Crown attorney Meaghan Cunningham and Justice Maria Carroccia in a courtroom sketch in London, Ont., in late May.Alexandra Newbould/The Canadian Press
The Hockey Canada trial has generated international interest – and questions from Globe and Mail readers about the journalistic ethics guiding this paper’s coverage. Some readers have wondered about the amount of explicit detail included: Do such descriptions meet the Globe’s editorial standard? Why are they necessary?
Crime and court reporting is a core function of news organizations. It allows the public an up-close view of our justice system. Decisions regarding which cases to cover are guided by readers’ interest – news organizations that find their audiences spend time with crime and court stories tend to produce more of them – and the public’s right to be informed. “Details of history’s most high-profile court cases – from Ted Bundy, to OJ Simpson, to Donald Trump and Dominique Pelicot – were brought into the public domain thanks to the diligent and difficult work of court reporters,” according to an article in The Conversation, an online publication with newsrooms in 10 countries.
“The work of court reporters is crucial to maintaining ‘open justice.’ This concept, which dates back to a 1913 divorce hearing, established the principle that justice should be done in public …” the article continued. “The publicity puts pressure on witnesses to tell the truth, helps quell false rumours about cases, and can lead to other victims coming forward or new evidence being uncovered.”
The Globe’s Hockey Canada trial coverage is shaped through ongoing discussions among senior editors, national editor James Keller told me via e-mail. “Readers deserve to know about the evidence presented in the trial, and in this case some of that evidence is graphic, given the nature of the allegations. Our goal is to always present them sensitively and in context – the central question is always why it’s important for the case.”
One reader e-mailed to say they felt reporting on cross-examination of the complainant made E.M. appear that she was somehow responsible for or deserving of the alleged assault. However, it is the duty of the news media to report arguments from both sides as they are presented in court. “We also have a responsibility to accurately and fairly present the evidence from the Crown and especially the defence – including when that evidence is graphic,” James said.
But do news media provide more coverage than they need to? Nik Usher, then associate professor at George Washington University and currently an associate professor at the University of San Diego, told NPR in 2016 that “the news media has always overreported violent crime. This has been something that’s been pervasive even since the ’70s. You know, ‘if it bleeds it leads.’”
The trial of five former members of Canada’s 2018 world junior hockey team, who are accused of sexually assaulting a woman in a London, Ont., hotel room in 2018, has raised questions about how news organizations cover such cases. Robyn Doolittle answers reader questions with Standards Editor Sandra E. Martin. The accused players have all pleaded not guilty.
The Globe and Mail
The shift to 24-hour online news, and the competition for page views, has exacerbated this tendency, Dr. Usher continued. “You know you can get a reliable amount of web traffic if you post a crime story. Now, of course, this is sort of circular, right? If you keep posting crime stories and that keeps getting a reaction from people, you’ll post more crime stories.”
Since the Hockey Canada trial began on April 22, The Globe has published eight stories about the trial on page A1, and 24 elsewhere in print, including opinion pieces. That averages out to fewer than one a day.
Some news organizations, including the CBC, CTV News, Sportsnet and TSN, have preceded their stories with a content advisory such as: “Warning: This story contains graphic details and allegations of sexual assault.” Other news media, including The Globe and Mail, Toronto Star, London Free Press and the New York Times’ The Athletic, have not.
There is evidence that such warnings aren’t particularly helpful. “Advocates claim that warnings help people to emotionally prepare for or completely avoid distressing material,” wrote the authors of a paper published by the Association for Psychological Science. “Most studies … have concluded that trigger warnings have a trivial impact on emotional responses. Two studies found that warnings increase negative emotional reactions toward material.” The authors noted that only one study found that content warnings “reduce emotional reactions toward material.”
Some readers have also asked why articles on the Hockey Canada trial have been closed to commenting. Here, again, we see the role of the news media in our justice system. As The Globe’s published Community Guidelines point out, “comments by readers could breach a publication ban or otherwise reveal information that could put The Globe at risk. Comments are closed by default at the time the story is posted.”
Covering this trial has been especially challenging, said James. “The added layer for this trial has been the legal issues around the jury and the long list of things we were unable to report.” In general, journalists face fewer restrictions when reporting on cases decided by a judge alone, including opinion pieces. (My predecessor, Sylvia Stead, wrote about this in relation to the 2016 sexual-assault trial of former CBC host Jian Ghomeshi.) When covering jury trials, additional care must be taken to avoid publishing anything that might influence or prejudice the jury. For instance, journalists cannot share any information that was not presented in court; nor can they report on information protected by a publication ban.
“That changed when the jury was dismissed and the case switched to a judge-alone trial, which allowed us to report things that the jury and the public had yet to hear, but we continue to be vigilant to protect the identity of the complainant, E.M.”
When this trial was before a jury, a publication ban prohibited the media from reporting anything the accused had told Hockey Canada’s lawyers back in 2022, during the organization’s internal investigation of E.M.’s complaint.