FDA Media Study of the 2012 Alberta Provincial Election (Revised as of April 21, 2013)

FDA Media Study of the 2012 Albert Election

Media Study Completed May 22, 2012Revised as of April 21, 2013

Executive Summary

The FDA media study focuses on the last two weeks of the 2012 Alberta provincial election regarding the newspaper, radio, and television media sectors. The FDA collected data from two major media corporations in each sector and presents the relevant findings in the following report. The PC Party and Wildrose Alliance Party had 65.2% of total media exposure and the seven other registered parties had 34.8% of total media exposure. Five of these seven parties had 4.1% of the total exposure. These results are similar to the actual election results in terms of percentage of coverage and percentage of popular vote received, and almost identical in terms of media and election result rankings of parties. The Alberta Legislature does not regulate provincial media in terms of election coverage. Therefore, the FDA recommends reform in media practices that should include some form of regulation such as a code of media conduct during elections and/or required election coverage for parties based on, for instance, the number of candidates each party endorses in an election. The high degree of media

Prepared By

Mr. Stephen Garvey, Executive Director Foundation for Democratic Advancement, Bachelor of Arts in Political Science, University of British Columbia and Master of Philosophy in Environment and Development, University of Cambridge.

Purpose of the Media Study

The purpose of the Foundation for Democratic Advancement (FDA)’s media study (the Study) is to determine the percentage of election coverage by major media for the nine registered Alberta political parties. This Study is an extension of the FDA’s 2012 electoral fairness audit of the Alberta electoral system, in which Alberta received a failing score of 45 percent for legislation pertaining to media election coverage.

The goal of the FDA's media study is to give Albertans and other stakeholders objective data onelection coverage by major media outlets and of the nine registered parties during the last two weeks of the 2012 Alberta Election. Members of the Alberta Legislative Assembly may want to use this data as a basis for regulating provincial private and public media during the 28 day election period.

The views in this media study are the views of the FDA only. FDA members are in no way affiliated with Elections Alberta or any of the province's registered/non-registered political parties, or any of the Alberta media corporations. The Study is an independent assessment based on objectivity, transparency and non-partisanship. The FDA assumes no responsibility or liability for any errors in its data collection or inaccuracies in its research of relevant corporate documents.

About the Foundation for Democratic Advancement

The Foundation for Democratic Advancement (FDA) is an international independent, non-partisan democracy organization. The FDA’s mission is to measure, study, and communicate the impact of government processes on a free and demo-cratic society.

Overall, the FDA works

1. to ensure that people become more knowledgeable about the outcomes of government processes and can then make decisions that are more informed;

2. to get people involved in monitoring government processes at all levels of government and in providing sound, practical, and effective suggestions. (For more information on the FDA visit: www.democracychange.org)

To ensure its objectivity and independence, the FDA does not conduct privately paid research. However, if you or your organization has an important research idea or are aware of an important issue on government processes, the FDA is available to listen to your idea or issue and possibly help raise public awareness by initiating and leading change through report research and analysis. Please contact the FDA at (403) 669-8132 or email us at [email protected] for more information.

An online version of this report can be found at: www.democracychange.org For further information and/or comments on this report please contact Mr. Stephen Garvey at [email protected] of Contents

Introduction 4

How to Read the Report 6

Chapter 1: Alberta Media Corporations in Study 7Corporate Ownership of Alberta Media 7

Alberta Press Results 17

Alberta Radio Results 21

Alberta Television Results 25

Chapter 2: Overall Media Study Results 29

Chapter 3: Analysis 32

Chapter 4: Conclusion 38

Chapter 5: Recommendations 40

References 44

Appendix 1: Research Methodology 48

Appendix 2: 2012 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit of the Alberta Electoral System,Media Coverage Audit Results 51

Appendix 3: 2012 Alberta Election Results 55

FDA Media Study Team 56

Introduction

The FDA’s study on the Alberta media based findings on non-partisanship and objectivity.

The media study involved three main components:

1) Identify major Alberta media corporations in the press, radio, and television.

2) Collect data on the selected Alberta major media from April 9, 2012 to April 23, 2012.

3) Compile and analyze data.

Using media ownership data for Alberta, the FDA identified the major media corporations in the press, radio, and television and chose two media corporations in each sector for the Study. This approach allowed the FDA to focus on corporations with a large market share, rather than concentrate on every Alberta media corporation.

The FDA data collection team is comprised of five FDA members and each individual focused on a particular media corporation whether a newspaper, radio program, and television news broadcast. The collection team used spreadsheets to capture specific election content such as direct reference to parties and their candidates, interviews, front-page articles etc. In order to improve the accuracy of collection and analysis, the team re-checked and re-evaluated data results that were inconsistent with the overall findings.

Members entered media data into a master spreadsheet to determine percentages. To improve the comprehension of the results, the FDA combined data into the most relevant categories such as total media exposure in the press, radio, and television, and total media exposure in each media sector. The FDA analyzed the results in relation and comparison to the 2012 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit Report on the Alberta Electoral System and the 2012 Alberta Election results.

The report is limited in that it does not include every corporation or interest involved in Alberta media. However, by covering the major media outlets in each sector, the FDA is able to show evidence of the percentage of media coverage during the last two weeks of the Alberta Election. The report is also limited in its focus on the last two weeks of the election period as opposed to the entire four week election period. The FDA has limited data on the correlation in coverage between the first two weeks of the election period with the last two weeks. There may or may not be a correlation. The FDA assumes that the data collected is consistent with the content of all other Alberta media owned by the media corporations in the Study, and this assumption is supported by the online data. In addition, the FDA believes that although the Alberta election was characterized by a two party race this in of itself does not justify the narrow, unbalanced election coverage.

The FDA acknowledges that Alberta private media has no legal requirement to provide the electorate with broad and balanced election coverage and that the onus is not solely on the media to inform the public. The electorate should also make efforts to gather information and form conclusions on its own volition. Yet, the FDA believes that during an election, legislation should mandate broad and balanced electoral coverage for the public in order for citizens to have a reasonable opportunity to

______________________________________________________________________________Foundation for Democratic Advancement | 2012 FDA Media Study of the 2012 Alberta Election April 21, 2013 R1 of 55

make informed decisions on Election Day. (For more discussion on the democratic grounds for broad, balanced electoral discourse, see the Conclusion on page 36.)

The FDA is a registered non-profit corporation, and therefore it cannot issue tax-deductible receipts. In addition, the FDA is the sole funder of this report. As a policy to maintain its independence and objectivity, the FDA does not conduct privately funded research projects. The FDA relies on donations. If you value this report, please consider donating to the Foundation for Democratic Advancement to help cover the costs of producing this report and communicating its content to the stakeholders, and to continue its work in Alberta, Canada, and abroad.


How to Read the Report

Chapter 1 focuses on percentage of Alberta media ownership in the daily newspaper, radio, and television sectors. In addition, Chapter 1 shows the media study findings for each media sector based on percentage of coverage of the nine registered Alberta political parties.

Chapter 2 shows the total media study findings with comparisons, for example, to actual elections results and number of candidates endorsed by each party. Chapter 4 outlines the FDA recommendations based on identified issues in media ownership concentration and election coverage of political parties. In its recommendations, the FDA balances freedom with democracy while guided by the principle that a fully informed electorate should be the overall outcome of the election periods.

The Foundation for Democratic Advancement characterized these definitions in relation to the data collection for the purpose of the media study.

