The Bridge with Peter Mansbridge - Do You Agree With Journalism's Five Core Values?

Episode Date: April 22, 2021

A new study looks at. the differences between journalists and the people it serves.  And then there's the issue of context in. the age of Covid. Plus more on our Thursday potpourri podcast

Hello there, I'm Peter Mansbridge. You're just moments away from the latest episode of The Bridge. The question for today is, do you think our journalistic core values are the same? Think again. Like you, I have been so grateful and so thankful for frontline workers during the COVID crisis. Let's just talk about the frontline workers at SickKids, which is one of the world's best children's hospitals. SickKids doctors also work behind the scenes on incredible breakthroughs to help our kids and generations to come.

Listen to their inspiring stories in a new season of the popular podcast called SickKids Versus. Each episode explores a major SickKids discovery, like, well, a virus-fighting supermolecule or a cure for hard-to-treat cancers. Just visit sickkidsfoundation.com slash podcast or search Sick Kids Versus and spell versus VS. So Sick Kids VS. You'll be amazed at what you learn.

Okay, so I'm looking at the calendar in front of me here. It says Thursday, April 22nd. That sounds good. That sounds like spring. That sounds like we're deep into spring. So why, when I look outside the window, do I see snow all over the ground? Something's not right. I know we live in the snow belt here in Stratford, Ontario,

southwestern Ontario, west of Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge, north and east of London, Ontario. It's the snow belt, but really, April 22nd, snow after a week of, you know, sunshine and warm temperatures and flowers bursting through the ground. I tell you, what a country. You got to love it. I give you some quick good news.

Although this is going to sound funny, calling this good news. But it's a hopeful sign. Let's put it that way. Looking at the British news feed today, and one of their headlines is that for the first time in more than a year, coronavirus is no longer the leading cause of death in both England and Wales. In fact, it's not number two, it's number three. Heart disease. And the number one cause of death, dementia, Alzheimer's.

COVID-19 is now number three in England and Wales. That's a hopeful sign. I mean, it sounds terrible to say that. It's still a leading cause of death, one of the leading causes of death. But it's dropping in its numbers. And you know what you can thank for that? You can thank the vaccines for that.

Vaccines. I was happy to see yesterday so many people in Canada tweeting their pride in the fact that they got the vaccine. That their name had finally come up, their number had been called, and they got the vaccine. And there are lots more vaccines available now, and they're going to continue to be. It's really ramping up. And as Isaac Bogoch told us a couple of days ago,

when they dropped that age limit, which they've done not far enough yet as far as I'm concerned. But they've dropped it, and people are flooding to the vaccine centers. There's still hesitancy out there, and those people have to be convinced if we're going to make this work. But just look at the numbers. That sign in England is a good sign.

That's what vaccines do. You know, they're not going to cure COVID, but they are going to blunt it. Okay. I was teasing journalistic core values as a subject. I mean, this is Thursday. It's kind of potpourri day. We like to deal with some of the issues that are piled up on my desk in the last week or so that we haven't got to because of the breaking news of the day. And there's, you know, there seems to be every day

breaking news. But you know, what I define as breaking news may not be what you define as breaking news. And that, in a way, is what I want to talk about, because I've come across a really fascinating new study that I want to talk about, because I've been sitting on this for a few days. But I think you're going to find this interesting, because I know from your letters that you love to talk journalism and try to understand the decisions that those of us in the journalistic business make on a daily basis.

What our values are, what are our core values, and are they the same as what you have? And well, that's what this study is all about. So let me give you a little background. You know, doing day-to-day journalism, that can be pretty hectic. I can remember in my days, you know, there wasn't a lot of time during the day to sit down and think about the issues of journalism. I didn't go to journalism school. Even the people in the newsroom who did, and that was most of them, didn't spend a lot of time articulating what we thought about journalism. We just did journalism. We didn't go around talking about journalism as a pillar of democracy,

although you hear me talking about that all the time on this podcast. But we didn't sit in the newsroom and talk about it. We didn't sit there waving copies of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and pointing, which section is it? Is it section two, subsection B? Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms, freedom of thought, belief, opinion, and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication. We didn't wave that around.

We didn't read that. We didn't say we were special. But there was an unspoken sense, I think, that we shared common values about, you know, why we were journalists. Now there's a new research study by the nonpartisan and objective research organization called NORC, N-O-R-C. It's at the University of Chicago, along with the American Press Institute. And together, what they do in this study is they lay out what they call journalism's core values.

