1 See, for example, Fagen, Richard R., Politics and Communication (Boston: Little Brown, 1906)Google Scholar; Williams, Raymond, Communication (3rd ed.; London: Penguin, 1979), 10Google ScholarPubMed (“… society is a form of communication through which experience is described, shared, modified, and preserved”), and Seymour-Ure, Colin, “Presidential Power, Press Secretaries and Communications,” Political Studies 28 (1980), 253CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 See Deutsch, Karl, The Nerves of Government (New York: The Free Press, 1966)Google Scholar, and Nationalism and Social Communications (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1953)Google Scholar.

3 See, for example, the work of Edelman, Murray, The Symbolic Uses of Politics (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1969)Google Scholar, and also his Political Language (New York: Academic Press, 1977)Google Scholar; and Merelman, Richard, “The Dramaturgy of Politics,” Sociological Quarterly 10 (1969), 216–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 See Godfrey, David and Parkhill, Douglas (eds.), Gutenberg Two (Toronto: Press Porcepic, 1979)Google Scholar; and Madden, John, Videotex in Canada (Ottawa: Ministerof Supply and Services, Canada, 1979)Google Scholar.

5 Frye, Northrop, The Bush Garden (Toronto: Anansi, 1979), 10Google Scholar.

6 Ibid., 11.

7 See, for example, Marchildon, G., “The Women's Section of the Saskatchewan Grain Growers Association: A Study in Agrarian Activism” (unpublished M.A. Thesis, University of Victoria, 1981)Google Scholar.

8 Berger, Thomas R., Northern Frontier, Northern Homeland: Report of the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Inquiry, Vol. 1 (Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services, 1977), 1Google Scholar.

9 For a careful elaboration of this point, see Peers, Frank W., “The Nationalist Dilemma in Canadian Broadcasting,” in Russell, Peter (ed.), Nationalism in Canada (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1966), 252–67Google Scholar, and his shorter essay “Tensions Over Communications,” in Feldman, E. J. and Nevitte, Neil (eds.), The Future of North America: Canada, the United States, and Quebec Nationalism (Cambridge: Harvard Center for International Affairs, 1979), esp. 87, 88Google Scholar.

10 Porter, John, The Vertical Mosaic (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1965), 460CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 Ibid., 459.

12 Clement, Wallace, The Canadian Corporate Elite (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1975)Google Scholar.

13 Porter, The Vertical Mosaic, 459.

14 House of Commons Debates, May 18, 1932, 3035Google Scholar.

15 See, for example, in addition to the Aird Report (1929), the Massey Report (1959), the Fowler Reports (1957 and 1965), the O'Leary Report (1961) and the Davey Report (1970) esp. Vol. I, 2.

16 Porter, The Vertical Mosaic, 486. He pointed to the rapid promotion of British journalists, and he might have added broadcasters. Such names as Tom Kent, Basil Dean, Arnold Edinborough, Ron Collister, James L. Cooper, and Michael Barkway give credence to this view. The British connection and the BBC inflection were highly prized.

17 O'Leary Report, 5, 6. Former Secretary of State David MacDonald views Telidon in the same light as “the greatest threat to Canadian identity since the first U.S. television stations began to broadcast over our border.” The Institute, Newsletter of the Institute for Research on Public Policy 3, April 15, 1981Google Scholar.

18 See Peers, in Russell (ed.), Nationalism in Canada; also see Peers, “Oh Say, Can You See?” and Warnock, John, “All the News It Pays to Print,” both in Lumsden, Ian (ed.), Close the 49th Parallel, Etc. (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1970) 117–56Google Scholar; and Black, E. R., “Canadian Public Policy and the Mass Media,” Canadian Journal of Economics 1 (1968), 368–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The definitive work on the history of broadcasting in Canada is Peers, Frank W., The Politics of Canadian Broadcasting, 1920–1951 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1969)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also his The Public Eye: Television and the Politics of Canadian Broadcasting, 1952–1968 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1979)Google Scholar.

19 See Deutsch, The Nerves of Government, 176ff. Richard Simeon does discuss the role of communication and the importance of information in federal-provincial relations. It is not, however, a major theme. See Simeon, Richard, Federal Provincial Diplomacy (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1971), 194, 217–18, 310Google Scholar.

20 In an interview, a senior public servant in British Columbia pointed out that, as recently as 1972, provincial deputies were severely limited in their negotiations with their counterparts in Ottawa because of the inadequacy of the provincial data base. In this connection see also Simeon, Federal Provincial Diplomacy, 213 and esp. 224, 225.