Direct news stories refer to news stories in newspapers, radio, and television that are specifically about a registered party and/or a candidate(s) of the party.

Indirect stories refer to news stories in newspapers, radio, and television that mention a registered party and/or a candidate(s) of the party.

Interviews refer to news stories for newspapers, radio, and television where the news organization questions a representative or candidate of a registered party, or using an interview by another organization or statement by the representative or candidate of the registered party, for print or broadcast.


Chapter One: Alberta Media Election Content

Alberta Media Corporations in Study

Press

Calgary HeraldCalgary Sun

Radio

QR770, Rutherford ShowCBC Radio Calgary, Alberta@Noon

Television

CTV CalgaryGlobal Television Calgary

Corporate Media Ownership

Press

The Postmedia Network Incorporated, a wholly owned subsidiary of Postmedia Network Canada Corporation, owns both the Calgary Herald and the Edmonton Journal. According to Postmedia Network's website, Postmedia Network Incorporated is the largest publisher of English-language daily newspapers in Canada.

Quebecor Media Incorporated/Sun Media Corporation owns the following provincial daily newspapers: the Calgary Sun, Edmonton Sun, Fort McMurray Today, and Herald-Tribune (Grand Prairie).

2010 weekly circulation numbers

Postmedia Network Incorporated

Calgary Herald has 914,165 paid circulation.

Edmonton Journal has 756,148 paid circulation.

Quebecor Media Incorporated/Sun Media Corporation

Calgary Sun has 279,724 paid circulation.

Edmonton Sun has 323,410 paid circulation.


Fort McMurray Today has 10,305 paid circulation.

Herald-Tribune (Grand Prairie) has 28,155 paid circulation.

Other Alberta paid daily newspapers

Black Press:

Red Deer Advocate has 83,987 paid circulation.

Glacier Canadian Newspapers/Alta Newspaper Group:

Lethbridge Herald has 112,622 paid circulation.

Medicine Hat News has 70,452 paid circulation.

Based on these four corporations and their weekly circulation numbers, Postmedia Network has64.8 percent of the paid daily newspaper market in Alberta, and Quebecor/Sun Media has 24.9 percent. Combined, these corporations maintain 89.6 percent ownership of the Alberta paid daily circulation.

Table 1 2010 Paid Circulation for Alberta Daily Newspapers

Alberta weekly paid circulation

2010 weekly paid

circulation

% of weekly

circulation

Black Press 83,987 3.30%

Glacier Cdn/Alta Newspaper Group

183,074 7.10%

Postmedia Network 1,670,313 64.80%

Quebecor/Sun Media 641,594 24.90%

Total 2,578,968 100.00%

Total of Alberta Daily Market by Postmedia and Quebecor/Sun Media

89.60%

In terms of Alberta weekly newspapers, Quebecor/Sun Media owns 32 of Alberta's 118 weekly newspapers or 27.12 percent of the Alberta weekly newspaper market. Postmedia Network Corporation does not own Alberta weekly newspapers (Merrell, 2012). Alberta weekly newspapers reach about 80 percent of Alberta's non-metro households, and have a combined circulation of about 800,000 including the North West Territories (Holmes, 2012). According to Mr. Murray Elliott, President of the Alberta Weekly Newspaper Association, in a letter to the FDA dated June 1, 2012,


the Alberta weekly newspaper election coverage may seem “lopsided” like the Alberta daily newspaper coverage (Elliot, 2012). Mr. Elliott argues that the weekly newspaper coverage reflects the views of the communities the newspapers serve, and that weekly newspaper editors found it difficult getting information from the other seven parties. In a radio interview of the FDA on May 22, 2012, QR660 News confirmed the same difficulty in getting information from the smaller parties.

Ownership breakdown of Alberta Weekly Newspaper Association community weeklies (Merrell, 2012)

55 – independently owned and operated (29 own one newspaper; 16 own 2 to 4 newspapers);32 – Sun Media (a subsidiary of Quebecor);18 – Great West Newspaper Group (a co. that started with the St. Albert Gazette in 1961); 8 – Black Press Ltd., (a newspaper company headquartered in Vancouver); 5 – Southern Alberta Newspaper Group (owners of the Lethbridge Herald, Medicine Hat News)

The FDA pie chart captures Alberta daily newspaper weekly circulation percentages. The chart includes Postmedia Network and Quebecor/Sun Media, which were part of the FDA media study.

Radio


Alberta Radio Ownership by Company and Station (CRTC Ownership Charts for Canadian Radio and Television, 2012) QR770 (including the Rutherford show) is owned by Corus Entertainment, which is controlled by J.R. Shaw. Corus Entertainment has interests in the following Alberta radio stations

CHED—AM Edmonton (Corus Entertainment)CKNG—FM Edmonton (Corus Entertainment)CHQT—AM Edmonton (Corus Radio Company owned 100% by Corus Entertainment)CISN—FM Edmonton (Corus Radio Company owned 100% by Corus Entertainment)CKRY—FM Calgary (Corus Radio Company owned 100% by Corus Entertainment)CFGQ—FM Calgary (CKIK—FM Limited owned 100% by Corus Entertainment)CHQR—AM Calgary (CKIK—FM Limited owned 100% by Corus Entertainment)

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) owns CBC Radio Calgary (including Alberta@Noon). The CBC is a Canadian crown corporation; it receives federal funding and revenue from commercial advertisement. The CBC owns the following Alberta radio stations

CBCX—FM CalgaryCBR CalgaryCBR—FM CalgaryCBX EdmontonCBX—FM EdmontonCHFA Edmonton

Other Alberta radio

Touch Canada Broadcasting Inc. (Owned by Charles R. Allard):1 Calgary radio station3 Edmonton radio stations1 Rural radio station

Astral

3 Calgary radio stations2 Edmonton radio stations1 Rural radio station

Bell Media Calgary Radio Partnership

1 Calgary radio station

Thomas Fung (Fairchild)


1 Calgary radio station

Paul Hill

1 Edmonton radio station

Elmer Hidebrand

1 Edmonton radio station (53.98 percent ownership)6 Rural radio stations

James A. Pattison

9 Rural radio stations

Newcap Incorporated

2 Calgary radio stations2 Edmonton radio stations28 Rural radio stations

Rogers Communications Inc.

4 Calgary radio stations3 Edmonton radio stations7 Rural radio stations

Vista Broadcast Group Inc.

3 Rural radio stations

Table 2 Alberta Radio OwnershipBased on Numbers of Radio Stations


% of Alberta radioownership (based on

number of radio stations)

Calgary Edmonton Rural

CBC Radio 3 4 0

J.R. Shaw 3 3 0

Touch Canada 1 3 1

Astral 3 2 1

Bell Media 1 0 0

Fairchild 1 0 0

Paul Hill 0 1 0

Elmer Hidebrand 0 1 6

James Pattison 0 0 9

Newcap 2 2 28

Rogers 4 3 7

Vista 0 0 3

Total AB radio stations 18 19 55

Table 3 Percentatge Breakdown of Alberta Radio Station Ownership

Radio corporations in

media study

% of radio ownership in

Calgary (based on number radio of

stations)

% of radio ownership in

Edmonton (based on number radio of

stations)

% of radio ownership in AB rural (based on number radio of stations)

Total % of AB radio

ownership

CBC Radio 16.7% 21.1% 0.0% 7.60%

J. R. Shaw 16.7% 16.7% 0.0% 6.5%

Total AB radio stations

92


The FDA pie chart captures the percentage of ownership of Alberta radio including ownership by J.R. Shaw and CBC Radio, which were part of the FDA media study.


