HOW RACE AFFECTS THE MEDIA’S COVERAGE OF CANDIDATES IN CANADIAN POLITICS by Erin Tolley A thesis submitted to the Department of Political Studies In conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Queen’s University Kingston, Ontario, Canada April, 2013 Copyright © Erin Tolley, 2013 Abstract This study examines how race affects the media’s coverage of candidates in Canadian politics. Situated in the literature on political communication, gendered mediation and race studies, it proposes a new theory of racial mediation, which posits that politics are covered in ways that reflect the assumption of whiteness as standard. Although candidate self-presentation does influence media portrayals, this alone does not account for differences in the framing of candidates’ policy interests, viability and socio-demographic characteristics. The project argues that candidate race has a significant but subtle impact on media portrayals. Articles from the print media coverage of the 2008 Canadian election are analyzed using a hand- coded content analysis, which is replicated through an innovative automated approach. The study finds that visible minority candidates’ coverage is more negative and less prominent than that of their White counterparts. It is less likely to focus on key electoral issues and much more likely to emphasize socio-demographic background. Visible minority candidates are held to a higher standard and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, they are portrayed as less viable and credible than their competitors. Gender can amplify these effects, with raced and gendered discourses characterizing the coverage of visible minority women. The media study is complemented by 40 elite interviews that probe candidates’ communication strategies, issue emphasis and self-presentation, as well as reporters’ negotiation of these elements in their construction of news stories. While there are visible minority candidates who emphasize elements of their ethnocultural heritage, my findings suggest that few rely only on racialized strategies, nor are White candidates immune from racialized appeals. Nonetheless, journalists struggle to adequately portray nuance and candidates’ multi-dimensionality. They ii employ familiar narratives and tropes, and generally only seize on racialized framing when it applies to visible minority candidates. Although the study does not provide a direct test of media effects on vote choice, it draws on existing literature to argue that because media coverage influences the ways that voters evaluate issues and develop schema for understanding the world around them, the portrayal of visible minority candidates has the potential to alter electoral opportunities and outcomes. As a result, racialized coverage and race continue to matter in Canadian politics. iii Acknowledgements When I first decided to leave my position in the federal government to pursue doctoral studies, one of my cubicle colleagues wryly remarked, “Academia, eh? Well, that’s certainly a lonely, lonely life.” Although this is true—the reading, writing and revisions largely occur while cloistered in one’s office—very little of what one does in graduate school is truly solitary. One’s work is in fact given life by others. I am particularly grateful to the parliamentarians, candidates, staffers and journalists who agreed to be interviewed for this project. They are not named, but their perspectives are voiced on the pages that follow. It is only because they were willing to share their experiences with me that I was even able to tell this story, and I feel honoured to have had the opportunity. I would also like to acknowledge the financial support provided by the Trudeau Foundation, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and Queen’s University. These resources are what made my research and, really, this entire adventure possible. Economic capital aside, I have benefitted enormously from the social capital offered to me by my advisors, Elizabeth Goodyear-Grant and Keith Banting. I contacted Elizabeth months before I’d even applied to Queen’s and she agreed to supervise my dissertation although wisely counseled that I “get accepted to the program first.” She has been a trusted advisor, cheerleader and friend. Keith happily came onboard, offering the long view and a healthy dose of skepticism about my project. Keith and Elizabeth are excellent scholars, and their tough but fair commentary helped me hone my arguments, improve conceptual weaknesses and find my academic voice. They did all of this at a time when both of their personal and professional lives were filled to the brim with other priorities, and I am forever indebted to them for that. At a recent conference, PG Forest, the Executive Director of the Trudeau Foundation, noted that the best mentors view their role in a manner similar to that of the Crown’s prerogative: to be consulted, to encourage and to warn. Keith and Elizabeth did all of this and more. Thank you as well to the members of my examination committee: Linda Trimble, Fiona