Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2021

The Current Transcript for April 23, 2021

Host: Matt Galloway

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

[Music: Theme]

SOUNDCLIP

So what will happen in the coming weeks? I'm really afraid this time that it's got out of control.

MATT GALLOWAY: India's health care system is cracking under the strain of covid-19 with hundreds of thousands of new cases each day in the country, oxygen in short supply and new variants of the virus emerging. The doctors are overwhelmed. In a moment, whether the decision to temporarily ban direct flights from India and Pakistan will prevent the spread of variants here. We'll also talk in 30 minutes about what's actually happening in India. We'll head there. And you also hear how Canadian doctors are trying to help. Also this morning, Alan Rusbridger has spent decades as a journalist, most recently as the editor of the British newspaper, The Guardian, and at a time when the truth itself seems under threat, he's worried.

SOUNDCLIP

I really want my children and people who are younger than them to find the value of journalism and to believe in it, because I think journalists are as essential as bees. You know, I don't think we do need people who we can trust.

MG: In an hour. He's here to talk about fake news media literacy and the future of journalism. We start, though, with a third wave and a tighter border. Good morning. I'm Matt Galloway and this is The Current.

[Music: Theme]

Bill Blair says Canada's borders have 'layers of protection.' An expert warns those layers have 'many holes'

Guests: Billy Blair, Kelley Lee

MG: Canada's premiers are shutting it down, whether it's lockdowns, curfews, even closing provincial borders, drastic measures are rolling out across this country.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: We'll be putting new border signs along the Alberta border, reminding travellers coming from outside the province that unless they're coming for essential business, they should not be here.

VOICE 2: We have decided to restrict non-essential travel into Nova Scotia.

VOICE 3: So we have some of the strictest borders in the country. We will try to tighten them up a little bit more. And by doing so, it is our hope to limit the importation of the virus to our province.

VOICE 4: We'll be limiting access to border crossings between Ontario and the provinces of Manitoba and Quebec. And we're calling on the federal government to immediately tighten up our international borders.

MG: Yesterday, the federal government took action on those international borders. Direct flights from India and Pakistan will be stopped for 30 days. Bill Blair is the minister of public safety. Minister, good morning.

BILL BLAIR: Good morning.

MG: There have been calls for bans on flights from countries dealing with outbreaks for some time. Why has it taken so long for your government to act on this?

BILL BLAIR: You know, first of all, we have used the notice to airmen in the past. And you may recall back in December when the NuvaRing emerged in the United Kingdom, we were amongst the first countries in the world to take action to stop all flights from United Kingdom. And then we followed up with very, very strong measures that apply to all countries with respect to the requirement of a preboarding test, negative test and additional measures. Now, I think from the outset we've demonstrated that we're quite prepared to add additional layers of protection when required and we have amongst the strongest border measures in the world. Earlier this week, the prime minister advised Canadians that we would be taking additional measures in response to the variants that were emerging in hotspots, particularly in India. And of course, even on Wednesday, I spoke to national news and said we would within 24 hours be taking action. We consulted with the public health agency. We looked at the data. We took the steps that were announced.

MG: But there have been flights coming into Toronto from Delhi daily multiple times a week into Vancouver. We know there have been cases on these flights recently, 121 international flights had passengers with covid-19 on them. People have been calling for this for some time. Why has it taken so long for the government to act on this?

BILL BLAIR: Yeah, first of all, the reason we have that is because we [unintelligible]. And as I said, we actually imposed restrictions over a year ago. We stopped all non-essential international travel coming into Canada, booked by both land and air, and one of the few countries in the world that has taken that very strong measure to to stop the spread of covid coming into our country through international travel. But we also we have required just the beginning of the year pre-arrival testing so that people have to have produced a negative test. When people arrive, they're also been tested again, they're put into a 14 day quarantine if they arrive by air from international destinations, which is where the hotspots are located. We also put them in government assisted accommodation for three days. We have put some measures in place, but the variants that have emerged in India most recently are very, very concerning. And so we've taken a step we've taken before to do two things. And I think they're both really important. First of all, we stopped the all direct flights from India, but we also know that people take connecting flights and so we've added additional measures so that we can break that connecting travel. So, for example, if someone was to fly from India to Toronto through the United Kingdom, through Heathrow Airport, under normal circumstances, they'd be able to do what's called an airside transfer. So they don't leave the airport, they don't land in the U.K. They just sort of cross the hall, get on a different plane and continue on to travel to Canada. We're requiring that they break the travel that they actually land in the United Kingdom. They'll have to comply with all of the restrictions and provisions to keep themselves in place. They'll have to obtain a negative test in the United Kingdom before being able to continue their travel on to Canada. And that basically closes the loopholes of direct flights and connecting flights to stop travellers from India.

MG: India, if you say that we have some of the tightest restrictions in the world, I mean, that's not true. I mean, Hong Kong, you have a three week hotel quarantine. It's a mandatory quarantine. In Australia. They have very strict quarantines. In Taiwan, for example, you have your cell phone data tracked so they know where you are. If we have these restrictions, clearly they aren't tight enough because the variants are here. I mean, the very first found in India is here. The variant found first in Brazil is here. So would you admit that the restrictions have not been tight enough?

BILL BLAIR: Well, Matt, our restrictions really are composed of several layers of protection. And yes, we have we stopped all non-essential travel from every country in the world, and very few countries have done that. We've used a notice to airmen before to restrict flights from certain hotspot countries. We do require pre-board testing. We test again when they arrive. We order every traveller into a 14 day quarantine.

MG: And yet the variants are here.

BILL BLAIR: And yes, the variants have travelled around the world into every country and we have seen that. And and we have also demonstrated, I think, that very clearly that we're willing to add additional layers of protection when it's required. And so we've done that. The prime minister on Tuesday advised Canadians that we'd be taking additional measures. We did then consulted, as we're supposed to do with the public health agency. We looked at the data and yes, there has been a very concerning number of people who have been arriving from on flights from India. And we get about four a day; two into Vancouver and two into Toronto. That's the average direct flights from into Canada each day. We looked at the data coming from those flights and the data indicated that there was a preponderance of all of the infections that come in. Matt, I also want to be clear, the measures have been working. Less than two percent of cases in Canada are travel related. So the other 98 percent are directly related to what we call community transmission.

MG: And the community transmission of those variants, though, I mean, that's why we have this this third wave that's rippling through many communities.

BILL BLAIR: Well, it's community transmission of Colvert, including the variants. And that's why the public health measures that's provinces and public health, regional public health agencies have put in place are so important. And Canadians need to continue to be respectful and adhere to those public health guidelines in order to slow the spread, of course. But we continue the important work of acquiring and supply and administering vaccines across this country. It's really important that people follow those guidelines.

MG: Patrick Brown is the mayor of Brampton, Ontario. That is where the covid positivity rate is over 22 percent. Take a listen to what he says is needed in his community.

