It sounds like a fringe battle cry, but what a few years ago could have been described as a minority sentiment has now become more mainstream. Justin Trudeau really has resigned, and threatening to replace him is none other than Pierre Poilievre, who’s using this very slogan as part of his campaign for prime minister: “defund the CBC.”
This comes off the coat-tails of a trend of media criticisms from the far-right, the rise of the fake news phenomenon, and closures and mass lay-offs at both legacy and independent news outlets over the past few years. In 2024 alone, the CBC laid off 141 employees and terminated 205 vacant positions. The year before that, Meta banned Canadian news from being shared on their social media sites Facebook and Instagram in response to Bill C-18 — the Online News Act — which was intended to help Canadian journalists receive fair compensation from the digital intermediaries who deliver their news by making it mandatory for them to pay news publishers for the content shared on their platforms.
Many of us have already adapted to a new media landscape; we’ve become accustomed to receiving news updates from influencers on TikTok, X, and Instagram, or podcasts headed by outspoken commentators, activists, and journalists. We’re getting what we want to hear, when we want to hear it — but what does that mean for us as citizens and as a democracy? And what does it mean for the future of journalism in Canada?
It’s all about the money, money, money
Back when I was a kid in the early 2000s, my grandparents received our local newspaper, the Aldergrove Star, in their mailbox. On Sunday we would get the extra special paper, The Province, which I loved because it had a colourful, two-page spread of comics to feast my eyes upon. But while my grandparents and I enjoyed our Sunday papers, the news industry was undergoing seismic shifts.
Print newspapers are largely funded by advertisements and subscriptions, and were once a profitable business. For small-town newspapers, there was little competition from other papers and therefore an easy and open market to tap into.
Everything changed when websites began to share news. Web publishers realized they could deliver news to consumers almost immediately — papers didn’t need to be printed or delivered — stories could be posted and available instantly, cutting the added costs of printing massive quantities of newspapers.
It’s safe to say that the internet changed a lot of things for a lot of people, but for newspapers, the change was tragic. No longer were people or companies buying advertisement space in print publications — they were taking out ad space online, and posting items for sale on sites like craigslist instead of the classifieds. Newspapers tried to keep up: they began to publish online and made their own Facebook and Instagram pages. But it wasn’t enough — they couldn’t compete with online advertisements and lost large portions of their income because of it.
But even before the internet broke the news economy, media conglomerates had been getting a headstart. Large companies like Black Press Media, which owns swathes of both Canadian and American newspapers, were consolidating multitudes of community news companies under their corporate wing. This strategy of media consolidation had, in the past, proven to be a profitable business model. But with the new economic challenges facing newspapers, this didn’t end up being the case over the long-term. Black Press filed for creditor protection (meaning their liabilities outweighed their assets, leaving them unable to repay their debts) in January of 2024, emerging on what they said was solid financial footing shortly after in March of the same year. Black Press is just one microcosmic example of the larger trend of conglomeration in the news business. Newspapers all over Canada and the United States were experiencing much of the same troubles, leaving them saddled with crushing debt and a need to scale back their operations.
When it comes to transitioning traditional newspapers to cyberspace, part of news companies’ inability to keep up economically was that they were providing their readers with free news by not requiring them to pay for a subscription.
Tyler Olsen, founder and managing editor of the Fraser Valley Current said that as long as news is available to people, they don’t realize they should be financially supporting it.
“You wonder if it requires all [of ] disappearing for people to actually understand that they need to pay for it. It’s only in the last 15 years that suddenly you can spend your entire day reading free news. And that’s clearly not sustainable.”
Even worse, newspapers are competing for people’s attention.
“People used to read newspapers as a forum of entertainment, and people still do, but there are more forms of entertainment.”
No longer were people subscribing to cable (thereby giving news broadcasters a cut of the bill): they were buying subscriptions to Netflix, Disney+, and Prime Video — often inadvertently cutting news out of their lives.
Daddy Government to the rescue! … Or not.
In a legislative summary published on Oct. 13, 2022, a study undertaken by The Department of Canadian Heritage (a federal organization intended to foster and promote Canadian identity, values, culture, and heritage) on media and local communities was presented. The introduction to the study states:
“We heard that media consolidation did not always lead to better access to news by local communities. We heard that the advent of news aggregators like Google and Facebook “muddied the waters” conflating news sources so that a phenomenon known as fake news emerged. We also heard that journalistic integrity and the ethos of verifiable and accountable journalism is at risk when it becomes indistinguishable from “citizen journalism.” We noted that access to reliable news and information was integral to a functioning democracy.”
The information collected from this study and from predecessor studies that examined the alarming downfall of local, regional, and community news, motivated the government to intervene. In an attempt to support news businesses, the Federal government implemented Bill C-18 in June 2023.
The reaction to this bill was swift and fierce. Meta quickly implemented a ban on Canadian news on their sites. The full impact of this bill on Canadian news is yet to be seen, but it hasn’t come without its criticisms.