So I thought I'd read them to you. I'd lay them out. There's five of them. Basic principles. Because mainstream journalism is under a lot of pressure these days. We've talked about that pressure right here on the bridge many times. People are getting their news from non-traditional places. You know, Facebook, Twitter,

TikTok, whatever. Well, you have to wonder if these new places subscribe to the core values. So here they are. As I said, there are five of of them I'll read them out here oversight the need to monitor powerful people

and know what public officials are doing that's why a good newsroom does just doesn't you know print a news release verbatim from government or big business or even a big union we check what's in the release. We try to ascertain if it's true and then put it in context. Second core value, transparency.

The idea that society works better when information is out in the open and the public knows what's happening. This seems like a prerequisite for democracy. If government does things because it has a mandate from the people, the people have to have information to know if it really wants to provide a mandate. Now, we could be into that in the next little while, if there's an election in Canada. Core value number three, factualism. The idea that the more facts people have, the closer they will get to the truth.

This is, you know, this is what journalists are supposed to be doing, and we tried to do day after day, night after night, week after week, month after month, year after year. We chased down facts. Here's number four. Giving voice to the less powerful. Journalism wants to amplify the voices of people who aren't ordinarily heard. Now,

you know, we used to do this all the time. Not enough for some people, too much for others, but we did it. Prime ministers, premiers, all politicians really, and all powerful people in society have no problem getting their views out. You know, we'd sometimes call the people who weren't in those categories, we'd call them ordinary people. And they're not easily heard. 50 years ago, we barely heard from women.

More recently, you think of people from the LGBTQ community, visible minorities, indigenous peoples. They've all started to be heard through the efforts of journalists. And finally, core value number five, social criticism. This is the importance of casting a spotlight on a community's problems to solve them. From, you know, simple consumer features, why does my dishwasher break one day after the warranty expires? To in-depth investigative journalism that tackles systemic problems like sports coaches who are pedophiles this is a type

of journalism that brings tremendous pride to a newsroom when you break those kind of stories so there you have the big five right right? The five core values of journalism. Oversight, transparency, factualism, giving voice to the less powerful, and social criticism. And I think I can safely and proudly say that I try to subscribe to all of them. I wouldn't want to know a journalist who didn't subscribe to them. Now, I said this was a research study. So what did they study? They studied whether consumers of journalism also subscribe to those same five values.

They questioned about 4,000 people. That's a pretty large sample. You know, most of the polls and research studies you see and hear about, and we talk about on this program, are kind of usually around 1,000, sometimes 2,000, 2,200. 4,000 is a very big sample. What they find? Well, they found that most people, by and large,

do not embrace those values that we in the business embrace. 67%, that's two-thirds, did embrace factualism. They want the facts. But then it was 50% for giving a voice to the less powerful. Only half. Less than half, 46% agreed with the value of oversight. Even a smaller sample,

44% supported transparency. And only 29% were in favor of social criticism. Now, this was an American study. So, these aren't necessarily numbers that are agreed to in Canada, but, you know, journalism in this country has got its critics too. And perhaps this is why.

Beliefs that have long been held in newsrooms, if you believe this study, are not held in the same esteem by readers, listeners, and viewers. The best journalism pokes its nose into places some people don't want noses, which reminds me of what the famous American journalist H.L. Mencken said about the role of journalism to afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted. So what do we take from all this? Well, maybe there are just too many comfortable people out there.

Love to hear what you think about that study. The Mansbridge Podcast at gmail.com. The Mansbridge Podcast at gmail.com is where you can send your, your comments. If you have them always include your name and where you are writing from. Got a letter from one of our listeners in Brazil this morning. I woke up to read that. I love it when we hear from listeners around the world. And I think that's our first one from Brazil.

We've had others from South America, but I'm not sure we've had one from Brazil before. Okay, along the lines of that study, I mean, it's a little different. But I found this really interesting because it's about this constant reminder that we need to keep things in context, to keep things in perspective, especially when we're dealing with big stories. So this was in the New York Times. I'm going to read a little bit of this because it does,

it's helpful to read it. Guido Calabresi, a federal judge and Yale law professor, invented a little fable that he's been telling law students for more than three decades. He tells the students to imagine a god coming forth to offer society a wondrous invention that would improve everyday life in almost every way. It would allow people to spend more time with friends and family, see new places, and do jobs they otherwise could not do. But it would also come with a high cost.

In exchange for bestowing this invention on society, the God would choose 1,000 young men and women and strike them dead. Calabresi then asks, would you take the deal? Almost invariably, the students say no. No way, I wouldn't take that deal. The professor then delivers the fable's lesson. What's the difference between this and the automobile?

