October 27, 2003
The race for Mayor of Toronto has taken on an interesting new wrinkle in that the media and its pollsters have already decided the race and the actual election is a formality that could just as well be skipped. According to most media types, the mayoral campaign has been a fairly boring affair over the past 10 months that hasnt really rated their attention. However, with the release of a couple of polls in the past two weeks, the mayors race has "dramatically" morphed into a psychodrama of epic proportions.
What does this mean for you, the voter? Good question, because of this unique position that the media has assumed, the average voter is being deprived of valuable information which is key in helping to decide how to cast the ballot.
So-called "fringe" candidates are not being reported on because the media "knows" they havent a chance of winning. As such, these candidates have to resort to dramatic publicity stunts to have anyone pay attention to their campaign. Take John Nunziatas claim that another mayoral campaign offered him a six-figure bribe and the deputy mayors job if he dropped out of the race and ran for a council seat instead. What would Nunziatas motivation be for waiting more than a month to make this information public, if it isnt the medias ignoring his platform and not reporting his initiatives?
Tom Jakobek, whom pollsters are placing at 2 percent (or statistical death) cant get the media to report on any of his initiatives, no matter how relevant or well thought out. Its a good thing he isnt a physicist whos discovered viable fusion energy because it would go unreported.
Recently Jakobek called a press conference to announce his plans to initiate an international disease assessment office to head off a repeat of the recent disaster wrought by SARS. He sent a media advisory to every media outlet in Toronto stating this, yet not one member of the media showed up to hear what he had to say. Consequently none of his ideas found their way to the public, who one can be sure would be very interested in not having SARS II playing in Toronto any time soon.
A similar thing happened to Jakobek, following a street gang shootout at Kennedy Subway Station during which two young men lost their lives. Again, he sent out a media advisory that outlined his initiative on dealing with street gang crime and called a press conference at Kennedy station. Again, not one member of the media bothered to show up. When questioned, one reporter for a prominent Toronto Television outlet said that his producer pulled him off the story while en route to the press conference.
Is the media not interested in what a legitimate candidate for mayor has to offer on issues as important as SARS or gun violence on Torontos streets? It would appear that the interest threshold for reporting anything that a candidate has to say has to be in excess of 15%. If a candidate is over that number, then the media will report it, no matter how asinine or unrealistic. If its less, then it doesnt rate the time of day, no matter how well thought out the initiative might be.
This leaves the voter in an awkward position. If the media doesnt find it necessary to report what a candidate is all about, how will the public find out what that candidates platform is? It appears that the average voter is now going to be forced to be that much more diligent in pursuing the candidates platforms. Voters will need to visit candidates web sites, read their literature, attend all-candidates meetings and question individual candidates on their position, if they are expecting to get real and honest information. Relying on the press will not guarantee that this information will either be forthcoming or accurate, for that matter.
Media bias and manipulation of elections by the media has become so prevalent that many media members dont even bother hiding their biases from the public any more. Royson James of the Toronto Star recently e-mailed one of his readers that the reason he didnt mention Tom Jakobek in a story was " because hes not fit to be mayor".
When the poll that found David Miller in first place was released, Bill Carrol of CFRB couldnt understand how anyone could vote for a tax and spend candidate like Miller and not John Tory.
One wonders what makes James, Carrol or any other media type so uniquely qualified to make that decision on the voters behalf.
So, it looks like its down to this: if as a voter you want the best person to win, you would be well advised to turn off the radio and television, use the newspapers to wrap fish instead of reading them and find out for yourself what the candidates are all about. Understandably in this age when everyone is too busy to spend time on themselves or their families or friends, this is a lot to ask. But as a functioning citizen of a viable democracy it also your duty.
We endlessly hear Canadians complain about their elected officials and their governments. But, if we are electing these governments on the basis of polls, columnists and reporters, we have only ourselves to blame for the lack of excellence in their performances.
If you want to make sure that the person you vote for best represents you, then do the work necessary to find that person. Otherwise, the media will cast your ballot on your behalf.
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2018 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2018 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement