Volume 8, Number 4 - May, 1995

ON CBC, DROPPING UNEMPLOYMENT A BAD NEWS STORY

IN 1992 THE NATIONAL MEDIA ARCHIVE GAVE ITS 5-year analysis on how the economy is reported by the national networks. Among the findings on the reporting of economic indicators was the conclusion that good economic news is no news. The Archive has updated that study, and over the next few months will be providing the results. Much has happened in the economy and politics since 1992. A new government, whose election campaign mantra was "jobs, jobs, jobs," has had to deal with a 10 cent reduction in the dollar, a 3 percentage point increase in interest rates, and a down-grade in its credit rating.

We begin our report on the economy with the defining issue of the Liberal party's election campaign: jobs. Since the Liberals have come to power the jobless rate has gone from 11.0 percent to February's 1995 low of 9.6 percent.

Good news on unemployment gaining headlines

As figure A shows, as the unemployment rate decreased, network attention increased. This is in contrast to the National Media Archive's previous study where increases in unemployment were met with more attention than decreases in unemployment.

This finding should not come as a surprise. Because high unemployment had become the norm since 1991, its monthly fluctuations, even if they were on the increase, did not warrant substantial news coverage. However, as the trend began to shift from increasing to decreasing unemployment, the networks picked up their interest.

If it is true that journalists value as newsworthy change more than the direction of the indicator, then the change in direction, ie., unemployment going down, should have been given more attention than no change in unemployment figures. When we examined unemployment from 1988-1992 not only did the networks give more attention to unemployment going up, but they placed it more prominently in the newscast.

In 1993 and 1994 this did not occur on CBC. Of the 13 stories on increasing unemployment reported by CBC in the two years analyzed, 7 of them were reported in the evening's top five stories. In contrast, of the 26 stories which reported the unemployment rate going down, 54 percent were in the top five placements of the newscast.

CTV places more emphasis on the lowering jobless rate

CTV's coverage differed substantially from that of CBC. On CTV when the unemployment rate went down it was reported more frequently at the top of the news than when it went up. Of the 12 stories on CTV on increasing unemployment, half were presented in the top five stories. Of the 28 stories on unemployment going down, 64 percent were in the top five placements.

While both networks report declines in unemployment more frequently and with more attention than increases, their coverage still focused on the negative. On CBC, when unemployment was on falling, assessments and analysis were three times as likely to be negative as positive. Coverage was predictably negative when unemployment went up, but it was not nearly as negative as when unemployment went down. For example, when the unemployment rate went to its lowest level in two years, CBC provided the downside to every positive statistic.

In contrast, on CTV, increasing unemployment received more negative attention than decreasing unemployment. Assessments of unemployment on the increase was 59 percent negative. Assessments of decreasing unemployment were 56 percent negative. In both instances, CTV's sources were less likely than CBC's to be negative about the outlook for unemployment.

One illustration of the difference in tone between the networks on reporting the unemployment rate is their April 8, 1995, treatment of the decline in unemployment. While both networks reported the salient points, CBC's introduction and conclusion were much more pessimistic than that CTV's.

. . . as the unemployment rate decreased, network attention increased. This is in contrast to the National Media Archive's previous study where increases in unemployment were met with more attention than decreases in unemployment.

Pamela Wallin's introduction began on a positive note: "Good evening. Canada's unemployment rate has fallen to a two-year low. Statistics Canada today released the details of what CBC News reported last night, that the jobless rate is down half a percent to 10.6 percent. And Statscan says the drop reflects a real increase in jobs in some of the hardest hit sectors of the economy." Bill Cameron continued with the theme that would also be Allan Garr's: "With close to 1.5 million Canadians unemployed, the overall jobless picture is still pretty bleak, but the bragging in Ottawa has already begun. Our economic specialist Allen Garr looks at what the new numbers mean, and who, if anyone, deserves the credit."

In contrast, Lloyd Robertson's introduction did not report the downside of the figures: "The talk about jobs and the economy was more upbeat today than it's been in a long time. The reason: a second straight month of good news about employment. Statistics Canada reported today that the economy generated 48,000 new jobs during march. Most of those were in manufacturing and construction. The unemployment rate fell from 11.1 percent to 10.6 percent, the lowest in 26 months. As Ken Ernhofer reports, reaction to these numbers could be summed up in one word: hope."