Television

Alberta Tevision Ownership by Company and Station (CRTC Ownership Charts for Canadian Radio and Television, 2012)

CTV Calgary is owned by BCE (Bell Media—TV). BCE owns the following Alberta television stations

CFCN—DT CalgaryCFCN—DT-5 LethbridgeCFRN—DT EdmontonCFRN—TV-6 Red Deer

J.R. Shaw controls Global Television Calgary. Shaw Media Incorporated owns the following Alberta television stations

CICT—DT CalgaryCISA—DT LethbridgeCITV—DT Edmonton

Other Alberta television

CBC 1 Calgary television channel2 Edmonton television channels

James A. Pattison

1 Rural television channel

Rogers Communications Inc.

2 Calgary television channels2 Edmonton television channels


Table 4 Alberta Television Station Ownership Based on Number of Stations Owned

Alberta television ownership

Calgary Edmonton Rural

Bell Media (CTV) 1 1 2

J.R. Shaw (Global TV) 1 1 1

Other television owners

3 4 1

Total AB television stations

5 6 4

Table 5 Percentage of Television Station Ownership

Television corporations in media

study

Total % of AB TV ownership (based on number of TV

stations)

Bell Media (CTV) 26.7%

J.R. Shaw (Global TV) 20.0%


The FDA pie chart captures the percentage of ownership in the Alberta television sector including ownership by J.R. Shaw and Bell Media, which were part of the FDA media study.

Media Study Data Collection Results

Alberta Press

Table 6 Daily Newspaper Covergage of Alberta Political Parties

Alberta registered political parties

Front page/ non front page

articles, editorials in

print

%

AB Liberals 141 17.7%

AB NDP 130 16.3%

AB Party 20 2.5%

AB Social Credit 4 0.5%

Communist AB 0 0.0%

EverGreen AB 9 1.1%


PC Party 246 30.9%

Separation Party 0 0.0%

Wildrose Alliance 246 30.9%

Total 796 100.0%

Table 7 Percentage Breakdown of Daily Newspaper Coverage of Alberta Political Parties

Alberta registered

political parties

Online front page and non front page

articles and indirect mentions

%Total exposure in print and online

%

AB Liberals 113 17.0% 254 17.4%

AB NDP 112 16.9% 242 16.6%

AB Party 19 2.9% 39 2.7%

AB Social Credit 1 0.2% 5 0.3%

Communist - AB 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

EverGreen AB 4 0.6% 13 0.9%

PC Party 194 29.2% 440 30.1%

Separation Party 1 0.2% 1 0.1%

Wildrose Alliance 220 33.1% 466 31.9%


Total 664 100.0% 1460 100.0%

The FDA pie chart captures the total print media exposure (including online) of Alberta political parties from the FDA newspaper data collection.


The FDA bar chart demonstrates the print media significant bias for the Wildrose Alliance Party and PC Party, and the bias for the Alberta Liberals and Alberta NDP.


Alberta Radio

Table 8 Percentage of Radio Coverage on QR770 (Rutherford show) and CBC Radio Calgary Alberta@Noon


Number of news stories directly

about party (and/or

candidates of party) and/or

interviews

%


AB NDP 10 9.1%

AB Party 4 3.6%


Communist AB 0 0.0%

EverGreen AB 1 0.9%

PC Party 45 40.9%



Total 110 100.0%


Table 9 Percentage Breakdown of Alberta Radio Election Coverage


Number of news stories indirectly about party or candidates of

party (Anytime party or

candidates are indirectly

mentioned)

%

Total exposure of direct and

indirect stories, and interviews

%

AB Liberals 63 12.8% 83 13.8%

AB NDP 41 8.3% 51 8.5%

AB Party 5 1.0% 9 1.5%


Communist - AB 0 0.0% 0 0.0%


PC Party 212 43.1% 257 42.7%



Total 492 100.0% 602 100.0%


The FDA pie chart captures the total media exposure of the Alberta political parties from the FDA radio data collection.


The FDA bar chart demonstrates the radio media significant bias for the PC Party and Wildrose Alliance Party, and bias for the Alberta Liberals and Alberta NDP.

Alberta Television

Table 10 Election Coverage on Global TV Calgary and CTV Calgary


Number of news stories directly and

indirectly about party (and/or candidates of party) and/or

interviews

%


AB NDP 66 16.1%

AB Party 13 3.2%


Communist - AB 1 0.2%

EverGreen AB 4 1.0%

PC Party 128 31.2%




Total 410 100.0%

Table 11 Percentage Breakdown of Alberta Television Election Coverage

Alberta registered

political parties

Number of online news articles directly and

indirectly about party (and/or candidates of party) and/or

interviews

%

Total exposure of direct and indirect

TV stories, TV interviews, and online stories

%

AB Liberals 44 16.0% 107 15.6%

AB NDP 40 14.5% 106 15.5%

AB Party 18 6.5% 31 4.5%


Communist - AB 0 0.0% 1 0.1%


PC Party 87 31.6% 215 31.4%




Total 275 100.0% 685 100.0%

The FDA pie chart captures the total media exposure (including online) of the Alberta political parties from the FDA television data collection.


The FDA bar chart demonstrates the television media significant bias for the Wildrose Alliance Party and PC Party, and bias for the Alberta Liberals and Alberta NDP.


Chapter Two: Overall Alberta Media Study Results

Table 12 Percentage of Total Media Coverage for Alberta Political Parties


Total exposure in newspapers, radio,

and television in last two weeks of

AB election

%


AB NDP 399 14.5%

AB Party 79 2.9%


Communist - AB 1 0.0%

EverGreen AB 23 0.8%

PC Party 912 33.2%



Total 2747 100.0%


The FDA pie chart captures the total media exposure of the Alberta political parties from the FDA data collection.


Table 13 Comparison of Total Media Coverage Versus Election Results


Percentage of total media exposure in last two weeks*

2012 Alberta Election results according to popular vote

1. PC Party 33.2% 43.9%

2. Wildrose Alliance Party 32.0% 34.4%

3. Alberta Liberals 16.2% 9.9%

4. Alberta NDP 14.5% 9.8%

5. Alberta Party 2.9% 1.4%

6. EverGreen Party of Alberta 0.8% 0.4%

7. Alberta Social Credit Party 0.3% 0.0%

8. Separation Party of Alberta 0.1% 0.0%

9. Communist Party - Alberta 0.0% 0.0%

The table captures the overall ranking of total media exposure in the last weeks of the Alberta Election as compared to election results.

* The percentage is based on the data collected in the last two weeks of the Alberta Election from six major media corporations.


Chapter Three: Analysis

The PC Party received the highest total coverage in all three media sectors with a score of 33.2%. The Wildrose Alliance Party followed close behind with only 1.2% less coverage (32%). Coverage drops off significantly with the Alberta Liberals and Alberta NDP garnering 16.2% and 14.5% of media coverage, respectively, 18.7% and 17% less coverage than the PC Party received. After the Alberta NDP, coverage drops off significantly again with the Alberta Party at 2.9% coverage (30.3% less coverage than the PC Party).

