Cananda Stands Up Against Media Consolidation

Let me reiterate a important fact media scholars face in the United States, today: there is little to no public debate centered on the media today. There isn't a debate confronting media consolidation nor the important role a free press play in shaping a democracy. However, in Canada, media is a topic of debate.


Robert McChesney reports, "In 2001, there was an explosion of serious debate over the damage that monopoly ownership of newspapers does to the editorial freedom of individual publications and the quality of the broader public discourse." In Canada media reform and activism is a hot topic.


McChesney then points us to Alexa McDonough, leader of Canada's New Democratic Party from 1995 until 2003, and a leading activist in the media reform in Canada. McDonough, forced a public debate on media and democracy in 2002 after a scandalous Canadian Newspaper: CanWest Global began buying up newspapers across the country, and wanted to impose a single, editorial ideology," and firing employees who wouldn't comply with it. Canada would have one voice. However, McDonough set out to ensure that would not happen. She joined other opposition party member within Canada's House of Commons and McChesney details the remarkable debate that took place in the summer of 2002, where Canada's new democratic party put big media of the forefront of public debate.





McDonough said, "As unsettling as these abuses of journalistic practice are, focusing on the high-handed actions of the Aspers alone ignores the real disease that is eating away at our democratic fabric--the truly alarming scale of media concentration and commercialization in this country. Last weeks reversal of the past 15 to 20 years of media and broadcast policy in this country. The multimedia conglomerates must be broken up. They have been encouraged by federal policymakers in the mistaken belief they would defend the country's cultural sovereignty. They are having the opposite effect."





I do wonder how long it is going to take before the United States takes the steps that are essential for a strong media reform, which starts with a public debate. Other countries are fed up with lack of regard for the public interest and commercialization of American culture. The myth that every country aspires the capitalist prosperity that American culture provides is beginning to shine through, but corporate shareholders in broadcast television aren't telling this to the public.



Mc Chesney points us to The Canandian New Democratic Party's stance in public debate:

Our cultural identity has been put in jeopardy by an American media tide, globalizing economic forces, and the new communications technologies. The liberals have done nothing to stem this tide. In fact, their trade deals have turned our culture into commodities--opening the door to split run magazines today and other U.S. attacks tomorrow. Severe funding cuts have undermined our public broadcaster, the CBC. And, media barons have been able to buy up our newspapers, television, and radio stations, severely limiting the scope of information that reaches the public," the platform declared. In a global information society, the voices of our artists, writers, creators, and citizens need to be strengthened, not undermined. Media ownership must be balanced with strong independent voices to ensure the free flow of ideas and the health of our democracy. And governments must make it clear that our culture identity is not for sale by ensuring that trade deals include protection for our culture. New Democrats are fighting for investments and policies that protect Canadian culture."



Maybe the United States needs to encorporate Canadian culture from within!