7.4 Media Actions During the Pandemic

Introduction

A free and robust democratic society is uniquely and inextricably dependant on the free exchange of accurate and reliable information that is without bias and without government or corporate influence.

It is absolutely imperative that a media source declare any known or perceived biases which it may have to the public so that the public can clearly make a distinction between facts and opinion.

The Canadian public depended on the media providing fair and accurate information to allow them to properly assess the situation as it unfolded and to allow the public to make critical decisions both for themselves and their families.

This report utilizes the following definitions:

Media is defined as:

The main means of mass communication (broadcasting, publishing, and the Internet) referred to collectively as the media. Examples include cable and over-air television and radio, internet services, as well as print media such as magazines and newspapers.

Traditional media is defined as:

Print media and broadcast media comprised of state and corporate media companies, encompassing television, radio, magazines, newspapers, and internet content as produced solely by those state and corporate entities..

Internet service provider is defined as:

Internet services which include simple access provision to the supply of media companies which provide a “public discussion“ platform.

Freedom of Expression and Freedom of the Press

The concepts of freedom of expression and freedom of the press are so important to the development of and maintenance of a democratic society that these freedoms are clearly set out in the foundational documents of Canada. For example, Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as expressed and codified in the Constitution Act, 1982.

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-12.html#docCont

Within the Constitution Act, 1982 under Fundamental Freedoms, item 2 states the following:

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

(a) freedom of conscience and religion;

(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and

other media of communication;

(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and

(d) freedom of association.

Item (b) specifically indicates that there is to be “freedom of the press and other media of communication.“

Freedom does not simply refer to the censorship of various forms of media or communication, it also encompasses the absence of interference or influence from the state. A free press is in direct opposition to a paid press which is expressly concerned with and exists to espouse the opinions and positions of those entities that are paying it.

The freedom of the press and media extends to all areas of communication (written or spoken) and in the instance of this investigation must include the freedom of scientific research and publication.

Consumers in Canada are generally protected from unscrupulous or misleading advertising and information. There are generally provisions to protect consumers from “Conduct Against Consumers,“ which is to protect the public from misleading and deceptive conduct and unconscionable conduct, et cetera.

So the question becomes exactly what type of media coverage did Canadians receive from their traditional media outlets over the course of the pandemic?

Did the traditional media examine with a critical eye everything that the government was telling Canadians, or did they simply echo what was being provided to them from government sources?

Did the traditional media support freedom within their own newsrooms? Did they permit investigative reporters to examine the claims being made by the government and prepare news stories that were presented to the public?

Did the traditional media carefully interview all sides of the issues, and did they take extra care to protect people who presented alternative views to that government narrative?

Has the traditional media done anything in the current situation to address any of their real or perceived shortcomings during the pandemic?

Testimony Concerning Media Actions During Pandemic

Significant testimony was provided to the Commission which clearly demonstrated that freedom of the press and other media no longer exists in Canada, on all levels involving the traditional media sources in Canada.

Based on the testimonies received, the traditional and online corporate media did not act independent of government and corporate influence.

The dissemination of critical and accurate information concerning the facts related to the pandemic itself, effective measures to treat COVID-19, government-imposed mitigative measures, and the safety and effectiveness of vaccines were almost entirely based on government and industry or government- and industry-influenced or sponsored sources.

Active measures were taken by traditional and online media sources to suppress, censor, and ridicule opposing opinions related to the pandemic.

The recommendations and mandates were in a constant state of change, and the investigative press took no steps to actively investigate or evaluate the validity of those measures and made no attempts to inform the Canadian people of the realities of the measure being mandated.

Without accurate and complete information, the Canadian people could not make critical decisions on medical matters that deeply affected every aspect of Canadian Society. Furthermore, without clear and accurate information, the public were never put into a situation where they could provide “Informed Consent“ prior to accepting any proposed medical treatment that was being foisted on them by the government, medical community, and even their employers and religious leaders.

Many Canadians were left at the mercy of what turned out to be an unrelenting cascade of false, misleading, and incomplete information as provided by various government agencies.

Many Canadians were not aware, due to exclusionary reporting and outright censorship, of the experimental and untested nature of the COVID-19 vaccines.

Many Canadians were not aware of the significant planning that had taken place prior to the pandemic and how the mandates and directives of the government during the pandemic were in conflict with the recommendations of the official emergency pandemic plans.

Critical definitions of terms were revised and facts were blurred in order to coerce Canadians into accepting the government/industry narrative.

Long understood and trusted terms were used to provide a false sense of confidence for Canadians. Examples include:

• pandemic,

• vaccine,

• biologic,

• Spike Protein Disease,

• ambassador,

• safe and effective,

• relative efficacy, and

• absolute efficacy.

