by Propaganda
columnist David Warren, complaining about multiple factual errors and attribution
failures. Her complaint was unusual in that it involved careful research spanning three
years. Her results paid off: the OPC upheld her complaints dealing with faulty or
misleading attribution and one of the factual complaints in an adjudication made
on October 28, 2010. About her other factual complaints, the ruling said that while
Wainio’s sources were “substantially more reliable and persuasive than those apparently
relied upon by the columnist,” it was with one exception unable to make a conclusive
finding of factual error, lacking the power to summon witnesses, etc. The entire judg-
ment can be found on the OPC website under “Recent Decisions” followed by the
drop-down menu “Past Decisions,” where you reach the case by scrol ing down.
The benefit of enabling the public to access the complaints makes the OPC much
more valuable as a corrective to faulty journalism. There is a downside, though, in
CHAPTER 7: THE QUESTIon oF ConTRoLS 279
BV-Propaganda-Interior-04.indd 279
9/5/13 4:52 PM
that a newspaper no longer feels obliged to print the whole text of the adjudication.
Thus, the Ottawa Citizen presented only a brief summary of the Wainio decision. The
rationale is that interested persons can look up the whole adjudication on the website.
However, that is not nearly as effective in reaching the casual reader, who is much
more likely to read an adjudication printed in the offending paper itself. How many
such readers wil have the time and patience to embark on an Internet search to find
the relevant material?
The Role of Canadian Press Councils
When the OPC was first set up in 1972, the Canadian correspondent for the New York
Times, Jay Walz, commented “until a nationwide council is created, there is no chance to consider the implications of the trend towards concentration and monopoly that
the Davey committee found to be advancing so ominously in Canada.”81 That seems
in retrospect to be a prescient remark, underscoring the limited role played by press
councils in Canada.
In 1972, the Globe and Mail, not a member of the OPC at the time, editorial-
ized that “Press councils have no punitive power to control recalcitrant members
who continue to go their merry way—as the British council experience has dem-
onstrated. Publishers go on buying scandal-case confessions while the council wor-
ries itself over such problems as the use of the word ‘Mister’ in second reference to
persons in the news.”82 The root of the problem is that the councils, as mentioned
earlier, are financed by the industry itself, which is interested foremost in staving off
government interference and gaining public confidence. A limited usefulness can-
not be denied, to judge by the experience of the OPC, but the nature of the limits
depends largely on the public mood and the enthusiasm of publishers themselves for
the highest standards of journalism, which may or may not coincide with perceived
financial interests.
In his chairman’s remarks in the 1990 Annual Report of the OPC, former
Supreme Court of Canada Justice Willard Z. Estey remarked that voluntary bodies
“bring about a moderation of the exercise of the right of freedom of expression by the
press through group influence and peer pressure and by regular reminders of the use of
common sense by the reporter or commentator.” These voluntary restraints, he wrote,
“have proven to be more successful than heavy-handed direct intervention by the state
into the relationship between the writer and the reader.” Critical to the success of self-
regulation is that it not operate “in a manner which will curtail or suppress legitimate
dissemination of fact and comment.” Regulatory intrusion into everyday life, he wrote,
is evident everywhere in our daily life and virtually the only “pruning mechanism”
against the growing tentacles of government, outside of the political process, is the
“free and independent press”:
280 PROPAGANDA AND THE ETHICS OF PERSUASION
BV-Propaganda-Interior-04.indd 280
9/5/13 4:52 PM
Without a dedicated investigative press, service by all levels of democratic organs of government to the community is diminished.... Access-to-information legislation
accelerates this modern vital role of the journalist. Competition amongst the press
excites the exercise of the right of access. This competition ensures a better-informed
public. That same pressure, however, elevates the importance of the organization and
exercise of self-restraint by the voluntary institution, the press council.83
goVERnMEnT InFoRMATIon
The US progressive and independent journalist, I.F. Stone, made the point that too
many establishment journalists have been co-opted by government so that carefully
contrived deceptions are passed on uncritically to the public. Politicians in power
attempt to hide wrongdoing and rationalize coverups in the name of the national
interest as perceived by the party in power. The news correspondent is brought into
the government official’s confidence so that he or she begins to feel like a statesman
rather than a critical newsperson.84 However, those in government who are responsible
for disseminating information are often frustrated with the media, which are often
interested in the sensational rather than in what people need to know for the better
working of society. A major attempt to show off an important function paid for by
taxpayers’ money may be scuttled because of other media needs.85
In modern democracies, governments work to ensure that measures they deem
necessary will be received favourably by the people. They are concerned that their
actions not be misinterpreted and that the reasons for various measures are under-
stood. However, since governments are formed from political parties, there is always
some two-sidedness to any campaign of government information. On the one hand,
there is the aim of informing; on the other, there is the temptation to spend public
money to promote a favourable image of the political party in power. This latter use
of public funds gives an enormous advantage to the party in power. Public money may
also be spent with a view to giving a favourable image to a government department,
thus enhancing budgets and the prestige of officials in that department. The film Red
Nightmare was made in the 1950s by the US Department of Defense with Warner
Brothers. It promoted fear of Communism, along with glorification of the role of the
military; in the last scene of the film, armed forces personnel join hands in a display
of brotherhood and nationalism. The message of the film encouraged public support
for large defence expenditures.
