There once was a time when I would have looked forward to a year in which voters would be going to the polls on two occasions. That’s not the case anymore, which is why I can’t say that I’m too jazzed about the arrival of 2025.
A younger, more idealistic me used to view elections with a sense of excitement, an opportunity to usher in new players and ideas for the betterment of all, but now I tend to view them more as a pain in the butt, a time when rational people lose their minds and those who were already unhinged really cut loose.
Yes, I know elections are a foundation of our democracy so I should treat them with the reverence they deserve, but cover more than 30 of them over three-plus decades and then let me know how you feel.
Politics is already a charged environment, but it goes on steroids come election time as candidates and their supporters pull out all the stops in an effort to secure victory. They become hypersensitive to everything, believing that not only is the media out to get them, but even the smallest detail could prove to be the difference between winning and losing.
Those covering an election are caught in the middle, and just like the referee who’s always picking on your favourite team, they’re often viewed negatively even though they’ve got no skin in the game.
Those folks who are ardent supporters of a particular party clearly see the world through a certain lens, but I’ve found that doesn’t stop some of them from offering what they believe are their ‘unbiased’ opinions on media coverage. I’ve encountered these types during every election campaign, although after moving from the coast, I was hoping it was just a B.C. thing. Unfortunately, it’s not.
The only election I’ve covered since moving to Okotoks was the 2023 provincial race, which should have been a rather tame affair given the predictable outcome, but that didn’t mean tensions weren’t running high.
About a week into the campaign, I remember being called down to the front desk to rescue a reporter who was being berated by a couple that believed their candidate of choice was getting the shaft. They were agitated by two stories, arguing that we were biased against their candidate and were being driven by some ulterior motive.
I should mention that for the articles in question, we took pains to ensure each candidate received the same amount of space, that all photos were the exact same size, that the headlines were sufficiently bland and that if one candidate was quoted early in one story, they would be placed later in the second one.
It was reasoned that by doing so we would head off any claims of favouritism, although that didn't necessarily factor in the different shades of lenses through which the articles would be viewed.
With the distinct possibility of a federal election in the spring and a municipal one set for the fall, I can’t say that I’m looking forward to the extended silly season that 2025 will bring.