The PC Party and Wildrose Alliance Party account for 65.2% of the total media coverage (covered by the FDA study). Together, the PC Party, Wildrose Alliance, Alberta Liberals, and Alberta NDP account for 95.9% of the total media coverage. The remaining five parties, The Alberta Party, Alberta Social Credit, Communist Party – Alberta, Evergreen Party of Alberta, and Separation Party of Alberta, account for 4.1% of the total media coverage. The Communist Party – Alberta had 0.0% coverage in major provincial media outlets.

The Alberta election results were almost identical to the total media coverage results in terms of election ranking and similar in terms of percentage of coverage and percentage of popular vote:

1) PC Party (+ 10.69 in popular vote as compared to total media coverage captured by FDA study)2) Wildrose Alliance (+2.35)3) Alberta Liberals (-6.32)4) Alberta NDP (-4.66)5) Alberta Party (-1.54)6) EverGreen Party (-.41)7) Alberta Social Credit (-.30)8) Alberta Separation Party (-.10)9) Communist Party - Alberta (0.0)

The media and election results show that major media coverage does not correlate exactly to popular vote. Yet, media coverage does correlate exactly to overall election result in terms of ranking. In addition, the media and election results show that parties with the most significant media coverage had higher (positive) percentage of popular vote as compared to other parties with less media coverage.


Results in the radio section of the Study had the most disparity as compared with the other media areas. Yet, the ranking in this section is almost identical with the election results and the media results more resemble the election results.

1) PC Party (+1.19)2) Wildrose Alliance (+1.65)3) Alberta Liberals (-3.92)4) Alberta NDP (-1.34)5) Alberta Party (-.14)6) EverGreen Party (-.11)7) Albert Social Credit (-.30)8) Alberta Separation Party (0.0)9) Communist Party - Alberta (0.0)

The FDA compares Study results with the percentage of candidates (per party) who ran in the election. The purpose of this comparison is to determine if there is any correlation between percentage of media coverage and number of candidates fielded by the Alberta parties.

Table 14 Comparison of Alberta Media Coverage Versus Number of Candidates Endorsed by Each Alberta Political Party


Number of candidates in AB

election

% of candidates in election

% of total media coverage as per

FDA study

PC Party 87 100.0% 33.2%

Wildrose Alliance 87 100.0% 32.0%

AB Liberals 87 100.0% 16.2%

AB NDP 87 100.0% 14.5%

AB Party 38 43.7% 2.9%

EverGreen Party 25 28.7% 0.8%

AB Social Credit 3 3.4% 0.3%

Separation Party of AB 2 2.3% 0.1%

Communist Party - AB 1 1.1% 0.0%

Maximum Number of Candidates Allowed in Election Per Party

87

The table shows the disparity in media coverage and number of candidates fielded by each party. If


each party receives 1.15% of media coverage per candidate it fields, then the percentage of media would be:

Table 15 Percentage of Media Coverage Based on Number Candidates Endorsed by Each Political Party



election

% of media coverage based on 1.15% per

candidate

PC Party 87 100.0%



AB NDP 87 100.0%

AB Party 38 43.7%

EverGreen Party 25 28.7%


Separation Party of AB 2 2.3%

Communist Party - AB 1 1.1%

Candidate value as % of media coverage

1.15%

Based on 1.15% of coverage per candidate within 100% coverage divided between nine parties, the Alberta parties would have the following media coverage:


Table 16 Percentage of Media Coverage by Number of Candidates Endorsed by Each Party Versus Media Coverage Per FDA Study


% of media coverage as % of

number of candidates

% of total media coverage

as per FDA study

PC Party 19.9% 33.2%

Wildrose Alliance 19.9% 32.0%

AB Liberals 19.9% 16.2%

AB NDP 19.9% 14.5%

AB Party 10.9% 2.9%

EverGreen Party 7.8% 0.8%

AB Social Credit 0.9% 0.3%

Separation Party of AB 0.6% 0.1%

Communist Party - AB 0.3% 0.0%

Total 100.0% 100.0%

The table illustrates that the PC Party and Wildrose Alliance benefited the most from media coverage during the election with the PC Party having 13.3% more coverage than under percentage of candidates and Wildrose Alliance having 12.1% more coverage. The Alberta Party fared the worst with -8.0% less coverage, the EverGreen Party of Alberta with -7.0%, Alberta NDP with -5.4%, and the Alberta Liberals with -3.7%. All parties had negative values for coverage under percentage of candidates except the PC Party and Wildrose Alliance Party. It should be noted that the FDA assumes that smaller parties would field more candidates in an equitable and fair provincial electoral system. For the electoral fairness audit results for the entire Alberta electoral system see the FDA Electoral Fairness Report on the Alberta, 2012.

Under a system of equal media coverage, each party would receive 11.11% of the coverage:


Table 17 Media Coverage as Per FDA Study Compared to Equal Media Coverage


% of total media

coverage as per FDA

study

% of equal coverage

% difference in actual coverage

versus equal coverage

PC Party 33.2% 11.11% +22.09%

Wildrose Alliance 32.0% 11.11% +20.89%

AB Liberals 16.2% 11.11% +5.09%

AB NDP 14.5% 11.11% +3.39%

AB Party 2.9% 11.11% -8.2%

EverGreen Party 0.8% 11.11% -10.31%

AB Social Credit 0.3% 11.11% -10.81%

Separation Party of AB

0.1% 11.11% -11.01%

Communist Party - AB

0.0% 11.11% -11.11%

Total 100% 100% 0%

The table captures the severe inequality of dissemination of view points in the actual election, in which the PC Party and Wildrose Alliance received plus 20% in media coverage (as compared to an equal system) and the AB Social Credit, Separation Party, Communist Party, and Alberta Party received minus 8.2% or lower. The Alberta Liberals and Alberta NDP were in the positive zone for coverage (as compared to an equal system), but more than 15% less than the PC Party and Wildrose Alliance.


The FDA scatter chart captures the disparity in election coverage between the actual election coverage (black symbols) versus election coverage in an equal system (yellow symbols).


Chapter Four: Conclusion

The Alberta provincial government does not regulate the political content of newspapers, radio, and television during the election periods (FDA Electoral Fairness Report on Alberta, 2012). Both private and public media outlets in Alberta determine their own election coverage. With the PC Party and Wildrose Alliance Party capturing 65.2% of coverage in the 2012 Alberta Election (based on the FDA study), and five parties capturing only 4.1% of coverage, it is clear in the latter half of the election that provincial private and public media outlets did not demonstrate broad and balanced election reporting. The benefit of broad and balanced coverage is to provide a reasonable opportunity for voters to gather, explore, and examine various sources of information in order to make educated decisions at the ballot box.* In theory, elections should reflect the decisions of the public as to who will govern them. It is acknowledged that private media is driven primarily by profit, viewers/readers, shareholders, and/or ideological, partisan agendas; public media is driven by viewers/readers and/or ideological, and partisan agendas rather than a concerted effort to inform voters in the broadest sense. Given the discrepancy between the purpose of elections and the evidence of this report, the FDA recommends implementing some form of regulation in order to ensure that Alberta’s private and public political coverage is consistent with a fully informed electorate. The FDA concedes that a functioning democracy requires voter responsibility to educate themselves about parties, candidates, and policy in tandem with information being readily available by the media. However, it assumes that many voters do not take the required time or effort to examine party platforms but rely on readily available and convenient newspaper, radio, and television news.

* With reference to Harper v. Canada (Attorney General), 2004, Supreme Court Justices Iacobucci, Bastarache, Arbour, LeBel, Deschamps, and Fish JJ. articulate the democratic rationale for equal dissemination of points of view:

“In promoting the equal dissemination of points of view by limiting advertising of third parties [or regulating media corporations] who are influential in the electoral process, the overarching objective of the spending limits [or regulation of media] is electoral fairness....

