Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This article explores the Ontario newspaper framing of non-medical cannabis legalization in the years prior to and after legalization through inductive content analysis of newspaper articles. The predominant discourse in Ontario was regarding economics and the change in provincial government leadership. The coverage also shifted from a negative tone pre-legalization to neutral and positive post-legalization. These findings underscore the relationship between political dynamics and media framing in shaping public discourse on potentially contentious topics.

Keywords

agenda setting content/coverage press and society cannabis legalization inductive content analysis community journalism

Introduction

The debates around the morality of cannabis use, criminal behaviors, public health consequences, and individual rights and freedoms have had a lengthy history in Canada (Cloutier et al., 2022; Sorensen et al., 2022). Yet, what began as a federal election campaign promise became a historic moment in Canada with the passing of Bill C-45, the Cannabis Act, on October 17, 2018. With this new bill, Canada became the second country in the world after Uruguay to legalize non-medical cannabis. While the Cannabis Act is a federal law and regulates cannabis at the federal level, it allowed each Canadian province and territory to develop their own regulations (Crépault, 2018). Consequently, these regulations differ greatly across Canada, causing gaps in policy where some provinces have much stricter regulations than others. This difference in legislation has likely resulted in media coverage that varied dramatically across the country, with local media focusing their narratives on the decisions of their respective provincial or territorial governments. With the increasing prevalence of cannabis legalization worldwide, it is important to look at how news media have portrayed cannabis legalization in different Canadian provinces and how this portrayal is intertwined with policymaking and provincial politics.

An examination of the regional portrayal of cannabis legalization allows for a more nuanced view of how this national policy discourse took place, as region-specific concerns can impact the portrayal of this discussion in the media. As the largest province by population, as well as being home to the nation’s capital, much of the news media that is produced in Ontario is consumed across the country. When looking at regional variations in the media coverage of the Cannabis Act, Ontario stands out as having media coverage that was heavily influenced by provincial politics. At the time the Cannabis Act was passed, Kathleen Wynne of the Ontario Liberal party was the premier of the province and drafted a distribution policy that was among the strictest in Canada. In June 2018, with only 4 months until non-medical cannabis was legalized and available to the public for sale, the Progressive Conservative Party, led by Premier Doug Ford, was elected. This change in government resulted in a new provincial policy for the sale of non-medical cannabis, notably the decision to include private retail of cannabis in addition to an online government-run cannabis retail store. While previous research has looked at this topic on a federal level (Aversa et al., 2023; Gagnon et al., 2020; Sorensen et al., 2022), during the legalization period, Ontario had a unique set of circumstances that highlighted the importance of considering the intersection of national and regional policy decisions on media content. With a distinct regional political change, as well as this region having such a large influence on the media of the country, Ontario media coverage provides an excellent case study in which the politics of one region of a country have an outsized influence on the national media coverage of potentially controversial legislation.

This study builds upon previous research on national coverage of the controversies surrounding non-medical cannabis legalization in Canada by conducting a pre- and post-cannabis legalization comparative content analysis of Ontario newspaper coverage. The study specifically pertains to media coverage of non-medical cannabis as defined in the Cannabis Act (Government of Canada, 2018). The specific objectives are to explore how Ontario news media portrayed the legalization of non-medical cannabis pre- and post-legalization in Ontario; to explore the changes in narratives before and after legalization; and to describe how various Ontario newspapers framed the cannabis legalization issue. In examining these objectives, we found that political and economic themes dominated the discourse, while health topics were not often mentioned. These differences occurred across the political stance of the newspapers, as well as across time; and were significantly influenced by the 2018 Ontario Provincial elections.

Literature Review

Given the contentious nature of cannabis legalization, debates surrounding cannabis legalization have been a popular media topic, as well as political topic, in the time before and after the passing of the Cannabis Act (Aversa et al., 2023; Gagnon et al., 2020; Golan, 2010; Haines-Saah et al., 2014). For more than a century, newspaper media has framed the public’s perception of cannabis with a range of competing discourses, spanning from moral to immoral (Sznitman & Lewis, 2015). This has also been found to play a role in the agenda-setting of policymakers, as a change in public opinion can subsequently exert pressure on policymakers to respond (Gunning & Illes, 2021; Mach et al., 2021). Media most often covers topics that are prioritized by governments and interested parties, publishing more frequently on topics that receive sustained attention, which places pressure on policy makers to pay attention to those topics (Langer & Gruber, 2021; Yanovitzky, 2002). The influence of the media can shape not only public opinion, but also how public policy is developed.

