If your news consumption is anything like mine, you scanned the headlines about this week’s Federal Budget and scratched your head at the range of takes on what the government announced. 

  • “Carney unveils budget focused on strengthening Canada’s finances” (CBC News) 
  • “Carney’s ‘generational budget’ brings nearly $80 billion deficit” (Global News) 
  • “Liberal budget earmarks billions for ‘bold and swift action’ to meet US disruption” (Rocky Mountain Outlook/Yahoo Finance) 
  • “That’s it? Carney’s first budget fails to meet the moment his government hyped so much.” (Globe & Mail, Andrew Coyne) 

By the time you got through Ontario’s Fall Economic Statement later in the week, your scalp might have needed a break.

This isn’t unusual. Any political story comes with a kaleidoscope of perspectives.  

But it’s a good example of just how difficult it can be to form a view that you can truly consider your own. Here are a few reminders and tips on how to cut through the noise and come to your own conclusion: 

Consider the source

The Outlet:  

Social media

People make stuff up. I know, you’re shocked, but sometimes we are a little less skeptical when what we read is something we like. Always check that there is a legitimate source behind the claim in a post, even if it has 500,000 likes. 

Mainstream media

It’s not that the guy or gal on your drive-home radio show is right, and the Journal, Star, Gazette reporter is wrong. Each outlet wants to speak to the concerns of its own audience. That may mean the budget will look like it’s focused on spending billions more tax dollars in one news story and focused on cutting the civil service and foreign aid programs in another story. Well, which one is it: budget cuts or spending billions? Both, actually. 

The OG:  

I know, I know, unless you’re getting paid to do it, very few people have time to read the actual budget, even though it really does have a lot of pictures. But you can read the key documents in a few minutes, or watch the Minister deliver his budget speech online, so you can see or hear information straight from the horse’s mouth, so to speak. Same goes for hearing opposition comments directly from the party leaders. Here’s a link to the news release, with a handy synopsis, quotes from ministers and the PM and even quick facts! 

The Commentator:  

Commentators generally wear their political leanings on their sleeves, but quality counts on this one. Some commentators can be conservative, but not partisan, for example. On the other hand, when you watch a political panel on your news channel, ask yourself: Is this person sharing their own thoughtful view, or are they delivering the key messages of their party? The former group can surprise you because they occasionally take a position or make an argument you wouldn’t expect.  

The Echo Chamber: 

If you stick to one or two specific outlets for your news and views, try reading one that you know would take an alternate tack on covering the budget. At the very least, it will help you understand why others may have such a different view from your own. 

‘People’:  

This one qualifies more as a pet peeve. As a communications professional, public opinion and focus groups are important considerations in my work. As an individual, not so much. I immediately tune out when a reporter, politician or commentator purports to know what ‘people’ are thinking. As an individual, you’re the only one who knows what you’re worried about, or interested in. Ignore those comments as much as possible rather than letting them colour your personal view somehow. 

 

The bottom line is that, regardless of your views and influences going into something like a federal budget, a thoughtful approach to learning about it will lead to a thoughtful perspective. Don’t let volume dictate what you listen to–we all know the loudest voice isn’t always the most reasonable. And it’s always good to sample a different flavour of anything, even if it’s an alternative viewpoint. I’m corrected or educated on a daily basis, especially by my two teenagers, and I think I’m more open to considering other views as a result–after I check the source, of course.