BILL BLAIR: It's a step in the right direction, but I would hope that it was broader. If you look at the countries that have responded most effectively to the pandemic, they secured their borders. You look at Israel or New Zealand, they didn't hesitate to close airports. And, you know, I am glad that we have more restrictions on India and Pakistan, where we have a double mutated variant that is out of control, but all other travel is still open. You know, we have the variant moving quickly in British Columbia and there are numerous flights in every day from British Columbia. It doesn't stop people that will go to multiple destinations. And it still leaves many avenues in which these variants can enter the country. So I'm concerned and I'm concerned because of the advice of our physicians. And until recent it was our medical officer of health who told the regional council that he's worried that the lax restrictions at Pearson Airport puts our community at risk.

MG: Patrick Brown has said, close the airport. And that means close the airport to anything but essentially cargo and essential flights coming in and out. Would your government consider that?

BILL BLAIR: At the present time, no, Matt. And quite frankly, I think you've got to recognise we're not an island for 13000 miles out in the middle of the Pacific. We're a country that's first of all, our economies and our societies are fully integrated with our neighbours to the south. You know, putting food on the on the shelves and getting essential workers to do essential work requires that we have had to have very strong measures that facilitates the movement of goods and people across our borders. And so we've managed that. And I would invite Mayor Brown to actually come in and look at the measures that are in place at our airports. You know, I think it's important that people have an informed understanding of all of the extraordinary measures that are put in place. Our Border Service officers, the Public Health Agency of Canada and law enforcement are present at the borders. They are administering very strong restrictions. Everybody must arrive with a negative test. Everybody is tested again upon arrival. We then order them into quarantine. We accommodate them for three days in order to facilitate the beginning of that quarantine period. But they have to continue it. We test them again at the end of 10 days. You know, we've imposed very strong measures. And I would point out again to Mayor Brown, it's a very, very small percentage of- and certainly, yes, some variance come from from different countries. And there's a number of different ways in which that's transmitted. But it's a very small percentage of the cases in Canada are related to travel. And that's why it's so important that in places like France- and right across the country, Canadians adhere to those public health guidelines that regional health authorities take the appropriate measures to take the concrete measures to slow down the spread of this virus in Canada. And we're doing a lot, a great deal of work. And when we've demonstrated we're willing to do more when necessary.

MG: What about the issue of enforcement? I mean, we hear of hundreds of travellers getting around the restrictions at land borders and then boasting about it, saying that they flew to Buffalo, they walked across a bridge or drove across the bridge and then continued on, did not get involved in any sort of quarantine on the other side and said that they would quarantine at home, but also felt that they didn't really need to take the steps that the government has put into place. What more can your government do to enforce the rules that you've put in place, particularly at land borders.

BILL BLAIR: Yeah, first of all, let me let me tell you, we actually track the complaints pretty closely. 99.6 percent of Canadians are complying with all of the requirements that we impose upon them for the pre-arrival negative test and they enter into quarantine to do so responsibly and respectful to their fellow citizens. There have always been scofflaws in this country and people who selfishly choose to ignore the rules. You know, if someone crosses that land border, they're still ordered into quarantine. They're still required to provide the test. They're still subject to being tested upon arrival. All of those measures are in place and Canadians are, in the main, overwhelmingly compliant. There are some people that break the law and we have a recourse for that. And that's the responsibility. The police have jurisdiction. We've worked very closely with the RCMP, but also with the police and people, for example, in Toronto in order to enforce the quarantine orders. And we follow up with people when we send them home for quarantine, you know, they're contacted again. They're random checks at their house and there are enforcement measures in place. But, you know, it's unfortunate that some selfish people will choose to break the law and we have a recourse for that. We enforce the law and the law has significant consequences for those who break the law.

MG: And yet people feel as though the consequences aren't strict enough and so they're willing to to bend the rules.

BILL BLAIR: No, no, listen, we have laws about a lot of things. [Cutting] The level of compliance in Canada amongst Canadians is, I think, demonstrates that the overwhelming majority of people are respectful of those rules. And for those selfish individuals who choose not to obey the law and obey the rules, they're putting themselves, they're putting their families and they're putting their community at risk. And that really does need to be consequences.

MG: Mr. Blair, we'll leave it there. It's good to speak with you. Thank you very much.

BILL BLAIR: Thanks very much, Matt.

MG: Bill Blair is Canada's minister of public safety. Kelley Lee is the Canada Research Chair in Global Health Governance at Simon Fraser University. She's in Burnaby, British Columbia, and has been listening in. Kelley Lee, good morning to you.

KELLEY LEE: Good morning, Matt.

MG: How effective will the ban announced yesterday in terms of direct flights from India and Pakistan be in stopping further variants from coming to this country?

KELLEY LEE: Well, we've been studying this for over a year, and I would say that, you know, we need a comprehensive approach. So this is a reaction to what is another variant that seems to be of interest, potentially of concern. And what we've learnt from looking at other countries and we've heard about this just now, is that if you are preventative, if you are pre-emptive in those risks, then that means that you get on top of them before they emerge. So this is a reaction. You're putting in something that already the variant is in the country and you're sort of acting too late by that point. So we need a more comprehensive approach, one that is really screening every traveller and testing and quarantining them regardless of where they come from. So targeting hot spots as we're calling them, it's not the effective way to go.

MG: You heard the minister say that we already have some of the toughest restrictions in the world when it comes to testing and quarantining for that. What do you make of that?

KELLEY LEE: Well, our researchers looking at all countries around the world, as I say, and there is now an emerging gold standard on what package of measures are needed and when they need to be applied. And this combination is pre-border at the border and within the border measures. And as I say, you need to do this early on and you need to do it continually. So not not reacting, but preventing. So we've talked about, you know, Australia, New Zealand and North South Korea. But there's also countries like China and Vietnam have done this kind of gold standard practise. So on this basis, what we have in Canada, it is better than it was because we had, you know, quite, quite loose measures. But it still really falls short of that gold standard. We have a long list of exemptions. We have some loopholes to close. We have quarantine measures that need to be more strictly enforced. And we have data which is actually partial and it doesn't provide us with timely and detailed risk assessment. So I'd say maybe Canada is like a bronze medal standard, possibly.

MG: We know that the variants are already here. British Columbia yesterday confirmed dozens of cases of the so-called double mutant covid-19 variant that was first seen in India. What do we know just briefly about this variant?

KELLEY LEE: Yes, well, it's a variant of interest up to this point, and I think it arrived in B.C. somewhere around early April, and there's now, I believe, 39 cases have been identified. It is turning into a variant of concern, potentially because of what's unfolding. And it is this double mutation and it seems to be highly transmissible and possibly, you know, causing higher rates of death. So it is one of many variants that are people are watching. And I think the key point is that we need to expect variants to keep emerging and we need to be anticipating that, you know, they're going to keep coming into the country if we continue to have travellers coming in that are not properly screened, tested and quarantined.

