We often read on the X platform that the media only have themselves to blame for the media crisis: no one believes them anymore, so no one consults them anymore.
There is nothing surprising in finding this statement on a social network that attracts like a magnet all those who hate journalists. However, I admit to being a little more surprised when I heard a more polite, but nonetheless similar, interpretation of the media crisis by Quebec’s Minister of Culture.
You have read extracts from it in “A café with Mathieu Lacombe” recently published by Isabelle Hachey in the Context section1. Excerpts from a broader conference that the minister gave to members of the Professional Federation of Journalists of Quebec in mid-November.
In the midst of a media crisis, Mr. Lacombe then shared his thoughts on the responsibility incumbent on journalists. He spoke of “the crisis of confidence in the media”, the “loss of public confidence” and “disaffection with many faces”.
Ouch.
Note, if there is an elected official in Quebec who has all the legitimacy to address the subject, it is the Minister of Culture. It is he, after all, who is responsible for the media, public aid, and programs.
Not only is he entitled to his opinion on the media ecosystem, but he is entitled to share it.
But I still admit to feeling great discomfort. The same discomfort I feel when we import problems from elsewhere into Quebec as if they were ours.
First, let’s get one thing straight: there is NO connection between the “media crisis” and public trust.
None.
The media crisis is a crisis of revenue, of advertising, of innovation.
Think about paper newspapers whose advertisers are fleeing to the web. Think of the web giants siphoning off revenues that went to newspapers. Think about general TV which is suffering from the decline in popularity of cable. Think about the business models that have not evolved despite a context that requires thinking outside the box.
We are therefore not at all in public confidence, but rather in the necessity of the digital shift, in rapid changes in behavior and in the constant transformation of habits and rituals of information consumption.
Besides, if it can serve as a clue, the paper edition of The Press could reach 200,000 copies per week and 350,000 copies on Saturday. Whereas today, all platforms combined, we easily exceed a million unique devices reached… every day of the week.
“Disaffection”, really?
That said, the heavier meaning lies elsewhere: is there, yes or no, a crisis of public confidence in the media?
The question actually arises when we consult the polls. But the answer is far from clear, with confidence rates oscillating between 30 and 60%, depending on the sources.
There is therefore reason to wonder about what has been dragging down this confidence for several years. But to talk about a “crisis of confidence in the media”? In Quebec ?
I don’t see how we can come to such a conclusion, other than by spending too much time on X…
We have felt a stronger distrust for some time, even in Quebec. But this goes far beyond the media and is expressed against institutions: elected officials, governments, cities.
Journalists may be receiving rocks, but so are Justin Trudeau and François Legault, as well as mayors.
Moreover, the last time the Edelman firm surveyed Quebec2, she concluded that trust there was much greater than elsewhere in the world, and even greater than in Canada. And it revealed that 59% of Quebecers trust the media… while 60% trust the government.
So one of two things: either at 60% there is no crisis of confidence, or there is one, and it affects all democratic institutions. Which leads to a very different reflection from that of Mathieu Lacombe.
I therefore struggle to understand in this context, especially at a time when closures and layoffs are increasing in the media, that the minister invites the journalistic brotherhood to think about raising “ethical criteria”, expanding the mandate of the Press Council. and the “reporting formats” to favor.
These questions, with due respect, do not concern the government, first of all. And above all, the existential danger facing the media industry is not at all the appropriate time to raise major ethical questions prompted by political power.
In other words, we can – and we must – question this shaken confidence, but it has nothing to do with the recent layoffs and media closures. The urgency, which the government has also understood, is to safeguard this crucial industry.