Television's Coverage of the Quebec Election--the Midway Point

AT THE START OF THE QUEBEC ELECTION campaign, the Globe and Mail reported that interest outside Quebec was higher for the election campaign than interest inside the province. One Quebec newspaper, le Soleil, reported in a front-page story that there were twice as many reporters from English media as from French media on the campaign buses.

In fact, this election is proving to be the most reported of any recent provincial campaign of the decade. No other provincial election has even come close to receiving the amount of attention the Quebec election has received to the mid-way point in the campaign. Ironically, by the end of the first week of the campaign, Wendy Mesley acknowledged that not much was happening on the campaign trail: "Despite the summer temperatures, Quebec's election campaign has so far been anything but hot." Despite the lack of action, the national networks continue to closely monitor the campaign's progression.

By day 27 of the campaign, the CBC had run 31 stories and CTV 29 on the Quebec election. The greatest number of stories any other province received during its last campaign was British Columbia, which got five stories on CTV. All the other provinces, including Ontario, received less than 4 stories on either network to this point in the campaign.

Presumably the heightened attention to the Quebec campaign was due to the realization that this election could have far-reaching consequences for the rest of the country if a separatist government were elected. The consequences of the sovereignty issue will profoundly affect the history of the rest of the country.

Networks fail to address consequences of sovereignty

While Quebec's separation, should it occur, will have a significant impact outside Quebec's borders, the networks have been surprisingly reluctant to discuss the economic consequences of Quebec sovereignty. Only ten percent of each network's attention to the Quebec campaign examined the economic consequences of Quebec separating from Canada.

This is perplexing given the intense scrutiny this campaign has received from the national English networks. It is even more disturbing in light of the networks' promises to provide comprehensive coverage. Wendy Mesley's statements of 28 July that "We'll look at what is at stake for Quebec and for the rest of Canada" has not materialized.

Far from informing the public about the high stakes involved if Quebec separates, the networks have predominately focused on the personalities and antics of the campaigners. At the mid-way point, over one-third of CBC's and almost one-half of CTV's attention to the campaign has focused on the campaign trail. The apparent rift between Bloc Quebecois leader Lucien Bouchard and Parti Quebecois leader Jacques Parizeau received far more attention than the consequences of the outcome of this election.

Separation dominates English TV coverage

Although the networks have failed to address the aftermath of a separate Quebec, the issue of separation was the dominant issue in the media coverage. Separation rhetoric comprised over one-third of CBC and almost one-third of CTV attention to the election campaign (figure B). While the media have focused on this issue almost exclusively, polls indicate that the public has other issues on its mind. According to a Gallup poll issued on 28 July only five percent of Quebeckers think separation is the most important issue facing the country.

Click here to view Figure B: Coverage of the Quebec election campaign, July 25 to August 21, 1994

Nonetheless, the national networks focused on separatism during the first half of the campaign. For example, on 25 July Sandie Rinaldo introduced the election story saying: "Parizeau was in the province's separatist heartland and his message about how he would deal with the federal government was tough and uncompromising." In the story, Alan Fryer focused on the people in the region: "Around here, support for the PQ and for separation is as traditional as it is strong. "`I've been a PQist for 20 years'" says this man, `since the time of Levesque.'" Little wonder Jacques Parizeau chose this city on the Saguenay to kick off his campaign."

Even when the candidates veered away from the topic of separation, the networks continued to highlight regions with separatist leanings. For example, on 4 August, CBC's Kevin Tibbles surveyed the views of people in a region which has had a history of voting for the Liberals, Parti Quebecois and Bloc Quebecois. Tibbles' focus was not on which party would best represent the region, but on the citizens' views of separation. In one exchange, a husband and wife discuss their feelings about separation.

Paul Turhan: Well, I've been P.Q. since P.Q. is P.Q.

Kevin Tibbles: They say they're not afraid of separation.

Paul Turhan: It's like a divorce, you know. Divorce, for sure it's hurt, but sometimes--some things have to be done, I think it have to be done.

