Andrew F. Cooper is a distinguished fellow at the Centre for International Governance Innovation.

Given that Canada hosted this year’s G8 and G20 summits, the Canadian media took a particularly in-depth interest in the summits. The Canadian connection to the elevation of the G20 to the leaders’ level was a focal point of discussion leading up to the summits. Former Prime Minister Paul Martin was widely cited and interviewed regarding the G20 process and its evolution. Canada’s ability to influence the agenda for international cooperation was also examined. 

With the G20 summit being held in the downtown of the country’s largest city, Toronto, pre-summit stories covered various logistical issues from road and access closures, to the shutdown of major arts and cultural attractions, and the shift of a Major League Baseball series from Toronto to Philadelphia. Pre-summit coverage also focused on the impact on Canadians in general, with questions relating to security and summit spending highlighted in media coverage. 

When the summits drew near, and once they began, the media increased its coverage of the substantive issues surrounding the weekend’s meetings.

The Role of the G8 in the G20 Era

Canada’s role in hosting the first, and possibly last, dual summit gained traction in the mainstream press. Coverage focused on the complimentary role of the G8 and G20 summits, with questions asked about the need for both forums. Attention was focused on the differentiation between the two forums as well as the role of the G8 in the G20 era. Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s maternal health proposal, the Muskoka Initiative, drew mixed reviews, but was presented as a means of reinforcing the role of the G8 moving forward.

Reviews were mixed, however, concerning the need for the G8 to continue. Attention was paid to the move by G20 countries to insert themselves into the process, while the G8 countries attempted to maintain their traditional positions. There was discussion on how the emergence of the G20 was sidelining the G8 and establishing a more representative forum for international economic cooperation. Differences between the two summits and the member countries remained a topic of discussion, but attention was also given to whether or not the enlarged G20 forum was even adequate for legitimately and effectively managing the global economy.

G20 Conflict or Cooperation

The number of different voices within the G20 provided room for debate about how the forum members would work with one another. Various levels of divergence were cited, as was a lack of consensus on key issues. Prime Minister Harper was cited as helping to manage these disagreements and advance his agenda. Compromises between the various positions were regarded as proof of the success of the summit. The need for maintaining solidarity and overcoming differing positions was seen as a crucial test for the G20 in the future. The Toronto summit was viewed as a successful example of overcoming these differences and working towards greater compromise. Fears of a possible double-dip recession or another financial crisis were mentioned as the impetus for causing the G20 leaders to overcome their internal disagreements and stabilize the economy.

While supportive of the G20 leaders in their efforts to achieve compromise, the media also focused on the different positions and interests of the United States and China. For its part, China was viewed as a “winner” at the summits as its pre-summit currency announcement allowed it to avoid criticisms and “fly under the radar.” This move by the Chinese was welcomed by both the Canadian media and the Canadian government. Media focus was also given to how national interests seemed to trump international cooperation.

The G20 Framework

Much of the media’s attention on outside engagement was concentrated on the G20 protests that became violent in downtown Toronto. Given that this level of protest and violence had not been seen before by the largely Toronto-based media, they gave prominent billing to the action in the streets. These G20 protests in the host city received negative criticism and, for a good part of Saturday, the violence and protests overshadowed the summit itself. Questions were levied against Prime Minister Harper because of the summit fallout.

Amidst this landscape, the media also gave attention to the voices that were excluded from the summit process itself. Criticisms were leveled that charities, NGOs and other activist groups were unable to give their voice to the discussions and receive attention from the media. The media also provided coverage of alternative summits, including the G(irls) 20 Summit, which sought to promote greater female involvement and perspective in the world’s problems, and the G20 Young Entrepreneur Summit.

Focus on the policy work at the summit itself was centred on progress towards greater financial reform. Attention was given to the business community’s reaction to the summit. Coverage recognized that the G20’s work towards attaining sustained and balanced growth was not over, but that the Toronto summit seemed to be a positive step forward. Room was also given to dissent and criticisms of the G20 leaders. Analysis of how various countries approach and affect the global economy was also provided. Much of the technical discussion on the G20 agenda was overlooked in favour of discussion on national accountability for the summit commitments.

G20 Record of Achievement

Despite the summit’s unprecedented costs, the Canadian media agreed that the summit process is a worthwhile endeavour. Accountability remained a priority for the Canadian media, though, as coverage focused on the need for Prime Minister Harper to ensure the effectiveness of the summits. One newspaper commentator went so far as to outline what would happen at a “successful summit.” The media provided coverage of the leaders’ concerns over accountability, at both the G8 and the G20. Efforts made by G20 leaders to ensure that transparency and credibility are addressed were welcomed.