Traditional media providers and their news broadcasts in Canada are no longer independent of the government and special industry interests as they are either directly funded by government and large industry groups or receive very significant funding through advertising from these organizations.

Due to the Canadian government‘s lack of enforcement of the Competition Act, traditional media companies in Canada have been allowed to conglomerate to the extent that little or no independent companies now exist. Most news and media outlets are owned and controlled by a very small cadre of large corporations. This reduces Canadians‘ choice of independent media outlets to near zero.

According to testimony received, the CBC alone receives more than one billion dollars in direct government funding; it is not known how much additional funding they receive from government advertising or pharmaceutical industry advertisements.

Other traditional media sources in Canada received hundreds of millions of dollars of direct government funding over the course of the pandemic period. It is interesting to note that this funding was not provided to all media firms, only specific media firms, especially traditional media sources.

In addition, the days of an independent media in Canada and in most of the Western world are long gone. The days of the independent newsroom or the news outlet that are not owned and controlled by huge multinational interests have passed.

Most traditional news sources in Canada are no longer independent, and they no longer permit independent and unbiased journalism to take place within their organizations. Reporters are often specifically directed as to what stories they can and cannot cover, based on a corporate directive.

As demonstrated from the Twitter Files release in the United States, government agencies were working hand in hand with large media firms such as Twitter, Youtube, and Facebook to directly censor and/or limit the exposure of opinions and facts that did not support the approved government narrative.

The NCI heard very specific testimonies from the following witnesses:

Rodney Palmer
A veteran journalist, Rodney Palmer presented on the difference between news gathering and propaganda, exposing how CBC shifted away from news gathering to promoting propaganda and fomenting hate.
(Toronto: March 30, 2023)

In his second testimony with the NCI, Rodney Palmer reported on the bias at CBC in terms of their funding and manipulation of the news.
(Ottawa: May 18, 2023)

In a taped announcement for the NCI, Rodney Palmer described CBC‘s new Twitter label.
(April 18, 2023)

Anita Krishna

She described her behind-the-scenes journey as a former Global TV director.
(Ottawa: May 18, 2023)

Jean-Philippe Chabot

A former CBC employee, he described how he navigated his vaccine status disclosure.
(Ottawa: May 18, 2023)

Marianne Klowak

A former veteran CBC journalist, she testified on the decline of journalism at the CBC during the pandemic.
(Ottawa: May 18, 2023)

Jeff Sandes

He reported on the changing landscape of journalism.
(Vancouver: May 3, 2023)

Jeffery Tucker

He described the loss of trust in mainstream media during COVID-19.
(Winnipeg: April 14, 2023)

Dr. Robert Malone

He testified on COVID-19 injections and 5th-generation warfare against humanity.
(Toronto: March 30, 2023)

Cathy Jones

She described how the media was complicit in the pandemic narrative.
(Ottawa: May 17, 2023)

James Corbett

An independent journalist, he discussed the international health emergency treaties.
(Ottawa: May 18, 2023)

The testimony of witnesses allege that the media sources in Canada, which should in a democratic society inform Canadians, did not perform their duties in a non-biased and fair manner.

Witness statements describe a corrupt and biased system of reporting that only presented the government and corporate narrative while omitting any reasonable and balanced dissenting information regardless of the source and the credentials of those sources.

Many witnesses described being targeted by media for ridicule and, in some instances, with violence.

Widely cited is the August 26, 2021, front page of Canada‘s largest newspaper the Toronto Star.

In addition, media carried an interview from September 8, 2021, with Mr. Justin Trudeau who stated the following:

Yes, there is a small, fringe element in this country that is angry, that doesn‘t believe in science, that is lashing out with racist, misogynistic attacks, but Canadians, the vast majority of Canadians, are not represented by them, Trudeau said.

These are simply a few of hundreds of statements and headlines that targeted Canadians with hate and made them potential targets for violence.

Few if any dissenting articles were provided in the traditional media to rebut these statements or offer an unbiased review of these statements.

In fact, many statements were carried in the traditional media that were factually incorrect and to this date, many of these media outlets have not retracted or condemned the comments made.

People who had legitimate opinions that were contrary to the government narratives were savagely vilified in the traditional media. People were called “anti-vaxxers,“ “haters,“ “misogynists,“ “racists,” and “extremists.“

Witnesses testified that the news was being directed from central corporate headquarters and that reporting or investigation of any opinions which were contrary to the government narrative were not to be pursued.

According to the testimony of Mr. Rodney Palmer, the news organizations contained within the traditional media morphed into propaganda organizations rather than news-gathering organizations.

Mr. Palmer included the following Oxford definition of news gathering:

. . . the process of doing research on news items, especially ones that will be broadcast on television or printed in a newspaper.

