Go Ad Free

So apparently Canada’s “Local Journalism Initiative” — the one sold to taxpayers as a lifeline for rural news deserts and underserved communities — has been handing money to some of the biggest media players in the country.

Not exactly a surprise, but still impressive in its audacity.

According to records tabled in Parliament after a question from Conservative MP Arpan Khanna, grants meant to support struggling local coverage went to outlets like Toronto Star, The Globe and Mail, Winnipeg Free Press, and Winnipeg Sun.

Khanna’s written question demanded a breakdown of the Local Journalism Initiative since 2019: which intermediary groups handled the money, whether they reported who got paid, and the final recipients by name, date, amount, location, and media type. In other words: who got the cash, when, how much, and for what.

And once those records surfaced, the fairy tale got harder to tell.

This wasn’t just some general media support fund. It was pitched as coverage for communities lacking local journalism — places with no daily paper, weak civic reporting, limited access to information. Yet the disclosed recipients included some of the most established names in Canadian media.

Among the payouts highlighted from the response:

• $408,468 to Le Droit in Ottawa
• $347,172 to The Hamilton Spectator
• $338,880 to Winnipeg Free Press
• $282,062 to Telegraph-Journal
• $257,576 to The Telegram
• $236,844 to The Guardian
• $202,152 to Winnipeg Sun
• $171,664 to The Peterborough Examiner
• $158,277 to Toronto Star
• $138,125 to Daily Gleaner
• $30,750 to The Globe and Mail

That’s a fascinating definition of “underserved.” Toronto gets local journalism money. Ottawa gets local journalism money. Winnipeg dailies get local journalism money. Next we’ll learn Bay Street needs northern development grants.

The question also matters because it exposed the structure: funds were distributed through third-party organizations such as News Media Canada and the Community Radio Fund of Canada, rather than Ottawa directly cutting cheques to every outlet. That creates useful distance. Bureaucrats can say they support the program, intermediaries can say they made the calls, and taxpayers get to play Where’s Waldo with the money trail.

News Media Canada, a subsidy lobby group, CEO Paul Deegan told MPs the initiative was critical for rural voices and small-town weeklies. He described mom-and-pop papers barely hanging on.

Then the records came out and taxpayers discover cash landing at major urban dailies owned by corporate chains.

And while all this was happening, independent journalists weren’t being helped — they were being shut out. Questions were treated like trespassing.

Meanwhile, legacy outlets are waved through. The local journalism program was supposed to end in 2024. Instead, cabinet extended it with another $58.8 million. Because once government starts subsidizing media, apparently it’s harder to cancel than a streaming subscription.

And this is the deeper issue.

When governments fund journalism, they insist it’s about democracy, reliable facts, public service. Maybe sometimes it is. But when the money starts flowing to already-dominant outlets in Canada’s biggest cities — while independent competitors are frozen out of access and forced to fight for credentials — people stop seeing public service and start seeing insider privilege.

If the goal is to save local journalism, then stop blocking independent local journalism. If the goal is to subsidize legacy brands with political connections, at least have the honesty to call it that.