In truth, automobiles kill many more than 1,000 young Americans each year. The total U.S. death toll hovers at about 40,000 annually. We accept this toll, almost unthinkably, because vehicle crashes have always been part of our lives. We can't fathom a world without them. It's a classic example, says the Times newsletter that I'm reading from, of human irrationality about risk. We often underestimate large chronic dangers like car crashes or chemical pollution and fixate on tiny but salient risks like plane crashes or shark attacks.

We used to have that debate in the newsroom all the time. You know, it's a shark attack off the coast of Nantucket. One person was killed. And it's an item that leads the news. Now it leads the news because it's news. It's different. It's what's changed from the day before. You don't get killed by a shark every day. But in proportionality, is it worthy of that kind of coverage? And we'd have the same question about you know bus crashes train crashes where we would banner those

you know train goes off a mountainside in India and 68 people are killed and it becomes a story on the network news as opposed to 500 people may have died that day in car crashes.

No mention. Now these are different issues, right? But it's proportionality. One way for a wrist to become salient is for it to be new. This is reading back in the article. That's a core idea behind Calabresi's fable he asked students to consider whether they would accept the cost of vehicle travel if it did not already exist that they say no underscores the very different ways we treat new risks and enduring ones

and the writer of this newsletter says, I've been thinking about the fable recently because of COVID-19. COVID certainly presents a salient risk. It's a global pandemic that has upended daily life for more than a year. It's changed how we live, where we work, even what we wear on our faces. Fortunately, it's also curable. The vaccines have nearly eliminated death, hospitalization,

and other serious COVID illness among people who have received shots. The vaccines have also radically reduced the chances that people contract even a mild version of COVID or can pass it on to others. Yet many vaccinated people continue to obsess over the risks from COVID because those risks are so new and salient. One of the conclusions in this piece is, this is what vaccines do.

If you're vaccinated, COVID presents a minuscule risk to you, and you present a minuscule COVID risk to anyone else. A car trip is a bigger threat to you and others. About 100 Americans are likely to die in car crashes today. The new federal data suggests that either zero or one vaccinated person will die today from COVID. That's vaccinated people. Goes back to the first story we told

on today's podcast about those numbers in Britain going down. Vaccines are the way out of this. Once again, they don't cure COVID. They blunt it in its tracks. You've got a chance for a vaccine. Take it. I'm a 100% believer in this. I've had mine. First shot.

I'm anxious to get that second shot. It's going to be a while yet. But I'm more than halfway home on that. I'm anxious for all of my friends and family to get shots. I feel for those who are not of the age yet or live in the hot zone yet, who are waiting to get their shot. But I'm encouraged by the smiling faces and the constant tweets and Instagram posts of people who have just had their shot. In some cases, they look like they've been reborn. Okay, we're going to take a quick break quick break i got a couple of

interesting stories to close out the potpourri section of this thursday edition of the bridge one of them has to do with water that's when we come back so don't go away you still trying to find ways to get into the world of crypto? Well look no further. Bitbuy is Canada's number one platform for buying and selling Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. Bitbuy has launched a brand new app and website

with a new look, lower fees and new coins. Bitbuy is your one stop shop to get involved and super easy to use for beginners. Visit bitbuy.ca or download the BitBuy app. Enter referral code PODCAST20 to get $20 free when you make your first deposit. You remember one of the persistent stories of the last, I guess, about 20 years? It comes up, comes and goes every once in a while, and it's about water. And the story is, the Americans are running out of water, fresh water,

and every time they start running out of fresh water, they think of us. They love thinking of us when they run out of fresh water because we got lots of it, and for the most part, we protect it. But we have lots of water. People have written novels about the U.S. invading Canada because of water. Well, every time you hear stories about how the U.S. is having problems on the water supply front, you go, uh-oh, you know what that means. You know what they're going to start talking about again now. Well, talk about studies.

The Brookings Institute. World respected. Highly respected. They've got a new study. And this is what it concludes. Models suggest the United States may lose access to

one-third of its fresh water supply in the next 50 years, with nearly half of the country's freshwater basins unable to meet demand by 2071. Although total water use has actually declined in recent years, due to improved technologies and other conservation strategies, the United States still used 322 billion gallons per day in 2015, with thermoelectric power plants

using 41% of the water, irrigation 37%, and public supply 12%. Per capita water use is running at about 82 gallons per day per person nationally. You know, I look at that number and I go, how the hell do they use 82 gallons a day per person. You know, think about your water supply and what you consume in water every day. Drinking it, washing in it, cleaning your teeth,

flushing the toilet, cooking. I mean, think about all those, but 82 gallons a day. Now, that's the American average. I don't know. I guess we're probably somewhere around the same, if not more. Remember when they used to do those studies on how often you use the telephone? Nobody in the world uses a telephone as much as Canadians. Or at least that's the way it used to be.