CBC's Alan Garr ended his story on a decidedly negative note: "There is another troublesome wrinkle in today's figures. Something Statistics Canada calls "an irregular event." One-third of the drop in the unemployment rate came about because 28,000 young people gave up looking for work." CTV's Ken Ernhofer, on the other hand, ended with more optimism: "Experts still expect double-digit unemployment until after next year, and say the rate may actually climb as discouraged workers head back to the job hunt, but after all the talk of a jobless recovery, they say they're happy the trend finally points in the right way."

Summary of Unemployment Reporting

Good news on unemployment gaining headlines. As the unemployment rate decreased, network attention increased.

CTV's coverage differed substantially from that of CBC. On CTV when the unemployment rate went down it was reported more frequently at the top of the news than when it went up.

While the networks reported declines in unemployment figures more frequently and more attentively than increases in unemployment, the coverage still focused on the negative. On CBC, when unemployment was on the decline, assessments and analysis was three times as likely to be negative as positive.

Methodology

Results on unemployment are based on census samples of 43 CBC Prime Time, and 1 Sunday Report as well as 56 CTV news stories from January 1, 1993 to December 31, 1994. All stories about unemployment appearing during that time were coded, representing a total population rather than a random sample of stories.

Further information or details on the coding design and methods may be obtained by contacting the National Media Archive.

Separatists Win the Sound Bite War

AS THE QUEBEC REFERENDUM CAMPAIGN sputters and starts, television news is paying close attention to the politicians involved with the Quebec issue. The National Media Archive tallied the number of times each of the prominent federal and provincial spokespersons on the separatist and federalist sides were mentioned on national television news.

Winning by a landslide are the separatists, with Parizeau providing the most sound-bites and fodder for discussion on both networks. As figure B illustrates, over half of the mentions of the four leaders on CBC and CTV concerned Jacques Parizeau. Trailing not too far behind is Bloc Quebecois leader Lucien Bouchard with 35 percent of CBC's and 28 percent of CTV's mentions of these leaders.

In contrast, the federal minister responsible for fighting the Quebec referendum, Lucienne Robillard, and her ally, Quebec Liberal Daniel Johnson, combined, received only 13 percent of CBC mentions of the leaders. The federalists fared somewhat better on CTV receiving 24 percent of the coverage.

Most of the attention Bouchard received in February was a result of the media blitz concerning his return to the House of Commons after his infection and amputation. Regardless of the personal issues surrounding his return, it was a well orchestrated political event. For example, as CBC's Paul Adams noted: "Since last month when cameras caught the first glimpse of the recovering Lucien Bouchard, there's been growing speculation about his return to public life. Today, Bouchard himself suggested he may be back soon. In the letter to Bill Clinton, Bouchard asks for a meeting when the U.S. president visits Ottawa later this month."

When he returned on February 19, the networks provided a clear indication that it was a political story rather than a personal one. For example, CTV's Sandie Rinaldo introduced the story on Bouchard that day saying: "The man who wants to save the flagging fortunes of Quebec's drive for independence reclaimed his place at political centre stage today. Bloc Quebecois leader, Lucien Bouchard, gave his first televised interview since he lost his leg 80 days ago. With support for independence stalled at around 40 percent, Bouchard's return is a welcome and timely sight for embattled sovereigntists. With more on a political comeback, here is CTV's Alan Fryer."

Anchors Away: How the Media Reported the Firings of Pamela Wallin and Keith Morrison

ON APRIL 2, 1995, THE OTTAWA CITIZEN REPORTED the claim of the host of CBC Prime Time Magazine, Pamela Wallin, that she had been fired from the flagship program. On Monday night, Peter Mansbridge confirmed that Wallin would be leaving the show. He reported that "The CBC says the program is being moved toward more documentaries, in-depth reports, and fewer interviews. Discussions are now underway to find a new role for Pamela within CBC that will make better use of her interviewing skills. Beginning tonight and for the next several months on the magazine, guest hosts will be sitting in." He followed that with the news that Keith Morrison was also dismissed: "And over at CTV news, another major move: Keith Morrison, the co-host of Canada A.M., will no longer work at that network. CTV had earlier announced that he would anchor their nightly newscast in the future."