21 Caims, Alan, “The Governments and Societies of Canadian Federalism,” this JOURNAL 10 (1977), 718Google Scholar. See also the work of Murray Edelman on the place of symbol, myth, and metaphor in politics, especially Politics as Symbolic Action (New York: Academic Press, 1971), 65–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Connolly, William E., The Terms of Political Discourse (Toronto: Heath, 1974), 1Google Scholar, where he says, “The language of politics is not a neutral medium… it is an institutionalized structure of meanings that channels political thought and action in certain directions”; and Graber, Doris A., Verbal Behaviour and Politics (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1976), esp. chaps. 7, 10Google Scholar.

22 A comparison of a British regional daily with, say, the Vancouver Sun is instructive in this respect. The quantity of news in all categories is much greater in the latter. In fact, if quantity is the sole criterion, the Vancouver paper or the Toronto Star provide more information than any British daily.

23 See Soderlund, Walter C., et al., “Regional and Linguistic Agenda-Setting in Canada: A Study of Newspaper Coverage of Issues Affecting Political Integration in 1976,” this JOURNAL 13(1980), 356, and, on 349, 350, a review of similar findings by othersGoogle Scholar.

24 See Porter, The Vertical Mosaic, 485, 486; and Wallace Clement, The Canadian Corporate Elite, 287. Porter points out about the 35 editors and publishers he studies, “like the ownership group which has hired them, they are exclusively British in origin. No doubt they have been assessed by the ownership group as safe as far as ideas and values are concerned.” Porter's data obviously reflects the situation in the 1960s.

25 See Nichols, M. E., The Story of the Canadian Press (Toronto: Ryerson, 1938)Google Scholar; Rutherford, Paul, The Making of the Canadian Media (Toronto: McGraw Hill, 1978), 51, 52Google Scholar; Cumming, Carman, “The Canadian Press: AForceforConsensus,” in Adam, C. S. (ed.), Journalism, Communication, and the Law (Scarborough: Prentice Hall, 1976), 86–103Google Scholar.

26 See Johnston, Richard, “Federal and Provincial Voting: Contemporary Patterns and Historical Evolution,” in Elkins, David and Simeon, Richard (eds.), Small Worlds: Provinces and Parties in Canadian Political Life (Toronto: Methuen, 1980), 141Google Scholar; and Westell, Anthony, The New Society (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1977) 65Google Scholar, where he says “It [the Globe and Mail] often sets the agenda not only for other papers but also for the politicians in Ottawa who look to it for guidance …. “

27 Meisel, John, “Political Culture and the Politics of Culture,” this JOURNAL 7 (1974), 604Google Scholar.

28 Lippman, Walter, Public Opinion (New York: Collier Macmillan, 1961, [first published in 1922]), 29.Google Scholar And see also Wallas, Graham, Human Nature in Politics (3rd ed.; London: Constable, 1920)Google Scholar.

29 A useful summary can be found in Curran, James and Seaton, Jean, Power Without Responsibility (Glasgow: Fontana 1981), chap. 14CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and in Curran, James, Gurevitch, Michael, and Woollacott, Janet (eds.), Mass Communications and Society (London: Open University, 1977), chap. 3.Google Scholar

30 Glasgow University Media Group, Bad News (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1976), xGoogle Scholar. For similar expressions of the same point of view, see Blumler, Jay G., “An Overview of Recent Research Into the Impact of Broadcasting in Democratic Politics,” in Clark, M. J. (ed.), Politics and the Media (London: Pergamon Press, 1979), 83Google Scholar; Fletcher, Fred, “News Coverage in Provincial Politics,” in MacDonald, D. G. (ed.), Government and Politics of Ontario (Toronto: Macmillan. 1975), 25Google Scholar; “Priorities of the Media vs. Priorities of the Public,” in UBC Alumni Chronicle (Autumn, 1980), 5ff.Google Scholar; Richard R. Fagen, Politics and Communication, 1; and Kraus, S. and David, D., The Effects of Mass Communication on Political Behavior (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1976), 225–26Google Scholar.

31 See the report in Monday Magazine, April 24–30, 1981; and fora popular account of publishers’ prerogative, Stewart, Walter (ed.), Newspapers: the Inside Story (Edmonton: Hurtig, 1980), 116ffGoogle Scholar. R. H. Wagenberg and Walter Soderlund found, in a 1974 study, that newspaper chain owners did not deliberately seek to foster a particular position during an election campaign which is hardly surprising. They also concluded, however, that “the press is an agency for maintaining the status quo in terms of the major outlines of liberal capitalist society … “(“The Effects of Chain Ownership on Editorial Coverage: The Case of the 1974 Canadian Federal Election.” this JOURNAL 9 [1976], 689)Google Scholar.

32 Bennet, Tony, et al., Media and Society (Milton Keynes: Open University, 1977), 11Google Scholar. See Also Tuchman, Gaye, Making News (New York: Free Press, 1978), 182ffGoogle Scholar.

