Anti-American, Anti-Canadian
The civil and uncivil in the media
William Wolfe-Wylie
glories of the Internet, writers on
both sides of the border are far
from ignorant of these reports
and the comments made about
each country.
W hen high-profile countries elect a new leader, the world sits up and pays attention. Whether it was Tony Blair’s win for a third term in 2005, the accusations of electoral fraud that flooded Ukraine’s election in 2004, or the election of George W. Bush in the U.S. for a second term, columnists, bloggers and political pundits have risen to the challenge of criticizing and analysing the elections. But in the age of Googlenews and unprecedented abilities to communicate electronically, candidates for higher office are more aware than ever before of how they are viewed at home as well as abroad.
Bloggers, columnists and editorial writers have all jumped on the electronic publishing train. But while media outlets and politicians have always offered commentary on foreign elections, for the first time it is now possible for the citizens of each country to easily learn what the other is saying about them. And in Canada and the United States, this has caused some debate of its own.
With television broadcasts such as Rick Mercer’s “Talking to Americans” and the United States still bitter about Canada’s decision not to participate in the Iraq war, tensions between the two countries have been rising steadily. Now, with the ongoing federal election campaign on the heels of George W. Bush’s re-election, it is more obvious than ever that, as neighbours, we take a great interest in what each other is doing. And the language that we use to describe each other isn’t always flowery. Egos are getting bruised.
Anti-U.S. language coming out of the current federal election campaign caused U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins to stand up and ask Prime Minister Paul Martin to tone it down. Martin responded fiercely, saying he would not be dictated to with regard to which subjects he may or may not raise.
In response, one Arizona-based newspaper, the American Thinker, published on January 4 that a “beleaguered Liberal leader” is trying to “cling to power by attacking the nation’s oldest ally and largest trading partner.” It went on to argue that it seemed irrelevant to Canadians that “Canada sells 83 per cent of its world exports to the United States and some 50 per cent of all Canadian jobs depend either directly or indirectly on those exports.”
Americans, even though we would hesitate to believe it, are curious about our current federal election. On December 2, 2005, Patrick Basham of the Cato Institute wrote a column in the Washington Times about Conservative Leader Stephen Harper, calling him a “gift from Canada.” Basham went on to describe Harper as a “free-market economist . . . pro-free trade, pro-Iraq war, anti-Kyoto and socially conservative,” claiming that if elected, “Harper will quickly become Mr. Bush’s new best friend internationally and the poster boy for his ideal foreign leader.”
Thanks to the all-too-recent glories of the Internet, writers on both sides of the border are far from ignorant of these reports and the comments made about each country. One U.S. opinion writer eagerly noted that “Canadians bring up ‘the States’ or ‘Americans’ to make comparisons or evaluations that mix a kind of smug contempt with a wariness that alternates between the paranoid and the absurd.”
Whether or not Canadians or Americans would like to admit it, we’re tied to each other in a lover’s embrace, and it stings whenever we hear the other speak ill of us.
But it’s nothing new; we’re just more aware of it now than ever before. What has changed in the past decade is the ease with which the masses are able to consume another nation’s media. Suddenly, in a matter of minutes, we are able to examine the popular opinion of any country regarding any major political event around the world. Stephen Harper was able to respond quickly to the comment made about him in the Washington Times, and attentive bloggers and newspaper columnists are able to examine the facts and analyse the news for themselves.
What we need to realize is that our need to talk about the world around us, now in a truly global sense, has been around for centuries and isn’t going to go anywhere anytime soon. Now that we have so much more available to us and from a much wider variety of sources, it’s become more obvious than ever that there exists in the world a huge diversity of opinion. And we’re going to be increasingly exposed to this range of viewpoints on all issues. Let’s just remember to keep the conversation civil.
William Wolfe-Wylie is Atlantic Bureau Chief for Canadian University Press and News Editor for the Argosy at Mount Allison University.