As cannabis has been increasingly legalized for medical and non-medical purposes across the globe, this decision has been framed by the media in different ways. In the United States, media reporting on drug use and cannabis legalization, for both medical and non-medical purposes, has often relied on a sense of moral panic and leans toward prohibition (Block, 2017; Eversman, 2013). Much of the newspaper coverage has been found to heavily emphasize the legal and economic impacts of cannabis, with some emphasizing the costs to society due to crime from cannabis (Block, 2017; Hughes et al., 2011). This negative portrayal can have a strong influence on public opinion and public policy, as media is a large part of how drug policy is communicated to the public (Blidook, 2008; Tieberghien, 2014; Yanovitzky, 2002). Many newspapers have begun to move toward a more balanced approach to framing the cannabis legalization debate, incorporating both evidence and policy considerations (Aversa et al., 2023; Lenton, 2004). As Canada is only the second country to legalize non-medical cannabis, the media portrayal of this policy serves as important case study for future media communication research on potentially controversial policy decisions.

According to the Canadian Press, journalists should maintain “honest, unbiased, and unflinchingly fair” reporting (Our News Principles, n.d.), yet previous research has found that news outlets are influenced by underlying social, political and economic dynamics (Aversa et al., 2023). This presents an inherent bias to readers that is particularly influenced by the political stance of the newspaper, potentially swaying readers to the editorial stance of the paper (Aversa et al., 2023; Gagnon et al., 2020). While non-medical cannabis legalization has been frequently depicted as a legal and regulatory discourse (Sorensen et al., 2022), the media coverage of cannabis has traditionally been negative and sensationalist, with a predominant focus on crime and public safety (Haines-Saah et al., 2014). Previous research found five frames, including economics, medical, political/legal/regulatory, social and glamorous/popular culture, as well as an “other” category (which includes topics not covered repeatedly, such as ethical issues, sports and political figures; Aversa et al., 2021, 2023; Sorensen et al., 2022). Past research has indicated a shift toward a more balanced and progressive framing in Canadian media (Aversa et al., 2023). Canadian newspaper coverage of cannabis has previously focused on economic topics such as retail sales, but had a minimal amount of coverage of public health topics (Aversa et al., 2023; McGinty et al., 2016; Sorensen et al., 2022). Given past tendency toward sensationalism, which can contribute to moral panic, exploring how the media frames these narratives in Ontario will help provide context for future studies on the interaction of regional media, a shifting political landscape and controversial policy. While there has been an increased focus on cannabis media research, what is relatively underexplored is how regional politics intersects with the temporality of media coverage on non-medical cannabis legalization. Consequently, this study sought to answer the following questions: (a) What themes were most prevalent in Ontario news coverage of cannabis legalization and was there a temporal difference in coverage? (b) Which sources were given the largest voice in the coverage of cannabis legalization? (c) Did the sentiment and coverage of different themes vary by editorial stance? Answers to these questions would improve our understanding of how political dynamics and media framing together shape public discourse on potentially controversial and complex issues.

Theoretical Context

This study is underpinned by complementary theoretical conceptions from media framing, indexing theory and the moral panic framework. Media framing is how the media describes a given issue, which can change the views of the reader based upon what aspects of policy claims are highlighted or suppressed (Golan, 2010). Underpinning media framing, the agenda setting theory suggests that the media have the capacity to shape the general public’s priorities so that members of the public are led to view some issues as more salient than others based on the amount of attention being given (Cook et al., 1983; McCombs & Shaw, 1972). As cannabis legalization can be a polarizing topic, an emotional response can be elicited depending on how the discussion is framed (Hathaway & Erickson, 2004). In Canada, the media has directed attention to specific aspects of cannabis legalization, such as the economic benefits, thereby ensuring that what the media deem important is highlighted, while other issues are suppressed (Aversa et al., 2023; Sorensen et al., 2022). The contentious nature of cannabis legalization lends itself to media framing, as the media have been found to create inaccurate claims based on the location and editorial stance of the paper, with the same story sometimes being reported upon very differently in different newspapers (Tieberghien, 2014). Given that media framing influences the public perception, it is an important theory when discussing how the media covers potentially contentious policy debates.

