In a majority decision with two dissenting opinions delivered on Wednesday, the CRTC ruled in favor of the complainant, who expressed dissatisfaction with the use of the “n-word” four times in a segment of the Annie-hosted show Le 15-18 Desrochers at ICI Radio-Canada Premiere in Greater Montreal, August 17, 2020.
Columnist Simon Jodoin, invited to comment on current events, shared his opinion on the social acceptability of naming Pierre Vallières’ book title, Nègres blancs d’Amérique, after launching a petition demanding the dismissal of a Concordia University professor quoted the book in class. Among other things, he went into the consequences of the controversy surrounding his mention and asserted that this obscured the content of the work and the thinking of the author.
Angered by the use of the “N-word,” the listener behind that decision, Ricardo Lamour, first complained to the Council and the CBC’s French Ombudsman. The complaint was escalated to the show’s senior content manager. The plaintiff objects to the naming of the full title of the work and the lack of warnings and explanations as to the meaning of the word.
In her September 2, 2020 response, the show’s first Chief Content Officer writes that the term was used strictly to cite the work and that its use was neither abusive nor reckless. She specifies that the columnist was tasked with presenting a personal analysis of current issues and that the formula did not lend itself to debate.
Dissatisfied, the complainant turned to the CBC’s French Services Ombudsman to request a review. In its decision of October 26, 2020, the ombudsman (new window) recognizes that the word is a misleading designation and an inhuman insult.
However, he believes that the CBC should not ban the use of the term in all contexts, but that it should be used appropriately and responsibly. As such, he notes that the CBC did not violate Radio-Canada’s journalistic standards and practices in connection with the column.
After this setback, the same listener filed a complaint with the CRTC asking for a review of the CBC Ombudsman’s decision, which the commission did.
CRTC verification
The Council acknowledges that the word has not been used in a discriminatory manner in the context of the Chronicle and acknowledges that the ‘n-word’ might evolve differently from one community to another.
However, the CRTC believes that broadcasting a clear viewer notice at the beginning of the program segment would have been appropriate. Viewer advice is designed to help listeners make their program choices, he writes.
In addition, he argues that the CBC did not exercise sufficient care and vigilance in handling the remark and that the CBC did not show sufficient respect and sensitivity to the affected communities.
The Commission believes that the company’s program should reflect the multicultural and multiracial nature of Canada. Consequently, according to the Federal Authority, the broadcasting of the segment in question does not contribute to strengthening the cultural and social fabric and reflecting the multicultural and multi-ethnic character of Canadian society.
The CRTC concludes that the content broadcast during the segment of the SRC’s Le 15-18 program is contrary to the goals and values of Canadian broadcasting policy and that it did not meet the high quality programming standard.
In light of this observation, the CRTC requests the SRC to issue a public written apology to the complainant.
Additionally, the CBC must report by September 27, 2022 on the internal programming measures and best practices it will be putting in place, including guidelines for presenters, columnists and on-air guests, to ensure we can better deal with a similar thing topic in the future. This document must be accessible to the public.
Noting that the controversial segment remains accessible online and will be caught up, the Council instructs the SRC to provide details by 29 July 2022 on how it intends to mitigate the impact of the “word in n”.
Dissenting opinions
Broadcasting Commission Vice Chair Caroline J. Simard disagrees with the CRTC’s conclusions and expressed her disagreement.
In the absence of discriminatory language, she says, I believe the majority decision failed to apply applicable law, developed by Canada’s Supreme Court, which states that there is no right not to be offended under the Canadian Charter and the Act.
Although the majority recognizes that there can be a different development of the “word in n” from one community to another, the conclusions of the majority decision do not, as provided for by the law, take into account the specificities and needs of the francophone community identified by the CBF-FM radio station is served by Radio-Canada,” she continued.
Councilor Joanne T. Levy also expressed her dissent. Indeed, the discussion of Pierre Vallières’ book met the requirements of high-quality programming. It was relevant, informative and clear. No one suggested it was an invalid discussion that didn’t deserve to be had, she said.
According to them, the reason for the majority decision lies in the provision of the Broadcasting Act that stipulates high-quality programmes. It is a subjective test that defies transparency, fairness and predictability.
Levy says the decision ignores the primary right to press freedom enshrined in Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms and protected by the Broadcasting Act. She adds: The decision will have unintended consequences that will lead to a kind of willful journalistic omission, silence discussion and encourage censorship.
A complex question
The CBC’s first director of advertising and public relations, Marc Pichette, said via email that the society wanted to investigate the issue more closely.
We were informed of the CRTC’s decision on the complaint about the mention of Pierre Vallières’ book title in a column of the ICI Premiere program Le 15-18 in Montreal late this morning. This decision and the dissenting opinions that have accompanied it illustrate the complexity of the issue, he writes.
Radio-Canada acknowledges that use of the “n-word” is offensive. For this reason we have monitored and restricted its use on our radio waves. In addition, she would like to take the necessary time to thoroughly study the decision taken by the CRTC and the follow-up that she intends to make, he indicates.