CTV's morning show, Canada AM, reported on both anchors' departures, but provided little more than Mansbridge's account.

Viewers and media watchers were left to discover the details from the printed press. While 25 stories were reported in the daily newspapers and weekly magazines across Canada on the staff changes at CBC and CTV, these stories were intensely subjective, speculative, and gossipy. Over one quarter of the stories on the dismissal of the two anchors focused on the most trivial and titillating aspects of the events.

In Macleans' April 17 cover story on Pamela Wallin, "Did the 'old boy's' get her, or was she her own worst enemy? The perils of Pamela," Scott Steele recounted some network insider reaction to Wallin's firing. He quoted one former colleague as saying: "You could almost hear champagne corks popping around the building." The gossip went further to relate industry nicknames including: "Pamatollah," "Canada's highest paid lighting director," and said, in effect, that the "CBC didn't screw Pamela, Pamela screwed Pamela." This tone was prevalent in most of the stories about Wallin and Morrison.

Media ignore role of ratings

Typically, when the media cover a story on the firing of a high profile individual, they focus on the business angle when appropriate. They look, for instance, to see whether or not the CEO was performing for his shareholders. For example, when GM appointed a new CEO in November of 1992 it was, as Fortune magazine reported, because "sales were falling in an economic downturn and GM was short of cash." TV anchors get fired for similar reasons, with the exception that their performance is judged by ratings rather than sales or dividends. If an anchor can't pull in the ratings, he or she loses market share.

It is somewhat puzzling . . . that the media gave such limited attention to the issue of Wallin's and Morrison's ratings.

In the U.S., when a major newscaster is dismissed the issue of ratings is first and foremost. For example, when the NBC morning show Today replaced 13-year veteran Jane Pauley with Deborah Norville in 1989, news accounts noted that the once popular program had slumped in the ratings race. As Time magazine reported on October 23, 1989: "Today is No. 1 in the morning-news ratings, and has been for nearly four years. Yet its margin over ABC's Good Morning America has been shrinking. For the past two weeks, Today has led by only 0.4 of a rating point, and it has fallen to second place in the key demographic group of women ages 25 to 54."

Brian D. Johnson explained the stakes of ratings in his April 17, 1995 Maclean's article "Inside story." He writes, "In the United States, where ratings can make or break careers overnight, top anchors earn millions of dollars a year; here no one earns more than a few hundred thousand. But it is still a high pressure game . . . the messenger is the medium." It is somewhat puzzling therefore that the media gave such limited attention to the issue of Wallin's and Morrison's ratings. On those occasions when ratings were mentioned, they were done so fleetingly, dismissively, and without a great deal of seriousness. Only 1 percent of total attention to the staff changes discussed the role of ratings.

Even when ratings were discussed, they did little to shed light on the reasons for the firings. In his "Inside Story," Johnson discussed ratings in a tone more appropriate for Entertainment Tonight than for a serious news magazine. He writes, "The idea of Mesley sharing a desk with her ex-husband, who has since begun living with actress Cynthia Dale, sounds wild. But it could be great for ratings. The soap operas of Wallin's dismissal certainly goosed up last week's numbers: early in the week, CBC overtook CTV news by a slight margin as a nightly average: 936,000 watched the Magazine portion, a 15 percent rise. Network executives released the figures on Friday in an internal memo, but it seemed early for gloating: sheer curiosity probably accounted for the increase."

The Toronto Star's media reporter, Antonia Zerbisias, took a more serious view of the role that ratings played in the dismissal of Keith Morrison from CTV's Canada AM. In a story published April 5 she wrote, "there's speculation that, when he filled in for chief anchor Lloyd Robertson last month, the numbers for the newscast slipped. But the ratings didn't fall much, 6 percent or so. Not enough for alarm bells to go off." Zerbisias failed however, to clarify her figures and state how many people 6 percent represents.

It is no coincidence that Morrison, CTV's designated heir to Lloyd Robertson, was fired after his two week trial. Nor is unreasonable to assume that CTV, which currently enjoys higher ratings than CBC, made a management decision to secure its ratings lead over the public broadcaster. This critical information was missing from most news reports dealing with Morrison's dismissal from CTV. Most of the news coverage of Morrison repeated the rumour that he had been fired because he was pressuring senior anchor Lloyd Robertson to retire.