Jobs given short shrift

According to the previously-mentioned Gallup poll, thirty-four percent of Quebeckers feel the most important issue facing the country is jobs. Yet their concern with the economy was not reflected in overall national television coverage, where jobs received only eight percent of CBC and seven percent of CTV's attention.

When the jobs issue was mentioned it was given only cursory attention rather than in-depth coverage. For example, on 25 July Sandie Rinaldo introduced the story on the Quebec campaign saying: "The Quebec election campaign focused on jobs, the economy and relationships with Ottawa today." However, Alan Fryer's following report said little about the two parties' policies on jobs or the economy, but focused more on separation instead.

Predicting a PQ victory

It is indeed ironic that this provincial election campaign has received so much attention since the media themselves have been predicting a PQ victory from the first day. On the first full day of the campaign, 25 July, Wendy Mesley introduced a CBC Prime Time story saying: "The choice Quebeckers make on September 12th could start the country down the road to dissolution. Parti Quebecois leader Jacques Parizeau has promised a referendum on sovereignty within ten months of a P.Q. victory, and his party is well ahead in the polls."

Both networks used the polls extensively to predict a P.Q. victory. CTV News reporter Colin Gray concluded a story on 27 July saying: "Johnson is trying to convince Quebeckers that the only alternative to his government is a separatist option that will cost jobs. But the PQ says there won't be a referendum on sovereignty for nearly a year. And with polls showing many Quebeckers are fed up with the Liberals, Johnson's main problem may be those people who think it might just be worth taking a chance."

. . . thirty-four percent of Quebeckers feel the most important issue facing the country is jobs. Yet their concern with the economy was not reflected in overall national television coverage . . .

While the first week of the campaign saw reporters and candidates all but call the election won by the Parti Quebecois, polls released in the second and third week showed the Liberals gaining momentum. For example, on 29 July Kevin Tibbles reported: "Whether Johnson's decision to attack almost exclusively the PQ's sovereignty option is enough to get him elected remains to be seen. But when this election was called, many expected Jacques Parizeau to knock Daniel Johnson flat on his back. As week one winds down, Johnson is still standing, more than holding his own."

Media analysts and practitioners often defend their practice of following the leaders because, they say, it tells voters about the organization of the parties and provides insight into how they might run government. They also argue that this information is sufficient for voters to make a decision about which government to choose.

While the first week of the campaign saw reporters and candidates all but call the election won by the Parti Quebecois, polls released in the second and third week showed the Liberals gaining momentum.

Considering that the majority of the viewers in English Canada have no say in the outcome of the campaign, is there a need to follow the electioneering of the parties and candidates so closely? Of what value or interest is it for Canadians to learn, as CTV reported on 9 August, about the relationship between the media and the parties in this campaign? Cynthia Drummond concluded that story with this interesting admission: "Both teams are doing what they must to ensure maximum coverage and positive coverage for their leaders. Journalists are there waiting for someone to say something important or make a mistake, and the voters in whose hands the fates of the leaders finally rest, are by all counts taking in a few television pictures of the campaign, giving a collective yawn, and getting on with enjoying what's left of the short Quebec summer." If the Quebec voters are not interested in the campaign trail, why do the networks believe that the rest of the county is concerned?

This emphasis on the Quebec campaign may reveal that while the networks have dedicated extraordinary resources and personnel to the campaign with little regard to the actual impact on Canada, the campaign will be viewed in the same way as all other campaigns. This is in stark contrast to what Canadians learn about the election process in other parts of the country.

Summary of the first half of the Quebec election

The dominant issue in the media's coverage of the election campaign has been separation. This single issue comprised over one-third of CBC and almost one-third of CTV attention to the election campaign.

So far, the networks have failed to address the consequences of sovereignty. Only ten percent of each network's attention to the Quebec campaign examined the consequences of Quebec separating from Canada.