The right of meaningful participation in s. 3 of the Charter cannot be equated with the exercise of freedom of expression. The two rights are distinct and must be reconciled. Under s. 3, the right of meaningful participation in the electoral process is not limited to the selection of elected representatives and includes a citizen's right to exercise his or her vote in an informed manner. In the absence of spending limits, it is possible for the affluent or a number of persons pooling their resources and acting in concert to dominate the political discourse, depriving their opponents of a reasonable opportunity to speak and be heard, and undermining the voter's ability to be adequately informed of all views. Equality in the political discourse is thus necessary for meaningful participation in the electoral process and ultimately enhances the right to vote....


While the right to political expression lies at the core of the guarantee of free expression and warrants a high degree of constitutional protection, there is nevertheless a danger that political advertising [or media ownership concentration] may manipulate or oppress the voter....

Promoting electoral fairness by ensuring equality of each citizen in elections, preventing the voices of the wealthy from drowning out those of others, and preserving confidence in the electoral system, are pressing and substantial objectives in a liberal democracy....

In their reasons, Supreme Court Justices McLachlin C.J., Major, and Binnie JJ. quote from Libman, supra, at para. 47:

'Elections are fair and equitable only if all citizens are reasonably informed of all the possible choices and if parties and candidates are given a reasonable opportunity to present their positions so that election discourse is not dominated by those with access to greater financial resources [or greater media access and exposure].'”

[ ] by the Foundation for Democratic Advancement.

The argument by the Canadian Supreme Court is very clear: electoral fairness is a pressing and substantial part of democracy and an educated and informed electorate is part of that fairness. It follows that based on the evidence in this report that Alberta private and public media requires regulation to facilitate a process that informs citizens of all possible choices. Presenting comprehensive and extensive information on only two of the nine registered parties falls well short of that standard, and ultimately does a disservice for Alberta voters.


Chapter Five: Recommendations

The FDA identified three media regulatory options for Alberta. It recommends that one or more of these options be considered for future provincial elections. In addition, the FDA acknowledges that there is a delicate balance between freedom of the press and regulation of the press, however, the FDA believes that regulation may be necessary to overcome the disconnect between motives of private and public media and democratic elections solely about the voice of the people. Below the FDA draws on legislation from foreign countries strictly from a legislative standpoint.

1) Media ownership concentration laws.

Norway, France, and Bolivia have media ownership concentration laws. The purpose of these laws is to create a plurality of media ownership, and thereby encourage pluralistic media coverage of elections. However, there is no guarantee that media concentration laws will result in pluralistic election coverage. Under these laws, it is still possible that media ownership could still favor the PC Party and Wildrose Alliance Party in Alberta.

An outline of Norway's regulation of media ownership in which significant ownership positions are restricted, is outlined ( The Media Ownership Act, 1999)

Section 10 National restrictions on ownership

A significant ownership position in the market nationally shall normally be considered to exist:a) in the case of control through a share of 40 percent or more of the total daily circulation for the daily press,b) in the case of control through a share of 40 percent or more of the total viewing figures for television,c) in the case of control through a share of 40 percent or more of the total listening ratings for radio,d) in the case of control through a share of 30 percent or more in one of the media markets mentioned in litras a), b) or c), and 20 percent or more in one of the other media markets mentioned in litras a), b) or c),e) in the case of control through a share of 20 percent or more in one, 20 percent or more in another and 20 percent or more in a third of the media markets mentioned in litras a), b) or c) orf) when an enterprise controlling 10 percent or more in one of the media markets mentioned in litras a), b) or c) becomes owner or part-owner of an enterprise forming part of another grouping controlling more than 10 percent or more within the same media market (cross ownership).Section 11 Regional ownership restrictions


A significant ownership position in the media market regionally shall normally be considered to exist in case of control through a share of 60 percent or more of the total daily circulation of regional and local newspapers in one media region.

a) France requires plurality of election coverage through a media code of conduct, media ownership concentration laws, and an independent and impartial public media. France restricts press ownership to 30 percent of the market, and guarantees political parties equal airtime on private and public audiovisual media outlets. In Alberta, the Postmedia Network Corporation owns 65 percent of the Alberta daily newspaper circulation, and there is no guaranteed equal airtime or code of conduct for private and public media.

From the French Embassy in the United Kingdom (Freedom of Speech in French Media, 2012):

“In France, the state guarantees the freedom of the press and safeguards the independence of the media by preserving the conditions for diverse opinions and pluralism in the media. The law prevents excessive media concentration by prohibiting any one media group from owning more than 30% of daily newspaper circulation. The Act of 29 July 1881 on freedom of the press provides a framework for press freedom by setting restrictions aimed at striking a balance between freedom of speech, protection of individual rights, and public order. In 1984, the Constitutional Council acknowledged the constitutional value of press freedom and its necessary role in a democracy.

The freedom of the press has also applied to television since Act 82-652 of 29 July 1982 on audiovisual communications, which ended the state monopoly on television. The purpose of the various laws on audiovisual communications is to guarantee media independence and pluralism by establishing rules on to limit media concentration (Arts. 17 and 41-4 of Act 86-1067). Freedom of speech in the audiovisual media must not infringe individual rights. Article 1 of Act 86-1067 of 30 September 1986 on media freedom conditions “the exercise of that freedom… on respect for human dignity, individual rights and private property, on the plural expression of schools of thought and opinion, on the protection of minors, on the preservation of public order and national security and on the standards expected of a public service”. The legislation includes special measures to protect minors, such as the ban on broadcasting programmes for them of a pornographic or violent nature.

The guidance for public television channels and the agreements signed by private channels set forth ethical principles of independence and pluralism similar to those defined in the legislation. The Higher Audiovisual Council (www.csa.fr), France’s independent media watchdog, guarantees media freedom. It is not empowered either to impose or to prevent the airing of a programme, but supervises programme compliance with the law and channel guidance after it is broadcast. The CSA pays

special attention to programmes for young audiences and to ensuring that the same ______________________________________________________________________________

Foundation for Democratic Advancement | 2012 FDA Media Study of the 2012 Alberta Election April 21, 2013 R1 of 55

amount of broadcast time is allocated to political parties and candidates during electoral periods. Act 2000-719 of 1 August 2000 on media freedom amends and expands the 1986 Act by increasing the diversity of the audiovisual offering, chiefly through provisions on the introduction of digital terrestrial television and the establishment of local television stations” (Bold by the FDA).

b) Bolivia has media ownership concentration laws based on a constitutional ban on monopolies and oligopolies. Media ownership is divided equally between private media, government, and social and indigenous groups:

Privately owned radio and TV usage no more than 33 percent of licenses.Government radio and TV usage no more than 33 percent of licenses.Social and indigenous groups' usage no more than 33 percent of licenses (Bolivian Law of the Electoral System, 2010).

Bolivia's approach overcomes the limitation of Norway's and France's ownership laws by further guaranteeing a plurality of election content and more diverse expression in broadcast media. However, it is unclear how feasible the Bolivian approach is considering the infrastructure and hardware cost of broadcast news outlets and the limited funds of most non-profit and charity groups.

2) Media coverage based on percentage of candidates endorsed by parties.

