“Do I ghost her again?” »
I admit I laughed a lot when reading the email sent by mistake to a journalist from La Presse Canadienne by the office of the Minister responsible for Housing, France-Élaine Duranceau1.
Like any journalist, I have already been “ghosted” by political press officers who find me tiring. But I have never yet been informed in writing that this ghosting was perfectly intentional or that they were thinking of sending me “the general response which does not respond”.
I admit I laughed, but actually, it’s not funny at all. Because in a world where journalists are more than ever at a disadvantage compared to public relations specialists, this anecdote reveals an increasingly worrying phenomenon for those who care about the public’s right to information.
This email sent to the wrong recipient had the merit of highlighting two public relations strategies used to avoid embarrassing questions from journalists. First, “ghosting”, derived from the English verb “to ghost”, which here consists of suddenly speaking like a ghost, that is to say no longer speaking at all to your interlocutor as if he were was suddenly transformed into a ghostly being to whom it is useless to respond. If it is true that some silences are worth a thousand words, we can read here a form of response disguised as a ghost, in defiance of the rules of transparency which must guide any democratic state.
The goal ? Hoping that the journalist, who most often deals with tight deadlines, lets go and moves on to another call.
The second strategy, which consists of responding without saying anything, is more common. It’s a sort of ghost in disguise as an answer. In the past, we spoke of “cassette”. Today, it very often takes the form of a copy and paste into an email that contains a lot of empty sentences and very little relevant information.
In the case that concerns us, journalist Sarah Smellie of La Presse Canadienne asked Quebec, as she asked each of the provinces, if they recognized the right to housing as a fundamental right and if they intended to legislate for it. protect2.
This is a matter of eminent public interest at a time when more and more citizens are struggling to find housing across the country and when the federal government recognizes that the right to housing is not a luxury, but a right. fundamental for every person.
While in Quebec, we hesitated between two disguises as a response, most provinces fell back on the second which, although more elaborate, fools absolutely no one: “the general response which does not respond to say that the “Housing is a priority for our government,” to use the words of the email from the press secretary who got the wrong recipient. A response as credible as when a robotic message makes you wait by saying: “Your call is important to us. »
Fundamentally, in the age of ghosting, the mission of journalists has not changed. As the United Nations reminds us every May 3 on the occasion of World Press Freedom Day, a free press plays an essential role in democracies. It is a pivot of good governance. It guarantees transparency, accountability and the rule of law. It promotes participation in public debate. It helps to fight against inequalities3.
That said, even in a free society like ours, this mission is increasingly difficult. I spoke from the outset of journalists in “numerous disadvantage”. With a ratio of one journalist for every ten professionals in advertising, marketing and public relations in Quebec, this disadvantage is increasingly marked. The result: it is increasingly difficult for reporters to overcome the barrier set up in front of them by the image-makers hired to control the message. Or, to use the teachings of Martin St-Louis: it is more and more difficult for them to bring their game in the game.
Even if they want to do well and quickly provide journalists with true information, public relations specialists must juggle time and access constraints as well as the obligation to serve their client’s interests, observed in an analysis published in 2018 by professor at the UQAM Media School Chantal Francoeur. Result: they sometimes find themselves on the margins of the principles of transparency, rigor, diligence and fairness4.
The rules of conduct of public relations specialists can then become simple facade values and pro-public relations pleas.
Extract from Chantal Francoeur’s analysis
Since then, everything indicates that this phenomenon has become more pronounced. Whether we’re talking about the right to housing, the living conditions of seniors or the horror unfolding in Gaza, my notebooks and my email, just like those of my colleagues, are full to the brim with these formatted responses which do not They don’t come from Quebec or Ottawa.
“We are very concerned about subject x, y, z,” we are told without saying anything.
And what do we do with this feeling of “concern”? Very often nothing, or too little.
When we ask to speak in person to the official or employee responsible for a file, we are told that they are prohibited from speaking and that we must go through the public relations specialists. But who can we talk to when those we have designated to speak say nothing?
We will always have ghosts.
1. Read the article “France-Élaine Duranceau should apologize, demands the PQ”
2. Read the article “Canada recognizes housing as a human right. Few provinces have followed suit” on the website Toronto Star (in English)
3. Visit the World Press Freedom Day webpage
4. Consult the analysis of Professor Chantal Francoeur
reference: www.lapresse.ca