Introduction
The fundamental role of the media is to build a common base for audiences to interpret news. While examining most of the Canadian news media, one is likely to notice that minorities are either scantily covered or are portrayed in demeaning terms. More than 15% of the Canadian population consists of immigrants. Of this, over 50% are minorities. However, the media have resisted this phenomenon of diversity (Herding 311-315). Some of the minorities include blacks, Muslims, Aboriginals, Asians, Latinos, Gays/Lesbians, Independents and Non-believers. The substance of this paper is to discuss how Canadian media have portrayed Aboriginal groups both in history and today.
Historical outlook of Canadian media coverage of Aboriginals
Historically, Canadian media served the role of government mouth piece where they perpetuated racism and ethnocentrism against aboriginal people. Phrases like the ‘redskins’ and the miserable ‘fishing tribes’ were used. Some newspapers published opinions that campaigned for the removal of aboriginals from Victoria. News media often praised the capitalists and those who supported the removal of aboriginals to enhance economic development. The media must have been obsessed with this idea that even today; it is still its preoccupation (Alia 34). The government plan to allow aboriginals autonomy did not receive much coverage. An example is given of British Columbia community Newspapers which issued a directive to its news team not to write any commentary that seemed to support such moves (Furniss 18).
Apart from racial segregation, colonial newspapers advocated for aboriginals to be displaced from their ancestral habitats because there was the notion that aboriginals did not use their land appropriately. Thus issues of land use, denial of autonomy, inferiority of the aboriginals featured prominently in the news (Martinuk Para. 7).
After the Métis uprising, the news media began to win over the government in the use of force against aboriginals. Reporters urged the government to protect white communities. In response, aboriginal leaders, having been keen on what was being said about them appealed against being depicted as aggressive and uncertain. They also identified the need to influence public judgment and as a result; newspapers like the Vancouver Sun begun to devote specific reporters to cover aboriginal issues. Stereotypes though continued (Herding 322). Modern news media may show more sensitivity to aboriginals than colonial newspapers but in most cases, Aboriginals are seen as the cause of their own problems; some journalists have accused them of lacking the will to end their misery soon. On the contrary, one of the strengths of the colonial press was that respect was accorded to the way aboriginals dressed in their traditional gear (Frances and Tator 1-2).
Aboriginals in the Media Today
As the world consciously adopts equality campaigns; film, television, and book producers in Canada have continued to show how Canadian Aboriginals are viewed. They construct the sense of view about the minorities in a way that exposes them as poor or weak (Herding 312). Thus the media can be said to make them vulnerable to violence.
The news media attention to mistreatments compares unfavourably to the coverage done to white people. Colonial notions that lowered the dignity of aboriginals at the expense of white supremacy must have contributed to this disparity. Findings suggest that inadequate news and images carried in daily media sources portray aboriginals as peripheral human beings. For example, whenever an aboriginal was reported as missing, their coverage is usually 20 times less in national newspapers. On the contrary, white people in the same predicament received more detailed coverage and in fact the intense tone of loss was emphatically presented in the coverage (Alia 57).
Labeling could be a way in which the media constructs opinion among the audiences. By recreating the notions already in the public domain, aboriginals are barred from being prepared to handle their own lives. Thus they are shown as dependent on the civilized majority groups. For example, they are at times shown as warriors, something which they used to do longtime ago (Herding 316). This shows that that backwardness as shown will only end if they allow others to control them.
Other labels include the exposition of aboriginals as poor resource managers. This is because their occupation used to be mainly hunting and fishing which means that most of their land would lie fallow. Although they have recently been regaining their lifestyle by fighting for land rights, winning elective seats and demanding hunting rights; they are shown as rivaling with non-aboriginals. The latter often see them as submissive (Frances and Tator 4).
The Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples asserts that aboriginals are usually barred from the media absolutely. Aboriginal opinions are either not published or are given a lacing to hide their real views. They are often shown as miserable sufferers, mad warrior-like peoples, uncertain and thus a threat to established order (5). Canadian rural and urban newspapers air aboriginals on a different wavelength. For example, rural newspapers divert conflicts involving aboriginals with other people as a result of urban and rural differences. Urban newspapers depict problems of the state in accommodating aboriginals as simple conflicts. Both portray aboriginal as a group best controlled through force (Furniss 28-29).
Negatives images and terminology
In most cases, aboriginals are labeled individually but based on the generally perceived traits of the whole community. As shown before, they described as violent and unpredictable. They are shown as cruel, ancient and time wasters. Any aboriginal is also placed in the context of head wearing dress and other traditional regalia and hence seen as unfit for the contemporary society. They are described in rude words. While referring to aboriginals, reporters often centre on what they feel aboriginals should have rather than what they already have. For example, features are written about aboriginal poor primitive life and newspapers present European lifestyle as a requirement to amass wealth. They give the view that a modern person should shun traditional dress, attend school, speak English or any European language and be Christian. Aboriginals are shown as being under the care of the ‘sophisticated’ communities and that they are poor because they do not know how to adapt. The media omits to show the efforts of aboriginals in trying to solve their own problems (Herding 327-329).
