The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

15| The IFP -H alton H ills | T hursday,F ebruary 8,2018 theifp.ca Canada is facing a crisis of quality journalism. Reporters are being laid off in droves, many smaller communities are now "news deserts" with no lo- cal newspaper, and the amount of serious investi- gative journalism is declin- ing sharply. And if you believe, as I do, that a vigorous, investi- gative press is essential for a strong democracy, we should all be very con- cerned. At the beginning of its mandate, the Trudeau gov- ernment seemed to share that concern. It commis- sioned the Public Policy Forum, under the direction of veteran editor and jour- nalist Ed Greenspon, to study the issue. The final report, enti- tled "The Shattered Mir- ror," was released a year ago. It outlined in vivid de- tail the crisis and put for- ward 12 core recommenda- tions. The government also commissioned the Com- mons committee on Cana- dian heritage, under Van- couver MP and former journalist Hedy Fry, to con- duct a parallel investiga- tion. After months of hear- ings and dozens of witness- es, it came up with 20 prac- tical recommendations. For the record, it should be noted I participated in both processes. As chair of Torstar and a 40-year veter- an of the Toronto Star, I care passionately about quality journalism and the health of our democracy. Needless to say, the very survival of Torstar's dailies and weeklies is also fore- most on my mind. That said, now that the Trudeau government is more than halfway through its mandate, what has been its response? My view? Studied indif- ference. Across the board, the Trudeau government has either ignored or rejected virtually all the recom- mendations. What particu- larly stings is that the vast majority would not cost taxpayers anything. To make matters worse, in announcing her govern- ment's decisions, Heritage Minister Mélanie Joly em- phasized her government wasn't interested in bailing out "industry models that are no longer viable." Left starkly unclear was where quality journalism would then originate. And newspaper executives, my- self included, were left ask- ing: if this is what the Tru- deau government really thinks, then why did we go through this lengthy pro- cess? To illustrate the point, let me chronicle the fate of 10 recommendations: 1. Copyright protection for newspapers: Under Ca- nadian copyright law, orig- inal content from Canadi- an newspapers can be easi- ly duplicated and distribut- ed on the internet for free. This has become a real annoyance, particularly when aggregators, blog- gers or others use original material without permis- sion or fee. The Public Policy Fo- rum recommended Ottawa amend the law to help newspapers protect their content "for a reasonable time." Newspapers, under- standably, have also ar- gued they should be paid for their content. The result? Nothing to date. 2. Facebook and Google: These two multinational giants now control more than 70 per cent of all digi- tal advertising in Canada. Yet the playing field is pa- tently unfair for Canadian media. Under Canadian tax law, companies can deduct the cost of advertising only if ads are placed in Canadi- an publications. Yet this law does not apply to the in- ternet. So not only do Facebook and Google not pay corpo- rate tax or GST/HST, be- cause they are headquar- tered outside Canada, but they accept ads on the same basis as Canadian media. The list of countries that have sought to address simi- lar concerns is impressive: New Zealand, Norway, South Korea, Japan, Swit- zerland, South Africa and Israel, as well as the Europe- an Union. Last month Aus- tralia launched its own in- vestigation. Both the Public Policy Forum and many me- dia groups have asked Otta- wa to do the same. The result? Nothing to date. 3. Federal government advertising: For the past several years, Ottawa has followed a "digital-first" strategy in placement of federal ads. That, in turn, has led to a reduction in the propor- tion of federal spending for daily newspaper ads by 96 per cent and for communi- ty newspaper ads by 21 per cent. These figures, impor- tantly, come directly from the Department of Canadi- an Heritage. The issue was fully stud- ied last year by the Com- mons standing committee on government operations and estimates. In its final report, it con- cluded Ottawa's advertis- ing strategy had resulted in a "misalignment" of the reality that many Canadi- ans still rely on traditional media. It urged more spending be directed to tra- ditional media "including TV, radio and print media." The result? Nothing to date. 4. Digital tax credits: The heritage committee recommended that news- papers be given a tempo- rary