Governments may also suppress information they do not wish the public to hear
or they may practice disinformation. A conspicuous example of the latter was the
campaign by the Reagan administration against Mu’ammer al Qaddafi in the summer
of 1986. The Wall Street Journal proclaimed that a military attack against him was in the works. Two months later, the Washington Post published a memo from National
CHAPTER 7: THE QUESTIon oF ConTRoLS 281
BV-Propaganda-Interior-04.indd 281
<
br /> 9/5/13 4:52 PM
Security Advisor John Poindexter indicating that the story had been leaked to the press as part of a disinformation campaign against Qaddafi. In Britain, a disinformation campaign by the Thatcher government to support the sinking of the Belgrano at
the time of the Falklands/Malvinas War was exposed by Clive Ponting in his book The
Right to Know.86
Canada has devoted an unusual amount of attention and several major studies
to the problem of disseminating information to the public. Periodically, Canadian
newspapers snort with indignation about the avalanche of government advertising
that swells their own pages. They also profit from it, and sustained pressure to do away
with such “advocacy advertising” has not yet happened. The Conservatives will berate
the Liberals for the practice and then do the same themselves when in power. More
recent advertising by the Conservatives has focused on television and radio, Prime
Minister Stephen Harper coming under attack for spending over $100 million relating
to its “Economic Action Plan.” Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau said in Parliament “It is
becoming obvious that rather than helping Canadians, the government would rather
continue to spin Canadians.”87
The Canadian government has wrestled several times with philosophical ques-
tions relating to provision of information. During World War II, the Bureau of Public
Information—later renamed the Wartime Information Board (WIB)—worked to
shape public attitudes to the war. Its general manager, John Grierson, believed in
participatory democracy, and during his tenure, the WIB issued pamphlets explain-
ing how Canadians could have influence on the political system. These pointed out
that only a few men controlled the press and radio, apart from the public system;
they also enthusiastically supported labour activities and accomplishments. When
a general election was called in June 1945, the Liberal Party chose a WIB slogan for
its campaign: “Building a New Social Order for Canada.” The Liberals won handily,
benefiting from the WIB propaganda. In the long run, Grierson’s ideas were too left-
wing to be acceptable to the Liberal establishment, and, as we saw above (see note 55),
his credibility was further weakened by his involvement in the Gouzenko Inquiry.88
Government-sponsored studies of its own provision of information have varied
in purpose, intent, and conclusions. In the early 1960s, restraint was the general mes-
sage. At the end of the decade, when participatory democracy was in full flower, the
aim was to empower the less fortunate by giving them more information directly and
subsidizing their ability to make themselves heard. Information Canada in the early
1970s was touted as a more democratic, because more efficient, information provider,
but the media saw it as an institution that would consolidate information and make
government propaganda easier. They may have been right on this, but their motives
were also open to suspicion, since any direct contact between government and people
has a diminishing effect on the media’s importance.
282 PROPAGANDA AND THE ETHICS OF PERSUASION
BV-Propaganda-Interior-04.indd 282
9/5/13 4:52 PM
The glassco Report
An important Canadian examination of government information policy was carried
out by the Royal Commission on Government Organization, headed by J. Grant
Glassco. Volume III of its 1962 report dealt with information services. It noted that
the development of special machinery of government information had been gradual,
starting with the Editorial and Information Division of the Department of Mines. In
1910, the Department of Agriculture, having issued farmers’ bulletins since 1887, created
a Publications Branch. In 1920, the new Department of National Health established a
Publicity and Statistics Division to enlighten the public on maternal and child welfare
and the dangers of various diseases and how to treat them. World War II had a “catalytic
effect” on information services. The machinery was set up to engage in propaganda. It
was dismantled after the war, but “the wartime experience left a lasting impression on
political leaders and administrators and during the next few years most departments
and agencies which had not already established information services did so.”89
The report listed four main categories of tasks:
1. Services to the public, such as the census, weather forecasting, research informa-
tion, etc.