Canadian Professor and journalist Sue Gardner speculated in an article for McGill’s Max Bell School of Public Policy that the bill was government intervention in the wrong way and would negatively affect journalism in Canada.
“Australia brought in the News Media Bargaining Code, upon which the Canadian legislation is modelled. Since then, it’s estimated that about 90% of revenues negotiated as a result of the new law have gone to Australia’s three largest media companies.”
But that doesn’t mean that this will be the case for Canada. Earlier this year, the Canadian Journalism Collective (CJC), a federally incorporated non-profit organization led by 12 independent publishers and broadcasters — including French language outlets, community and Indigenous news, and Black and minority publishers in Canada — made a deal with Google. As of October 2024, this deal will continue for five years, totalling $500 million.
“The Canadian Journalism Collective-Collectif Canadien de Journalisme (CJC-CCJ) has signed an agreement to act as the collective responsible for receiving and distributing $100 million annually from Google in support of Canadian news businesses under the Online News Act.”
Olsen says that the Fraser Valley Current is set to receive a cut of this money.
“We’ll be getting some money from that deal and that will help support and pay for our continued existence and the ability to do our jobs and pay salaries for journalists.”
There are a number of other benefits for news producers that come directly from the government itself. The catch? News organizations must obtain Qualified Canadian Journalism Organization (QCJO) status — a designation that our federal government distributes and decides who qualifies for it. These benefits include salary subsidies, tax breaks for subscribers, and tax-exemptions.
In a 2019 report from an independent panel of experts on journalism and media, it was recommended that “publications used for the diffusion of hate content” should not be granted access to these benefits. Despite that, CANADALAND, an independent news and podcasting company, has raised a number of questions on how governments will navigate this designation, particularly when it comes to handling misinformation. Jonathan Goldsbie, a reporter for CANADALAND, summarized their podcast interview with Collette Brin, the chair of the Independent Advisory Board on Eligibility for Journalism Tax Measures:
“In an interview on this week’s CANADALAND, the chair of the board that evaluates applicants confirms that the publication of hateful or inaccurate content would not, in itself, preclude an outlet from obtaining status as a Qualified Canadian Journalism Organization (QCJO).
“[When] asked by [host Jesse] Brown if there’s an acceptable level of misinformation, Brin says, ‘You know, I would love to say no, but it’s a difficult question to answer.’”
When it comes to QCJO status, another question is whether government-funded news interferes with one of the central functions of journalism: holding the powerful to account.
Olsen said that so far, this hasn’t been much of an issue.
“There are lots of organizations that do very critical reporting on government[s] that have that designation. You can look just at the National Post as being the obvious example … they’ll receive this money.
“I think there’s a long-term issue, in that the longer you run such a program, the more chance that somebody will come along that abuses it… I also think there’s a long-term problem just in having an industry dependent on permanent subsidies.”
With a changing political, social, and technological landscape, we are seeing new trends in journalism — innovation often comes during times of crisis — and those who are passionate about keeping journalism alive have found ways to fund their initiatives. Despite the alarming headlines, Olsen says there is a light on the horizon.
“In Canada, a lot of [news organizations] have continued to grow and succeed and slowly build larger and larger audiences to the point where they’re able to hire people and they’re able to grow and bring people on.”
Independent journalism is often funded by listener support, private funders, government tax credits and grants, advertising, and because of Bill C-18, “big tech” money. Each news outlet differs in its financial ethics and guidelines; some publications like CANADALAND have committed to refuse government funding. Others, like The Breach, refuse corporate money, but many news publishers use some combination of both.
When it comes to the future of the Fraser Valley Current, Olsen is optimistic.
“We still haven’t got to the point where we’re really growing much, we still need to find more revenue. But it’s at least provided some opportunity for a life raft from something that is kind of like a sinking ship.”
Legacy media (referring to long-standing and established news outlets, like the CBC, LaPresse, Quebecor, and the National Post) have historically been well-funded and widely read, but still have a tumultuous social and economic field to navigate.
As of 2023, Statistics Canada has reported that citizens of all income levels have low levels of trust in the news and information they receive from media, but according to Forbes magazine it’s all about balance.
“Traditional outlets, while no longer unchallenged gatekeepers, still offer credibility and depth. Meanwhile, new media platforms excel at immediacy, relatability and engagement. Thriving in this landscape isn’t about choosing sides—it’s about bridging the strengths of both. Brands that embrace transparency, authenticity and the right balance of legacy and new media will lead the way.”
The news on my feed (I bought it)
In a study from Pew Research Center, 37 per cent of Americans aged 18-29 get their news from a new set of players on the field: the “news influencers.”
“‘[N]ews influencers…’ refer to individuals who regularly post about current events and civic issues on social media and have at least 100,000 followers on any of Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, X (formerly Twitter) or YouTube. News influencers can be journalists who are or were affiliated with a news organization or independent content creators.”
