Speeches and Interviews

October 6, 2003

Problems of News and Current Affairs Inherent in the Increasingly Polarized Views of the World

Notes for remarks by Harold Redekopp Executive Vice-President, CBC Television to the Conference Of Public Broadcasters International, Kraków, Poland

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Perhaps I can offer some reflections on our topic from a Canadian perspective. Much of what I want to say today is based on a major research study we recently commissioned about Canadian audiences' news and information needs in the 21st Century, and how the CBC as the national public broadcaster can meet them. It's a real "brick" of both qualitative and quantitative research data, and we're still digesting it. The two CBC people most closely involved in this work — our Editor in Chief, Tony Burman, and our Senior Director of Strategy and Planning, Christine Wilson — are both here today and can comment in much greater depth on it.

Social Trends

Let me start by touching on a few of the broad current trends in Canadian society as a whole. Now, obviously, these are generalizations, but I believe there's some truth to them.

First, I would say that in Canada there is a new and growing sense of self-confidence. Perhaps you saw last week's Economist, with its cover story on "Canada's New Spirit." We've just recently been re-running a series of both documentary and dramatic programs about our late former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, and I would suggest that the mood in the country today is in some ways as buoyant as it was when he came to power during the late 1960s. We're a lot less defensive than we used to be, and also a lot less hung up on that elusive thing called "the Canadian identity." We're a lot more comfortable in our own skin. The research indicates that one big reason for this is the extent to which Canada has created an open, tolerant, "small-l liberal" society, welcoming immigrants from all countries, and accommodating a wide range of attitudes and behaviours. 9 in 10 Canadians think "Canada is the best country in the world to live in," and 8 in 10 agree that "we do have our own identity; we just don't need to shout about it."

The second trend, globalization, is connected to the first. The world is growing smaller, and the world's issues have become our issues — partly because of immigration; partly because of social, political and economic trends. Yet its dangers and downsides are recognized, as much as its attractions and benefits. In particular, many people feel that globalization means "American takeover."

And this brings me to the third trend I want to discuss, which is the strong and even growing divergence between Canada and the United States.

Throughout its existence, Canada has had to struggle against the economic and cultural dominance of its neighbour to the south. When public broadcasting was being created in this country in the 1930s, the rallying cry was "the State or the United States!" And the issue remains highly relevant today. Many Canadians define themselves in terms of their differences from Americans.

I want to stress that I am definitely not indulging in US-bashing here. Far from it. Like many Canadians, I have immediate family members living and working south of the border. There is an intricate web of ties connecting our two countries. And yet, there is a paradox in all of this.

Increasingly, our economic connections flow north-south. Yet our cultural connections remain strongly east-west.

One of Canada's leading social researchers, Michael Adams, recently published a book called Fire and Ice, in which he makes this point. It may appear that with talk of border harmonization, common currency and private health care clinics, Canada is drifting inevitably towards a closer political and philosophical alliance with the United States. And yet, Adams' research reveals that the two countries are actually diverging in significant ways, in terms of their attitudes, opinions and values.

Again, I stress that I'm generalizing, and opinion on these matters is divided in Canada. But I would suggest that many Canadians take quiet pride in our evolving stand on issues like gun control, same-sex marriage and decriminalization of marijuana, precisely because they are points of differentiation between us and the US. A headline in the Washington Post earlier this year made the same point. "Whoa Canada!" it exclaimed. "Legal Marijuana. Gay Marriage. Peace. What the Heck's Going On Up North, Eh?" In fact, on many social issues and attitudes, Canada probably has as much or more in common with Europe, as with the United States.

The United States and the United Kingdom are our closest natural allies and trading partners. In fact, the US today takes 88% of Canada's exports. Yet there is wide support for our government's policy of distancing itself from the Iraq War. According to the Strategic Council polling group, 8 in 10 Canadians agree that Canadians critical of the war should speak out, and two-thirds characterize the Canada/US relationship as "cordial but distant" or "friendly but not especially close."

One of the most popular programs ever broadcast on CBC Television was created by one of our comedy superstars, Rick Mercer. It's called Talking to Americans, and it satirizes Americans' legendary ignorance about all things Canadian. On a more serious note, we recently joined forces with a number of other international broadcasters on a project entitled What The World Thinks of America.

Implications for News Media

So what are the implications of these social trends for those of us in the news and information business — particularly those of us who are public broadcasters? Again, let me suggest just three among many. #1: there is a growing appetite for international news coverage. #2: there is a growing desire for real meaning and context in that coverage. And #3: it's essential for our international coverage to see the world through the eyes of our own national sensibilities, and not in some kind of globally homogenized blender. Let me say a bit about each of these in turn.

Today, the whole world is right in our back yard, 24 hour a day, 7 days a week. The need for, and the perceived importance of, international news is extremely widespread among Canadians. Not surprisingly, it's particularly strong among immigrants — even second and third generation ones. But across the board, 8 in 10 Canadians want to be better informed about international issues — and 4 in 10 say they feel strongly about this. 7 in 10 want to know more about what people in other countries think about current events. This appetite for more international news and information was identified in our research as one of the primary opportunities for CBC News.

Now, I have to confess that many of us found these results somewhat counterintuitive — because, you know, whenever we broadcast an extended current affairs program or documentary about international affairs, our audience ratings tend to go down, not up. This may in part be an example of the familiar difference between what people say they want, and what they actually watch — the difference between attitude and behaviour. But I think there may be more to it than this — and that brings me to my second point, which is about how we provide international coverage.