The language in most news media pokes fun at aboriginals. For example aboriginals may be mislabeled as Injun or Joe. Offensive words such as papoose, half-breed, combatant, savage, wanderer, and ancient are used. Sometimes the language of aboriginals is ridiculed. For instance, when books use phrases such as “several moons have passed”, imply that aboriginals are still prehistoric. Besides, illustrations of aboriginals in most media inaccurately portray their dress as inappropriate, that is, wearing clothes that do not fit the environment or occasion. At times they include traditional aboriginal gods or items when these are supposed to be sacred and secret (Alia 59-60).
Aboriginals and their Independent Media
Dissatisfaction in the way the media covered aboriginal issues inspired the northern aboriginal communities to lobby for an independent media. In early 1980s, the Canadian central government, through the observations made by the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission [CRTV-TC], formulated the Northern Broadcasting Policy. It was aimed at making broadcasting initiatives to help northern native communities to preserve their culture (APTN). Apparently, most of the aboriginals, having been subjected to media stereotypes would be reluctant to identify themselves as aboriginals hence the danger to their culture. This led to the creation of the Aboriginal People’s Television Network [APTN]. It began producing educational programs on social, political and cultural issues; especially those concerning the aboriginals. These programs were presented in local languages. Beginning its major operations in 1999, APTN helped to air native opinion in the media, something which lacked before. It developed to be a greater source of information for the natives both in rural and urban areas [it airs programs on cable networks]. It has grown to include French and English but a large proportion of its content is aired in the 15 aboriginal dialects. Unlike non-aboriginal media, APTN involves the audience through call-in programs and local news coverage. It has also improved the native welfare by establishing links across the country for easier news sourcing as well as training of aboriginal journalists to work within the APTN. Some of the programs aired include Bingo, Moccasin Flats and Renegadepress.com. On the overall, APTN has given natives a sense of belonging. It has involved aboriginal culture and personalities which help the aboriginal audience to identify with it as their own (Oswald).
Relationship of aboriginals with Non Aboriginals
Despite the aboriginal effort to acquire positive coverage, most non-aboriginal newspapers show aboriginals in constant contact with non-aboriginals. They are mostly shown to conflict with non-aboriginals on issues over their autonomy, land repossession and property ownership. They have been shown as inept workers who lack capability to relate well with other societies. They are also shown as victims of mistreatment and betrayal. At times they collaborate with other societies but end up frustrated. For example, they may vote in leaders from other communities who in turn must ensure their welfare but they usually get betrayal because members of the other communities only pursue their interests. As a result, aboriginals do not have the ability to take independent decisions; they must rely on others (Herding 330). However, the recent outreach by APTN may have influenced publications such as the Winnipeg Free Press to involve positive coverage of aboriginal activities at a greater length.
From this discussion, we can deduce that the treatment given to aboriginals is influenced by the media. The non-aboriginal media exhibit that; aboriginals cannot control their lives and misuse possessions such as land. Hence this battle of personal motives is propelled by media coverage. The non-aboriginal media have historically opined that Aboriginal community should be denied autonomy because of the fear that majority communities would lose resources found in their habitat. Thus they ought to be under the control of non-aboriginals. However, aboriginal media covers them positively. They involve them in the production and presentation of programs by airing in local languages. Perhaps the recent nationwide outreach by APTN will introduce a new notion that aboriginals are equally worth positive coverage.
Reference
Aboriginal People’s Network. 2009.
Alia, Valarie. Un/Covering the North: News, Media and the Aboriginal People. Vancouver: UBC Press. 1999.
Furniss, Elizabeth. “Aboriginal Justice, the Media and the Symbolic Management of Aboriginal/Euro-Canadian Relations.” American Indian Culture and Research Journal. 25.2(2001):1-35
Herding, Robert. “The Media, Aboriginal People and Common Sense.” The Canadian Journal of Native Studies. 25.1(2005):311-335. Web.
Henry, Frances and Carol Tator. “Racist Discourse in Canada’s English Print Media.” Canadian Race Relations Foundation [PDF version]. 2009. Web.
Oswald, Brad. “Dream Catcher.” Winnipeg Free Press. 2009. Web.
Martuk, Susan. “Natives Need Freedom from Both Government and Band Council.” The Province. 2003. Web.
Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. Final Report on Public Education: Building Awareness and Understanding.4th Ed. Ottawa: Canada Communications Group. 1996.