He defined propaganda as

Persuasive mass communication that filters and frames the issues of the day in a way that strongly favours particular interests, usually those of a government or corporations. Also, the intentional manipulation of public opinion through lies, half-truths, and the selective retelling of history.

According to Mr. Palmer, the CBC were putting forth as “experts“ organizations such as First Draft, who provided propaganda information in place of actual news sources. The information provided by First Draft was in contradiction of other newspaper sources, such as articles in The Washington Post from April of 2020.

There were numerous reports in 2020 from publications such as Vanity Fair, which presented credible evidence contrary to reports by the CBC.

Mr. Palmer provided an article from the BBC from 2023, which directly contradicted the CBC reporting, and yet no retraction or further follow up from the CBC has been provided.

Mr. Palmer cited internal correspondence from CBC concerning pandemic misinformation only weeks into the pandemic, a time when it would not have been possible to discern what was true or false information.

There are a number of industry groups that many of the traditional media in Canada are a part of that seem to be focusing on what they deem as “trust“ issues, which Mr. Palmer asserted explains some of the monolithic reporting by many of these organizations.

According to Mr. Palmer, CBC took steps to report over 800 pieces of information found on social media that Internet service providers censored. It is difficult to understand how the CBC took on the role of censor.

Reporting was skewed toward developing public hate of people who were not in agreement with the government narrative, yet the CBC did not carry out an independent investigation of the information to confirm the truthfulness of the government narrative.

Qualifying language was used to promote the government narrative.

CBC also used articles to suppress alternative drug treatments for COVID-19. Mr. Palmer cited a CBC Radio News article from September 2, 2021.

Anita Krishna testified about the extent of the “hysteria“ that was being promoted in the newsroom, right from the very start of the pandemic, prior to them having any real information available. She further stated that their newscasts were leaving out significant areas of information. In her opinion, the news was misleading, and she brought this opinion to management who disregarded her concerns and chastised her for bringing up alternative information.

Anita Krishna also spoke about how the new stories had been slanted to promote certain government narratives, and she had never before seen this level of propaganda and censorship within the newsroom.

Testimony from Marianne Klowak indicated that over her 34-year career at the CBC, she was always allowed to pursue stories without much restriction and that approval was always provided on the local level. During the pandemic, journalists were restricted as to what stories they could investigate and report upon as they related to the pandemic.

Ms. Klowak indicated that many of her stories were blocked and never made it to air; these included reporting on protests, reported COVID-19 vaccine injuries, safety concerns, and other pandemic-related issues.

Conclusions

Traditional media sources in Canada did not provide Canadians with fair and balanced news reporting during the pandemic.

According to witness David Leis, over 2,000 media outlets in Canada received federal government funding, and therefore, they are under great pressure to support the narrative being promoted by the government.

The government would not have been able to institute the unprecedented actions during the pandemic had it not been for the collusion between the traditional media and the government.

Traditional media sources promoted propaganda stories, promoted hate, targeted certain Canadians, and provided hateful and dangerous rhetoric.

Hateful and terrifying propaganda promoted terror in Canadians and prompted various people, organizations, and agencies to take steps based on that terror, instead of on science.

From the early stages of the pandemic until the current time, the traditional media has not yet taken any significant steps to correct the record for Canadians.

According to the Government of Canada, following is the definition of terrorism:

In Canada, section 83.01 of the Criminal Code[1] defines terrorism as an act committed “in whole or in part for a political, religious, or ideological purpose, objective or cause“ with the intention of intimidating the public “. . . with regard to its security, including its economic security, or compelling a person, a government or a domestic or an international organization to do or to refrain from doing any act.“ Activities recognized as criminal within this context include death and bodily harm with the use of violence; endangering a person‘s life; risks posed to the health and safety of the public; significant property damage; and interference or disruption of essential services, facilities or systems.

Given that the actions of the media caused terror and panic within all sectors of Canadian society and that this terror was the result of a political narrative handed down by the Government of Canada, consideration must be given to evaluate the detailed chain of decisions made, to determine if an act of terrorism was, in fact, carried out.

Recommendations

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC)

CBC as an organization must be held to account for their very damaging and dangerous actions. Significant steps must be taken to prevent this from ever happening again.

CBC was originally founded on November 2, 1936. Many of the principles under which the CBC was created and justified, no longer exist. With the advent of the Internet and the incredible reduction in the cost of creating quality content, the CBC no longer has a significant role to play in the promotion of Canadian content or the provision of media services to the rural and remote areas of Canada.

1. The CBC should be stripped to its very fundamental functions of providing information to Canadians with a special focus on French language and Indigenous issues. All other current functions and productions of the CBC must be terminated immediately.