MG: So Bill Blair's point, though, I mean, we're not an island, you know, 3000 or 13000 kilometres out in the middle of the ocean. I mean, can you truly protect the borders in such a way that would ensure that those variants don't make their way into Canada?

KELLEY LEE: Yeah, and I mean, he's right in that it's very difficult to stop passengers coming in or arrivals coming in with variants with the virus. But what you can do is make sure that you test everyone. And there are many exemptions to this at the moment. So not everyone is actually tested and not everyone is quarantining. So make sure that you identify every case and that you quarantine them. And that's the way you do it. What you're doing is stopping the the variant from getting into the community and that will be a much better way. And so, you know, what we have right now is, yes, a layered approach, but those layers aren't stitched together. There are many holes in the system whereby there exemptions and so on, which obviously is not working because we have so much variance in this country.

MG: Who gets an exemption.

KELLEY LEE: So there's a long list if you go on to the government website, people that are exempt from the pre-tests, for example, are children under four, which is understandable, people who are transiting through Canada, people in medical and health care treatment coming to Canada, essential workers. And that includes government officials, law enforcement officers, crew members, armed forces and so on. There are people deemed of national interest. You know, I could go on. There's there's a whole list of those each. There's also quarantine exemptions. If you're a student coming in, you need not go into the three day hotel quarantine. You can quarantine with your university or your college depending on if they have facilities there. You know, you go out, there's so many- it's very complicated. If you're trying to travel to Canada, you've got to go through pages and pages and scroll through a website to try to figure out what you need to do. And that really shouldn't be. It should be really a blanket set of measures that very few people should be exempt. And and as we learn more about vaccination, you know, we may be able to loosen some of those measures. But really, there's too many exemptions. And that way people are still coming in and bringing variants into the country.

MG: I guess just finally, in the last couple of minutes that we have now that the variants are here, we see provincial governments looking at tightening their borders and looking at some border restrictions around interprovincial travel. Is that what needs to be done to stop the further spread of these variants?

KELLEY LEE: We know that covid-19, the virus that causes covid-19, is spread by local, national, international travel. Travel is just deeply implicated with with the spread of the of the virus. So unfortunately, because our international borders aren't secure, what happens is the risk is downloaded to the provinces. So the provinces are facing the situation because we haven't managed to get the international borders right. So if you look at countries we've talked about, they're able to open up inside like a castle with an outer wall because they've got that right. So our inner wall is our provinces and so they don't get it right. Then what happens is the viruses are at our doorstep and then people have to deal with it themselves.

MG: So we would you would support them. More interprovincial restrictions,

MG: unfortunately, this time, yes. Because we don't want the variants to spread around the country. We don't want Canada to be another whisler. We have three variants already that we're battling and it sounds like we've got a fourth front opening up. So it is the time, unfortunately. And I you know, this is a real hardship for people, but people just need to stop moving. And if it's not a voluntary thing, it has to be a a public health order then at this time, I think it's really important.

MG: Kelley Lee, good to speak with you again. Thank you very much.

KELLEY LEE: Thank you, Matt.

MG: Kelley Lee, Canada research chair in Global Health Governance at Simon Fraser University and a researcher with the Pandemic's and Borders Research project. Your thoughts on this. Welcome. Of course, we're in the midst of this in many parts of the country. And you can email us thecurrent@cbc.ca. Your CBC News is next. And then.

SOUNDCLIP

The volume is humongous. It is just like a tsunami. Or you can see it was a tsunami.

MG: As we've been hearing, India is in the midst of a deadly second wave and covid cases are setting records. And the health care system has reached a real breaking point. We'll hear from those on the front line in India in about six minutes time. We'll also talk about what Canadian doctors are doing to try and help colleagues in that country. I'm Matt Galloway you're listening to The Current CBC Radio One.

Doctors weigh up the COVID-19 crisis on the subcontinent

Guests: Dr. Aqsa Shaikh, Dr. Tarun Bhatnagar, Ananya Tina Banerjee

MG: Good morning, I'm Matt Galloway, and you're listening to The Current.

[Music: Theme]

MG: Still to come, the former editor of The Guardian newspaper in the U.K., Alan Rusbridger, will be here. His new book explores the ever blurring line between fact and fiction in the media. That's coming up in 30 minutes. But first, India's battle against a deadly second wave.

[Music: Theme]

VOICE 1: The situation that you see here is really devastating because the number of deaths that you see and the ones that are reported are completely contrary. We were not prepared. As a country, we were not prepared. And it's really sad to see my mother go with her because she was just 59 and she recently retired and wanted to spend some quality time with us. But all I could feel lying down on- [starts crying].

MG: India is in the throes of a deadly second wave of covid-19. With over 330000 new cases reported today, the country said a world wide record for the second day in a row, the death toll has been exacerbated by shortages of oxygen and ventilators. In some hospitals, patients are two to a bed, others dying in parking lots waiting to get in. Dr. Aqsa Shaikh is the head of the vaccine programme at New Delhi's Jamia Hamdard Hospital, and Dr. Tarun Bhatnagar is an epidemiologist at the Indian Council of Medical Researchers National Institute of Epidemiology. He joins us from Chenna.i Doctors, hello to you both.

DR. AQSA SHAIKH: Hi.

DR. TARUN BHATNAGAR: Hi, Matt.

MG: Dr. Shaikh. What is it like inside your hospital right now?

DR. AQSA SHAIKH: In untidily, the covid second wave is rampaging very widely and the situation is very grim. Nothing that we have seen before ever in our medical lives so far. Most of the hospital beds are full to the capacity. As you correctly mentioned, now we have to even put sometimes more hospital beds and more patients, sometimes on a single bed. And when it comes to the ICU beds and ventilators, we have actually none. And most importantly, even when we have the beds available, we do not have sufficient oxygen to provide to our patients, which is the basic minimum that we can do at this moment. So it's a very terrible situation, you know, with people gasping on the streets and dying on the streets and the funeral fires burning through the night. So it's really very, very scary situation right now, especially in Delhi.

MG: You said that it's rampaging. What is that? I mean, I've heard extraordinary numbers in terms of a test positivity rate. What is it in Delhi?

DR. AQSA SHAIKH: You know, just to give an example in my own institute that this positivity rate is today somewhere between 60 to 70 percent, which means that two thirds of the samples that we're testing a positive and these are only the people who are coming out to get tested, a lot of people in home isolation who have all the symptoms of it and the reason that they're probably not coming out to get tested.

MG: Dr. Bhatnagar, what are you seeing elsewhere in the country? Does that sound familiar in terms of the reports from other parts of India?

DR. TARUN BHATNAGAR: Yeah, I think in general, if you see the sort of rampant across all the states in the country, although eighty one percent of the new cases are being reported only from eight states, all of these eight states are actually covering the western part of the India. So not as well as the central eastern part of this country. So in general, I think it's sort of similar across all the states, except for some smaller reports from the northeastern parts of India and the very north of India, where the reports are slightly lower than the rest of the country.