Anyway, that per capita use is expected to continue its current downward trend. Yet these decreases will be outpaced by population growth and increasing demand for electricity. Now, this part I like. You got a leaky pipe? You got any leaky pipes? When's the last time you had a leak? Like either tap leaking or a pipe leaking? Leaking pipes lose up to 18% of treated water each year in the United States.

2.1 trillion gallons. Leaky pipes. Now, people say, how the heck did that happen? Well, you know why it happens? Because in the United States and in Canada, our nation's water pipes are 45 years old on average. That's why when you, you know, you go to new construction sites or houses being renovated, two of the first things they do is they strip out all the wiring and put in new wiring, and they strip out all those lead pipes. And they put in, you know, plastic pipes,

color-coded pipes. You know, lead's a big deal. It's a big problem. And it remains a big problem. Do the two words Flint, Michigan tell you anything? Anyway, there's nothing anywhere in this Brookings Institute report that says, hey, look at Canada, we could get water there. But you can be sure there are some people

going to be thinking that. You know, we're so lucky. We have so much fresh water and the potential for even more. And the potential, some argue, to use this as a great export. It's a natural resource that we can afford to move some of.

I'd like to hear a debate on that. Okay, last point for this day. You know, a couple of weeks ago, we had our special on electric cars. And there was a lot of reaction around that. A lot of people were really interested in it. And looking at the various consequences of the car market going from, you know, gas to electric. Hey, it's happening. You know, like it's just happening.

Just watch your television. Just watch the ads you're seeing on TV for automobile companies. Almost every one of them, foreign and domestic, are talking about their incoming electric, all-electric models. Well, you know what else is happening? In the transportation area, increasing numbers of people are going to two-wheeled vehicles. Two-wheeled electric vehicles.

You'll be motorcycles, mopeds, scooters. Global two-wheeler sales, I'm reading here from Bloomberg News, global two-wheeler sales held up better than passenger vehicle sales during the pandemic over the last year. 74 million were sold. These are U.S. numbers once again. 74 million were sold in 2020, slightly more than the 70 million passenger cars. And one of the main reasons is two-wheelers are going electric faster than cars, faster than any other segment of road transport. Two-wheeler sales on the electric side are at over 25 million last year.

That's about 35% of sales globally, far ahead of passenger cars, where electric vehicles are still only around 5% of sales. Interesting, eh? So that little hum you may hear down the street, just like a nice, soft, electric hum. It's a two-wheeler, scooter, moped, motorcycle. So you look at the breakdown all over the place and it's pretty impressive. China leading the way, as China tends to do.

Listen to this, though. This is the last point I'll make. Other subcategories of the electric vehicle, two-wheeler category, get very blurry, particularly at the low end of the market. The difference between a moped and an e-bike, or for that matter, a bicycle, could disappear very soon. The next time you see an Uber Eats or Deliveroo driver, have a look at what they're riding. It's likely some product bending hybrid of an electric bike, moped, scooter, or motorcycle.

I want to keep an eye out for that. All right. There you go. It's Thursday. Potpourri day. Lots to crunch on there. Lots to think about. And if you have thoughts, once again, don't be shy.

The Mansbridge Podcast at gmail.com. The Mansbridge Podcast at gmail.com. Send them along with your name and the location you're writing from. Tomorrow's broadcast, podcast, is the weekend special, and that's where the letters that strike me as interesting and new, that's where they come from.

We've already had a few this week, quite a few actually, but we're always looking for more, so try to get them in, try to get them in before midnight tonight. That's midnight Thursday. From wherever your time zone may be. And we'll see what can happen in tomorrow's podcast.

All right, I'm Peter Mansbridge. Got to go out and shovel snow. It's a tough life, you know. It's really, it's not that bad. It'll probably all be gone by noon. We'll see. All right, I'm Peter Mansbridge. This has been The Bridge for Thursday.

Thanks for listening. Talk to you again. Oh, I should remind you, 5 o'clock, Sirius XM. Exclusive to Sirius XM, 5 p.m. Eastern today. Good talk. Chantelle Hebert, Bruce Anderson, we'll talk about the big political stories of the week. One hour of fascinating good talk. See you then. Thank you.