Freedom Flyer July 1995 Cover

Freedom Flyer 28

the official newsletter of the
Freedom Party of Ontario

July 1995




Bad press... is NO press!

MEDIA BIAS HAMPERS CAMPAIGN EFFECTIVENESS

ONTARIO (April 28 - June 8, 1995) - There is no doubt that the most difficult challenge facing new political parties during an election is getting adequate media exposure to let the public learn about party platforms, policies, and accomplishments. The importance of this cannot be understated, since perceptions of a party's electability are formed primarily through - and by - the media.

While readers may be led to believe that Fp media coverage reproduced in this newsletter is abundant, it must be borne in mind that compared to last election (1990), media interest in Freedom Party during Election'95 was greatly diminished and this disinterest was often highly suspect. From the very start of the election campaign, media coverage of Fp was skirted, inaccurately portrayed, or evaded altogether.

This was the case even in the London area where Fp has had a relatively high profile between elections. Despite faxed and delivered media releases, candidate participation in all-candidates' debates, election signs, distribution of tens of thousands of pieces of literature to the London-area ridings, and polls initially indicating support for alternate parties as high as 7-8%, the media was surprisingly deficient in helping the public learn more about its political alternatives.

VAUGHAN RESPONDS

Fp secretary Robert Vaughan was quick to challenge coverage about Freedom Party in the pages of the London Free Press by calling the paper to account for dismissing Freedom Party as a "fringe" party and for its omissions in announcing Fp's candidates in certain London-area ridings, despite having been informed of their candidacy.

In a May 6, 1995 column addressing Vaughan's complaints, London Free Press Reader's Advocate Gordon Sanderson, while admitting that the names of Fp's candidates "were sidetracked at the paper," nevertheless attempted to deflect responsibility for the paper's shortcomings onto Freedom Party for not having "formal nomination meetings".

In fact, all registered political parties and candidates must go through a formal nomination and registration process with both Elections Ontario and the Commission on Election Finances before they can be regarded as official candidates on the ballot. Even if the media was not informed by the party of who their candidates are, this information is readily available through either of the two registration bodies.

On the very page opposite Sanderson's column addressing Vaughan's concerns, Freedom Party was once again dismissed as an "established fringe party" by Queens Park Free Press reporter Greg Van Moorsel ('Party strategies to watch'). There was no mention of Fp's platform, record of action, or campaign strategy, while attention was given to the Family Coalition Party, the Natural Law Party, and the Reform Association. (Van Moorsel was the reporter whom Fp president Robert Metz challenged to produce an audio tape of alleged racist remarks made by London landlord Elijah Elieff. The tape proved not to exist, but the Free Press has yet to correct its reporting of it. See our issues index with links to past issues of Freedom Flyer for details.)

This prompted Vaughan to write the London Free Press a long letter challenging its lack of coverage on Freedom Party. To his surprise, Vaughan found his complaints reprinted in the paper as an editorial column, complete with photo and by-line, which we have reproduced in this issue.

Unfortunately, despite improved expectations following the appearance of Vaughan's editorial, Free Press coverage was the same or worse.

HOW COME WE NEVER HEAR ABOUT Fp IN THE MEDIA?

Any one of the 300 people attending May 15th's all-candidates' debate on health care sponsored by the Thames Valley Placement Coordination Service would have expected news coverage of the event to give prominent mention to Fp's presence. Two Fp candidates (Jack Plant and Lloyd Walker) were on the discussion panel and contributed a great deal to the debate, while two other Fp candidates (Maureen Battaglia and Barry Malcolm) were on hand to greet people. With all four relevant riding candidates present, and with an impressive information display at the event, Freedom Party had a high profile and was the best represented party in attendance. However, the only mention of Fp's presence at the event in the Free Press on May 16 was that Plant and Walker happened to be "other members of the panel."

At a June 5 all-candidates' debate chaired by the Reverend Susan Eagle, and participated in by representatives from the Free Press and other electronic media, Freedom Party's three London candidates (Battaglia, Plant, Walker) virtually monopolized the debate with powerful arguments and personal insights directed at an audience that was predominantly hostile to Fp's point of view. Most of the questions asked were directed at Fp's candidates.

Sponsors of the debate included the Cross-Cultural Learner's Centre, Students for a Green Society, and Life Spin, a group that had just received $250,000 from the Rae government. Their questions to the candidates were geared towards social and environmental issues - and continued funding of their groups. Several personal attacks were directed at Fp leader Jack Plant in an attempt to demonstrate some sort of conflict between his support of privatizing municipal services and his employment as a London firefighter.