MG: Who is most vulnerable to this second wave of covid talked about in the car?

DR. TARUN BHATNAGAR: We are definitely seeing the usual pattern of the older people and people with comorbidities getting more severe infection this time around than we are. Having said that, there's also a lot of reports of young people who are now being seen to be coming to in large numbers to the hospitals, although the exact numbers are not clear. But at least at the hospital level, it seems that the virus is not sparing the younger population compared to as it was doing in the bloodstream.

MG: Dr. Shaikh, you said that you've never seen anything like this before, and the picture that you painted is a shocking one. How are you and your colleagues managing through all of this? And what sort of effect is what you're seeing having on you?

DR. AQSA SHAIKH: It's really a very desperate and helpless situation because even though we may have the human resource available, we do not have oxygen available at the moment. A lot of the hospitals, there are a lot of problems in the hospital. Supplies into state politics is playing its part. And a lot of states have stopped the cross-border transport of oxygen tankers that even it's basically a beg, borrow, steal situation, you know, when it comes to oxygen right now. So it's a very desperate situation where you have doctors when we do not have sufficient ICU beds or the oxygen available. Also what we have started doing is that in order to make sure that people are comfortable at the homes and not coming to the hospitals and occupying the beds, then they don't require to. You started doing the daily consultation for a lot of patients who are in home isolation and to reassure them that they can get well at home and they don't really have to rush to the hospital and book a bed, which may go to someone who is more in need.

MG: Dr. Bhatnagar, at the beginning of our conversation, we heard from the heartbroken man who said that as a country, we were not prepared. Why our cases surging so drastically in India in the second wave?

DR. TARUN BHATNAGAR: Well, that's a good question. I think we saw the first wave sometime in mid-September, peaking around a little below 100,000 cases. And after that, the cases started coming down until January, February, and then again beginning March. We've seen a sudden rise in the cases. I mean, the last million cases took only three to four days compared to 21 days that it took for the first million to two to be reported. So I think it's a mix of sort of three factors. As we say, an infectious disease eppy. There's the host factor, the ageing factor and the environment. So talking about the host, I mean, the people that I guess people became complacent in terms of compliance to wearing masks, compliance, to not visiting crowded places. So I think it became sort of business as usual in later part of last year. And I guess that's one of the main reasons why. And then, of course, there were elections in the country. There have been big religious festivals where people have been congregating political rallies. So all of that, again, contributing to giving a suitable environment for the virus to transmit itself from one person to the other. And then now I guess we have reports of variance in terms of the mutations that the virus has undergone. And initially there were reports of the variants, which are popularly known as the UK variant, are in South African women being reported from some parts of the country. And now more recently, we have the so-called Indian variant or the double mutant that is now being reported from many parts of the country. So the virus has mutated and what it looks like that the mutations have provided at a higher level of transmissibility. So we are seeing more of now people within households and families being affected compared to what we saw on the first wave where many people within the family were spared even. Yeah. So it's it's and of course and I think finally, as a as a macro environment, I think there's been a general sense propagated over all that everything was fine and sort of all we had had left the country, so to speak, and we would never have a second baby, what was being seen in Europe or the US. But I think all of this has contributed to the current situation that we're in.

MG: And in that situation. Dr. Shaikh, I mean, Delhi is in the midst of a week long lockdown. Is that going to make any difference at all in trying to alleviate the desperate situation that you've been describing?

DR. AQSA SHAIKH: As Dr Tarun mentioned, that there has been a lot of lapse in the part of the population itself, in the part of the community in terms of letting the guard down, in terms of not following the covid appropriate behaviour. We have seen that this is the first time around in India in terms of religious festivals, in terms of, you know, school holidays. Also coming up. And there are people thronging the markets and on. So I guess at least to some extent, this lockdown will help people, you know, stay at home. And while there might be some impact on the economy, this is the price that we had to pay for our misbehaviours and for whatever things that we didn't do in the gap between the first and the second view. So, yeah, it's an unfortunate decision of lockdown. It was what we had to do, what we had to do actually, to make sure that people stayed at home. So I hope that we will actually make some difference.

MG: Tell me about vaccinations, because your vaccine programme, I mean, you know, anywhere around the world, it's a bit of a race against time, but particularly in a situation as desperate as what you've been describing, the vaccination programme would be even more important. But you were tweeting out a photo earlier today of an empty vaccination centre. What's going on with the vaccines, Dr. Shaikh?

DR. AQSA SHAIKH: There are a lot of problems when it comes to India's vaccination programme. Sighs You must be knowing that we had a shortage of the vaccination, which the government may have denied. But then on ground, we knew that there was a shortage of vaccination. We know that. [Unintelligible] stop its foreign commitments, even if this applies to the Canada, for example, the EU has started the process of suing AstraZeneca because they could then keep their commitments of providing the requisite stocks to the European Union. So there has been an issue of vaccine shortage that have been on the issues of not giving licences to the vaccines that have been approved elsewhere because the bridging studies were not done in the Indian population. But of course, we've seen that in the last week the government decided to allow these vaccines to be also used in India, though there has not been a local study done. We will be seeing what should be our vaccination programme from the first of May. But then again, there has been so much uncertainty as to what the rules will be, how the be private hospitals will be providing the vaccines directly from the manufacturers. There's going to be decentralisation of vaccine procurement between the state governments and the vaccine manufacturers will negotiate the price. And we have seen that that has led to the overall increase in the price of the vaccination when it comes to the end user. So what is really happening is that the vaccine prices are going to increase from the 1st of May well be able to vaccinate people who are 18 years and above. In addition, there's also a lot a lot of vaccine hesitancy that we keep fighting every day. And the people [unintelliglbe] that the vaccines are not effective, especially against the mutant strains, because we see a lot of doctors on SNL who have been vaccinated getting the coveted infection. That's a little milder. So there is a lot of mistrust when it comes to the vaccine programmes, when it comes to the vaccines and when it comes to the government's giving out these vaccines and that we're fighting. So the other picture is actually from yesterday and from my own vaccination centre where we didn't have any patients at all in that time slot. Why the hospitals are brimming with the patients. So really a very sad state of affairs there.

MG: Dr. Bhatnagar, how much faster does the vaccination programme need to be if India is going to try to get ahead of this? What, 10 percent of the population has even had one dose so far?

DR. TARUN BHATNAGAR: Yeah, you're right, it's been slow to start with, as Dr. Shak also mentioned, that there was a lot of vaccine hesitancy initially amongst the health care workers themselves, although what I see on the ground is that at least amongst the general public, there seems to be a sense that they should get vaccinated because there are conflicting opinions. So we've reached a total of one hundred and thirty five million doses administered as of date. And in fact, just yesterday, I think there were around three million doses instead. Having said that, I think the in order to be able to vaccinate the entire population, or at least at least 70 percent of the population, we would need to go definitely like 10 times more than what we are doing currently. But I'm afraid with the current situation of a vaccine shortage, the delay in the supplies that are going to be seen in the near future and some level of vaccine hesitancy still being there, this target seems to be difficult to achieve.