five-year tax credit for a portion of the labour and capital they spend on digi- tal innovation. In fact, Ontario also had a digital media tax credit but it has been discontin- ued. The re- sult? Noth- ing to date. 5. Canada Periodical Fund: Since before Con- federation, this fund and its precur- sors have provided finan- cial support to Canadian magazines and weeklies. Maclean's magazine, for example, receives $2 mil- lion annually from this fund, allowing it to contin- ue in operation. Both the Public Policy Forum and the heritage committee recommended that daily newspapers be included in this fund. The result? Idea reject- ed. 6. The Canadian Press: Canada's national wire ser- vice, which celebrated its 100th anniversary last year, has had a pension problem for several decades. Eight years ago, the three owners of CP (one be- ing Torstar) went to Ottawa to see if CP could get an ex- tended period to meet its obligations. The proposal, fully supported by CP's staff, was enthusiastically endorsed by then finance minister Jim Flaherty. And it cost Ottawa nothing. "CP is too important to this country," he told us. Eight years later, inter- est rates being even lower, the three owners returned to Ottawa to see if this relief could be extended. In coun- tries such as France, for ex- ample, the French equiva- lent of CP is seen as so im- portant to French democ- racy that the government directly subsidizes it. And what did current Finance Minister Bill Mor- neau tell us? "Why should I do anything special for CP?" The result? CP's request was denied. One year later, CP is en- tering a different federal relief program. But it has been a slog. 7. CP and local journal- ism: To help provide news coverage in smaller com- munities, the Public Policy Fo- rum sug- gested The Canadian Press be giv- en the man- date and re- sources to fill the gaps. The idea is for CP to hire 60 to 80 reporters across the country to do the bread-and-butter coverage of city halls, courts and leg- islatures. The estimated cost is $8 million to $10 mil- lion a year. A similar con- cept has been rolled out in Great Britain by the BBC. The result? Nothing to date. 8. CBC and cbc.ca: The huge exception, of course, to Ottawa's studied indif- ference is our national broadcaster. The Trudeau government has pledged an additional $675 million over five years to the CBC. Parenthetically, just 1 per cent of Ottawa's total funding to the CBC would pay for more than half the Toronto Star's newsroom. In today's digital world, the greatest competitor to Canadian newspaper web- sites is cbc.ca. It is an excel- lent website, flush with re- sources and funded, of course, by the public. Not only that; it is free. Fur- thermore, it is out in the market competing for digi- tal advertising. The heritage commit- tee, in its report, proposed that Canada adopt the Brit- ish model where the BBC does not compete for ads. The rationale is that the public broadcaster has an obvious advantage with its guaranteed public funding. The result? Idea reject- ed. 9. Non-profit journal- ism and philanthropy: In the U.S., Germany and oth- er countries, non-profit- able journalism ventures are funded by grants from foundations. Under their laws, such grants are considered charitable donations. This is how such renowned American investigative websites as ProPublica survive. In Britain, the Guardian is owned by a trust and supported partly by grants and reader con- tributions. Both the Public Policy Forum and the federal task force on charities urged the passage of similar legisla- tion in Canada. The result? Idea reject- ed. 10. Investigative jour- nalism support: To help promote investigative and civic journalism, the Pub- lic Policy Forum recom- mended the creation of a le- gal advisory service. Large newspapers, such as the Star, have in-house counsel who provide essen- tial legal advice on difficult investigations or articles. For smaller publications, these costs can be prohibitive. The result? Nothing to date. In summary, this list speaks for itself. In fact, there are other more ex- pensive proposals that are deliberately not included. Again, most of the 10 above cost nothing, but rather in- volved changing the law or practice. Studied indifference. I believe this country and its journalism and de- mocracy deserve better. - John Honderich is the chair of Torstar, the To- ronto Star's parent compa- ny. OPINION We should all be very concerned by the crisis facing quality journalism The Trudeau government has either ignored or rejected virtually all the recommendations proposed to help support newspapers, writes John Honderich JOHN HONDERICH Column I believe this country and its journalism and democracy deserve better.