Our CBC News Study found the same thing as other similar studies, such as those conducted by the BBC and the Pew Institute in the United States. In a world of information overload, too often the news media simply aggravate the problem. Rather than making sense of events and improving understanding, we actually add to the confusion. Half the people we spoke to in the research study say they sometimes feel overwhelmed with too much news. Almost as many say they sometimes don't understand what they see and hear. "I will listen very carefully," said one person, "and ten minutes later, I can't remember a single thing they said." I suspect it's an experience all of us have from time to time. (And by the way, this is true, not just of international stories, but domestic political stories, as well.)

Increasingly, people expect the news media to make sense of a chaotic global world, and help them understand it. That means living up to our public broadcasting mandate of, not just informing, but enlightening and engaging — generating thoughtful reactions from listeners and viewers, so they can be better citizens of, not just their country, but of their world.

I hasten to add that the research also tells us that depth and meaning does not necessarily mean length and detail. In a world of multiple choice and multi-tasking, a good rule of thumb is that "short and deep" is often better than "long and detailed." That's something we need to constantly remind ourselves and our journalists. But we do need to find ways of moving beyond simply telling people about events, and even beyond explaining them, to actually taking people into the story, exploring its implications and making them feel part of it. Our qualitative research describes this as "making international stories local."

Let me give you three examples of what I mean. We recently ran a report from Brockville, in southern Ontario, assessing how the cutting of emissions under the Kyoto agreement, as it is implemented, will affect city life. Brockville has a large pulp and paper mill. Another report, from Nunavut in the high Arctic, described how Kyoto might help stall climate changes there. And our weekly business program did a special show on how the trade war between Canada and the United States over softwood lumber will affect one British Columbia town.

Another part of "making the international local," is bringing it home to domestic audiences through their own perspective, rather than that of some other country. I think that's one of the reasons why it's so important for us to maintain a strong network of our own foreign correspondents, rather than relying on syndicated services. We call it "seeing the world through Canadian eyes," and our viewers and listeners tell us they value it highly.

Challenges and Opportunities for Public Broadcasters

We live in a world that is at once increasingly global and increasingly polarized. In my view, the appropriate response for us as public broadcasters is definitely not to turn inward and focus on our own affairs, our own problems, our own perspective. Rather, we should turn outward: embrace the wider world in all its multiplicity and contradictions...bring it home to our domestic audiences...and at the same time share our various perspectives on world events and issues with audiences in other parts of the world. This is our challenge, and this is our opportunity. How might we go about it? Again, our Canadian research suggests some possible answers.

Another of the paradoxes in the research is that in Canada, when people want breaking international news, they tend to tune first to CNN. However, those same people are very critical of the network. They recognize that CNN has a particular political point of view, which many of them discount. And yet they watch it. (I should stress I'm referring here to the domestic CNN service that spills across the border into Canada, not CNN's international service.) BBC World, on the other hand, is spoken of in almost reverential terms for its credibility, balance, sheer resources, and ability to connect people around the world. Yet it attracts a much smaller audience in Canada — in part because it's only available on a digital specialty tier of cable and DTH satellite delivery services.

There is a case to be made that a third perspective — an unaligned perspective — has considerable interest and appeal — and not just to Canadians. Again during the Iraq War, as during the September 11th tragedy, we heard from many viewers across the United States who get CBC coverage through the Newsworld International cable network, thanking us for providing an alternative view to the others available to them. A respected American TV critic recently referred to us as "the best channel you can't watch," and said he learned more about this past summer's devastating heat wave in France from one story on CBC, than from a whole season of American newscasts. I think there's a good reason for this, which has to do with the nature of Canada.

Because in many ways, the CBC is a mirror of the country it serves. Unlike so many countries, Canada was not formed by war or revolution. It was formed by compromise and patience. The two founding peoples, English and French, shared little in common and liked each other less, but to survive, they had to work together. And so, the history of Canada became a story of negotiation and co-operation.

When it comes to the international arena, Canada is not a "great power." Historically, our government has directed its efforts abroad more towards international co-operation, peacekeeping and humanitarian initiatives, than towards involvement in political disputes. The high-water mark in Canadian foreign policy was what came to be known as "Pearsonian diplomacy," after our great post-war External Affairs Minister and later Prime Minister, Lester Pearson. Since those days, Canada's prestige abroad has shrunk somewhat: a story told in Andrew Cohen's recent book, While Canada Slept. Many Canadians would like to see their country reclaim a place on the world stage.

One way to do this could be in international broadcasting. As I've mentioned, Canadians tend to view many international developments quite objectively, rather than taking sides. Our news service, through its balanced and global perspective, has always reflected this reality. We've become pretty good at explaining the world to Canadians. In the process, I'd like to think that we have also become quite good at explaining the world — to the rest of the world.

Now, we at the CBC are not alone in this. Many of you in this room work for public broadcasters who have similar histories, reputations and competencies. That is why I continue to nurture the dream that we could work together to satisfy the growing appetite for meaningful, in-depth, objective treatment of international affairs, not just in my country, but in yours, as well. Since I spoke about this to you last year in Hong Kong, we have continued our discussions with our Australian and South African colleagues. One small concrete step is a new series of current affairs programs, called Hemispheres, co-produced by the Canadian and Australian Broadcasting Corporations, and aired on both networks.

I'd like to end my remarks this afternoon by floating a very specific idea. Originally, CBC was a partner in the Newsworld International channel. We since sold our share, and now have a program supply agreement with Vivendi/Universal. However, it appears quite likely that Newsworld International may come into play again as part of the complex negotiations around NBC's acquisition of the Universal properties from Vivendi. There are news reports that Al Gore has created a consortium to buy it. If the opportunity presents itself, I would hope that we at CBC might be able to reach out to some of our public broadcasting colleagues around the world, so that together we could seize the opportunity to transform a going concern in North America into a vital global force for improved international understanding. That's an opportunity that I, for one, would love to take advantage of.

Thank you very much.