MG: We just have a few seconds left. And I'll ask you both this question, Doctor, about Nigar. Given what we have heard, what are you most concerned about in the days and weeks ahead?

DR. TARUN BHATNAGAR: Well, I think people need to understand that it is now up to themselves to save themselves from the infection and from severity, and I think so. I mean, there being variance and there may be other issues with the vaccine. I think it's ultimately the people at large who need to be able to do to adhere to the will with appropriate behaviours. And I feel that that is something that might be difficult in the current population.

MG: Dr. Shaikh, for you, just briefly, what are you most concerned about right now?

DR. AQSA SHAIKH: We are in a war zone, literally. We are in such a big crisis situation in Delhi. And I think the government needs to stop everything else and just focus in on ensuring that the ICU beds, ventilators and oxygen, most importantly, oxygen for the patients in the immediate term, they need to ensure that people uptake vaccine that do vaccine manufacturing is really boosted, even if it requires government finances and people start taking the vaccine any long term. You know, we know that a poor health infrastructure and Broyhill finances will lead to a situation like this every now and then. So they really need to start investing in health and make health of the people the priority.

MG: I know that things are very, very busy. I really appreciate you both taking some time to speak with us this morning. Thank you very much.

DR. TARUN BHATNAGAR: Thanks. My pleasure.

DR. AQSA SHAIKH: Thank you for having me.

MG: Bye bye. Dr. Aqsa Shaikh is the head of New Delhi's Jumia Hamdard Hospital Vaccine Programme. Dr. Tarun Bhatnagar is an epidemiologist at the Indian Council of Medical Researches National Institute of Epidemiology. The situation in India, as you can imagine, is being watched very closely here in Canada. Doctors and health experts here with ties to that country are mobilising to see what they can do to help. Professor Ananya Tina Banerjee is a social epidemiologist with the School of Population and Global Health at McGill University in Montreal. Professor, good morning to you.

ANANYA TINA BANERJEE: Good morning.

MG: What do you make of what you've heard from your colleagues in India?

ANANYA TINA BANERJEE: It is a dire situation and, you know, listening to Dr. Shaikh and Bhatnagar and so many other physicians in India last night, it's we're starting to feel really helpless and we're unsure what to do, especially for us who are Indian to living in Canada, how we can help our loved ones. We are fearing for our loved ones. And, you know, we're just working around the clock, not sleeping. And it's devastating. What's happening is actually heartbreaking. It's heartbreaking and it's quite emotional.

MG: I can hear it in your voice. I mean, and just knowing how large the diaspora is here, I mean, even if people aren't in the medical community, people in the communities here would have ties to friends and family, obviously back home and wondering how they're doing.

ANANYA TINA BANERJEE: Absolutely. We are constantly on the phones with our relatives, you know, making sure that they are staying home. They're going to public health protocols, wearing, you know, wearing masks, social distancing. I think what's even more devastating is that, you know, it hasn't happened to me knock on wood yet, but my colleagues who have, you know, their sisters and brothers or grandparents who have caught the virus and what's been really hard is, you know, trying to figure out how we can manage the treatment at home. And the relatives have gone to hospitals are begging to be let in and they're being turned away. It's such a hopeless situation. I never imagined at this point there is a group of leading physicians across the world of Indian descent, you know, have come together. I've had the pleasure of working with as well know are creating tip sheets to how to manage covid-19 at home when hospital and medical care is not accessible and trying to translate them in various languages. And as you know, the oxygen supply is the most devastating part. India is literally gasping for air.

MG: Let me ask you about the tip sheets first. I mean, what is it that you're offering in terms of that information? The people here and as you say in the diaspora, communities around the world that are kind of offering four for folks back home.

ANANYA TINA BANERJEE: So Dr. [unintelligilbe] from McGill University has, you know, brought together many people of Indian descent, including, you know, physicians in India. We've been meeting every night, you know, for about one or two hours. And also we've created various different subgroups. So there is an oxygen team, there's a health communication team, there's a fundraising team. And so with respect to the health communication team that they have been working hard to create education sheets that can be distributed widely across India through social media and doctors. And, you know, our own infectious disease specialists in China have been part of this group. And so essentially, you know, we've broken it down into three parts. So how to effectively manage covid-19 at home, you know, when you first start to have symptoms. And then second, how to manage, you know, the disease when your oxygen saturation is hovering about, you know, 92 percent. And then what do you do if your oxygen saturation drops by 92 percent. And if it drops to 92 percent? You know, that's what we are encouraging, you know, our loved ones and our friends to go to the hospital. What's also been really hard is we are trying to also figure out how to get oxometers to everyone in India so they can actually carefully monitor their oxygen levels. That's that's the key, you know, thing right now is to make sure that people are closely monitoring their breathing and closely monitoring their oxygen at home and only having to go to the hospital if they absolutely have to.

MG: What about the role of the Canadian government? Is there a space I mean, as Canada deals with its own third wave and Canada has benefited in some ways from from vaccines coming from India? Is there a place for Canada to turn that around and try and help out people in the midst of the Indian second wave?

ANANYA TINA BANERJEE: Absolutely. I mean, Canada and India have extremely strong strategic and economic ties. I think what we have to be mindful of that, you know, India has shared majority of their vaccines, manufactured, you know, a high proportion of Canadians who have received AstraZeneca vaccine. It is likely that it has, you know, come from India. And Canada needs to step up and they really need to work hard, you know, with the Indian government, really try to understand what they need immediately. And what they really need right now are oxygen supplies, ventilators, they need PPE. There's a lot that Canada can do right now. And I think also Canadians, they need to support everyone of Indian descent in Canada. As we said, we are battling our own third week here and knowing that South Asia has been very vulnerable group to covid-19, you know that pockets of Ontario. where there are is a high population, South Asians, including Brampton has been hit hard by the wave in Canada. And now they're dealing with having to see their loved ones being impacted by the second wave. And it's obviously a very emotional, hard time for all of us as we're down to

MG: just in the last few minutes that we have. Let me ask you about the decision yesterday by the federal government to ban passenger flights, direct flights from India and Pakistan for the next 30 days. Do you think, given what's happening in India and we're hearing about the, you know, the mutant strains of the virus that were first found, there is a travel ban, the best way to stop those variants from arriving in places like Canada?