Kay, Margaret Little and Jonathan Rose who asked insightful questions and made the final step of my PhD a valuable and enjoyable one. Allison Harell and Scott Matthews provided encouragement in the early stages of my work and taught me important lessons about research design and analysis. The administrative staff in the Department of Political Studies—especially Dianne Flint and Barb Murphy—shepherded me over various bureaucratic hurdles, while Janet Hiebert’s persuasive recruitment efforts were what convinced me to come to Queen’s in the first place. Yasmeen Abu-Laban, Abigail Bakan, Karen Bird, Jerome Black, Rita Dhamoon, Frances Henry, Stuart Soroka, Linda Trimble and Varun Uberoi offered useful advice on the construction and conceptualization of my project, while Marc André Bodet generously provided data on riding competitiveness. Thank you to Ian Brodie who helped me recruit several interviewees and to Farnaz Behrooz, Laura Carlson and Cory Leblanc who assisted with data collection and coding. Parts of my research were presented at the Bell Chair’s conference on Canadian Democracy at a Crossroads, the annual meetings of the Canadian Political Science Association, the European Consortium for Political Research and a workshop organized by Antoine Bilodeau at Concordia University. I am grateful for the feedback that I received from participants in all of these fora. In addition, a job talk at the University of Toronto in the Fall of 2011 provided me with a signal check and the confidence to keep going. iv My affiliations with Metropolis, the Public Policy and Municipalities project and the Welcoming Communities Initiative allowed me to pursue productive relationships with a number of researchers and policy practitioners, including Caroline Andrew, Meyer Burstein, Victoria Esses, Paul Spoonley, Bob Young and, especially, John Biles who has been a colleague and collaborator but most importantly a friend. From the first day I met him and he demanded a précis of my Master’s thesis, John has encouraged my scholarship and always been willing to argue discuss it. Through the Trudeau Foundation, I was introduced to a number of kindred spirits, including Amanda Clarke, Shauna Labman and Laura Madokoro, and I was fortunate to be matched with Daniel Lessard, an erstwhile CBC journalist turned novelist, who has generously shared his time, wisdom and contacts with me. He reminded me that writing—even the academic kind—should be interesting, although I was unable to inject the narrative arc (namely violence or a sex scene) that he suggested to spice up the methods chapter. When I showed up in Kingston for my first day of school in eight long years, my classmates graciously overlooked my penchant for business casual and helped ease me back into student life. One of the greatest gifts of this entire adventure has been the friendships and collaborations I have had the opportunity to forge as a result. Thank you especially to Randy Besco, Megan Gaucher, Rachael Johnstone, Edward Koning, Rémi Léger, Emmett Macfarlane, Matthew Mitchell, Mireille Paquet, Sara Pavan, Lucia Salazar, Chris Samuel, Beesan Sarrouh and Melanee Thomas who have shown an interest in my work, provided models of practice that I strive to emulate and happily raised a pint whenever the occasion warranted it. Growing up, there was never a shortage of newspapers, magazines or discussion in our house. My parents cultivated my interest in reading, writing and engaged citizenship, and this foundation underlies all that I have pursued since. They, along with my sisters, brother, their spouses and six awesome nephews have accepted me for the nerd that I am while nonetheless reminding me where I come from and should be going. My in-laws have welcomed this prairie interloper into their (crazy) Acadian family, and I have been the happy beneficiary of their seemingly boundless enthusiasm and support. My friends in Ottawa, Saskatchewan and beyond have offered needed respite and (probably unknowingly) strengthened my work by asking questions that forced me to consider what exactly my research means to Canadians outside the insular world of academia. Thank you to all of you. Mid-way through the writing of this dissertation, our little family grew by one. Although too young to understand exactly what Mom was up to at her desk, Raphael somehow instinctively knew that he needed to sleep through the night and reminded me that there is more to life than dissertation-writing and datasets (yes, really!) Raphael doesn’t see the world in black and white, but in full colour and helps me to do the same everyday. And finally, to René. In the first year of my PhD program, discussion in my field course on Gender and Politics focused on the gendered division of labour and women’s “double-day.” It was difficult for me to reconcile this with my own personal situation because, while I was away reading, writing and luxuriously soaking up bits of knowledge on whatever topic my heart desired, my husband was at home, cooking, caregiving and just generally keeping the joint running.