Zerbisias was also one of the few journalists to comment on Morrison's professional performance. In the April 5 story she reported that he might have been spreading himself too thin: "he might have been wrapped up in other projects, moonlighting for NBC, too busy to prepare for Canada AM, which resulted in some of his offbeat on-air antics." The rest of the printed press had little to say about Keith Morrison's relationship with NBC.

Calgary Herald columnist Bob Blakely also touched briefly on ratings. He wrote in an April 4th article that "Prime Time Magazine with Wallin has done fine in the ratings lately. Last month, PTN typically scored between one million and 1.3 million viewers, with around 15 percent of market share, and the Magazine portion suffered only a small drop-off to about a 14-percent share. The old Journal didn't do any better." At odds with Blakely's contention is the wider sentiment echoed by Mike Boon in the Montreal Gazette on April 4. He writes "Wallin and Peter Mansbridge never had any chemistry as an anchor team. . . . When Prime Time was moved back to 10:00 PM last fall, Wallin became host of the program's magazines segment--where her work made you mourn the absence of Frum and eagerly anticipate the nights when Brian Stewart would be pinch-hitting."

Ignored performance

Apart from ratings, how did the anchors relate to audiences? Canadian stories focused on gossip behind the scenes and on staff in-fighting. In contrast, stories about changes on American network news programs recount how audiences feel about the on-air personalities.

In Canada, reports about the anchors' job performances were not discussed as issues. Never challenged, for instance, was the CBC management statement, relayed to the public by Peter Mans-bridge, which implied that Pamela Wallin had strong interviewing skills. No one mentioned that Wallin constantly interrupted guests and played favourites. For example, when she interviewed the controversial feminist Camile Paglia, the exchange was tense. Wallin continually interrupted and challenged her guest. In contrast, when Betty Friedan was on the show, Wallin could not hide her admiration for the woman.

Further, no reporter mentioned Keith Morrison's blunders during his tenure at CTV and before at NBC. For example, his performance at NBC earned him some notoriety in the United States. Burton Yale Pines, former editor for Time magazine, awarded Keith Morrison the "Absolute Worst Story" on the economy in 1992 for his NBC Nightly News February 7 report which distorted the economic record of the 1980s. [Burton Yale Pines, Out of Focus, Washington D.C.: Regnery Publishing, Inc. 1994, p 264.] Further, no mention was made of mistakes Morrison made on Canada AM or his performance as guest anchor of the news for Lloyd Robertson. One of Morrison's most notable gaffes on Canada AM was his off-the-cuff remarks in June 1993 about out-going Prime Minister Mulroney. His quip lost him the interview and earned him the nick-name "Mr. Glib." That on-air glibness, especially on the network's highly-rated and most-watched CTV News program probably had more to do with his dismissal than alleged complaints made by producers about his freelancing at NBC. Morrison's style is so different from Lloyd Robertson's that it is not incomprehensible that audiences reacted strongly and negatively to his two-week stint.

Journalistic cheerleading gets in the way of objective reporting

Apart from ignoring the issue of ratings, some journalists have not so much reported the story as they have presented apologies. In a Vancouver Sun story which appeared April 5, Ottawa Citizen journalist Susan Riley called CBC's decision to fire Wallin "puzzling" and a "deep, self destructive instinct on the part of our public broadcaster." She writes, "Peter Mansbridge and Pamela Wallin were the best team in Canadian television news--better indeed, than most of their American counterparts." Riley characterized the CBC's firing of Wallin as irrational, implying that CBC executives weren't capable of evaluating Wallin's performance and her ability to appeal to audiences' tastes.

Morrison's style is so different from Lloyd Robertson's that it is not incomprehensible that audiences reacted strongly and negatively to his two-week stint.

Objectivity in reporting is one of the hallmarks of good journalism. It is evident, however, judging from the media's coverage of the recent firings of CBC's Pamela Wallin and CTV's Keith Morrison, that objectivity is an ideal not easily achieved when journalists are charged with the task of covering their own industry.

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.