Within the debate surrounding cannabis legalization, it is important to also look at who is included in an article as a source, as frames are shaped not only by what is covered, but also by whose voice is included. Complementary to media framing, the theoretical concepts within indexing theory help to explain how journalists choose their sources (Bennett, 1990). Previous analysis of news coverage, from cannabis to H1N1 vaccinations, has highlighted that journalists carefully choose themes and voices to shape their stories, thereby amplifying or suppressing other voices and perspectives that can significantly impact public policies, particularly those perceived to impact the public’s health (Baekkeskov, 2016; Golan, 2010). Indexing theory points out that mainstream media tends to reflect views of the political elites over those of the general public when discussing contentious topics (Bennett, 1990). When political elites are in official agreement, news media coverage tends to reflect this consensus, relying on fewer sources and potentially marginalizing dissenting voices (Bennett et al., 2006). However, when political elites are in disagreement, especially if there are policymaking implications, there will likely be a broader range of sources in the media to reflect the variety of opinions (Bennett et al., 2006). As cannabis legalization was a potentially controversial media topic that could reflect disagreement among political elites, indexing theoretical conceptions help to explain which sources were amplified, and which were silenced, in the Ontario media.

Media framing can also elicit a moral panic within readers if the media report on an issue with sensational and inflated claims (Hathaway & Erickson, 2004). Yet frequently, the panic created by media sensationalism is often disproportionate to the actual danger posed (Hathaway & Erickson, 2004). Consequently, moral panic is often used as a framework for the media coverage of drug related topics (Bright et al., 2013; Hathaway & Erickson, 2004; Silverman, 2010). Using moral panic in media reporting can create a compelling article, yet it may cause a skewed perspective of the topic being reported on (Silverman, 2010). Moral panic can also result in hurried policy development without substantial evidence that does not always meet the intended policy outcomes, which can have potentially unintended consequences (Bright et al., 2013). The tone that is used can influence policy development and the public perception. For instance, Lynch (2021) found that in the United States, in states with news coverage that use a positive tone when discussing cannabis legalization, there was an association with subsequent cannabis legalization. In addition, Kim and Kim (2018) found that in American newspaper coverage of cannabis, liberal sources were more likely to have a positive tone than conservative sources. Depending on a reader’s source of news, this tends to influence how the reader would feel about a given public policy. The tone that is used, as well as how the media frames the story and who has a voice, all contribute to a potential moral panic. This analysis will explore if previously reported frames that are related to moral panic, such as crime and harmful impacts on youth, persists in the Ontario news coverage of cannabis.

Methods

An inductive qualitative approach was used to analyze Ontario newspaper articles that reported on the legalization of non-medical cannabis in the year prior to and after the enactment of the Cannabis Act. Qualitative content analysis was chosen as it allowed the discovery of the contextual meaning by exploring emerging frames in the data (Priest et al., 2002). Open coding was employed, whereby frames from previous research were not used during the coding process. Open coding was chosen as it puts a greater emphasis on the interpretation of the data, allowing for more flexibility in exploring new and emerging frames that may not have been previously found (Wester et al., 2004). Due to the unique convergence of political and regulatory issues in Ontario the pre- and post-legalization time periods studied, open coding allowed for new findings to emerge, rather than being constrained to a set of pre-existing themes (Wester et al., 2004). Qualitative coding was completed in NVivo 14 for Windows.

This study included 813 articles published in four Ontario-based newspapers with the highest circulation (“Overview of Results: Spring 2021 Study,” 2021). Similar to Haines-Saah et al. (2014), these papers were chosen based on their varying political viewpoints, as well as their large readerships and consumption across Ontario. The research sample included two national and two provincial newspapers (see Table 1). The editorial stance of the papers is based on the categorization completed by Aversa et al. (2023). LexisNexis and Factiva databases were used to collect the newspaper articles by using the string search [cannabis OR weed OR marijuana OR pot] AND [legal OR legalization].

Table 1

Number of Articles Pre- and Post- Legalization by Newspaper.

Newspaper	Coverage	Editorial position^a	Province	City	Article count pre-	Article count post-	Article count total
Globe and Mail	National	Centrist	—	—	122	70	192
National Post	National	Conservative	—	—	87	69	156
Toronto Star	Local	Liberal	Ontario	Toronto	206	131	337
Toronto Sun	Local	Conservative	Ontario	Toronto	75	53	128
Total					490	323	813

Editiorial position is based on Aversa et al. (2023).

