This year has seen elections held in numerous provinces, including Saskatchewan, British Columbia, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia. During that time, the NNC received numerous complaints about concerns around issues of editorial fairness and balance in news reporting. 

A common theme we heard about from complainants during this electoral cycle, which is consistent with previous years, was a sentiment that news organizations were making decisions about which campaigns and policy matters to cover and, in turn, giving some candidates a perceived unfair advantage. We received complaints, for example, that news stories focused on only the ‘leading’ two or three candidates in a given riding, while omitting coverage of other candidates who espoused various other ideological perspectives. We also heard from individuals expressing their concerns about coverage of municipal policy matters, and the need to balance perspectives with personal privacy, especially at the community level where the personal and political may overlap.

In addressing these concerns, the NNC explained that journalism should always aim to provide the public with relevant information about candidates and elected officials in order to contribute to an informed electorate, both pre- and post-elections. This is tantamount to the media ensuring elected officials, and those seeking public office, are held accountable. We also explained that news organizations strive to cover as many candidates in any given race, and relevant policy matters, whether at the provincial legislature, city hall, or school board level. 

At the same time, journalistic standards and practices support the view that not all candidates in any election are entitled to equal space in individual stories. This is due to practical and principled reasons. For one, at a more practical level, it is virtually impossible for any news organization to equally cover the litany of candidates who run for any office. 

Perhaps more importantly, however, journalistic standards allow for news organizations to make editorial decisions that they deem relevant to their audiences. 

That said, by their nature, politics and elections are contentious, and reporting on them may provoke a range of reactions among readers. Such coverage necessarily involves a number of journalistic standards and practices depending on the nature of the story and issues involved. Below are some examples of the types of concerns the NNC has heard which illustrate the relevant journalistic standards considered in election coverage and reporting on politics, whether local or federal.

‘Unfair attack’ of politician in opinion writing

An individual took issue with an opinion column they felt was unfairly attacking the character of a federal party leader. The individual alleged that the opinion column showed “bias” in excluding relevant facts and drawing on circumstantial evidence to support the view that the politician was “courting” extremist groups. The NNC recognized that the complainant disagreed with the conclusions drawn by the columnist and wished to see a different opinion presented. However, it found no evidence that the opinion contained a specific factual error. In dismissing the complaint, the NNC explained that politicians, as public figures vying to represent the interests of Canadians, are subject to added scrutiny. Part of the role of the media in a democratic society is to serve as a watchdog on power and those seeking to acquire it. For this reason, it is standard practice for opinion content to include criticism of politicians and their platforms. (Case ID: 2024-31)

Balancing personal privacy and perspectives in local politics

An individual was concerned that a local news story about a public hearing on a proposed affordable housing project contained too much personal information by including her ethnicity and address. The story included statements from a number of local residents, including the complainant, who expressed opinions about the affordable housing project that would ‘prioritize Metis’ residents. The statements were based on information provided by the complainant in a public forum, in which she noted was a local resident and Metis, and had concerns about the project and its impact on the neighbourhood.

The news organization responded by explaining that reference to the complainant’s ethnicity was relevant because it showed that supporters and opponents of the proposed community project encompass diverse backgrounds. It noted that identifying the speakers as immediate neighbours to the project by including their addresses also showed to readers that the speakers were significantly affected by the issue, which may make their comments more relevant to readers. The news organization noted that public records indicate that the complainant included both of these details at the public hearing and in the letter submitted to the local council.

Journalists rely on public records, including data sets or testimony, to inform these stories, and as such, they are a vital resource to presenting stories in the public interest. The NNC noted that journalists take care to avoid perpetuating harmful stereotypes. For this reason, generally speaking, an individual’s race or ethnicity is not included in a story unless it is relevant to the matter at hand. That said, the news organization noted that the article’s inclusion of information about individuals’ race or ethnicity and specific addresses was based on public documents and was relevant to the story at hand. In this case, the NNC found no evidence the news organization published any materials, or other information, that were not made public as part of the community consultation process, and did not find grounds to support a breach of journalistic standards. (Case ID: 2024-57)

‘Bias by omission’ in presenting profiles on local election candidates

An individual was concerned that a local news organization did not publish a profile-style article about the local Green Party candidate, while such articles were published about the NDP and Conservative candidates. The reader alleged that this indicated “bias by omission” on the part of the news organization. The NNC recognized that the reader would like to see more coverage of their party candidate. We explained, however, that it is up to the news organization to decide which content best serves its readers. Responsible reporting on politics and policy does not necessarily equate to equal or specific coverage. For this reason, the NNC found no grounds to support a complaint about a breach of journalistic standards. (Case ID: 2024-64)