Last Thursday, I clapped AND worried, when I heard the news about the “word in n” at Radio-Canada.
First of all, I was delighted that the Federal Court of Appeal overturned the CRTC’s decision which upheld a complaint against Radio-Canada for the use of the “n-word” on the radio.
But then, I freaked out when I learned that Radio-Canada was maintaining its guideline regarding “offensive” words as it is!
What happens if the Court slaps the fingers of the CRTC, if Radio-Canada continues to be paranoid about “words we are not allowed to utter”?
- Listen to the interview with Alain Saulnier, retired professor of communications at the University of Montreal and former director general of information for Radio Canada on Sophie Durocher’s show via QUB-radio :
ONLY ONE OFFENDED PERSON
You remember the case, which caused a stir.
The CRTC tapped Radio-Canada on the knuckles because columnist Simon Jodoin quoted the full title of Pierre Vallières’ book white niggers of america. One and only plaintiff, one and only offended listener, had lodged a complaint. It’s important to remember that.
However, in the wake of the CRTC’s decision, Radio-Canada announced its guideline on offensive language.
It targeted any “abusive, degrading or unduly discriminatory, stereotypical or negative language” about “race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status or a physical or mental handicap”.
Radio-Canada basically said four things:
- Its hosts and reporters must apologize on-air if an offensive word is uttered by an interviewee;
- Its hosts and journalists must “act in such a way as to reduce the risk that the guest will repeat the offensive remarks”;
- Any rebroadcast of a program containing offensive language must be purged of any offensive language;
- A disclaimer must accompany any rebroadcast if the offending language is still there.
Except that no list of “potentially offensive language” was provided. For Radio-Canada employees, it’s like walking through a minefield… not knowing where the mines are that could explode in your face at any moment.
When Radio-Canada released this surreal guideline, retired journalist Gilles Gougeon published a letter in The duty in which he spoke outright about censorship at Radio-Canada. “That means an editor, a news director, a program director or the corporate lawyers, and ultimately the CEO will be forced to play censor. You have to say things as they are! […] We will now have to live with a new form of censorship and resist blackmail. It’s starting to look like post-war Quebec, where the Catholic Church blacklisted books and movies.”
It’s not some “nasty” Quebecor columnist who worries about censorship at Radio-Canada, it’s the former host of 5 out of 5!
WORDS ON THE INDEX?
When we learned of the Court of Appeal’s decision, Radio-Canada announced… that it was maintaining its guideline on offensive language!
If the CRTC does not have to dictate to Radio-Canada what can or cannot be said on the air, why Radio-Canada continues to tell its journalists and hosts what they can or cannot say on the air?
It’s the world upside down!