ANANYA TINA BANERJEE: You know what? What's really frustrating is that every time there is an outbreak globally in a certain region and the first cases detected in Canada, there is a travel ban. And I don't think this is the right way to go. In fact, I find it very discriminatory in all honesty. And it's been very frustrating because we have been pushing for the Canadian government to really restrict travel and really have a national travel ban. I mean, the reality is this pandemic is the way it's unfolding there's so much uncertainty with the rise of things. We don't know where variants are going to come from, from other parts of the world. And I think it's really important right now that, you know, Canada restricts all nonessential travel for all Canadians from anywhere in the world and also do not let anyone enter our country unless, you know, it's unless it's absolutely essential. I mean, until- India is a country of a billion people, until they are able to control their own pandemic, we're at risk globally, and I think right now we really need support here, and I think Canada really needs to take part in terms of a national travel and stop.

MG: So not just not just flights from India and Pakistan, but all flights essentially coming in.

ANANYA TINA BANERJEE: Exactly. All flights.

MG: Are you worried we just have a minute or so left, are you worried, given the stigma that we saw applied to people of of Asian descent in this country, that that kind of prejudice could end up being directed towards people in the South Asian community here now?

ANANYA TINA BANERJEE: Absolutely. It's already started. I'm sure you saw the cover page of the Journal Montreal yesterday

MG: Saying the Indian variant is here with a picture of Justin Trudeau on it.

ANANYA TINA BANERJEE: Yeah, Indian attire. I mean, that was fuelling prejudice. I was feeling racism against all of us. And, you know, what was the message that was being shared is that we must be aware of Indians. And so I am extremely scared to see what country in the days and the weeks. And the reality is we are going to be facing an escalation of racial attacks. I wouldn't even be surprised. Hate crimes still remember South Asians. You know, we are one of the biggest visible minority groups. And given that everyone's really frustrated with everything that's happening with this pandemic. And I'm worried they're going to take their frustration out on us.

MG: we'll have to leave it there. Professor, it's great to speak with you. Thank you very

ANANYA TINA BANERJEE: much. Thank you so much, MAtt.

MG: Ananya Tina Banerjee, an assistant professor of epidemiology at McGill University. This is The Current on CBC Radio One. My name is Matt Galloway. We're back in 90 seconds. Stick around.

Alan Rusbridger on fake news and objectivity in journalism

Guest: Alan Rusbridger

MG: Hi, I'm Matt Galloway. You're listening to The Current.

SOUNDCLIP

I'm afraid that the mass media are tending to try to make citizens experts on everything. Too many people listen to news at 11 o'clock every night, and only about one tenth of you should be listening to that news, not that because I don't want you to be informed, but because I don't want you to have bad dreams. You know, the world is not as bad as the news tries to make it. You wouldn't listen to the news if it weren't exciting. If they just said today is a good day for Canada.

MG: The prime minister, Pierre Trudeau, 50 years ago taking a shot at the media, it is safe to say that that sentiment would easily fit in today. In recent years, the media's reputation has taken a real beating, thanks in large part to the rallying cry of fake news. But there's also varnishing local newsrooms, corporate sponsored articles and simply navigating social media's influence, all playing their part. Alan Rusbridger was the editor in chief of The Guardian newspaper in the U.K. from 1995 through 2015. His new book is a guidebook of sorts for the press. It's called News and How to Use It: What to Believe in a Fake News World. Alan Rusbridger, good morning. Very nice to be here. Great to have you here. What's changed in the media in the five decades since the late prime minister made those comments?

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: Well, almost everything and nothing. I mean, I guess we're realising that it's frightening to live in a world in which we don't know what's true and what's not true and what happened and what didn't happen. So the elements of journalism are the same, but the everything else has changed out of all recognition. So the world that existed for, let's call it 300 years, where a limited number of people had access to the means of distribution and the printing press, the broadcasting studio has been replaced by a world in which four billion people are connected and all of them are publishers and all of them have the right to put their version of the world out there, and that is so revolutionary, we haven't even begun to work out what that means.

MG: What about the relationship between political leaders, particularly in Western democracies and the media? How has it changed?

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: Well, of course, the thing they can now do and Donald Trump, of course, of course, probably the most notable example of this is bypassed the media. They can say, why? Why should I be mediated by someone else when I can speak directly to the electorate in my own voice? And again, we're just beginning to come to terms with what that means and the fact that on social media, you will instantly be rebutted and argued with. It's a completely different media from the one way pushing out of messages, which is what politics was until 15 years ago.

MG: Where does that leave accountability? I mean, one of the reasons why journalists want to speak with those in power is to hold them to account. So if you can't do that, where does that leave accountability in the midst of a pandemic, for example?

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: Yeah, I mean hopefully in most democracies, journalists still have a role, but arguably the central role in in in having that function of accountability. But I think the trend is against journalism to some extent in some countries in which politicians prefer a different kind of accountability. And it's not I mean, in all these things, it's not all bad. I think a broader form of public accountability in which, you know, many, many people can hold you to account and call you out is not nothing. But I think there is something obviously because as somebody who worked in journalism for more than 40 years and even journalism, I believe that journalistic accountability is very important.

MG: The subtitle of your book says that we live in a fake news world. And in the book, you talk about the difficulty in trying to, you know, wrap your head around what fake news means. I mean, what does that phrase mean to you?

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: Well, colloquially, I think we understand that we're living in a sea of information, chaos and lots of it's rubbish. And some of it is deliberately rubbish and some of it is accidentally rubbish. And and and so we're losing the sense of what's true and what's not. The problem with the phrase is, I mean, again, we can't escape Donald Trump, but he used the phrase fake news deliberately to target actually the best of journalism in The New York Times and to say they're fake. As a tactic, really, to say, well, if I could persuade you that they're not telling you the truth, then I can persuade you that I'm telling the truth, that anything is up for grabs. And part of the reason for writing the book was as a wake up call to journalists as well as the readers, because we have to ask ourselves why, in most countries, trust in journalism is so low. You know, if what we're doing is to position ourselves against the information chaos out there, why we have to ask ourselves, are people not willing to buy our own narrative?

MG: You say in the book journalists need to look in the mirror more and. Try to see themselves as others, see them, if people were to do that, what would they see?

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: They would be very confused about what we take for granted. So we take it for granted that everybody understands the difference between news and comment, but I'm not sure they do. We take it for granted that people understand what it what it means to have a proprietor. But I think increasingly people think that's very odd that someone like Rupert Murdoch should have so much power around the world. Journalists use anonymous sources prolifically, assuming that readers will take it on trust that the people we are using anonymously exist and that we are who they say they are. But but that's a big ask. So there are lots of things that the journalists do that I think people expect us to understand about journalism. But even the word journalism is a very contested word. You know, in Britain, it means the Sun newspaper, but it also means the Financial Times and the BBC. Completely different ideas of what journalism is. In America, it means Fox News and it means The New York Times. And yet we have one rather inadequate word to describe what we want the public to believe in.

MG: This book is set up a bit like an A to Z, as we would say here, in terms of running through a number of different definitions and words that that matter in journalism. You mentioned Rupert Murdoch. How would you describe the role that he has played in shaping? Political discourse and political coverage in the U.K., but also in the United States?