Newspaper articles, editorials and letters to the editor that were written in English and pertained to the legalization of non-medical cannabis in Canada were included in the sample. Public service announcements, duplicate articles in the same paper and articles that did not pertain to the legalization debate were eliminated from the sample. The lead researcher reviewed all papers prior to eliminating articles from the sample. These articles were split into two time periods, “pre-legalization,” which encompassed October 17, 2017, to October 16, 2018, and “post-legalization,” which encompassed October 17, 2018, to October 17, 2019. This time period was chosen as it marked the emergence of the legalization of non-medical cannabis, beginning with the initial policy development and proclamation of the Cannabis Act. This 2-year period also includes the first year of legalized cannabis sales in Ontario.

The final sample was then uploaded to NVivo to begin qualitative coding. These articles were separated by newspaper and by either pre- or post-legalization. Prior to beginning coding in NVivo, the lead researcher read 20 articles, with an equal proportion from each newspaper and across the timespan of the sample to develop an initial codebook. This codebook was utilized to track emerging codes and ensure that codes remained distinct. Criteria were also developed to categorize content as positive, neutral or negative in sentiment, as previously described by Lynch (2021). Reading, and rereading, each article to ensure each was relevant to the research question was an iterative process throughout coding.

Coding was initially conducted for each sentence, with each sentence being coded to multiple themes if it included more than one theme. Each sentence was also coded by sentiment. This ensured that all themes and sentiments in a given article were accounted for. Factual statements that were opinion based were left neutral, such as “Many of the criminal charges laid in the initial raids have been dropped or stayed” (Gray, 2017). The exception to this was when a factual statement would clearly be understood as having a moral connotation, such as when discussing young adults driving under the influence. Finally, social events that celebrated cannabis legalization were coded as positive, as celebrations are typically considered to be a positive event.

The research team each then read and independently coded the initial 20 articles. After, the team met to compare codes and to come to a consensus on how to interpret each sentence, ensuring consistency in coding topics and sentiment. A mind map was used as a visual cue for each of the themes and to avoid creating duplicate themes (see Figure S1 in the Supplemental Material for an example of the mind map). The research team then independently coded a proportion of articles in the sample for content and sentiment. Once all articles were coded, the lead researcher reviewed the codebook and decided if the themes were exhaustive and mutually exclusive or if they needed to be collapsed into another theme to ensure exclusivity. The unit of analysis was individual references, defined as any paragraphs or sentences that were coded under each theme or sub-code during analysis. These references are the specific segments of text used when analyzing the resulting patterns.

Results

The results are presented in five sections, starting with the themes that emerged from the content analysis, which is then followed by temporal coverage, the amplification or silencing of voices, the sentiment of the newspaper coverage and finally by editorial stance of the newspaper. In presenting the results, direct quotations from newspapers are provided to contextualize the key themes and issues that were found. For clarity in language, the overarching themes are termed “frames,” while any sub-codes for each theme is termed a “code.”

Thematic Analysis

The frames that emerged from this research were legal and regulatory, economics, politics, social, health and education. The Ontario newspaper framing of non-medical cannabis legalization had a significantly political slant to it, enough so to separate politics and legal and regulatory frames instead of keeping them combined like previous research (Block, 2017; Bright et al., 2013). The legal and regulatory frame encompassed all mentions of policies, regulations, laws and their implementation. This included pardons for past offenses and critiques of the way these laws were being implemented. The economics frame pertained to the discourse surrounding the economic costs and benefits of cannabis legalization in Canada. This discussion centered around cannabis entrepreneurs, stocks, supply and demand, economic development, real estate and the black market. References about the black market that centered on challenges in legal enforcement were coded to legal and regulatory. Together, the legal and regulatory and economics issues represented 74% of references, painting a clear picture of the dominant themes in Ontario newspaper coverage, as seen in Figure 1.

