An RCMP epaulette in Edmonton in February, 2025.JASON FRANSON/The Canadian Press
Journalism is sometimes called the first draft of history. The job is straightforward: talk to people, figure out as best as possible what is happening, inform the public. For the RCMP in Saskatchewan, that’s a problem.
The head of the Mounties’ media relations operation in Saskatchewan sent a note to its journalism contacts in the province last week, warning that the act of journalism is perilous. Specifically, interviewing witnesses and publishing what these people say can be dangerous. Helpfully, the Mounties add, media unsure how to do their jobs can contact the police for advice.
Of course, the RCMP would challenge that framing. They say they are trying to protect public safety and the judicial process. And there can be legitimate concerns about how information gets relayed. But the aggressive approach they are wielding in Saskatchewan is wrong.
It suggests that even the police whose job it is to deal with the media don’t understand how the media works. Worse, they don’t seem to appreciate the vital role played by media.
Halifax mayor’s office facing RCMP investigation over recent audit
When events are unfolding people want to find out what is happening. For their own safety, they may need to know what is happening. If journalists didn’t provide information, rumours and innuendo would fill the vacuum.
Statements from official sources can be delayed, or lack crucial details.
During the 2020 mass shooting that began in Portapique, Nova Scotia, the RCMP in that province took 12 hours to convey to the public eyewitness accounts that the suspect was disguised as a police officer. According to a report of the Mass Casualty Commission looking into the incident, “the RCMP public communication, sent by Twitter during the evening of April 18, seriously understated the threat presented by the perpetrator and the associated risks to the public.”
Media coverage is also a crucial part of accountability. It offers an independent telling of events that may stand in contrast to the official account.
The RCMP note, signed by Superintendent Amber Clark, says that it was prompted by the recent shooting of two Mounties in Melville, Sask. But it says that police concerns predate that incident.
Saskatchewan man charged over shooting that injured two RCMP officers
The note raises three points: publishing witness accounts can undermine investigations and court cases, releasing the location of police officers during critical incidents can affect their safety and the way stories are covered can re-victimize victims of crime. Two of these points are uncontroversial.
There’s no doubt that care must be taken when reporting on crimes so as not to traumatize victims and their families. That is why responsible media outlets make a point of approaching these stories sensitively.
It’s also true that police can be put at risk if people broadcast their location in real time during an operation. And there was an account on X that was doing that during the Melville incident. But that account was not operated by the media, making criticism of the behaviour an odd fit for this note.
Finally, the note warns against publishing witness accounts. To reiterate, this is at the core of journalism. This is what reporters do.
The problem, according to police, is that people can have their memories influenced by news coverage they have seen. Coverage can also affect jury pools, police say. And it can undermine police work if a piece of information investigators want to keep under wraps, as a way of validating witness or suspect statements, is made public.
“We aspire to share information as quick as we can, but we also have a responsibility to keep everyone safe and to get it right,” Superintendent Clark wrote.
The not-so-subtle implication is that media that go against the police instructions here are putting the public at risk. That is a heavy-handed way to try to secure co-operation. While it might be more convenient for police if the media report only what the police would like the public to know, that is stenography rather than journalism.
The RCMP in Saskatchewan close their note by floating the possibility of a sit-down with media to “talk generally about our approach … to build a mutual understanding.” However, it’s hard to find common ground when the police begin with the premise that gathering and reporting facts is harmful.
Journalism, as with all first drafts, is not perfect. But first-hand accounts of what has happened during a major news event are of crucial public interest.