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: Well, I think you had to give him credit and I've tried not to paint him just with horns on. He's a proprietor who loves journalism - that's not true of all proprietors - and understands journalism, has protected journalism, has modified and modernised journalism. So it's not all negative. But at the same time, I mean, just to take the recent behaviour of Fox News in America during during the Trump election to the board trumped by the election, I mean, that wasn't journalism. And he has stood by and not only done nothing, but promoted that kind of entertainment and political manoeuvring. And that's the problem with Murdoch, that he bestrides three continents and doing something that is partly admirable in journalistic terms, but partly really shabby and borderline criminal. And and so he's not a great advert for people, for those of us who are trying to tell an unconfuse story about journalism.

MG: When you say that that wasn't journalism, what do you mean by that? Because you could imagine the viewers of Fox News, their eyebrows would shoot off the top of their head?

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: Well, I think the first thing that journalism has to be is independent. It has to be independent of everything, has to be independent of its own proprietor. It has to be independent of politics. You have to believe that it's not being bought by politics or by advertisers. And the moment it stops being that, then it stops being journalism. And if you couldn't- there are lots of academics who have tracked the editorial positioning of Fox throughout Trump and right down right down to the behaviour of the pandemic where it was overwhelmingly sceptical about the pandemic until the moment where where Trump realised that the two that he had to change his tune. And that's, you know, slavishly following a political line is not journalism. I'm sorry.

MG: It gets to two of the other words that you speak about in this book, Bias and Impartiality. What is the place of impartiality in journalism in 2021?

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: Well, these are very, I think, poorly understood and contested words, but let's assume that CBC is supposed to be impartial in the same way that the BBC is. So what is impartial and who decides? And I've watched in the U.K., which has broadly a right wing press, and it's a deliberate tactic, it seems to me, of the right to say, look, we're in the middle, we're reasonable people, we got elected law, and therefore the BBC is on the left. And if you say that repeatedly over 20 years, you redefine where the centre is. And so if you're a BBC manager trying to say, well, I'm going to try to be impartial, i.e. in the centre of the politics, it it's very difficult to resist this Right-Wing pull. And I mean, there are, of course, other people who believe in impartiality or objectivity and say, actually, it's better to be honest and to to have journalism of attachment. But but these these are big concepts for to expect listeners and readers to understand and be critical about.

MG: Do you have any time for that argument that that now is not the time for objectivity? I mean, and there are a lot of people particularly coming out of last summer when there was a reckoning on race and many parts of the world, black and brown journalists, who said that objectivity is a luxury, that that is not afforded in many ways to those communities, but also that now is not the time for objectivity. Do you have any time for that argument?

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: Well, I mean, coming from Britain, where we have the best of both, if you like, we have a very, very subjective process which, you know, has its political roots going back to the 18th century. And we have a very impartial BBC. And I think having both those gives you the best of all worlds. I mean, the argument for objectivity is quite a powerful one. You know, if you don't agree about the starting point for an argument and you're prepared to be very upfront and say, look, this is where I come from, so you're being transparent about where you're coming from, I think some great journalism can come out of that. But I wouldn't want just that because I'm happy to have that, as long as I've got the BBC. I know what I would just want the BBC with that newspaper. So it's a very delicate ecosystem.

MG: When you were at The Guardian, you had a reputation for helping to lead and drive a lot of investigative reporting. What is the state of investigative reporting right now, do you think?

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: Well, there's two terrific reporters out there who are doing it, of course, in an economic crisis, which the media is in at the moment. And it tends to be the thing that goes first. So, you know, you can understand a manager will look at what the most pricy form of time consuming, legally fraught form of journalism is. And they'll say, well, let's do without that. I think that's a mistake. We did, as you suggest, the last five years when I was editing, we did WikiLeaks, we did huge amounts of tax avoidance. We did torture rendition. We did phone hacking. We did the Snowden revelations. And it was it was costly. It was nerve racking and on the face of it, mad. But it turned out to be the business model, because when we then turn to readers and said, we want you to support us. The answer from readers was, if you're going to do journalism like that, we'll certainly support you. And it converts to to all the sort of local newspaper chains, alas, who have cut that. And the readers kind of shrug and say, well, I'm not sure what you're asking me to pay for.

MG: You mentioned Snowden and the revelations released by Edward Snowden in 2013. You testified before the Home Affairs Committee about the Guardian Guardian's decision to publish information that was taken by Edward Snowden. Take a listen to this.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: You and I both were both born outside this country, but I love this country. Do you love this country?

VOICE 2: How do you answer that?

VOICE 1: We live in a democracy. Most of the people working on this story are British people who have families in this country who love this country. I'm slightly surprised by the question, but yes, we are patriots. And one of the things we are patriotic about is the nature of the democracy and the nature of a free press and the fact that one can in this country discuss and report these things.

MG: You faced fierce criticism for publishing information that critics said hurt national security. Why did you decide to publish those documents?

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: The Snowden revelations were about the mixing of two kinds of power, state state power and big tech power, and it was not generally known that the major governments in the world had awarded themselves access to the information that we thought we were sharing with Google and Facebook and Twitter and others. And that is so fundamental to how a democracy arranges ourselves. It's the same arguments they having in the 18th century about whether the state could enter somebody's house and seise their papers. And for 300 years we've held it wrong. The state can't just walk into your house and seise your papers. And yet here were a lot of major governments just deciding that they would help themselves to all our data. So it was a hugely important story, even if, of course, the state disapproved of this story being written. But it comes back to the point about newspapers have to stand aside from power, including the power of government.

MG: How seriously should news outlets take those arguments of national security, do you think?

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: Well, I think you always have to listen to them and treat them seriously and and we did and we talk regularly to the American and British governments and said to them, look, we're going to publish a story tomorrow. Here are the documents we base it on. Is there anything you want to say to us? And sometimes they came back and said we would rather you didn't use such and such a name or there's one particularly problematic side. And generally we listen to them with respect. We didn't always follow their advice, but we listened with great respect.

MG: You were talking earlier about some of the trickiness around journalism and just defining what a journalist is. One of the sections in this book is about Julian Assange. Is Julian Assange the journalist?

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: Well, this comes back to the complicated question of what what what what is journalism? And there's no easy answer with Assange because he is a chameleon. He is a journalist at times. He's a publisher. He's an impresario. He's an activist. He he's a hacker. He has many identities. But when I worked with him when we worked with him, we were commonly engaged in a in a mutual enterprise of journalism, which is why I've always said I would defend him for the stuff that we did together. Subsequently he went off and did stuff which I find harder to defend. But but inasmuch as we jointly did stuff, good journalism, yeah, he was a journalist.

MG: When you say harder to defend, I mean, there are many people who say that he's been a conduit for for Russian operations against the United States and because of that shouldn't be afforded the same rights as other journalists and the same protection as other journalists.