An example from Canada is Pierre Poilievre’s interview with media commentator Dr. Jordan B. Peterson (cleverly titled “Canada’s Next Prime Minister”), which highlights the growing tendency for politicians to post on social media themselves, rather than speaking with the press. Olsen commented that government communications departments and strategies can sometimes take the role of the press.
“The governments are becoming less accessible to media outlets and journalists in the first place. So they’re trying to, and they’re succeeding at, monopolizing the avenue — the way that governments communicate and get information to people. And I don’t think that’s particularly healthy.”
This could create problems for delivering unbiased news to consumers. Anyone familiar with the algorithm (a social media sorting system that prioritizes and presents individualized content to users) could deduce this. We see the news that we want to see, and this creates polarization problems. Olsen said there needs to be a bigger audience for neutral journalism.
“The problem is … finding a reader … for those non-perspective voice oriented stories.”
It has yet to be seen how these new funding and platform models will impact journalism.
“Anybody who thinks they know what’s going to happen, or think they know how things are gonna shake out is probably overestimating their predictive abilities.”
And as for news influencers, Olsen says that they will never replace the need for true journalism.
“People get their media from people who get their media from the media. They’re getting all their information from the news … But they’re filtering it through their own perspective. And that can be useful. But the thing is, you need that underlying journalism that’s digging up those underlying facts to begin with, or everything else fails.”
Where have all the good journalists gone?
While it can be tricky to accurately measure the number of journalists working across Canada for a number of reasons, the most recent data suggests that the number of journalists in British Columbia is currently sitting at the lowest it’s been in nearly 30 years.
Christopher Cheung analyzed the statistics surrounding journalism in Canada in an article for The Tyee.
“According to Unifor Local 2000, which represents employees at B.C. newspapers such as the Vancouver Sun and The Province, their count of reporters saw a height of about 155 members in 2001, which dropped to 40 in 2021. As for editors, there was a height of about 318 in 2001, which dropped to 69 in 2021.”
Moreover, the number of journalists in Canada as a whole has fallen from 13,470 in 1991 to 10,555 in 2021.
So, where have all the journalists gone? According to Chueng, they could be using their journalism skills for communications departments. Data suggests that the number of individuals working in communications has risen dramatically, from 11,980 in 2016 to 21,765 in 2021.
“Communications professionals share some skillsets with journalists, but they handle information on behalf of their employers rather than purely for public interest like journalists do,” writes Cheung.
According to Olsen, many people who work in communications departments — including those that work for politicians — are former journalists.
“[The] government has been hiring away people from journalism outlets for as long as there’s been journalism outlets. But in the last 20 or 30 years, it’s gotten to the point where — and didn’t used to be this way — the number of ex-journalists in these operations vastly outnumber the people doing actual journalism.
“These places are all producing work that’s often meant to replicate or duplicate or look like journalism, or deliver information to people. Some of that information is very useful and important, and some of it’s baked in such a way that is designed to just deliver political results for whoever is hiring the people to do it. You have a lot of need for journalists and not a lot of people wanting to do it.”
With great power comes great responsibility
In light of all this, I sat down to talk with UFV’s Director of Communications Samantha Hannah and Associate Professor Dr. Paul Fontaine about the introduction of UFV’s new journalism minor.
Hannah says that the program is not necessarily intended to develop students into career journalists, but to compliment whatever the student’s major is.
“It really is meant to be that civic engagement piece. The idea that everyone could be a reporter in some sense, especially with social media and the prevalence of how people are disseminating news … you see major world events and the first thing that happens is everybody’s whipping out their phone and posting their version of events on social media.”
Hannah says that the program will explore media literacy for consumers, and educate students on ethical journalism so that they can engage and use their civic voices responsibly. Specifically, students pursuing a minor in journalism will learn to understand fake news, misinformation, and disinformation, examine how the field is changing and becoming more individualized, and cultivate curiosity.
Hannah says that non-communications students can use these skills to communicate their expertise. Alongside this is a desire to connect with the local journalism community and send a message that UFV does value journalism as a worthwhile field. This makes the creation of the journalism minor an important step for the UFV communications department.
Despite the precarity of the field of journalism, Fontaine, who spent five years working in local journalism, says that people still want to be journalists.
“It feels good to impact the world in a positive way and to hold powerful people to accountability. Those are functions of citizenship that I think a lot of people take seriously.”
The fact of the matter is journalism has been changing and adapting for years, and it won’t stop anytime soon. Whatever the future of media looks like, responsible reporting will always be necessary. The great thing about it all? We as consumers and producers have the power to influence where we go from here — let’s be responsible with that power.
Darien Johnsen is a UFV alumni who obtained her Bachelor of Arts degree with double extended minors in Global Development Studies and Sociology in 2020. She started writing for The Cascade in 2018, taking on the role of features editor shortly after. She’s passionate about justice, sustainable development, and education.
