Access to Information / Media Policy

Ottawa is building a list of "trustworthy" news outlets. Should that worry you?

A federally-linked Local News Directory is paying researchers to identify media deemed "trustworthy and reliable," according to records obtained by Blacklock's Reporter. The project follows a history of tension between federal officials and independent Parliamentary press outlets.

Source: Access to Information records Reported by: Blacklock's Reporter Published: Sept 9, 2026

Editorial illustration of a filing cabinet sorting newspaper icons into approved and unapproved categories

Directory, not just a list. A government-tied initiative is paying researchers to rate local outlets as "reliable."

Not the first friction point. Federal agencies previously blocked employee access to Blacklock's Reporter entirely, with no explanation given.

Independent outlets have a track record of friction with Ottawa — including a copyright lawsuit and a years-long press gallery accreditation dispute.

The Story So Far

A pattern of government and press friction

The Local News Directory itself is new, but it sits within a longer history between federal institutions and independent outlets like Blacklock's Reporter — a small, subscriber-funded publication that covers Parliament and federal regulation closely.

2012

Blacklock's Reporter launches

An Ottawa-based subscription news service founded by veteran journalists Holly Doan and Tom Korski, focused on federal bills, regulations, and Access to Information requests.

2012

A federal agency blocks the site

Shared Services Canada blacked out employee access to Blacklock's across government servers with no stated reason, according to Access to Information files later obtained by the outlet.

2013–2016

Copyright dispute with Finance Canada

Blacklock's sued the federal government over alleged unauthorized password-sharing of its subscription content; a Federal Court judge ultimately ordered Blacklock's to pay $65,000 in costs.

2024

Federal Court sides with Parks Canada

In a related case, the Federal Court found Parks Canada's internal password-sharing of Blacklock's content was fair dealing for research, reaffirming a broad reading of copyright exceptions.

Sept 2026

The Local News Directory surfaces

New Access to Information records reveal a directory project paying researchers to designate certain outlets as "trustworthy and reliable," reigniting concerns about state involvement in defining credible journalism.

Analysis

Why a government "reliability" label is dangerous

A directory can be a harmless index or a subtle instrument of control — the difference lies entirely in governance, criteria, and consequences for exclusion.

State-conferred credibility

Inclusion can be read by the public as an official seal of approval, while exclusion can unfairly cast legitimate, adversarial reporting as suspect — even when it's simply doing its job of holding power accountable.

Chilling effect

Outlets may soften critical coverage if visibility, funding, or legitimacy appears tied to staying on the government's good list.

Opaque criteria

"Reliable" is vague. Without published, viewpoint-neutral standards, the label can quietly reward compliant tone over accuracy or original reporting.

Conflict with watchdog journalism

Good accountability reporting often makes governments uncomfortable — a directory built on official comfort risks penalizing exactly the journalism democracy needs most.

Mission creep

A voluntary directory can quietly become a reference point for advertisers, grant programs, or public communications — shaping legitimacy far beyond its original scope.

"It will help people struggling to find news they can trust."

— Rationale cited in the Access to Information records on the Local News Directory

The Line That Matters

Legitimate index vs. democratically concerning list

The same underlying idea — a directory of news sources — can sit on either side of this line depending entirely on how it is governed.

Dimension	Potentially legitimate	Democratically concerning
Purpose	Searchable directory based on public, viewpoint-neutral criteria	Curated list that labels select media "trusted," implicitly devaluing others
Standards	Ownership transparency, correction policies, publication frequency	Political criticism, editorial tone, or official favour used as a credibility test
Governance	Independent administration, public methodology, appeal process	Officials or undisclosed contractors making discretionary judgments
Consequences	Listing without ranking or gatekeeping viewpoints	A "seal of approval" that can influence funding, access, or public trust

Next Steps

What the public should demand to see

The paywalled Access to Information records referenced by Blacklock's likely contain the operational details that determine which side of the line this directory falls on.

Funding source and mandate

Who commissioned the directory, which department oversees it, and what budget was allocated.

Selection criteria

Published, specific standards for "trustworthy and reliable" — not vague characterizations.

Who does the research

Whether assessors are independent, and whether their methodology is disclosed publicly.

Appeal process

Whether excluded outlets can challenge a decision, and how disputes are resolved.

Downstream consequences

Any link between directory inclusion and government advertising, grants, or media-support programs.

Sources: Blacklock's Reporter, "Gov't To List 'Reliable' Media" (Sept 9, 2026) and "Feds Run News Blacklist, Ban Employee Access To Website" (2012); Federal Court records via Fasken and The Weldon Times on Blacklock's Reporter v. Canada; ipolitics.ca on the 2016 costs ruling; Wikipedia entry on Blacklock's Reporter; Grant Ainsley on Blacklock's press gallery history.