Letter to the Picton Gazette
Thank you for your July 16 editorial regarding our article: Audit of Media Coverage in PEC. We appreciate the opportunity for dialogue and request that you publish this response from PECRA so that your readers will have the opportunity to draw their own conclusions.
The Prince Edward County Residents Association (PECRA) is a young grassroots, non-partisan civic initiative composed of residents from across the County. We don’t get paid for our work nor do we accept advertising to fund our work.
In Defense of Journalism
Our goal is to encourage transparency and help keep all publishers answerable to the public they serve, journalists as well as advocates. Our central argument remains: When community publications rely on taxpayer-funded journalism and advertising from developers, it’s fair for residents to question whether editorial leanings reflect financial incentives.
The Picton Gazette’s regular, favourable coverage of council, waterworks projects and development contrasts with The Wellington Times having a more critical stance—this, we believe, is a valid concern that there is such a sharp contract between these publications. Who is right? We will continue to independently verify all feedback received and correct errors where we receive credible evidence.
On Editorial Bias
You state:
“The threat of Artificial Intelligence to principled, well informed, and responsible human communication is real. And on vivid display on the CountyFirst website, an instance of the threats to civil discourse coming for us all from the dark and anonymous corners of the internet.”
Your comment “dark and anonymous corners of the internet” is unnecessary, demeaning and in poor taste. Why is the Picton Gazette on the internet and why does it clandestinely post on Facebook under individual staff names even though that’s a violation of Facebook’s terms? Don’t you have a presence on social media- the very media you criticize so vehemently? Yes, we leverage technology to support our work and we are proud of it as it keeps our costs low and allows us to analyse large volumes of information more efficiently with limited resources.
You have selectively picked a few short entries from our County Snippets section about events in the County and drawn broad disparaging conclusions. We encourage you to read our well researched articles in our news and research sections. However, in the interest of journalistic integrity we are happy to acknowledge errors and promptly correct them.
Unlike the Picton Gazette, we don’t receive funding from real estate advertising in every issue. We will continue to leverage technology to augment volunteer work for our community. The results of our analyses is far reaching. We have published a small fraction of what we have analysed so far.
Our work is collaborative
Our work is collaborative, grounded in public records and planning policy, and undertaken by volunteers committed to transparency and responsible governance. While the initiative is not incorporated and does not identify formal leadership, all material is reviewed for factual accuracy, legal grounding, and civic relevance. We are not perfect, as you will, of course, vehemently agree, there are admittedly mistakes made but we have promptly corrected them when they are pointed out. Of course, the Picton Gazette has no errors whatsoever in its content.
We are mindful of the Gazette’s editorial standards and your responsibility to uphold journalistic integrity. To that end, when your publication requested consent from PECRA to publish our Waterworks piece, as an Op-Ed in an upcoming issue of the Gazette, we proposed attribution of the article as “A Contributor to www.CountyFirst.ca, the website of the Prince Edward County Residents Association”.
We have not received a response from the Gazette as yet.
A fair and principled balance
Canadian courts have further recognized the legitimacy of anonymous public interest expression. In Grant v. Torstar Corp., 2009 SCC 61, the Supreme Court of Canada affirmed that commentary on matters of public importance—especially when grounded in fact and offered in good faith—deserves protection, even when critical of institutions or private entities. The Court underscored that open debate on public matters is a cornerstone of a free and democratic society. We stand by these decisions.
We would also respectfully note that the right to anonymous advocacy and expression is constitutionally protected in Canada. Under Sections 2(b) and 2(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, individuals are guaranteed the freedoms of expression and association. These rights include the ability to contribute to public discourse—particularly on matters of governance—without mandatory disclosure of identity. Many reputed national publications such as the Globe and Mail routinely exercise this right.
On Anonymity and Accountability
Prince Edward County Residents Association (PECRA) and CountyFirst are genuinely rooted in community advocacy—grounded in public documents, planning records, and verified data. Our decision to remain anonymous reflects two values:
- Safety & Inclusivity – Many residents want to raise concerns about council decisions, development, infrastructure, or governance without risking retaliation.
- Focus on Message, Not Messenger – By remaining anonymous, we ensure conversations stay centered on the issues, not personalities. We expect news to be unbiased and separate from editorial content.
We stand behind our data and invite anyone to independently verify our sources at www.countyfirst.ca. If you find an error, let us know and we will promptly correct it.
On Public Funding Claims
Our “Audit of Media Coverage in PEC” report clearly specifies sources and totals. We regret any confusion, but our figures refer to grants listed in federal and provincial databases:
- The Canada Periodical Fund (CPF) confirms eligible recipients—Picton Gazette and Wellington Times qualify.
- The Canada Media Fund (CMF) includes digital journalism projects, some of which are tied to these publications’ web initiatives.
- The Interactive Digital Media Fund (IDMF) entry we noted—$213K—was linked to an app developer based in Picton. An error, and we apologise for it.
We respect your $13K figure for Heritage Canada’s Aid to Publishers—but CPF, CMF, and IDMF are separate programs. Our “audit” clearly outlined these funding streams.
On Audit Accuracy
You state:
“But for CountyFirst, that’s just evidence of bias. “Significant taxpayer investment in the Gazette’s digital journalism appears to support editorial content that is disproportionately positive toward municipal leadership and developers,” it claims. The evidence? PECRA says it read 132 Gazette articles, found 7 of them were about development, and that 6 of those were “positive.” Conversely, it read 97 Times articles, found 2 mentioned development, and both were critical.”
Here are the facts: Our analysis is transparent: we reviewed publicly available articles, identified coverage on development and council accountability, and categorized tone using clear criteria. We leverage technology, where appropriate. We welcome scrutiny of methodology and stand by our results until shown otherwise. Our coding framework was far more stringent than in a normal analysis which would have resulted in higher favourable comments by the Picton Gazette. For example, addition of “unchallenged quotes from officials/developers” as a screening variable. We would be happy, for example, to provide you will the total count of positive/critical comments directed at Developers engaged in projects in Prince Edward County.
- Coding Framework:
- “Positive mention” = Favorable editorial framing, public praise, or unchallenged quotes from officials/developers
- “Critical mention” = Scrutiny, expressed concern, resident dissent, or highlighting deficiencies
Coverage of Mayor and Council
| Publication | Positive Mentions | Critical Mentions |
|---|---|---|
| Picton Gazette | 5 | 1 |
| Wellington Times | 0 | 2 |
Picton Gazette examples:
- Promoted strong-mayor powers as an efficiency tool for development.
- Frequent publication of mayoral Q&As with no opposing viewpoints.
Wellington Times examples:
- Investigative pieces into staff departures and governance issues.
- Letters and op-eds calling for independent council oversight.
CountyFirst / PECRA
Working Together for a Thriving Community