An Industry in Crisis Changed Canada’s Communications Landscape

By: Hannah Thibedeau

The media ecosystem in Canada “is in crisis.” That stark warning came from Mirko Bibic, President and CEO of BCE Inc. and Bell Media, when he testified before a parliamentary committee on April 11.  Bell Media is one of the top two largest media companies in the country with more than 30 local channels and dozens more specialty channels.

During a January appearance before the same committee, Catherine Tait, the top executive at the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), Canada’s public broadcaster, used the same language: “We have a crisis in the media sector.”

So, if top brass at two of Canada’s leading media outlets think their business is in “crisis,” what does that mean for effective message management? Are mainstream media outlets still the best option for getting a message out when the goal is to reach a target audience or influence public opinion, or is anyone even listening?

The Angus Reid Institute recently released data that shows the decline in usage of traditional media sources and a public moving their eyes and ears to digital news options like podcasts, aggregators and social media platforms.

Sobering statistics — but what are the options? Well that all depends on how you want your message received.

Many are trying, or have tried, to go the direct route — to bypass mainstream media forums by using social media.

You can see the appeal. No pesky reporters standing between you and your target audience. Platforms like Facebook, Twitter, TikTok, Instagram and LinkedIn, along with direct mail and YouTube, offer opportunities to reach users with a few clicks — the promise of instant communication, instant engagement. And of course, maintaining control of the narrative is also an attractive idea.

But by detouring around mainstream media, those messages frequently become siloed and are often immediately lost in a storm of conflicting messages — or, worse, in a chorus of like-minded applause.

Take, for example, the platform X, formerly known as Twitter. While it’s a valuable tool for information-sharing, its legitimacy and credibility are being questioned by many who accuse it of encouraging misinformation and disinformation to spread unchecked, and of allowing bots and fake accounts to amplify certain narratives.

Some politicians, including Official Opposition Leader Pierre Poilievre, feel they do not need to engage with traditional mainstream media. Poilievre and his Conservative Party emphasize the use of social media platforms, niche right-of-centre publications, direct mailing lists and press releases to get their unaltered and carefully crafted messages out to supporters.

But in most communications campaigns, convincing the convinced is the easy part. The key challenge is to reach the unconvinced and undecided; the ones who aren’t already listening. These are the people who want evidence, arguments, and engagement. They want those advocating a position to defend it, deploy facts, and answer questions. They want a conversation between informed individuals, and they want an emotional connection to the cause. Mainstream media outlets can do a better job of offering that, to more people, than any other platform.

After winning the 2024 Hyman Solomon Award for Public Policy in Journalism, Canadian political journalist Paul Wells said in his acceptance speech that public figures, businesses and large organizations can always bypass journalists in favour of social media, email lists, direct mail and YouTube. But he posed a question: Do such entities avoid journalists to get the truth to the public? All of the truth?

“There is a lot of information that is not volunteered,” Wells said. “People like me still have to ask and persist and search and observe and use all of our wits to get that information and make it available to citizens. So that you can function as citizens and not just audiences.”

When it comes to explaining and interrogating public policy, mainstream media outlets, for all their troubles, still have that stamp of credibility, authenticity, scope and trust.

The internet has not killed prose media. Some media outlets have evolved and embraced digital news. They’ve focused on diversifying revenue streams beyond traditional advertising, through subscriptions and partnerships, while still investing in investigative journalism.

Print and online media provide depth and detail. Broadcast media sacrifices a bit of that depth and detail to couch their storytelling in a form that instantly reaches people everywhere: conversations, using a combination of visual and audio elements.

When broadcast media engages, people listen. Audiences respond to authentic voices and faces. Real journalism is and should be about real stories adding the human factor.

Mainstream media may be in “crisis” but it’s not dead. It remains a reliable source of information and a cornerstone of democracy as it plays a crucial role in providing a platform for debate and discussion among citizens. There is, however, still a lot of room for improvement to remain relevant in today’s media landscape.

As communications professionals, it should still form the basis of our strategies and campaigns; but should never be seen as the only solution or option.  Times have changed on the media landscape, and it requires not just mainstream media to change with it – but all of those who engage with the public.

While the “crisis” in mainstream media is still being met with layoffs and cuts, it will only deepen the crisis.  Journalists, camera people, producers in the field remain the backbone of media outlets and provide the civic feedback and accountability a functioning democracy needs — and the engagement and profile our clients want.