The percentage of candidates’ coverage would be applied to Alberta's 28 day election period. As mentioned in the report, the FDA provides an example of percentage of candidates for Alberta's 87 electoral districts. Each candidate receives a value of 1.15%.

Table 18 Media Coverage Based on Percentage of Candidates Endorsed




election

% of media coverage based on 1.15% per

candidate

PC Party 87 100.0%



AB NDP 87 100.0%

AB Party 38 43.7%

EverGreen Party 25 28.7%


Separation Party of AB 2 2.3%

Communist Party - AB 1 1.1%

Candidate value as % of media coverage

1.15%

Based on 1.15% of coverage per candidate within 100% coverage divided between nine parties, the Alberta parties would have the following media coverage:


Table 19 Media Coverage Based on Number of Candidates Endorsed Compared to the FDA’s Media Study Results


% of media coverage of

coverage as % of number of candidates

% of total media coverage as per

FDA study

PC Party 19.9% 33.2%

Wildrose Alliance 19.9% 32.0%

AB Liberals 19.9% 16.2%

AB NDP 19.9% 14.5%

AB Party 10.9% 2.9%

EverGreen Party 7.8% 0.8%

AB Social Credit 0.9% 0.3%

Separation Party of AB 0.6% 0.1%

Communist Party - AB 0.3% 0.0%

Total 100.0% 100.0%

The limitation of percentage of candidates is that there are other factors such as electoral finance legislation and party registration requirements that determine the number of candidates a party can present. In addition, when a party fields candidates in all districts, this does not necessarily mean the party should get equal media coverage as other parties that field candidates in all districts.

3) Political content laws which require fair and balanced media content during elections through a code of media conduct.

Although there is a code of conduct for press in Canada and New Zealand, adherence is voluntary and they do not include provisions that apply to broad and balanced election coverage. In addition, the Canadian Broadcast Act does not include measures that require broad and balanced election coverage. However, Venezuela requires that election coverage be “complete and balanced”, and the Venezuelan National Election Commission is empowered financially to ensure complete and balanced coverage during elections (Regulation No. 6 of the Organic Law Electoral Process Field of Propaganda During the Electoral Campaign, 2012):

Chapter IIISocial Electoral Propaganda in Social MediaFinancing


The National Electoral Council may finance part or in full, the diffusion of electoral propaganda in the media of radio, television or printed, in accordance with regulations established for that purpose.

Impartiality of the media

Article 79. The media, public or private and independent producers cannot make on their own any type of propaganda aimed at supporting a candidate or a candidate, or to encourage or discourage voting or vote constituencies for or against any of the nominations.

Obligation to disseminate electoral propaganda

Article 80. The media may not refuse to broadcast election propaganda. In case of doubt or dispute, interested or concerned may request the National Electoral Council to determine whether the electoral propaganda meets the requirements of these rules, and its decision shall be compulsory.

Coverage

Article 81. The mass media and private information will be given a complete and balanced coverage of related information and without distorting the reality of the campaign. To this end, observe a strict balance in time and space dedicated to information relating to activities carried out by the candidate or candidates.

Venezuela's approach requires the media to provide complete and balanced election reporting and empowers the National Election Council to facilitate and create said coverage where it is lacking. Its code of media conduct is supported by state intervention where and when it is required. As long as state intervention is non-partisan and objective, and media corporations honour the code of conduct, this approach may be effective.

References

About Us. (2013). Alberta Press Council. Retrieved fromhttp://www.albertapresscouncil.ca/index.html


Bolivian Law of the Electoral System. (2010). Act No. 26. June 30, 2010.

Canadian Broadcasting Act. (1991). Retrieved from the Canadian Department of Justicehttp://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/B-9.01/

Charter of Rights and Freedoms. (1982). April 17, 1982. Retrieved from the Department of Justice http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-15.html#h-38

Code of Practice. (2006-2007). Alberta Press Council. Retrieved from http://www.albertapresscouncil.ca/code_of_practice.html

Constitution of the Bolivian Republic of Venezuela. (1999). Retrieved fromhttp://www.venezuelaemb.or.kr/english/ConstitutionoftheBolivarianingles.pdf

Constitution of the Republic of Bolivia. (2009). Retrieved fromhttp://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_id=189098

CRTC Ownership Charts for Canadian Radio and Television. (2012). CRTC. Retrieved from website: http://www.crtc.gc.ca/ownership/eng/ownership.htm

Daily Newspapers Paid Circulation levels: by Province. (2010). Newspapers Canada. Retrieved fromhttp://www.newspaperscanada.ca/daily-newspaper-paid-circulation-data

Election Act, Revised Statutes of Alberta. (2000, c. E-1). Retrieved from the Service Alberta website: http://www.qp.alberta.ca/574.cfmpage=E01.cfm&leg_type= Acts&isbncln=9780779733903

Elliott, M. (2012). Alberta Weekly Newspaper Association (AWNA). June 1, 2012 letter by Mr. Murray Elliott, AWNA President to Mr. Stephen Garvey, FDA Executive Director. Retrieved from the FDA blog: http://www.foundationfordemocraticadvancement.blogspot.ca/2012/06/awna-adds-to-discourse-on-alberta.html

FDA Canadian Provinces Electoral Finance Report. (2012). Foundation for Democratic Advancement. Retrieved fromhttp://www.slideshare.net/FDAdvancement/canadian-provincesfda-electoral-finance-audit-report

FDA Electoral Fairness Report on Alberta. (2012). Foundation for Democratic Advancement. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/FDAdvancement/2012-alberta-electoral-fairness-report

FDA Electoral Fairness Report on Bolivia. (2011). Foundation for Democratic Advancement. Retrieved from http://democracychange.org/?p=864


FDA Electoral Fairness Report on Egypt. (2011). Foundation for Democratic Advancement. Retrieved from http://democracychange.org/?p=760

FDA Electoral Fairness Report on France. (2011). Foundation for Democratic Advancement. Retrieved from http://democracychange.org/?p=906

FDA Electoral Fairness Report on Venezuela. (2013). Foundation for Democratic Advancement. Retrieved from http://democracychange.org/2013/04/2012-fda-global-electoral-fairness-report-on-venezuela/

Freedom and Democracy. (2012). Foundation for Democratic Advancement. Podcasts. Retrieved from http://democracychange.org/rss/podcast.rss

Freedom of Speech in French Media. (2012). French Embassy in the United Kindom. Retrieved fromhttp://www.ambafrance-uk.org/Freedom-of-speech-in-the-French

Harper v. Canada (Attorney General). (2004). Supreme Court of Canada. 1 S.C.R. 827, 2004 SCC 33.

Holmes, R. (2012). The Provost News. May 25, 2012 email to Mr. Stephen Garvey, FDA Executive Director.

Merrell, D. (2012). Alberta Weekly Ownership Information. Alberta Weekly Newspaper Association. Information received by the Foundation for Democratic Advancement June 4, 2012.

New Zealand Press Council Principles. (2012). New Zealand Press Council. Retrieved fromhttp://www.presscouncil.org.nz/principles.php

Official Poll Results. (2013). Elections Alberta. Retrieved from http://results.elections.ab.ca/wtResultsPGE.htm

Radio Regulations. (1986). Retrieved from the Department of Justice Canada http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR%2D86%2D982/

Regulation No. 6 of the Organic Law Electoral Process Field of Propaganda During the Electoral

Campaign. (2012). Retrieved from the Venezuelan Embassy in Canada.