2. All current senior management positions in the CBC must be removed in light of the revised operational mandate.

3. Dismiss all on air staff that participated in the dissemination of propaganda during the pandemic.

4. Replace the CBC Ombudsmen with a Board of Canadians chosen from across Canada, with two representatives chosen from each province and territory.

5. The first task of the Board is to investigate the origins and relationships with the government and industry that influenced the actions of the CBC during the pandemic.

6. Remove the CBC from the “Trusted News Initiative“ and all other related organizations.

7. One of the original functions of the CBC was to support Canadian content, and as such they should return to that role but not to the role as imagined in 1932; it must realize the reality of the 21st century. As such, the CBC mandate would be to help Canadians to develop Canadian content. We propose the following:

   1. CBC facilities and equipment, et cetera, might be made available as a resource to private media developers.

   2. Utilize expertise that is currently embedded in the CBC to educate and provide training to private Canadian content producers.

   3. CBC should use its resources to promote real Canadian content produced by Canadians, not the CBC.

8. A criminal investigation must be undertaken to determine what areas of criminal hate speech law may have been violated based on the reporting of the CBC.

Other Traditional “Privately Owned“ Media

Other traditional media outlets were as culpable as the CBC, but as private industry players, they do have the right to broadcast in accordance with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It would be extremely difficult to monitor their content on an ongoing basis, and it should not be the role of the government to regulate that content beyond required by current law.

1. However, any and all direct government support to these media entities must be stopped immediately. There is no reason for Canadian taxpayers to be supporting these entities. They are privately owned and as such must survive in the free marketplace as every other private business must.

2. There is an uneasy monopolization of traditional media that has occurred in Canada over the past 30 years. A complete investigation of the traditional media sources must be carried out under all federal legislation that deals with the development of monopolies in Canada.

3. A criminal investigation must be undertaken to determine what areas of criminal hate speech law may have been violated based on the reporting of the traditional media venues.

4. Internet social media platforms must not be censoring or editorializing content on their sites, unless the content is in contravention of the Criminal Code.

5. The Broadcasting Act must be rewritten to accurately reflect the broadcasting environment of the 21st century. The Broadcasting Act should not be used as a tool of the government to censor content or to advance the promotion and production of Canadian content. The act must endeavour to accurately set out the rules and regulations and remove interpretation or development of regulations by an unelected body such as the CRTC.

6. The role of the CRTC must be reviewed, and the CRTC possibly abolished if it is determined that the actual role of the CRTC is to simply develop regulations which are not specifically contained in legislation.

7. Bolster press freedom and other media communications protections by enacting comprehensive legislation and constitutional provisions in alignment with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which ensures and upholds the rights of free expression, access to information, and editorial independence.

8. Safeguard journalists from intimidation, harassment, and threats to their personal safety through effective law enforcement and judicial mechanisms.

9. Ensure that public broadcasting organizations, such as the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, operate independently and are insulated from political interference with editorial decisions made by experienced journalists.

10. Promote a diverse and inclusive media landscape that reflects a wide range of perspectives and avoids undue concentration of ownership or control.

11. Increase transparency in the allocation and utilization of public funds provided to the public broadcaster. This includes clearly disclosing the criteria and decision-making processes for funding distribution.

12. Establish independent bodies or committees to oversee and evaluate the disbursement of public funds, ensuring accountability and preventing undue influence.

13. Foster the development of non-profit and community-based media organizations to diversify the media landscape and provide alternative sources of information and perspectives.

14. Establish grant programs or tax incentives to support the sustainability and growth of non-profit media outlets, enabling them to operate independently of government influence.

15. Promote media literacy education initiatives that equip citizens with critical thinking skills to evaluate media sources, distinguish between fact and opinion, and understand the importance of independent journalism.

16. Promote adherence to professional journalistic standards and ethics, including accuracy, fairness, and accountability.

17. Support self-regulatory bodies, such as the Canadian Association of Journalists (CAJ).

18. Enforce ethical guidelines and provide recourse for individuals who believe they have been misrepresented or harmed by media coverage.

19. Engage in international forums and collaborations to advocate for press freedom and protect independent journalism globally.

20. Support initiatives and organizations that promote freedom of the press and other forms of media and provide assistance to journalists facing threats or persecution.

21. Encourage citizen participation and engagement in media governance, including public consultations, forums, and advisory panels, to ensure diverse perspectives and community interests are taken into account.

By implementing these recommendations, Canada can foster a media landscape that is independent, diverse, and accountable, serving as a cornerstone of democracy and providing citizens with reliable, unbiased information. It is crucial to uphold the principles of press freedom and support traditional media outlets in their role as watchdogs and providers of independent journalism.