It’s no wonder that tailspin has public confidence in journalism.


The world of journalism gained a lot of support last week when the Washington Post fired reporter Felicia Sonmes after an online campaign against his newsroom.

The Twitter barrage that led to her dismissal has been exposed to a lot of commentary and exquisite solitude by Bill Maher. However, Sonmez was hardly an awakened outlier. She sees how her confidence in her journalism is undermined by too many reporters and so-called press agencies that lack the discipline to keep their opinions away from work and social media. It’s just the latest example shown. Not only are they unaware of the vandalism they are giving to their crafts, but they are also unaware that by receiving government subsidies, what they think is being seen more and more suspiciously. Hmm.

It’s a mysterious combination of stupidity and naivety. As Paul Deegan, CEO of News Media Canada, explained, do you think they are the “most valuable guardians” of democratic language and therefore unaffected by the results? He used the phrase when lobbying mysteriously about freedom of speech in his submission to the failure of Canada’s first effort in the “Online Harm” bill. As evidence, Deegan pointed out that 30% of journalists are self-censoring on social media. myself? I’m worried about 70 percent not doing so.

Every day, they pour into the abyss created by their arrogance like a wave of lemmings, intellectually false about whether Jordan Peterson, Pierre Poirievre, or Leslin Lewis is this or not. Make a decision. And I’m not a clever laugh, as they do this with a self-righteous laugh and hang out at the bar with their peers after work. How they remain unaware of the fact that the rest of us are in the room with them, seeing them thin out their professional credibility is the stupidest of the times. It’s one of the mysteries. Perhaps it will make them popular at parties.

As I know, in schools of journalism, objectivity has been taught to be an old-fashioned virtue that is impossible and no longer essential to the news business.

I say: Child, please return your money. No one expects you to have their own opinion, but if you can’t separate them from your work, you keep them public and trustworthy for their fairness If you can’t train yourself to produce a piece, go for sale shoes. Certainly, objectivity is difficult. I’m honest. And love. Everyone sometimes fails. But don’t give up just because it’s difficult. Without it, everything would fall apart.

(A brief digression: I’ve been a fan of good journalists lately, and I’ve been writing only for publications that don’t respect readers by hiring people who are good at becoming journalists without government subsidies. In other words, he is a reliable person.)

It’s no wonder that public confidence in Canadian journalism has been a tailwind. According to the latest report (third this year), only 42% of Canadians trust “most news, most of the time.”

This latest study by the Institute of Journalism at Oxford University is even more alarming for the English press, which only trusts 39% of the news. This has decreased by 16 points over the last 6 years. To make matters worse, only 27% of Canadian Anglo-Saxons consider the media to be “independent of political influence,” down from 44% in 2016.

What’s interesting about 2016: It’s the year I attended an event in Ottawa. At this event, abandoned executives from the Legacy newspaper pitched a grant to the government to help “shift” a failed business into the digital world. Some of those papers shamelessly continued to use their front pages, news, and editorial pulpits to lobby for even more government support. But here we have been six years and have received about $ 500 million in public support since then. They continue to knock on the Prime Minister’s door like many Oliver Twist.

In response, the federal government has submitted Bill C-18, an online news law. Its job is to send money from social media and technology companies to government-approved news rooms.

The fact that Bill C-18 probably sends more money to the CBC than any other entity should be enough to reject it as a serious flaw. But aside from that, another big problem with the bill is the risk of helping many older companies that couldn’t adapt to change at the expense of about 100 new and innovative online news platforms emerging across the country. That is. ..

But in the long run, relying on Canadian subsidies to increase the number of government-approved media outlets and their journalists is even more problematic. And that is, the more they abuse their skills and rely on political establishment, the more their public confidence in them collapses. And the more trust collapses, the more they will rely on political establishment to meet their salaries.

It’s some tombs they are digging.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

Peter Menzies


Peter Menzies is an award-winning journalist and senior fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, former Vice-Chair of the CRTC.