Television Broadcasting Regulations. (1987). Retrieved from the Department of Justice Canada http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-87-49/

The Media Ownership Act. (1999). Retrieved from the World Intellectual Property Organization's website http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/details.jsp?id=9667

Wesley, J.J., & Colborne, M. (2005). “Framing Democracy: Media Politics and the 2004 Alberta Election.” presented at Annual Meeting of the Canadian Political


Science Association, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario. Retrieved from http://www.cpsa-acsp.ca/papers-2005/Wesley,%20Jared.pdf

Appendix 1

Media Study Methodology

The methodology is comprised of two major components: research and data collection. The FDA consulted Dr. Mark Wolfe, Communications Specialist from Mount Royal University on the methodology of its media study.


Research

The FDA Study focuses on Alberta major media in the newspaper, radio, and television sectors (including online). This approach targets large sectors of the market in order to form a reasonable picture of what occurred in the media during the Alberta Election. The FDA researched media ownership in each sector, and selected media organizations with significant ownership. In the newspaper and television sectors, due to large ownership concentrations and few media corporations, the FDA was able to identify significant media corporations. However, the radio sector proved difficult due to the large number of ownership groups. The FDA chose two significant radio corporations with 14.1% of the total Alberta radio market. There are twelve major Alberta radio corporations.

The FDA media study is limited to two corporations per media sector. Therefore, especially in the case of the radio sector, the media results in terms of determining the percentage of election coverage per party are limited. The FDA accepts this limitation, and it will expand the number of corporations in future Alberta media studies especially in the radio sector.

Data Collection

A five-person team, comprised of FDA members and guided by non-partisanship and objectivity, conducted the Study’s data collection. Each member of the team is responsible for tracking a particular news production whether a newspaper, radio show, or television news program. In addition, members record data into spreadsheets, and recheck data with media sources in case of discrepancy with overall data entries. Completed data from each member is then compiled into a master spreadsheet and used for analysis.

In the case of newspapers, the FDA focuses on the following categories

Number of front page articles about party and/or candidate of party

Number of front page articles about party and/or candidate of party which includes photo of party and/or candidates

Number of non-front page articles about party and/or candidates of party


Number of editorials about party and/or candidates of party

Number of online front page articles about party and/or candidates of party

Number of online non-front page articles about party and/or candidates of party

Number of times online, party is mentioned and/or candidates of party. Track per online article (and not per number of times mentioned in article)

In the case of radio and television, the FDA focuses on the following categories

Number of news stories directly about a party (and/or candidates of parties)

Number of news interviews of Alberta party representatives/candidates

Number of news stories indirectly about party or candidates of party (Anytime party or candidates are indirectly mentioned)

Number of online (television) news stories directly about a party (and/or candidates of a party)

For each news story, the FDA recorded one mark for direct (if directly about a party) and one mark for indirect mention; regardless of how many times the story mentioned the party. In the case of radio, the Study considered public phone-in calls indirect mentions, and each phone-in caller resulted in a single recorded mark. If a caller mentioned two separate issues, two marks were recorded, and if a caller mentioned several parties, several marks were given.

The FDA chose not to track positive and negative news stories, because of the subjectivity involved in determining these stories. What one candidate or party considers a positive news story, another segment of the voting population might perceive as a negative portrayal or having a negative connotation. Differences in values, beliefs, or ideology could cause this difference in perception. It is possible that a poor poll result for a party may have the positive effect of motivating the party's candidates and supporters to do more, or perhaps a positive poll result for a party may cause complacency amongst the party's candidates and supporters.

The FDA assumes that in a democracy, some, although limited, election coverage is better than no election coverage. Obviously, a news story about a serious scandal by a party's leader may have significant electoral consequences; whereas a news story about the subjective interpretation of a candidate's comments may have insignificant consequences. The PC Party and Wildrose Alliance Party, which received 65.2% of total election coverage, were the only parties to receive higher percentage of popular vote than their percentage of media coverage.

Limitations

The FDA media study is limited to the last two weeks of election. Therefore, it is possible the study results may not correlate to the first two weeks of the election. However, this fact does not cancel out the evidence of bias coverage in the last two weeks of the election. Although the Alberta election was characterized by a two party race, the FDA does not accept this as justification for the biased


coverage, because the emphasis should be on parties having a reasonable opportunity to present their positions, policies, backgrounds etc. so that ultimately Alberta voters are reasonably informed of all the possible choices. Was the two-party race a product of the biased media and/or unfair electoral finance laws, or a product of the will of Albertans?

The Study is also limited by covering only two major media corporations per media sector, and focusing on media corporations from Calgary. It is possible that coverage from the Edmonton and rural areas may not correlate to the coverage of the Calgary area. The FDA assumes that the content of news outlets in the Study is reasonably consistent with their corporations' other Alberta news outlets. The FDA data from online news sources shows a correlation in media content between the Edmonton and rural areas and the Calgary area. To strengthen this correlation, the FDA acknowledges that future media studies should include news outlets from Calgary, Edmonton, and rural Alberta.

Appendix 2

2012 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit Results for Political Content of Alberta Media

This chapter focuses on Canada’s media laws and the FDA's audit of them. Based on the concepts of egalitarianism and political liberalism, the FDA audit team examined media laws according to the standard of impartial and balanced political coverage before, during and after a campaign period (see


Definition of Key Terms and Research Methodology for further explanation). Table 2 below shows the FDA’s audit variables, their corresponding audit weights, and results:

Table 20 Alberta Media Election Coverage Audit Results

Media Election Coverage Section Variables

% Subsection Audit Weight

Numerical Sub-section Audit

Weight

Audit Re-sults

% Results

Broad and Balanced Elec-tion Coverage

30% 3.0 0.0 0.0%

Media Ownership 15% 1.5 0.0 0.0%Survey/Polls 5% 0.5 0.5 100%Freedom of Media 40% 4.0 4.0 100%Press Code of Practice/Conduct

10% 1.0 0.0 0.0%

Variables from Other Sec-tions

n/a n/a n/a n/a

Total 100% 10 4.5 45%

Broad and Balanced Political Coverage

Audit Questions

1) During the campaign period, is the media (private and public) required legally to publish/broad-cast broad/balanced coverage of registered candidates and parties?

2) Outside of the campaign period, is the media legally required to publish/broadcast pluralistic/bal-anced coverage of registered parties?

3) If the media is legally required to publish/disseminate broad and balanced political coverage, are there reasonable monitoring and penalty mechanisms in place?

Legislative Research

There are no provincial requirements that radio and television broadcasters have to be non-partisan and balanced in their electoral coverage (Radio Regulations, Article 6, 1986; Television Broadcasting Regulations, 1987).

Freedom of the press and a non-enforceable Code of Practice through the Alberta Press Council

Alberta guides media conduct (Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982; Code of Practice, 2006/2007).Media Ownership Concentration Laws

Audit Questions

1) If there are media concentration laws, are they effective in causing a plurality of political dis-course?


2) If there is no legal requirement of media plurality, impartiality, and balanced content or media ownership concentration laws, are there any other laws that are effective in causing a plurality of political discourse before and during an election period?


Alberta has no media concentrations laws, which would support plurality of electoral discourse. FDA researchers could find no media concentration laws. (In Norway, France, and Bolivia, there are media ownership concentrations laws that support the plurality of electoral discourse (FDA Electoral Fairness Audit Report on Bolivia, 2011; FDA Electoral Fairness Report on France, 2011; The Media Ownership Act, 1999).