Figure 1

Number of References Coded to Each of the Six Main Themes

Media coverage of cannabis legalization in Ontario was heavily politicized, with this theme including political debates and articles exploring the partisan division in the policymaking process. Examples of this coverage included comparisons of the provincial Liberal and Conservative policies, as well as discussion of Prime Minister Trudeau’s policy decisions and opinions on cannabis. There was also coverage of the differences in beliefs about the implementation of cannabis legalization from the different federal and provincial political parties. The social frame included references to social uncertainty and concerns surrounding legalization. An example of social uncertainty within the media discourse pertained to how exposure to legalized cannabis in public places would affect children, which can be related to moral panic depending on how it is framed. An example of this frame was the discussion surrounding the placement of cannabis retailers near schools, such as this quote from Loriggio (2018):

Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne is looking into how a decision was made to place one of the province’s first government-run cannabis stores less than a kilometre from a school, as school board officials say they were left out of the process. Ms. Wynne said on Thursday that safety remains her top concern as the province rolls out a chain of stores to sell and distribute recreational marijuana, which is expected to become legal this summer.

This frame also included discussions about celebrations relating to legalization and nuisances resulting from legalization, such as smell. The references coded to health were a combination of health benefits and concerns for humans, animals and the environment. This included concerns about physical and mental health, public health, hospital wait times and the environmental health impacts of pesticides from cannabis cultivation. There was also coverage of concerns regarding the impacts on children’s health, as it is generally recognized that children, and the protection of their well-being, are among Canadians’ perceived core values. It is therefore not surprising that the media reflected these core values by paying closer attention to the health of children as compared to other subsects of the population.

This study also produced an education frame that had not been documented in prior research. The lack of attention to this frame in the Ontario newspaper coverage made it important to include in this study, as education and research play an important role in the legalization discourse. This frame contained mentions of academic or corporate research, as well as curriculum changes and educational challenges that occurred as a result of cannabis legalization.

Temporal Analysis of News Coverage

As the four newspapers included in this study have different political views, the frame distribution by newspaper and time period was explored. Most of the references were found prior to legalization, which is consistent with the spread of the overall sample (see Figure 2).

Figure 2

Article Distribution by Newspaper and Time Period

All four papers had more references pertaining to the legal/regulatory frame pre-legalization as compared to post-legalization. Prior to legalization, public licensing discussed the plans of the government on how to sell cannabis, comparing government-run stores, both online and physical, and private stores, with an example quote below:

Given the problems the issue poses with some of their more socially conservative supporters, the Tories could have used the tight timeframe as an excuse to stick with the plan inherited from Kathleen Wynne’s Liberals to sell marijuana through about 150 government-run stores—a model that seemed insufficient in scale and consumer appeal to compete with the black market. (“Doug Ford’s Pot Plan,” 2018)

After legalization, references for public licensing no longer included this discourse, instead focusing on articles that compared the different licensing systems across the provinces. Driving while using cannabis appeared most often after legalization, with discussion surrounding the enforcement of new driving policies and the challenges this would pose for law enforcement officers. Coverage of municipal decisions to choose to restrict or allow cannabis sales compared different municipalities. As the legal/regulatory frame had the most coverage, a more detailed analysis was undertaken to explore if each newspaper portrayed this frame differently by focusing on specific topics. The Toronto Sun covered where cannabis was sold and utilized, with retail sales and public usage both being covered. The other three papers also had a prominent discourse about driving while using cannabis and compared cannabis laws to alcohol and tobacco. This discourse was limited in the Toronto Sun, with only one article on driving while high.

The economics frame stood out as the most evenly split prior to and after legalization across all newspapers. This coverage focused on the cannabis industry, the black market and growers. Discourse surrounding the cannabis industry in all four papers included references to the reluctance of banks to work with the cannabis industry prior to legalization and speculation about the survival of the new cannabis companies. This coverage of the speculative nature of the cannabis industry included comments such as:

When Ontario’s Progressive Conservatives won office in June, the looming national legalization of cannabis four months later seemed to leave them with a couple of bad options for managing its sale. (Daly, 2018)

The coverage on growers included references to individual cannabis companies. Reporting on the black market was related to how the black market would be altered as a result of cannabis legalization. This topic also included references to how the black market may or may not affect cannabis companies’ profits, as there were comments about whether consumers would purchase from the black market or a legal supplier. Supply and demand of cannabis became more prominent in the discourse after legalization in all newspapers, with an increase in articles describing instances such as retail shops having shortages or long wait times.