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: Yeah, well, I think if that's true, if he was a conduit for, you know, let's say the you know, the argument is that the KGB was stealing information and laundering it through Julian Julian Assange. I agree that that is not what I think of as journalism, and I would find that hard to defend. That's not actually what he's been accused of in his extradition hearing. But if that was what happened, then I wouldn't defend that. But I've never heard him speak about where he got that information from.

MG: In the era of very quick journalism and people may not call it journalism, which is what's posted on on social media, where information comes fast and furious and it's important to be first in some ways not to be accurate. You talk about slow. What is the importance of of slowness in journalism?

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: Well, I think it was a moment shortly before I retired where I just thought, look, this is a crazy hamster wheel. We're alone. And wouldn't it be nice just to have- some of the things that when I went to journalism, we had, you know, the ability to sort of sit down and read a book. You know, I learnt article you could take two days off to go and do research. And so I did create a kind of slow journalism department. And I do think that's essential. It's obviously not the only thing that a lot of news organisations could do. But I think every news organisation should have a slow department.

MG: What do we benefit we being society and we who consume media, what do we benefit when you're not on the hamster wheel and you're not just kind of seeking the dopamine hit?

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: Well, I think you sometimes do just have to take the long view. I mean, I think you need people who can stand back and say, well, where did this come from? Where is it going to? What are the implications? What are the consequences? How does this compare with what's happening in other countries? How can we join up the dots? And you can't do that in a hurry and you'd need a bit of space. And it's a different kind of activity from the people who are on the hamster wheel.

MG: I mentioned the racial reckoning in the United States and beyond last year, and that has reached into the newsroom as well. What do you think of the allegations that have been made against the British press in terms of how that press has handled the Megan Markle story? Has that been racist?

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: I mean, I hesitate to go around calling people racist. I mean, I find it uncomfortable and I think some of it may have come from a place in which people are not sufficiently self questioning about race. I think all organisations benefit from examining their unconscious bias. And I would rather use the word unconscious bias than than racism. And the British press is not alone in being very white, very middle class, and it's just not a very diverse workforce. And I'm afraid that's almost bound to lead to some forms of unconscious bias.

MG: Do you think that there will be more diversity in the media in coming years coming out of of what we've seen and questions that have been raised and articulated certainly in the last 12 months or so?

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: I think it's it's inevitable and it is happening. And I think there are two drivers. One is that I think it's just editorially bad. I mean, I include in the book a reference to the Grenfell Tower incident where the reporters drove down to this tower, the in the centre of London, and the reporters were nearly all white. And the people they were speaking to were nearly all black. And there was a lot of anger from those residents saying, you know, why do you only come when we die? We've been writing about this. Why have you ignored us?

MG: this is the tower that, I mean, was on fire in the centre of London.

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: Yeah. And that was a sort of very vivid capturing of a problem that has existed for a long time with very white newsrooms. So I think if you're a newsroom manager, you must realise you can't write about a society if you look completely different from the people you're trying to write about. So editorially, it's bad. And I think there's probably a realisation, too, that this is going to be commercially bad, too. If populations are more and more diverse and they have many more alternatives about where they can go to their news that they will trust. If you look out of touch and able accurately to write about some communities, is that's going to be bad. So it will change.

MG: We started by looking back 50 years of journalism. And one of the final words that you talk about in this book is youth. What are your hopes for journalism in the coming 50 years?

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: Well, I think I really want my children and people who are younger than them to to to find the value of journalism and to believe in it, because I think journalists are as essential as bees. You know, I think we do need people in society who we can trust to tell us what happened and what didn't happen, what is right and what is wrong. But I do think there's a lot of work to do to convince that generation. I mean, to take climate change. I think the record of a lot of newspapers in many countries has been abysmal on climate change. And young people will not read newspapers that are like that. They just won't. And so newspapers are going to have to think about how young people think and I think will be good for journalism and it'll be good for young people.

MG: It's a great pleasure to talk to you. Thank you very much.

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: Great to talk to you.

MG: Alan Rusbridger is the former editor in chief of The Guardian newspaper. His new book is News and How to Use It What to Believe in a Fake News World. Well, coming up next week on The Current, a story from Denmark. That country is the first European nation to start sending Syrian refugees back to Syria, saying that some parts of that country are now safe. Almost 200 Syrians have already had their residency permits revoked. Another 500 are being evaluated. Heba Al-Khalil is one of them. She's been in Denmark for more than five years and doesn't know what she'll do if she's not allowed to stay.

SOUNDCLIP

I don't know, actually. I absolutely don't know because I'm not thinking about that. I'm not thinking to start from zero in other land, in other country. I have Danish and I just believed that I will stay in Denmark. So I don't have this energy actually, again. I'm so tired of this. I'm I'm trying every day to fight and fight and have work, have a study, study every single day. You have asked me about- so I don't actually have this energy, but I don't know, I don't have any plan actually.

MG: Heba Al-Khalili recently had her second interview with immigration officials to see if her stay in Denmark will be renewed. I'll speak with her and others about what's happening with Syrian refugees in Denmark next week on The Current. That is The Current for this Friday. Coming up next on CBC Radio One, it's Q Tom Jones. He of the leather trousers and the golden voice will be on the programme speaking about a new album of cover songs that he says reflect his personal stories. How could you not want to hear Tom Jones? It's coming up in just a few moments on CBC Radio One. Before we hand it over to Tom and Q, we have one last little story for you. Seems like the perfect way to close on a Friday. Have you heard about George and his goose? George Patterson was working outside his cottage near Hampton, New Brunswick, last week when he took a gander over his shoulder and found a new friend. A Canada goose had waddled up to George and was sizing him up. And of course, any good Canadian knows that geese are truly the most terrifying of all of our wildlife. So George was cautious. It turns out the goose was more friend than fowl and stayed by George outside for the whole day. George and his wife Lisa told CBC News about their eventful day with goosey Lucy, and so, a lot of bad news, will leave you with this good news story, the story of a man and his goose. I'm Matt Galloway. Thanks for listening to The Current. Have a great weekend. And I'll talk to you on Monday.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: Generally, it's humans that are you know- the geese are minding their own business and it's the humans they kind of walk into their space and then they move away. Well, in this case, I was minding my own business and the goose came up property and it was getting closer and closer and closer. So then I expected it to be hostile, but I didn't move into it space. It was looking for food off the ground. And then that kind of started the relationship with what became the whole day.

VOICE 2: It didn't mind other people being around, but it definitely preferred him and it would turn its head sideways and look at him like a puppy. Look at you like with love. It was just so cute if it didn't leave his side. It waddled wherever he went

VOICE 1: to Hong Kong. I went inside so it seemed alarmed or whatever. So I came back outside. There's a kind of felt bad because it kept following me and there was a lot more work for it to walk than it was for me. And at one point I was going up the stairs again, and it's almost like you said, you know, enough of this, it walk up the stairs behind me.

Friday April 23, 2021 Full Transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode