In much of the world, free expression is shrinking, not growing.
As authoritarian governments pour resources into shaping global narratives, Canada stands at a quiet crossroads — possessing the journalistic tradition and democratic credibility to matter in the world's information landscape, yet choosing, so far, not to act. The argument being made is not merely about broadcasting infrastructure, but about whether a nation that champions press freedom in principle is willing to defend it in practice. With CBC/Radio-Canada already carrying the seeds of such a mission, the question is less about capability than about will.
- Russia, China, and Iran are winning the global information war — not by making themselves look good, but by systematically eroding trust in liberal democracies.
- Press freedom is declining worldwide, and the vacuum left by retreating independent media is being filled by state-controlled propaganda reaching billions in dozens of languages.
- Canada talks loudly about media freedom on the international stage while spending just $33 per capita on public broadcasting — less than half the democratic average — leaving its own broadcaster a skeleton crew of nine people serving a global mandate.
- CBC/Radio-Canada has the credibility, the bilingual foundation, and the journalistic standards to become a genuine alternative to authoritarian media, but lacks the investment to act on that potential.
- The UK's reinvestment in the BBC World Service after 2016 offers a direct model: modest political will translated into 11 new language services and a measurably stronger democratic voice in the world.
Canada has quietly faded from global conversation, and a recent federal election passed with barely a word about foreign policy, culture, or international communications. Yet there is a concrete way to reassert a Canadian presence in the world: transform CBC/Radio-Canada into a genuine international broadcaster, modeled on what the BBC World Service has done for decades — deploying journalists across continents, broadcasting in multiple languages, and reaching audiences far beyond Canadian borders.
The urgency is real. Authoritarian governments are no longer satisfied with controlling information at home; they are exporting their narratives with remarkable effectiveness. Russia's RT and Sputnik rank second and third among the most-consulted international public media outlets online. China broadcasts globally in six languages through television and in 65 through radio. Iran operates 40 channels across 20 countries in 30 languages. Their goal is not to inspire admiration — it is to sow doubt about the West.
Liberal democracies have begun to respond. The United Kingdom significantly reinvested in the BBC World Service in 2016, expanding to 40 language services. Canada, meanwhile, co-founded the Media Freedom Coalition and joined the Information and Democracy Partnership — principled gestures that have not been matched by investment in its own broadcasting capacity.
CBC/Radio-Canada has the foundation to do this work. Canada ranks among the world's strongest nations on press freedom, and the corporation brings high professional standards and genuine international experience. Radio Canada International has existed since 1945 and broadcasts in seven languages — but is staffed by just nine people, largely translating domestic content. That is not a global news service.
At $33 per capita, Canada spends far less on public broadcasting than the $88 democratic average. Closing that gap to build a real international service would serve multiple purposes at once: offering independent information to people living under authoritarian media, presenting a credible democratic alternative to state propaganda, and restoring Canada's voice in a world that has largely stopped hearing it.
Canada barely registers in global conversations anymore. During the recent federal election, the candidates offered almost nothing on foreign policy, culture, or communications—three areas where the country could actually matter. But there's a way to address two of these gaps at once: build an international news service at CBC/Radio-Canada, modeled on what the BBC has done for decades.
The idea isn't simply to expand the network of foreign correspondents who file stories for Canadian audiences. Instead, it means deploying journalists and broadcasting infrastructure across multiple continents, reaching people worldwide in many languages. The BBC World Service does this. France 24 does this. Canada does not.
The urgency comes from what's happening in the global media landscape. Press freedom has been declining for years, and that decline tracks directly with the erosion of democracy itself. Authoritarian governments are no longer content to control information at home—they're aggressively exporting their narratives abroad, and they're doing it with remarkable success. Russia's RT and Sputnik now rank as the second and third most-consulted international public media outlets on the internet, behind only the BBC. Their content isn't really designed to make Russia look good; it's designed to make the West look worse. China committed to this strategy over a decade ago, with Xi Jinping explicitly calling for the country to "tell China's story well" to the world. China Global Television Network now broadcasts in six languages, while China Radio International reaches audiences in 65. Iran, with a budget around one billion dollars, operates 40 television and radio channels across 20 countries in 30 languages, all aimed at countering what it calls Western propaganda and burnishing Tehran's image as an anti-imperialist power.
Liberal democracies have started to notice. The United Kingdom responded in 2016 by significantly reinvesting in the BBC World Service, expanding its staff and adding 11 new language services to reach 40 total. The BBC's then-director, Fran Unsworth, framed it plainly: in much of the world, free expression is shrinking, not growing, and independent broadcasters matter more than ever.
Canada has been vocal about media freedom in principle. It co-founded the Media Freedom Coalition in 2019 with the U.K., and it's among the founding members of the Information and Democracy Partnership, both dedicated to supporting press freedom and reliable information. But Canada hasn't matched those commitments with action on its own broadcasting capacity.
CBC/Radio-Canada has the foundation to do this work. The organization sits within a country that ranks among the world's strongest on press freedom according to Reporters Without Borders. It has high professional standards, real experience in international journalism, and already operates in two international languages. Radio Canada International has existed since 1945 and broadcasts in seven languages, but it's staffed by just nine people in Montreal, mostly translating content from the corporation's domestic websites. That's not a global news service; that's a skeleton crew.
Canada currently spends $33 per capita on public broadcasting. The average among comparable democracies is $88. The investment required to build a genuine international service would be substantial, but it would serve multiple purposes at once: it would give people in authoritarian countries access to independent information they increasingly lack, it would present a credible alternative to state propaganda, it would deepen Canadians' understanding of the world, and it would help the world understand Canada. For a country that has largely disappeared from global conversation, that's worth the cost.
Citas Notables
In much of the world, there is not more free expression, but less.— Fran Unsworth, former BBC World Service director
Tell China's story well to the world in accordance with the Chinese Communist Party line.— Xi Jinping, on China's international broadcasting strategy
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why does Canada need its own international broadcaster when the BBC already does this work?
Because the BBC serves British interests first. A Canadian service would bring a different perspective—North American, bilingual, shaped by Canada's particular values. And right now, there's almost no independent voice from Canada in the global information space. The authoritarian broadcasters are filling that vacuum.
But Canada is small. How would it compete with China's 65-language operation or Russia's massive reach?
It wouldn't compete on scale. It would compete on credibility. People in closed societies know state media when they see it. An independent Canadian broadcaster would be trusted precisely because Canada has no imperial ambitions and no authoritarian government backing it.
The piece mentions Canada spends $33 per capita on public broadcasting versus $88 elsewhere. That's a huge gap. Where would the money come from?
That's the real question. But it's also the point—Canada is already underfunding public media. This isn't asking for something entirely new; it's asking for Canada to invest at the level other democracies already do.
What would success look like? How would you measure whether this actually counters authoritarian propaganda?
You'd watch whether people in those countries actually tune in, whether they cite it as a trusted source, whether it shifts conversations. But honestly, the first measure is whether Canada is willing to try at all.
Is there a risk that a Canadian international broadcaster becomes just another voice in a crowded field?
There's always that risk. But the alternative is certain—Canada stays silent while others shape the story.