By Willy Noiles
At what point does the public’s right to know cease? It’s a question I’ve been asking myself ever since a story appeared on the front page of one of Niagara, Ontario’s local daily newspapers detailing how the bank took over St. Catharines Mayor Brian McMullan’s home.
Brian McMullan, St. Catharines, Ontario mayor and chair of Canadian and U.S. cities around the Great Lakes advocating for the lakes, signs an agreement with Ontario Environment Minister and St. Catharines MPP to safeguard the lake waters in Quebec City a few weeks ago.
What point did publishing this story serve? Firstly, it was hardly ‘front page news’ according to the usual definition because the bank seized the property back in April and the story was running two-and-a-half months later. If it had been any other story about an event that took place two-and-a-half months ago, the reporter would’ve been lucky if it appeared on page four, if at all.
So why did the story warrant front page? One almost wonders if it was done to publicly embarrass the mayor.
Secondly, and more importantly, how is the public interest served by printing the story at all? How often does the newspaper in question, the St. Catharines Standard—or any of the other newspapers in Niagara or any other region for that matter—publish stories about other people who’ve had their homes taken over by the bank? Even in the United States where home foreclosures have become a regular occurrence, I don’t recall reading in their newspapers about how “James Jones, of St. Petersburg, Fl,” lost his home to the Bank of First America after he was unable to keep up with mortgage payments. So if we don’t report on this kind of story when it happens to “James Jones,” why is it being reported on when it happens to St. Catharines’ mayor? One can almost draw their own conclusion about this apparent double standard.
But, let’s for the sake of argument pretend the media does regularly report on how “James Jones” or “Jane Doe” had their homes foreclosed by the banks. How do you think you’d feel if the bank took over the sale of your home and then the local newspaper decided to do a front page story on it shortly after? To say you’d feel “embarrassed” would probably be an understatement. Now imagine how you’d feel if you were the political leader of your town or city.
And for what? Is this affecting McMullan’s job performance? Having covered regional council regularly since 1998, one tends to get a pretty good read on how a councillor is performing. But if it hadn’t been for this front-page story, I never would‘ve guessed the Mayor was dealing with this problem in his private life. It certainly hasn’t stopped him from representing the city’s interests or standing up for what he believes in around the horseshoe at the region.
The article in question poses one question: “When asked if he was concerned citizens might mix his personal financial situation with the city’s business, McMullan said he didn’t believe that would be the case.” Talk about searching for justification for the story. Even if the Mayor had declared personal bankruptcy, I wouldn’t equate it with his job.
It’s not like the city gives the mayor a personal credit card they can use to charge whatever they think they need to perform the job. If they do need to purchase something, it’s paid for out of their own pocket and they submit the receipt(s) for reimbursement. As McMullan acknowledges, all municipalities are heavily regulated and we wouldn’t expect anything different.
Neither does the mayor make decisions about where the city should purchase from or contract or invest with on their own. The mayor of a municipality is not this all-powerful individual; they’re the head of council but council makes all decisions of magnitude with the mayor being only one of 13. Again, I don’t think we’d expect anything different.
In my nearly two decades of reporting for various Niagara newspapers, I’ve never publicly criticized the competition. This wasn’t a lesson learned in journalism school. Rather it was one of the lessons picked up on my first real job (this excludes a work placement at the Standard) where I learned what not to do from what my editor did. But this is also the first time in my nearly two decades where a local politician’s personal life was splashed all over the front page for no discernable reason.
If the Mayor had been charged with something or something was really starting to affect his job performance, I wouldn’t be questioning the decision to publish the story. But no crime has occurred and it’s not affecting his job performance. Back in the late 1990s, I remember being asked if I’d like to tackle a piece on how a MPP had had an affair. Even though the politician in question had portrayed themselves as a “family man” with “family values,” I argued against our paper doing anything on it because I could see it as being the thin edge of the wedge. Wiser heads prevailed and no media outlet picked up the story even though they most probably all knew about it.
In the U.S., politicians’ private lives are often the subject of media coverage. Do we really want to follow the example of our neighbours to the south?
What a politician does or experiences in their private life shouldn’t be fodder for news stories unless they’ve been charged with something or it could affect their job performance. But now that a media outlet has decided to report on a private matter in this Mayor’s personal life, what will be next?
Willy Noiles is a Niagara native who has contributed news and commentary to numerous publications in the region.
Niagara At Large invites our readers to share views on this post. A reminder that NAL only posts comments from individuals who also share their first and last names.)
Niagara At Large 
A more appropriate front page article would deal with the issue of Canadian banks using tax havens so they can reap the benefits from society without paying for them. Another appropriate front page article would be the issue of tax-payer funded bank bailouts. But of course corporate media doesn’t like those thorny issues.
LikeLike
Absolutely, I agree with you … I did have a discussion with somebody who actually believed it mattered if he lost his house, thinking this somehow reflects on his ability to manage the city. I say that nobody knows exactly what happened to lead to this situation, as I have seen in my lifetime many case scenarios where a home is lost to the bank (or surrendered to the bank) for reasons outside of personal financial mismanagement. I think we will be seeing a lot more of these things in the near future as our economy continues to collapse into itself and in some cases, people cannot afford to pay the payments, and in other cases — cannot sell the property — or even give it away.
LikeLike
This whole issue is getting into a very contentious area.
The decline of journalism can be documented very easily over the past 50 years or so. Some of the decline is due indirectly to the growth of television as the primary means for most people to receive the news. By its very nature, television news is governed by what pictures/video is available. The item with the best visuals becomes the lead item, not the most important item.
The advent of “tabloid” journalism, especially the British tabloids and the “supermarket” tabloids has hastened the decline of print journalism.