Surveys/Polls Audit Question

1) Are there reasonable public disclosure requirements on surveys and polls in terms of their methodology, data, and funder?


Election surveys must include information regarding who sponsored the survey, who conducted the survey and on what date, the population that the sample was drawn from, the number of people polled, and the margin of error (Election Act, Article 135.2).

Survey conductors must clarify if the survey does not employ recognized statistical methods (Election Act, Article 135.3). During the 'blackout period' 24 hours before the election, the press cannot print or broadcast previously unreleased election survey results (Election Act, Article 135.4). (In Bolivia, election propaganda including polls and surveys are not allowed 48 hours prior to the Election Day (FDA Electoral Fairness Report on Bolivia, 2011). In France, there is no commercial political advertisement 3 months prior to an election period and election propaganda during a campaign period must allow candidates adequate time to respond (FDA Electoral Fairness Audit Report on France, 2011). In Egypt (under Mubarak), polls and surveys are not allowed 7 days prior to the Election Day (FDA Electoral Fairness Report on Egypt, 2011).

At any time, the media can transmit survey results previously released to the public prior to the ‘blackout period’ (Election Act, Article 135.4).Freedom of the Media

Audit Question

1) Does constitutional or legislative law establish freedom of the media (including journalists)?



Television broadcast licensees cannot broadcast anything which contravenes the law or exposes anyone to discrimination based on race, religion, color, sex, sexual orientation, age, or disability. In addition, licensees cannot broadcast anything false or misleading (Television Broadcasting Regulations, Article 5, 1987).

Radio broadcasters must maintain a program log for one year, which will contain content and subject information for each program or advertisement aired. This log must be available to a commission upon request (Radio Regulations, Article 8, 1986). There is freedom of the Alberta press, radio, and broadcasters (Charter on Rights and Freedoms, 1982). There are no legislative restrictions on the journalistic profession in carrying out work.

The FDA could find no legislative provisions that guarantee journalists’ access to government sources, representatives, or officials.

Press Code of Practice/Conduct

Audit Questions

1) Does a Code of Practice/Conduct that supports impartial, balanced electoral coverage guide the press?

2) If a Code of Practice/Conduct that supports impartial, balanced electoral coverage guides the press, is the Code of Practice/Conduct enforceable?


Freedom of the press and a non-enforceable Code of Practice through the Alberta Press Council Alberta guides media conduct in Alberta (Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982; Code of Practice, 2006/2007).

There are no provisions in the Alberta Press Council’s Code of Practice that require non-partisan and balanced electoral coverage (Code of Practice, 2006/2007).

The Alberta Press Council’s Code of Practice has provisions for a right of reply, but the Council does not enforce the Code. Council does not monitor press companies, rather, assumes they have their own codes of practice and does not dictate what to publish (About Us, 2013).

Analysis

Based on legislated freedom of the media and disclosure requirements on survey/polls, Alberta ______________________________________________________________________________

Foundation for Democratic Advancement | 2012 FDA Media Study of the 2012 Alberta Election April 21, 2013 R1 of 55

scored 45 percent for electoral fairness in media legislation by the FDA. FDA matrices weigh freedom of expression the highest due to its relevance to democracy. In the media section, freedom of the media represents 40 percent of the total score and Alberta received full percentage points in this area. However, FDA Freedom and Democracy podcasts revealed that freedom alone cannot guarantee democracy (Freedom and Democracy, 2012). Without monitors to ensure equality, freedom of the media will allow the most powerful and wealthy individuals and organizations to dominate the political process. The FDA concludes that Alberta does not monitor freedom of the media in order to guarantee equality.

There is no legislative requirement in Alberta for impartial, balanced or pluralistic political media coverage. There are no media concentration laws or equivalent to encourage a pluralistic media sector and prevent significant ownership concentrations. There are no public subsidy measures to promote unbiased campaign coverage, and ultimately, balanced electoral discourse. The Alberta Press Council's Code of Practice does not mandate impartial/balanced political or campaign coverage. These findings suggest that Alberta's media is susceptible to partisan, imbalanced, and limited political and campaign coverage. A media network with significant ownership rights in television, radio, and the press could dominate electoral discourse, just as a media ownership oligopoly with similar viewpoints could do likewise. Alberta legislation allows for this possibility, as demonstrated in the 2004 Alberta Provincial Election. Election coverage mentioned the the Progressive Conservatives 58% of the time, the Liberals 16% of the time, and the NDP only 12% of the time (Wesley & Colborne, 2005).

The FDA argues that an electorate that is informed in the platforms of all relevant political parties will greatly impact the outcome of the election. It is essential for Alberta's democracy to have, at minimum, balanced and pluralistic campaign coverage. There are public policy options available as illustrated by media ownership concentration laws in Norway, France, and Bolivia, or legal requirements for impartial political coverage and public measures to ensure fair and balanced campaign coverage in Venezuela (FDA Electoral Fairness Report on France, 2011; FDA Electoral Fairness Report on Bolivia, 2011; FDA Electoral Fairness Report on Venezuela, 2013).

Appendix 3

2012 Alberta Provincial Election Results

1) PC Party 61 seats, 43.89% (567, 191 votes)2) Wildrose Alliance Party 17 seats, 34.35% (442, 467 votes)3) Alberta Liberal Party 5 seats, 9.88% (127, 662 votes)4) Alberta NDP 4 seats, 9.84% (126, 742 votes)


5) Alberta Party, 0 seats, 1.36% (17, 171 votes) 6) Evergreen Party of Alberta 0 seats, .39% (5, 079 votes)7) Alberta Social Credit 0 seats, 0% (294 votes)8) Communist Party-Alberta 0 seats, 0% (210 votes)9) Separation Party of Alberta 0 seats, 0% (68 votes)

(Official Poll Results, 2013).

FDA Media Study Team

FDA Researchers

Mr. Michael Fabris, Bachelor of Accounting, Brock University.Mr. Stephen Garvey, Bachelor of Arts in Political Science, University of British Columbia and

Master of Philosophy in Environment and Development, University of Cambridge.

FDA Data Collection Team


Ms. Sam Casselman, 1st year Political Science and Law and Society, University of Calgary.Mr. Michael Fabris, Bachelor of Accounting, Brock University.Mr. Stephen Garvey, Bachelor of Arts in Political Science, University of British Columbia and

Master of Philosophy in Environment and Development, University of Cambridge.Mr. Tom Kerwin, Master of Environmental Studies, York University.Mrs. Liza Valentine, Master of Architecture, University of Calgary.

Report Writer

Mr. Stephen Garvey, Bachelor of Arts in Political Science, University of British Columbia and Master of Philosophy in Environment and Development, University of Cambridge.

Report Reviewers

Mr. Shane Donovan, 4th year Political Science, University of Calgary.Mr. Michael Fabris, Bachelor of Accounting, Brock University.Mr. Tom Kerwin, Master of Environmental Studies, York University.Mr. Dale Monette, Bachelor of Commerce, University of Saskatchewan and Master of Accounting

(in progress), University of Saskatchewan.Mrs. Lindsay Tetlock, Bachelor of Arts in International Relations, University of Calgary and Master

of Arts in Historical Studies, University of Calgary.Mr. Mark Schmidt, Bachelor of Science in Psychology, University of Calgary.


FDA Media Study of the 2012 Alberta Provincial Election (Revised as of April 21, 2013)

News & Politics

Transcript of FDA Media Study of the 2012 Alberta Provincial Election (Revised as of April 21, 2013)