33 Wilson, R. J., “Media Coverage of Canadian Election Campaigns: Horserace Journalism and the Meta-Campaign,” Journal of Canadian Studies 15 (1980–1981), 56–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and see Broh, C. Anthony, “Horse Race Journalism: Reporting the Polls in the 1976 Presidential Election,” Public Opinon Quarterly 44 (1980), 514–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

34 Charlebois, Carol, “The Structure of Federal Provincial News,” paper presented to the annual meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association, June 1977, 36Google Scholar.

35 For an elaboration of this theme, see Williams, Raymond, Television, Technology and Cultural Form (Glasgow: Fontana, 1974), 53ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

36 The extent to which the members of one provincial assembly are apprised of the issues in the current constitutional debate is nicely illustrated in the Debates of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia, December 11, 1980, 4333, and December 12, 1980, 4376Google Scholar.

37 The continuing saga of Douglas Heal, hired by the government of British Columbia to improve the government's image, is instructive in this regard. See the Victoria Times-Colonist, April 23, 1981, and subsequent references, April, May 1981, and the Vancouver Province, May 3, 1981.

38 Williams, Communication, 177.

39 The advent of the 24-hour continuous news broadcast is illustrative of this fact.

40 See Anthony Smith, “Mass Communications,” in Butler, David, Penniman, Howard R., and Ranney, Austin, Democracy at the Polls (Washington: AEI, 1980), 193Google Scholar; and Blumler, J. G. and McQuail, D., Television in Politics: Its Uses and Influences (London: FaberandFaber, 1969)Google Scholar; and Blumler, in Clark (ed.), Politics and the Media, 81–83.

41 Robinson, M., “American Political Legitimacy in an Era of Electronic Journalism,” in Cater, D. and Adler, R. (eds.), Television as a Social Force: New Approaches to TV Criticism (New York: Martin Robinson, 1976), 97–139Google Scholar; and see also Crozier, M. J., Huntington, S. P., and Watanuki, Joji (eds.), The Crisis of Democracy (New York: New York University Press, 1975), 33–37Google Scholar.

42 Elkins and Simeon (eds.), Small Worlds, chap. 2, esp. 68ff. Michael Crozier has suggested that in Europe the “ruling elite and the educated audience” serve as a screen t o ‘‘structure the problems that will finally reach the audience”. It seems likely that this is also a factor in Canada more than in the United States (Ibid., 36).

43 Williams, Raymond, “The Growth and Role of the Mass Media,” in Gardner, Carl (ed.), Media, Politics and Culture: A Socialist View (London: Macmillan Press, 1979), 15Google Scholar.

44 Ibid., 22, 23.

45 When Premier Davis travelled to Israel the CBC sent a television crew to cover the exercise. When Premier W. R. Bennett of British Columbia travelled to Japan, the corporation was unrepresented (Globe and Mail, January 29, 1980, 4). See also Nelles, Vivien and Armstrong, Christopher, “Does the CBC really care about National Unity?” Vancouver Province, September 8, 1972.Google Scholar See Also “Western Canada poorly reported by television,” Vancouver Sun, November 8, 1972.

46 See Scanlon, Joseph, “Canada Sees the World Through U.S. Eyes,” Canadian Forum 54 (1974–1975), 34–39Google Scholar; and see Power, Philip H. and Abel, Elie, “Third World vs. the Media,” New York Times Magazine, September 21, 1980, 116ffGoogle Scholar. George Woodcock organized a “Committee of 100” to protest against the cultural imperialism of the CBC in 1976. And see Woodcock's “If confederation is indeed doomed, blame those who perverted its meaning,” Maclean's, December 26, 1977, 6Google Scholar.

47 Godfrey and Parkhill (eds.), Gutenberg Two, 1.

48 Lowi, T., “The Political Impact of Information Technology,” in Forester, Tom (ed.), The Microelectronics Revolution (Oxford: Blackwell, 1980), 454Google Scholar.

49 See Madden, Videotex in Canada, 16; and the Report of the Consultative Committee on the Implications of Telecommunications for Canada, Telecommunications and Canada (Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services, 1979) which assumes a national as opposed to a provincial dominance, 62, 63. In his introduction to Gutenberg Two, David Godfrey urges a “process of reversal which ensures that the creative use of these inevitable changes wins out over the forces of self-interest, uniformity, and centralisation.” David MacDonald raises the question “Who will be supplying this information to Canada?” in the context of American cultural domination or, as he put it: “Canadian initiatives, Canadian hardware, foreign content” {The Institute, I).

50 Lowi, in Forester (ed.), The Microelectronics Revolution, 457.

51 Ibid. 457.

52 See Fagen, Politics and Communication, 6; and Williams, Television, Technology and Cultural Form, 120.