Both networks used the polls extensively to buttress their argument that it was almost a given that the PQ would win the election.

Methodology on the Quebec campaign

Results are based on 33 CBC and 36 CTV News stories on the Quebec election campaign from July 25 to August 21, 1994. All stories appearing during that time were coded, representing a total population rather than a random sample of stories.

Reality Check: Did O.J. Simpson Receive More Attention than Rwanda?

"Knock, knock," said Simpson.
"Who's there?" asked the friend.
"O.J."
"O.J. who?" asked the friend.
"You're on the jury!" said Simpson with a laugh. [Account reported in Newsweek, August 29, 1994.]

ON 16 JULY 1994, OXFAM CANADA RAN AN AD in major Canadian newspapers to appeal for aid to Rwanda. In large type the ad read: "`O.J. SIMPSON LIMITED TO TEN VISITORS A DAY.' In other news: `500,000 Rwandans slaughtered. Another half million fighting for their lives in refugee camps.'" In a recent interview with TV Guide, Lloyd Robertson, Senior News Anchor at CTV answers the critics saying: "...as you back over the past several months and look at the lineup of our news show, you'll see that Rwanda got much more coverage than O.J. over the long haul."

We decided to take Robertson up on the challenge and test whether the networks actually gave more attention to O.J. Simpson than to the Rwanda story. The Oxfam ad and Lloyd Robertson's defence imply three elements of judging the importance of a news story. The first is simply the number of stories on the

". . . you'll see that Rwanda got much more coverage than O.J. over the long haul."

issues; second, the amount of attention; and finally, the order of items in terms of importance. As most viewers realize, the stories at the beginning of the news are deemed the most important. We examined all stories on CBC Prime Time and CTV News on Rwanda and O.J. Simpson to discern the nature of the coverage.

Rwanda got more stories than O.J.

Lloyd Robertson hasn't been voted TV Guide's "Most Trusted Anchor" for the past eight years running for nothing. His news show did in fact run more stories on Rwanda than O.J. Simpson from June 14 to August 24, as did CBC Prime Time.

CBC Pays More Attention to Rwanda

However, on CTV, the total amount of coverage as measured by the number of words devoted to O.J. Simpson, was slightly higher than the number devoted to Rwanda. Figure C illustrates this. On CBC Prime Time, however, the Rwanda story received one-quarter more coverage than the O.J. Simpson saga.

Click here to view Figure C: Words Devoted to Rwanda and O.J. Simpson

Although CTV gave as much time to both stories, they did judge Rwanda to be more important. Both networks presented more stories featuring Rwanda in the top items of the newscast than they did the O.J. Simpson story. Rwanda stories were in the top three placements in over one-third of CTV's and one-third of CBC's stories on the crisis. As well, on CTV, Rwanda stories were positioned fourth to sixth one-third of the time. In contrast, O.J. Simpson stories tended to be presented in the middle of both networks' newscasts.

Click here to view Figure D: Stories Devoted to Rwanda and O.J. Simpson

Summary of Rwanda and O.J. Simpson

In a recent newspaper advertisement, Oxfam Canada implied that North American news organizations were more concerned with the O.J. Simpson murder hearings than with the Rwanda story.

In fact, CBC Prime Time News and CTV News presented more stories on Rwanda than they did on O.J. Simpson.

While CTV gave slightly more time overall to O.J. Simpson than to Rwanda, CBC's coverage presented one-quarter more words on Rwanda.

Both networks placed the Rwanda story in their top news items more often than the O.J. Simpson story.

Methodology on Rwanda and O.J. Simpson

All stories on Rwanda and O.J. Simpson from June 14 to August 24 were analyzed according to their date, placement and length, as measured by the number of words in each story.

info@fraserinstitute.ca You can contact us at the above email address for any comments or information requests. Please report any dead links or technical problems.

If you know someone who would be interested in this web page, please enter their email address below, and we will forward this URL to them: Email Address:

Last Modified: Wednesday, October 20, 1999.