Among all the frames, the coverage of politics was the most affected by the proclamation of the Cannabis Act. Much of this discourse focused on the 2018 Ontario election and the policy differences between Ontario Premiers Wynne and Ford, which occurred prior to legalization. The comment below points to these policy differences:

Under premier Kathleen Wynne, Canada’s largest province was the first to introduce details on how it would sell cannabis—but the plan changed dramatically under her successor, Doug Ford, and now Ontarians may be the last in Canada to smoke up from store-bought weed. (Alam, 2018)

There was also coverage of the federal policy decisions from the Liberal Party and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, with discourse surrounding the division between different federal political parties and their political beliefs. The coverage of the social impact on Canadians included coverage of the stigma surrounding cannabis usage. This includes discussions about the taboo nature of cannabis, the potential benefits of legalizing non-medical cannabis for medical users and concerns about the location of cannabis stores. The taboo nature of cannabis was discussed in both its historical and current context:

If it all seems somewhat hazy, that’s because it is: after nearly a century of being trained to see marijuana as the enemy, law enforcement is navigating the same cultural curve as the rest of Canada. (Potter, 2018)

Concurrently, the potential uncertainties regarding legalization and how this would affect people at the community level was also discussed. Uncertainty around the impacts on youth centered around concerns that legalizing cannabis would normalize usage, leading to an increase in usage. References to different types of non-medical usage (i.e., vaping, smoking or consuming edibles) were found only after legalization.

It emerged from the analysis that health was the frame that was the most variable in coverage between papers, with the Globe and Mail, the Toronto Star and the Toronto Sun having coverage that was heavily skewed toward publications prior to legalization. The National Post showed a more balanced approach, with discussions of health occurring evenly across the sample temporally. Across all four papers, there was consistently more reporting about the implications for children’s health in comparison to adults.

With respect to discourse regarding the impact to education, the Toronto Sun had very even coverage temporally. The remaining newspapers all had more references prior to legalization than after. Research, or the lack thereof, as well as curriculum development and new post-secondary programs and courses were all covered relatively equally by all four papers. Except for the Toronto Star, the newspapers discussed the need for public education surrounding cannabis legalization and the new driving laws prior to and after legalization. The Toronto Star only covered the need for public education campaigns after legalization, but not before.

Amplification or Silencing of Voices

In three of the four newspapers, government officials were the most consistently cited source of quotes and information, however, the National Post more often used those in the cannabis industry, such as cannabis company executives or employees, as a source. These interested parties were commenting on issues such as privatization, taxes, entrepreneurship and the lucrative nature of cannabis sales. An example of this in the National Post is:

The challenge for the government is balancing quality and public safety with a desire to eradicate the illicit market, said Deepak Anand, vice president of business development and government relations at Cannabis Compliance Inc. (Owram, 2018)

The Globe and Mail amplified government voices but also highlighted the voices of individuals and organizations that had an interest in legal and regulatory issues such as police, lawyers and community groups such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving Canada. This resulted in a wider coverage of topics such as the black market, crime and driving while using cannabis. Coverage of government officials’ voices were also dominant in the Toronto Sun, but this paper allocated more space for pro cannabis perspectives and cannabis activists as compared to the Globe and Mail and the Toronto Star. Articles about cannabis legalization celebrations, cannabis resorts and cannabis tourism were more prominent in the Toronto Sun than in the other papers. The Toronto Star also amplified government officials’ voices and the cannabis industry, but had the greatest number of voices represented by the health sector in comparison to the other three papers. This was the only paper that amplified the voices of individuals advocating for public health, education and public health awareness campaigns regarding non-medical cannabis legalization. Articles emphasizing the necessity for public education and greater engagement by public health authority were exclusively present in the Toronto Star. While other newspapers had discourse on topics such as discussing children’s health concerns, they did not delve into the necessity for enhanced involvement by public health in the policymaking process.

Sentiment of Coverage

To assess whether articles published at different stages of the policy development process were reported upon differently, disparities in the sentiment of articles published before and after legalization were analyzed. Not all references convey a positive or negative sentiment however, as most references maintained a neutral stance and thus are excluded from this aspect of the analysis. Our findings align with the trend toward a more balanced framing in Canadian media (Aversa et al., 2023), as most of the references adopted a neutral stance.

