Why is the Vancouver police department playing media favourites?

The headline "Mental Health Horrors" that appeared  above the fold on the front page of Saturday's Vancouver Sun was designed to get readers' attention.

The subsequent articles cited a Vancouver police department report, which was  leaked exclusively to the Vancouver Sun in time for the weekend edition.

Other media outlets won't receive it until Monday.

The Vancouver police department is a public body, so why is it playing favourites and not distributing this report to all media simultaneously through its Web site?

It's inconceivable that the judiciary would leak a court judgment to one  media outlet and  keep it from the others.  There's not a chance that TransLink would issue a news release to one media outlet, but refuse to provide it to anyone else who asked. So why is the VPD doing this with one of its reports?

Why can't people whose first languages are Chinese or Punjabi have access to this report in their own language told by their own reporters?

Why can't community papers, the Georgia Straight, major radio and television stations, or the national media have access to this report at the same time as the Vancouver Sun?

For far too long, Vancouver police have had a symbiotic relationship with CanWest MediaWorks, which owns the Vancouver Sun and scores of other publications across the province.

The  Vancouver Sun  regularly runs the latest police comments about the Hells Angels above the fold on page A1 on Saturdays--often supplemented by the Hells Angels death-head logo to  drive up  circulation.

In a remarkable coincidence, the VPD has decided, for whatever reason, to pay CanWest thousands of taxpayers' dollars to publish its propaganda-filled annual report within the pages of the Vancouver Sun.

There's a new chief, Jim Chu, who has shown signs of being far more progressive than his predecessor, Jamie Graham. Chu made peace with the Pivot Legal Society--an action that stood in sharp contrast to Graham's tendency to insult critics of the department.

Chu has also developed a reputation for listening before speaking, which sets him apart from the previous chief.

Like many of the new generation of VPD leaders, Chu is also well educated. There are other very bright people at VPD headquarters in senior positions. They should know by now that playing media favourites will not help the department's image  over the long term.

That's why it's time that Chu took an interest in the department's media-relations policy and brought it into the 21st century. He should end the special  status for preferred media outlets, and focus all of  the media-relations  efforts on educating the citizens, no matter where they get their news.

Chu  might also be surprised to  learn that the VPD media-relations department demands that reporters provide their birthdates if they want to have access to news conferences at the police station.

Why is it necessary for a reporter to provide his or her birthdate to attend a news conference in a heavily fortified building when it's not necessary to provide a birthdate to attend a police board meeting in the same heavily fortified building?

(The Straight has refused to provide birthdates to the VPD  because it is an unnecessary intrusion on the reporters' privacy.)

Reporters don't have to provide their birthdates to enter the courthouse or a city council meeting or a coroner's inquest.

Chief Chu has already demonstrated that he has an open mind in his approach to policing on the Downtown Eastside.

Let's hope he also considers taking a second look at his department's  media-relations policy.  

It's time to  end the power trips, increase transparency,  and put the focus where it belongs: on serving the public.

Comments