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

As the host of 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 culture attractions, and the shift of a Major League baseball series. Pre-summit coverage also focused on the impact to Canadians in general with questions relating to security and summit spending highlighted in media coverage.

When the summits drew nearer and 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 G8’s role in the G20-era. Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s maternal health initiative, 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, around the need for the G8 to continue. Attention was given to the move by G20 countries to assert 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 enough to legitimately and effectively manage the global economy.

G20 Conflict or Cooperation

The number of different voices within the G20 provided room for debate around 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 cited as the impetus for causing the G20 leaders to overcome their internal disagreements and stabilize the economy.

While supporting the G20 leaders in their work towards compromise, the media also focused on the different positions and interests of the United States and China. For its part, China was seen to have been a “winner” at the summits as the country’s pre-summit currency announcement allowed it to avoid criticisms and “fly under the radar”. The Chinese move was welcomed by both the Canadian media and the Canadian government. Focus was given to how national interests seemed to trump international cooperation.

The G20 Framework 

Much of the attention given to outside engagement focused on the protests that turned violent and took over parts of downtown Toronto. Having not seen this level of protest and violence before, the largely Toronto-based media gave prominent billing to the action in the streets. The impact of the G20 protests on the host city received negative criticism and for a good part of Saturday 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 the 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 that sought to promote greater female involvement and perspective in the world’s problems and the G20 Young Entrepreneur’s Summit.

Focus on the policy work at the summit itself was centered on progress towards greater financial reform. Attention was given to the business community’s reaction to the summit and its implications. 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 was also provided of how various countries approach and affect the global economy. Much of the technical discussion on the G20 agenda was overlooked for discussions on national accountability for the summit commitments.

G20 Record of Achievement

Despite the unprecedented costs, the Canadian media were in agreement that the summit process is a worthwhile endeavor. 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.