2. Enlisting public support; for example, urging people to file income taxes early,
using postal codes, recruiting for national defence, etc.
3. Responding to a public right to be informed. “Knowledge of government activi-
ties is a public right, and indeed a necessity; but the growing size and diversity
of government make the satisfaction of this need more and more difficult. The
machinery and processes of government are therefore taking increasingly into
account the public demand to be informed” (GR 67). The report noted that busi-
ness people suffered when the government dragged its heels on classifying goods
for import duty.
4. Publicizing government activities. Here is where the provision of government
information entered the area of controversy. The report noted that proper lim-
its of such activity become “debatable.” Obviously, if a museum is established,
people should be told so they can visit it. But when governments go beyond
the obviously acceptable minimum and publicize their activities on the basis of
general newsworthiness, they enter an area which “is not always easy to draw”
between “releasing news and ‘telling a Department’s story.’” The publicity may
enter a realm of political controversy. “There is no fixed line between exposition
and argument, between publicity and propaganda” (GR 69).
The report then drew three conclusions. First, general government publicity
should be “strictly factual and as far as possible objective.” The task of information
services is “to inform rather than to persuade.” The “ultimate decision as to what
CHAPTER 7: THE QUESTIon oF ConTRoLS 283
BV-Propaganda-Interior-04.indd 283
9/5/13 4:52 PM
is news and how it should be presented must be left to the media.” Secondly, there should be “restraint and balance in volume.” Even when “information is objective in
character, sheer volume can transform it into propaganda.” Finally, an important dis-
tinction should be drawn between “material which genuinely informs and that which
is calculated only to impress; the latter has no place in the information activities of
government.” It is tempting, the report noted, to issue news stories, pictures, or films
depicting weapons, laboratories, and engineering works as marvels of the age—beg-
ging the question of their function and worth (GR 70).
The report further noted that the role of the public relations person for private
industry is on a different footing from that in government, in that maximum favour-
able exposure for the company is a legitimate goal. But the commissioners denied that
similar approaches are permissible in government. “Keeping the mass media supplied
with a flood of so-called news release
s is not a function of a department.” Taxpayers’
money “should not be spent to impress people with the quality of performance” (GR
70–71).
The commission felt that the Department of National Defence had gone over-
board. During a two-week period in November and December 1961 there were 68
press releases, including 10 “major stories”; seven news feature releases; more than
2,500 photographic plates distributed; and more than 100 radio, TV, and film assign-
ments completed. More than 700 radio tapes and 500 TV tapes were produced and
distributed (GR 71–72).
The report did not state that it was essential for government departments to speak
with one voice, but it was concerned about duplication of effort from a cost stand-
point. It recommended that government advertising accounts be awarded on the basis
of tender in the manner of other government contracts. The reason was that “vast
differences in value” were often received from different advertising agencies (GR 95).
The Glassco Report’s philosophy and recommendations are no less pertinent today,
with the burgeoning of government advocacy advertising to be described shortly.
The Task Force on Information
With the election of a Liberal government under the leadership of Pierre-El iot Trudeau
in the late 1960s, an energetic change in attitude towards government information came
to Ottawa. Like Trudeau, Gérard Pelletier, who became Secretary of State, was influenced
by London School of Economics Professor Harold Laski90 and sought ways of making
democracy more meaningful. In his book, La crise d’octobre ( The October Crisis), Pelletier expressed his concern very succinctly. The ordinary citizen, “while being assailed twenty-four hours a day by the written press, radio, and television, often has no other means of
expression than the placard at the end of a stick, as in 1850.”91 In line with this philosophy, the federal government provided a wide array of subsidies for alternate media, with programs such as Opportunities for Youth and Local Initiatives. The interest in media was
284 PROPAGANDA AND THE ETHICS OF PERSUASION
BV-Propaganda-Interior-04.indd 284
9/5/13 4:52 PM
further strengthened by the hearings of the Special Senate Committee on Mass Media in 1969 under Senator Keith Davey, who had proposed the idea for such an investigation