Of the sentiment references that were coded prior to legalization, many were found to be negative. The Ontario media coverage of cannabis legalization reflected indexing theory (Bennett et al., 2006), where the disagreement between provincial political elites resulted in a broad range of sources and voices, instead of a cohesive narrative. In previous research on cannabis media, news coverage that was more negative in tone shaped the discourse around illegal drug use and crime, instead of as a public health decision (Haines-Saah et al., 2014). This negative coverage could be seen in the Ontario media coverage prior to legalization, with comments such as:

Mr. Ford seemed to echo those concerns on Thursday, when he warned he was concerned about the welfare of children after recreational marijuana is made available. “This is a path that the federal government has dumped on all the provinces,” he said. (Giovannetti, 2018)

There was also considerable coverage of public sentiment through editorials, both pre- and post-legalization. One such editorial discussed how the writer felt that legalizing cannabis would lead to poor outcomes, with Bowie (2017) stating “Instead, we are now faced with a costly bureaucracy and government machine churning away while some people get rich and our society is left with managing the negative aspects of another potential social problem.” These editorials give an outlet to sources that may not otherwise be heard in a policy debate controlled by the political elites.

Post-legalization, there was a distinct shift in the reporting upon cannabis media. While references were still predominantly negative in tone the gap between positive and negative references diminished (see Figure 3). The Toronto Sun had the most noticeable change in sentiment, as it had a large increase in overall coverage with sentiment. Negative sentiment post-legalization continued to focus on the black market, such as “The traffic at these illegal operations is enormous. With each sale there is no HST paid, no contribution to the medical system or any other part of society. It’s profit straight to the black market.” (Warmington, 2019). The Toronto Sun was also the only paper that had a higher proportion of references coded to sentiment post-legalization, with a smaller proportion being neutral. The Toronto Star also showed an increase in positive sentiment after legalization.

Figure 3

Sentiment Pre- and Post-Legalization by Newspaper

Coverage by Editorial Stance

The National Post is a conservative paper (Aversa et al., 2023) that stood out for having fewer references about the health frame prior to legalization, which is in direct opposition to the other newspapers in this sample. It also featured more voices from the cannabis industry as compared to government officials, but maintained the most neutral tone out of the four papers. The Toronto Sun is the other conservative newspaper (Aversa et al., 2023), yet it more consistently cited government officials, with less inclusion of cannabis activists and pro cannabis individuals as sources than the National Post. There was also a noticeable change after legalization, in that the Toronto Sun had many more references with a more positive sentiment.

The Globe and Mail tends to have a centrist editorial position (Aversa et al., 2023) and had similar patterns to the overall sample regarding the frames that were represented. Government officials received the most representation and the second most represented group was that of individuals and organizations. There were also many more opinions about legal and regulatory issues as compared to the other three papers which had no change in sentiment on this frame prior to or post legalization. The Toronto Star is a liberal paper that had the same patterns as the overall sample. The Toronto Star amplified the voices of government officials but also provided the most space for voices from the health and education sectors. There was a slight shift toward a more positive sentiment post legalization; however, this was similar to the rest of the sample. This was the only paper that amplified the voice of public health within its articles by including the voice of public health officials and scientists.

Limitations and Future Research

As the analysis is restricted to the four largest Ontario newspapers, this study excluded smaller, local newspapers. This could potentially generate different findings if this research was extended to newspapers from smaller cities or rural areas in Ontario. In addition, articles were collected exclusively from newspapers, which leaves open a door as to how this discourse took place in other forms of media. Several of the findings in this research can also be attributed to the limited research on the health outcomes of cannabis research and as such, these findings may shift in the future. This study was also limited to a 2-year period outside of which themes may have changed as legalization became more normalized. While this research also theorizes the impact these findings have had on the public’s perception, as the public perception was not studied, future research could include the impacts of these articles on public perception.

Conclusions

Overall, this study identifies a greater shift from pre- to post-legalization coverage of the legal, regulatory, economic and political aspects of cannabis legalization as opposed to health or social frames. When combined with the trend toward more positive sentiment, this follows the trend toward less sensationalism found by Aversa et al. (2023) in the overall Canadian coverage of cannabis legalization. Haines-Saah et al. (2014) previously found that Canadian media framed cannabis in a sensationalist manner, focusing on negative health impacts and potential for increased crime, yet this study found that the cannabis legalization discourse was framed in terms of legal/regulatory, economics and politics. The unique situation in Ontario of a controversial federal policy being enacted in the midst of a provincial election also likely had an influence on the dominance of these frames in the discourse.

