CENSORSHIP AND THE CRTC
Editorial
In
what must be the most blatant example of censorship Canada has
witnessed in recent
memory, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommu-nications
Commission (CRTC)
is refusing to renew the licence of Quebec radio station CHOI-FM
because one of
its morning hosts has offended
"Canadian values."
Radio
announcer Jeff Fillion has been muzzled and his station shut down for a
series
of admittedly vulgar comments, including repeated potshots at a rival
radio
host who was convicted of paying for sex with a minor. In one case, Mr.
Fillion
said of a psychiatric patient: "Why don't they just pull the plug on
him?
He doesn't deserve to live. The guy's a freaking burden on society." In
another instance, he referred to a weather announcer's "incredible set
of
boobs" and added that "the size of the brain is not directly
proportional
to the size of the bra."
While it's clear Mr. Fillion's prattle crossed the bounds of good
taste, it is
hardly the stuff over which government censors should be getting
exercised. The
radiowaves are filled with mindless inanities. And inanities are,
evidently,
what some people want. CHOI-FM's ratings have been increasing of late,
which
invites the obvious question: Who is better placed to judge "Canadian
values" -- bureaucrats in Ottawa, or ordinary Canadians?
In its decision, the commission makes it clear it will not even permit
hosts
such as Mr. Fillion to make statements of fact if those statements
might expose
a group to hatred or contempt. Such a ruling sets a frightening
precedent.
After all, even the daily news often contains matters of fact that
might make certain
groups the object of derision.
We do not question that the CRTC is within its rights to maintain
certain basic
standards of decency. But to extend that mandate to include banning
remarks
that might hurt people's feelings or that might "undermine the
multicultural and multi-racial nature of Canadian society" is to
mandate a
level of social engineering that
belongs
in a George Orwell book,
not in a free and democratic
country.
If people are sufficiently offended by Mr. Fillion's comments, they
should stop
listening to his show and, if they feel strongly enough about the
matter,
petition the offending station and urge others to boycott it. But to
instead
turn to the CRTC and urge that agency to act as censor, as Mr.
Fillion's
critics (including the Mayor of Quebec City) have done, is not only
unfair,
it's dangerous.
The ruling suggests the proper role of government is to choose which
viewpoints
and truths are acceptable and polite enough to be tolerated and which
viewpoints and truths are too unpleasant to be permitted. This is a
level of government omnipotence
that no
Canadian, not
even the weather announcer of his fancy, should be willing to tolerate.
For,
there is no guarantee that her statements won't be the ones that the
CRTC tries
to silence next.
As
the U.S. writer and economist David Cushman Coyle
said:
"Democracy needs more free speech, for even the speech of foolish
people
is valuable if it serves to guarantee the right of the wise to talk."
You
can judge for yourself whether Mr. Fillion fits the definition of a
fool. But
the general point applies.
National Post, July 15, 2004.
Newsletter, September 2004-Text