FELDSTED: The consolidation and integration of our media results in the dull, ‘government-speak’ pap we detest

I recently wrote about the makeup of the Parliamentary Press Gallery.  

We need to know why the “Parliamentary Press Gallery” memberships are controlled by a private corporation. No private corporation should have the right to use Parliament or Parliamentary in its name as it is highly misleading; suggesting that it is a formal part of government.

Our Parliamentary Press Gallery must be an agency of government reporting to the House of Commons, and have an open and transparent means of appeal for any journalist who is refused membership.

A free press must not be managed by a private corporation, particularly not the segment reporting on the events and issues surrounding our government and governance.

Access to the press gallery includes access to house and committee proceedings, as well as some access to Ministers. 

Press Gallery membership is much more than being able to sit in the public galleries to observe proceedings ... otherwise we are being denied access to vital information. 

Part of a free press is access to information that is not managed by vested interests ... government or non-government.

The system may have worked for the century, when we had a highly a competitive media, but since media ownership consolidation began in the 1980s, competition has been strangled. Newsrooms have shrunk and editing has been centralized. A single central editorial staff may approve news stories for dozens of cable, radio, print and television outlets under a single ownership.

The consolidation and integration of our media results in the dull, ‘government-speak’ pap we detest. It also allows media outlets to intensify editorial control during an election campaign. Media owners are aware of the enormous influence they wield, and are mindful of the subsidies they receive or may not receive with a change in government.

Media consolidation is contrary to the public interest. Contrary because we do not receive the same broad range of opinion and views that a competitive media brought us, and we risk the undue influence that a consolidated media can bring to bear.

Governments should fear an independent, competitive free press – a free press is the eyes and ears of the public.

A consolidated media is something governments can pacify rather than fear, and that, is dangerous to a democracy.

Tyrants control the media and hide their plans ... while democracies thrive with a free press, and wither without it.   

John Feldsted

Political Consultant & Strategist

Winnipeg, Manitoba