A report from the show Investigation which lifted the veil on alleged abuse of indigenous women in Val-d’Or by police officers violated several journalistic standards and even misled the public, believes an expert.
• Read also: Police officers against Radio-Canada: credible women, believes the journalist
• Read also: SQ police officers against Radio-Canada: “grotesque” allegations, according to a former journalist turned agent
• Read also: “I was seen as a sexual abuser”: SQ police officers in Val-d’Or demand $3 million from Radio-Canada
“If it had been done according to the rules of the art, I am convinced that there would not have been this report… or it would have been different […] It would be much less impactful, less persuasive,” reported journalism expert Marc-François Bernier straight away.
The professor at the University of Ottawa is very critical of the work of journalist Josée Dupuis. His report was filed in court as part of a defamation suit by 42 police officers against the state-owned company, in connection with the report Abuse of the SQ: women break the silence, broadcast on the show Investigation in 2015.
- Listen to the segment Learn everything in 24 minutes with Alexandre Moranville and Mario Dumont on QUB:
Uncorroborated testimonies
The journalist gave the floor to indigenous women from Val-d’Or, in Abitibi, who claimed to have been victims of physical and sexual violence at the hands of police officers. This created a real shock wave, even pushing the government to create the Viens commission on relations between Aboriginal people and public services.
However, the report transgresses several standards of journalism ethics, explains Marc-François Bernier in his 90-page report. Among other things, “many allegations are disseminated without corroboration, without even a corroboration process,” he notes.
“When we come to serious allegations, here of a criminal nature,” said Mr. Bernier, referring to the alleged sexual abuse, “we must verify their basis as much as possible.”
The expert also cites the case of Priscillia Papatie, who recounted having been left in a Walmart parking lot in the middle of the night by police officers who had smashed her cell phone. However, she gave a contradictory version of this event, which can be heard in extracts left out during editing, the report reveals.
“The journalist did not seek to corroborate which of these versions was true,” writes Mr. Bernier. He specified, during his testimony, “that we had strings to see if it was true or not, but we did not pull on it.”
A sensationalist title
The university researcher also believes that “by choosing a misleading and sensationalist title, the team ofInvestigation and Radio-Canada have transgressed the rule of rigor and accuracy.
According to him, the journalist knew that certain allegations date back several years, when Val-d’Or was under the authority of municipal security. The “abusers” were former police officers then retired or police officers serving the Val-d’Or Municipal Police.
“This title encourages[e] falsely encourages the public to make a critical judgment and to express indignation against the SQ police officers stationed in Val-d’Or.”
“I think the public was misled and still is. The report is still online. Nothing warns the public that they should be wary of certain testimonies,” said Marc-François Bernier.
Remember that the SQ police officers who say they experienced “social opprobrium” following the broadcast are claiming $3 million in damages for defamation.