|
Is
Canadian Media Sensitive to Minorities?
|
|
|
Are
they properly depicted in Canadian media? |
While Canadian media continues to make noticeable
strides in coverage of Islamic and refugee issues, there remains a lot of work
and challenges ahead.
Last
month, Statistics Canada released figures that described the demographic
composition of Canadians. The results are not surprising; over the past few
years Canada continued to become a culturally diverse society. Comprising of
thousand-year cultures, new religions, and growing ethnic communities,
Canada’s wealth is measured in its myriad of people of different color, race,
background, and faith, the report implied.
Statistics
Canada also revealed the growth in Canadian faiths and religions. Of particular
import, were the numbers that showed Muslims growing in number to more than a
half a million of the Canadian population (580,000) – an increase of 128
percent in a decade.
The
news of a substantial growth in the Canadian Muslim population was not greeted
well in some media quarters. “Muslims are now double the number of Jews in
Montreal,” bellowed a radio talk show host.
“Canadian
Muslims now outnumber Jews,” screamed the front page headline of Canada’s
national newspaper, The Globe and Mail.
Why
polarize two segments of Canadian society who are distinct in their faiths, yet
identical in their Canadian identity? The headlines are effectively saying that
such a growth in the number of Muslims poses a threat to the Jewish community.
In
the post-9/11 era of yellow journalism it has become fashionable to negatively
reflect on the Muslim communities in North America; words like jihad are
misrepresented, the veil is mistakenly seen as a sign of male-dominated
oppression, Islamic holy months and days are surreptitiously associated with
elevated terrorism warnings.
Rosie
DiManno, a popular national columnist with the Toronto Star, has several times
catered to the misconceptions of Islam. Reporting from Baghdad in May, she says
“The women consigned, more often than not, to their heat-retaining black abbas
[sic], swaddled from head to toe, an infuriating sight…”
It
has become fashionable to negatively reflect on the Muslim communities
in North America. |
|
She
goes on to describe that the wearing of the abbayas “is the cultural
subjugation of women in the Muslim world.”
She
attempts to shelter her assault on a world religion by saying: “Accuse me of
cultural insensitivity if you wish, or even racism; I will lay counter-claims of
sexism and misogyny disguised as Muslim orthodoxy.”
In
another column she exalts at the lack of Muslim values when she says “It
delights me immeasurably to see so many Muslims enjoying the secular life.” In
yet another column, this same writer called Iraqi Shiite religious leaders “Quran-thumpers.”
While
there are efforts to approach Muslim and Arab issues with impartiality and
objectivity, the outcome remains somewhat lacking.
In
November 2002, Maclean’s Magazine and Global TV conducted a poll on Canadian
impressions of immigrations and refugee issues. Forty-four per cent of those
polled said they wished the number of immigrants and refugees from Muslim
countries would be restricted.
Two
weeks ago, the Globe and Mail ran an editorial cartoon commemorating Father’s
Day. The cartoon showed a young Arab boy giving his father a gift of a bomb
belt, used by suicide bombers. The father was dressed in traditional Arab garb.
The cartoon was emphasising that this is how Arabs and Muslims celebrate
Father’s day.
If
Canada’s national newspaper can so blatantly and brazenly insult such a large
cross section of Canadians, will it fare any better in dealing with refugee and
immigrant issues?
Forty-four
per cent polled said they wanted the number of immigrants from Muslim
countries restricted. |
|
With
headlines crying "Enough already!" "Quarantined", and
"We're swamped", Canadian media (particularly the Vancouver Province,
the Vancouver Sun and the Victoria Times Colonist) tried to create a crisis when
shiploads of Chinese refugees tried to make it to Canadian shores in 1999.
The
type of coverage the refugees garnered offered the Canadian public a very
restricted and narrow perspective of refugee issues in Canada. The average
person was lead to believe that refugees are a threat to Canada. Ignored was the
reason the Chinese refugees chose to leave their homeland. Ignored were the
perilous circumstances and the danger to human life.
The
refugees were stripped of the human element – they were now represented as a
liability on our lives, on our tax system, and on our immigration system.
When
the government imprisoned the refugees, neatly overstepped human rights,
bypassed just procedure and speeded their deportation, provided inadequate
translation services, insufficient and overworked representation, and punitive
tactics including isolation lockdowns, the public barely whimpered.
It
has become common to hear age-old statements like "they should go back
where they came from" and "they should come here on legal terms and
not be allowed to jump queue."
On
September 25th, 2001, two weeks after the terrorist attack in the United States,
the Ottawa Citizen newspaper ran an editorial examining immigration from mostly
South East Asian and Muslim countries.
Titled
“Welcome to Canada, Liar,” the piece, written by a former member of the
Immigration and Refugee Board, Professor Lubomyr Luciuk, practically brands all
refugee applicants as liars trying to wheel their way into Canada for illicit
purposes. Luciuk proceeds to imply that most refugees are terrorists-in-waiting,
ready to destroy Canada and all it stands for.
He
closes his editorial by saying: “Then our country will disappear, as surely as
New York's twin towers vanished in the holocaust perpetrated by terrorists who
exploited lax immigration laws to worm in amongst us.”
It
has become common to hear age-old statements like “they should go
back where they came from.” |
|
While
Luciuk is entitled to his own opinion, brandishing it like the sword of justice
in Canadian media is unjustifiable. His painting of refugees, (many of whom have
suffered, been tortured, and victimized as liars), their stories as yarns, and
their intentions to destroy Canada, only serve to strengthen the stereotypes
that immigrants and refugees should not be let into Canada.
So
what newspaper claims the grand prize of religious insensitivity and bigotry?
Most ethnic communities would say the National Post.
In
1999, Francisco Rico-Martinez of the Canadian Council for Refugees wrote that
the National Post had an overall antipathetic attitude towards immigrants and
refugees in Canada. He cited that the paper presented a disproportion of
negative articles and columns relative to other papers.
Nevertheless,
it must be pointed out that other papers seem to be making some headway in
bringing refugee and immigrant stories to the fore.
Ken
Wiwa of the Globe and Mail has featured a piece on how immigrant professionals
are interlacing and merging into one cohesive Canadian unit. He writes of an
“ethnic soup of immigrant investors - a restaurant run by a Jew, a Muslim, a
Hindu and a Buddhist”.
The
Globe and Mail also recently featured a front-page picture of a Somali immigrant
who had just been accepted into medical school. From Letters to the Editor, it
can be seen that the picture and accompanying article served both as an
inspiration and beacon to other immigrants in Canada.
Firas
Al-Atraqchi holds an MA in Journalism and Mass Communication. He is a
Canadian journalist with eleven years of experience covering Middle East issues,
oil and gas markets, and the telecom industry. You can reach him at firas6544@rogers.com
|