After the event, Fp president Robert Metz remarked, to the disbelief of many present, that "Freedom Party's candidates did so well that you can bet there won't be any coverage of this event in tomorrow's paper (Free Press)." True to his prediction, the Free Press did not report a single word on the event, but did manage to add insult to injury by running a lengthy editorial the following day by a member of Life Spin (one of the groups that sponsored the debate).

NO TIME FOR FREEDOM

Resistance to giving Freedom Party exposure by the media often took unexpected and proactive forms. During the last week of the election, Fp president Robert Metz was informed by a TV Ontario representative that although the network was aware of Freedom Party, and acknowledged that its program "Studio 2" had already featured interviews with the leaders of ALL the other alternate parties, Freedom Party would not be granted the same privilege. The reason given was that "other stories" were more pressing.

In London, Radio Western's CHRW has long had a record of displaying a particularly cool reception to Freedom Party. When Fp president Robert Metz, as a representative of Freedom Party, appeared as a guest speaker on at least three separate past occasions, program hosts incorrectly introduced him as "a community member interested in this issue" and it was left to Metz each time to clarify his position with respect to Freedom Party and to properly introduce himself to the listening audience.

On May 25, 1995, the station hosted an all-candidates' debate for the riding of London North and invited all the candidates of all the parties excepting Freedom Party's candidate, party leader Jack Plant. Since the debate was a call-in radio program, Plant took advantage of the situation by phoning in and introducing himself as the candidate from Freedom Party. The conversation went like this:

RADIO WESTERN:"Mr. Plant do you have a point you'd like to add to our conversation?"

PLANT:"Yes I would. I'd actually like to know why I wasn't invited tonight."

RADIO WESTERN: "I must say I don't have a good answer for you on that one but if there is an ISSUE that you'd like to raise, that you'd like to have aired in this forum while you're here with us..."

PLANT: "Yes there is an issue, actually. We're finding that there's quite an evasion of the Freedom Party out there by the local press, by the radio, and by some of the groups that are holding all-candidates' meetings. We find this happening quite a lot. We have to phone up and invite ourselves or whatever, but it's the job of the media to present these alternatives. We sent you a FAX yesterday. We're in the phone book. We've been around in London for eleven years and we have quite a track record in the London area. I don't know how anybody up there cannot be aware of us, but I was wondering it you had any advice or comment on that?"

RADIO WESTERN: "Actually, the purpose of this show is to provide candidates with an opportunity so I would invite any of the candidates who are here with us tonight if they want to respond to Mr. Plant's comments..."

There was, of course, no response to the question and an attempt was made to deflect the conversation to other topics, but Plant persisted in getting his point across by asking the other candidates if they might have any advice to offer with regards to getting some semblance of equal treatment by the media.

Once again, their silence was broken by the host suggesting that everybody was still waiting for Fp's "literature to hit the streets," although no attempt was made to explain how this had any bearing on Plant's question.

"Mr. Plant," concluded the program host, "I regret to say that I'm going to have to offend you all over again and move on to another caller so thank you for your contribution to the show tonight and best wishes in your campaign..."

On June 1, only a few days after Plant's conversation, Fp secretary Robert Vaughan was tuned into Radio Western to listen to commentary about the election. One of the speakers repeatedly tried to bring up Freedom Party, against the objections of the program host who successfully cut off any discussion of Fp.

Other media disappointments involved expectations based on past election experiences which did not repeat themselves in 1995. During the last election in 1990, Rogers Cable in Toronto featured a province-wide leaders' debate between the leaders of all the alternate parties. Radio stations like CFRB and CBC in Toronto conducted extensive and well-researched interviews with then Fp leader Robert Metz. None of these opportunities were extended to Freedom Party in 1995.

We have been asked by a number of our London-area supporters why Freedom Party was not featured on CKSL Radio's "Jim Chapman Show" during the election, which is London's only local phone-in talk show. We can offer no explanation, particularly in light of the station's publicized commitment to bring all the alternatives to the attention of voters, and in view of Chapman's awareness of Freedom Party. Once again in contrast to past experience, this was the first time in four elections that Fp was not offered an opportunity to appear on an open-line talk show in the London area.

In Toronto, Global TV featured a series on Ontario's alternate political parties and Freedom Party was well represented by Chris Balabanian. Unfortunately, Global had its own agenda, leaving anyone who watched its coverage of the alternate parties completely in the dark about what those parties may represent.

Experiences such as these are continual disappointments, and hard learning experiences, about the power - and bias - of the media. It may well be that much of the dramatic decline in support for the alternate parties was due, not only to the majority conservative victory, but to dramatically-decreased media exposure, and thus, dramatically-decreased public awareness.




Contact FP
Freedom Flyer Newsletter

e-mail

Page last updated on April 28, 2002

FP logo (small)