When Will Medicine Hat Adopt a Transparent Media Policy?
MEDICINE HAT – In a move that press freedom experts say turns a foundational democratic principle on its head, the City of Medicine Hat has been operating without a formal media policy, allowing it to unilaterally define—and exclude—certain news outlets in an arbitrary manner and for expressly stated reasons of content disapproval.
The conflict, which saw the previous city administration systemically deny recognition to independent outlets like The Medicine Hat Owl, is now a salient test for the newly elected City Council. The lack of a clear framework has led to contradictory justifications for the Owl's exclusion and, as extensive documentation shows, a deliberate corporate policy of non-engagement based on the administration's disapproval of its journalism.
The "Corporate Stance": Administration as Media Judge and Jury
The city's position was made explicitly clear in a February 2023 email from the City’s Manager of Corporate Communications to The Owl. After stating the city's expectation that media operate with "integrity, respect, and professionalism," the official wrote: "If we feel that understanding is not in place or that we can’t be confident those principles will be upheld, we are comfortable declining involvement."
The email then cites the Canadian Association of Journalists' ethical guidelines as a benchmark before declaring: "With these observations in mind, we believe it is in the best interest our organization to adopt a corporate stance of non-participation with Community TV in our media relations." The city concluded it would treat Owl journalists merely as residents, but "we will not have staff participate in interviews or provide other media opportunities to your organization."
Crucially, when subsequently challenged to provide specific examples of the alleged ethical breaches, the City administration could not offer a single one.
This formalized blacklisting, a practice that long predated but was perpetuated by former City Manager Ann Mitchell—who was fired this summer "with cause" for mistreating an employee—created a climate of fear. Mayor Linnsie Clark admitted to The Owl that she felt pressure from administration not to grant interviews to the Owl. Mayor Clark told Owl News that they were "looking at making it fair for everyone" when The Owl asked about taking over the post-council interview spot that had been a guaranteed privilege for CHAT News.
"This isn't about credentials or ethics; it's about control," said Kelly Allard, a court-accredited reporter with the Owl. "Every journalist at this publication is accredited by both the Alberta Court of Justice and King's Bench. For a municipal government to set itself up as a higher authority than the courts on who is a journalist—to blacklist an outlet without evidence while hand-picking favourites—is an alarming overreach."
A New Council, An Old Problem: Entrenched Favouritism and the Rejection of Accountability
The lack of a formal policy does more than create confusion; it fosters an environment where the old favouritism can be perpetuated and where the basic mechanisms of accountability are met with hostility. The recent interactions of this new council have starkly illustrated both problems.
When Allard contacted all nine council members for comment on a story about the 36 Hour Challenge —providing a standard journalistic deadline as a professional courtesy—the response was a case study in this failure. Allard received not one response, not even an auto-reply. Only after Allard sent another email stating her next step was to contact administration to tell them the e-mail system had a problem did she receive a reply. It was only from one council member. who seemed to take offence at the very premise of a deadline. Councillor Bill Cocks replied: "Kelly, I received your letter. There is nothing wrong with the email system. Typically, I will reply when I have something that needs to be said; but not to demands to meet a deadline imposed by a reporter."
This reaction is emblematic of a troubling mindset, particularly from Cocks who is a retired Crown prosecutor who is intimately familiar with procedural rules and the importance of timelines in official processes.
"I have heard too many times from former council members who say they didn't answer a question because they found it 'disrespectful,'" said Allard. "Journalists should be allowed to ask hard questions and not have to tiptoe around those with such delicate constitutions. Being on council means you can be held to account, and that means answering the hard questions."
This rejection of media protocol coincides with actions that perpetuate media favouritism.
During the Dec 8 2025 Public Services Committee meeting, Councillor Dan Reynish—a former anchor for the now-defunct (in Medicine Hat) CHAT TV news—actively steered city staff, suggesting they contact a specific person at his former employer to propose featuring a city program on CHAT’s “Smile Sundays” segment. This suggestion, singling out one outlet while ignoring others like the local newspaper, CBC bureau, or The Owl, raises clear questions about council neutrality and the appropriate use of position.
Charter Rights
Section 2b of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees
b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
The Canadian Government page goes on to say
Since the media are an important means for communicating thoughts and ideas, the Charter protects the right of the press and other media to speak out.
Governments do not get to choose who holds them accountable
If City staff who are paid from public monies think they have the right to deny access because they don't like what is written about their practices,
If Council members can refuse to answer questions (because apparently asking a question is disrespectful),
If Council Members refuse to reply because a journalist has told them what their deadline was,
then the Glass Palace is incredibly opaque.
The City Does Not Have To Reinvent The Wheel
The City has a clear model to follow. The City of Red Deer's "Corporate Administrative Policy 5103-C A Media Relations," provides a straightforward and professional template. Its definition of “Media” is inclusive and content-neutral: "individuals seeking to communicate information to the public via traditional and non-traditional means..." Crucially, it mandates that "The City responds to Media inquiries in a timely manner," establishing a baseline of accessibility for all.
"The previous administration's approach created a two-tiered system of information and an explicit policy of exclusion," said Allard. "The public loses when its government operates in the shadows, punishes critical inquiry, and allows personal history to dictate access. With a new council in place, we have an opportunity to reset. Adopting a professional, transparent policy like Red Deer's is not a concession—it's a commitment to transparency, professionalism, and the public's right to know."
The ball is now in the new council's court
Council Emails
Linnsie Clark mayor@medicinehat.ca
Ted Clugston tedclu@medicinehat.ca
Bill Cocks bilcoc@medicinehat.ca
Chris Hellman chrhel@medicinehat.ca
Yusuf Mohammed yusmoh@medicinehat.ca
Cheryl Phaff chepha@medicinehat.ca
Dan Reynish danrey@medicinehat.ca
Brian Varga brivar@medicinehat.ca
Stuart Young stuyou@medicinehat.ca