My personal journalism background was in radio. That form of journalism has almost completely disappeared!.
The item described above can perhaps be considered news in today’s society, but I really question whether it should be.
Many years ago, I worked in a radio station where much of the local news was based on what happened at the local courthouse – who was fined for impaired driving etc. When I switched to another station in the same area, the station owner took a different view and said “we are not part of the judicial system” and didn’t cover the day-to-day court stuff. As a matter of fact, when the local school board chair was arrested for shoplifting, neither the local radio station or the local newspaper carried items about it. The person was a well-respected member of the community who also happened to have a psychiatric condition that prompted the incidents (there were several).
The fact that the bank foreclosed on the mayor’s home is not really news in the broader sense. Banks are carrying out foreclosure activities on a continuing basis, especially in today’s hard economic times.
I tend to ramble a bit in these commentaries … but I guess one of the things that bothers me the most about the sorry mess that is journalism today is the fact that so much attention is being paid to incidents or situations that really have no bearing on the majority of people. Look at all the attention being paid to the Tom Cruise/Katie Holmes situation. It is beyond ridiculous.
Journalists should be focusing on stories and issues that matter to a large number of people. They should not be catering to prurient interests.
The item about the mayor was just that – catering to prurient interests. The question is why? Is the newspaper unhappy with the mayor? Does the newspaper want to see the mayor defeated in the next election. Does the newspaper have another person they would prefer to see as mayor? Is the newspaper perhaps using its influence to try to lead voters to a certain conclusion unfairly?
I leave it to the readers and residents of St. Catharines to make that determination.
LikeLike
Willyg,
I disagree with you on this one despite the fact that I may come to the same conclusion as you. Public figures are just that. We not only have a right to know about significant events in our elected officials lives, I believe the press has an obligation to print it. Now I think the fact that the other paper took so long does reek of opportunism.
The challenge I have is that the culture you have described means the news people in this town play favorites. “I won’t release on this guy but they can’t wait to get some dirt on that guy”. It would also appear news people stock pile stories for release under circumstances which only they know the trigger. I have to say the whole thing makes me crave the free press of the American revolution.
If you don’t believe that the way someone manages their personal finances and relationships is relevant to the electorate I ask you what you think is relevant. So despite the fact that I have come to the same conclusion as you, I still believe the information, although embarrassing, should be out there. I also believe the mayor probably feels a sense of relief that he no longer has it hanging over his head.
LikeLike
I agree totally Willy! However, and except for our “free” local papers and the internet newspapers, the St. Catharines Standard’s owners Sun Media, dominate the regional scene and I believe they have withdrawn from the Press Council so the normal ‘rules of the Canadian press trade’ don’t seem to apply here. I do think though that most readers will see that common decency should prevent intrusions into the Mayor’s private life.
LikeLike
I was also surprised to see this on the front page. On the positive side, maybe the house will sell, now that more people know about it being on the market.
LikeLike
So if the story wasn’t published and at a later date there is an accusation of malfeasance then everybody would scream cover-up. The Mayor made a colossal mistake in not issuing a statement about his plight, then managing the fallout. This is Public Relations 101
LikeLike
Dear Willy Noiles,
I respectfully disagree with your premise that what a person does in their private life has no bearing on what that person does in their public life.
Are you saying that a person’s character can be left outside the office or workplace door like a pair of soiled shoes?
Why would you say that a mayor’s financial prowess or non-prowess is of little or no interest to the general public?
It is proper to inform the public in this case because in this case it is our Mayor. It’s not a matter of kicking the Mayor when the Mayor has personal financial troubles. It is a matter of confidence in the Mayor’s ability to lead our city officials and councillors in sound fiscal matters.
I’m not interested in the Mayor’s private life however I expect to be informed about any issue that has the potential to affect me or the community that I live in.
Besides, isn’t this the same Mayor and Regional councillor making and voting on expensive financial decisions? Isn’t this the same Mayor, Regional Councillor and President of the ‘Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Initiative’ who now says the city’s recent heavy spending means that we can no longer afford to fully fund our infrastructure needs, including the cost of separating the storm sewer from the sanitary sewers which would keep sewage from entering our Great Lakes?
Further, you have no idea whether the Mayor’s problems do or do not affect his job performance and Mr. Noiles, if this is the first time in nearly two decades that you noticed a politician’s name splashed all over the front page because the politician had an affair but claimed to be a “family man” with “family values” or any other dubious conduct then you must have stopped reading about twenty years ago.
LikeLike
Dog days of summerThe Standard must be desperate for news any news the average family does not care about the woes of a Mayor, they might even revel in it, as everybody else, are concerned with their own survival.
LikeLike
My issue is we do not know the facts behind the case. We do not know how this happened. I have met many people with similar issues happening to them, and they did not relate to financial mismanagement at all. Should he be open about it? Perhaps. But I don’t know to what extent there is a legal responsibility for him to disclose matters like this, especially when they do not legally impact on his right to continue to occupy his office. I heard from others trying to cite that he was going bankrupt. Bankruptcy is a legal term, and if this were true, he would not be legally permitted to hold office (or sit on any board of directors), so I highly doubt this is an issue in this case. Bankruptcy is a public position and information on whether or not people are bankrupt or near it can easily be accessed, and there is nobody under this name that is near or assigned into bankruptcy. I imagine there may be a story behind all of this, but I would suggest people not draw conclusions until the actual facts are known.
I would only be concerned if there were criminal charges filed against him in a relevant area that can impact on his freedom, for example, or his legal culpability, or if he’s been found in breach of the Municipal Act. To date, nobody is saying any of the above is the case, so I just assume there is no issue with respect to his continued capacity to serve in this role (on this basis alone with the limited information provided).
LikeLike