The use of inductive content analysis allowed for the discovery of new frames that had not previously been found in the literature. These frames include education and politics, which had not been separated out in previous media framing research on cannabis legalization and could represent an area that is distinctive to regional media research when such policy decisions are in the purview of provincial governments instead of federal. The emphasis on legal/regulatory, economics and political topics in newspaper coverage could help normalize a new era where public health policies are evaluated not on the science, or lack thereof, but on the implications for the economy instead. As the public perception of the importance of these topics can be strongly swayed by the media’s framing (Tieberghien, 2014), the lack of attention to health and education could cause readers to think of these topics as lower in importance than the economic benefits of cannabis legalization.

There was also a shift in the coverage of these themes over time. There were more articles published pre-legalization, with an intense discourse on politics and legal/regulatory issues. The dramatic shift in provincial policy after the election, including a decision to start selling cannabis in retail stores instead of solely online, was likely part of the reason for the intense coverage of politics and legal/regulatory issues pre-legalization, but not post-legalization. Some of this shift, such as to coverage of shortages in retail locations post-legalization is due to an overall shift from debates surrounding legalization itself to whether or not the provincial frameworks were successful, which is in line with Aversa et al. (2023).

The framing of these articles was also done by amplifying or silencing certain voices. While government officials were often cited in three of the papers, having those from the cannabis industry used as a source of information can potentially shape the views of readers. This also results in different thematic coverage, as the newspapers that did not interview or have public health officials cited had limited coverage of health as compared to those who did cite public health officials for example. In line with indexing theoretical concepts, there was a leaning toward more frequent reporting of the views of privileged provincial elites (Bennett, 1990). This plays out in government voices and cannabis executives being cited over public health experts and the public in this study (Bennett, 1990). There is also an overall negative sentiment, but with a shift toward increased positive sentiment post-legalization. While Aversa et al. (2023) found that conservative newspapers focused on the negative elements of cannabis legalization, this study found that the national Conservative paper (the National Post) was the one to have the most neutral tone, yet focused on amplifying the voices of cannabis officials over government voices. The liberal paper in this sample amplified and provided more health and education coverage in comparison to the conservative or centrist papers. Overall, similar to Aversa et al. (2023) and Sorensen et al. (2022), there is a shift toward a more balanced framing in terms of themes and sentiment. Instead of these papers creating a moral panic stemming from concerns about the potential negative health outcomes of legalization, as Haines-Saah et al. (2014) had previously found, the debate surrounded regulation changes, which was amplified by the shift in political leadership.

Taken together, the new lack of discourse pertaining to cannabis related health concerns can be attributed to several factors. First, the absence of new scientific evidence regarding the health implications of cannabis use means there was limited evidence to discuss in the health discourse (Lucas et al., 2021). As there is limited evidence of what the long-term health impacts of cannabis usage will be, cannabis utilization and regulation remains an elusive issue of public health significance. Yet, the media for the most part remained silent on this issue, likely due to the lack of clear evidence. The media portrayal of significant public health policies can impact the way the public thinks about these topics, and ultimately, influence the policy development process (Sato, 2003). Second, speculation regarding the long-term impacts of cannabis usage does not provide for engaging news articles, especially in light of the lack of evidence. Once non-medical cannabis policy was implemented, much of the debate about potential health outcomes shifted toward dialogue pertaining to regulatory policies, social and economic outcomes. Health information is nuanced and less definitive as compared to political and economic topics, and as such, political and economic considerations will continue to dominate media discourse over scientific discussions pertaining to health. The emphasis on economic frames and the shift toward an increasingly neutral and positive tone in newspaper coverage of non-medical cannabis legalization can be seen as a step toward normalizing a new economy, despite the fact that it has yet to be ruled out as a potential public health threat.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-nrj-10.1177_30497841251404969 – Supplemental material for Contested framing of cannabis legalization policy in Ontario: A thematic content analysis of newspaper coverage

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-nrj-10.1177_30497841251404969 for Contested framing of cannabis legalization policy in Ontario: A thematic content analysis of newspaper coverage by Donna Kosmack, Mariah A. Peters and Isaac Luginaah in Newspaper Research Journal

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the undergraduate research interns who assisted in coding these articles.

Funding

This work was supported by funding from the Undergraduate Summer Research Internship (USRI) program at Western University.

Ethical Considerations

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal participants.

Consent to Participate

Not applicable.

Consent for Publication

Not applicable.

ORCID iD

Mariah A. Peters

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Alam

(2018, August 22). Cannabis legalization: What is your province or territory doing? A guide; Legal recreational marijuana will become a reality in Canada on Oct. 17. Here’s what different governments are doing to prepare, and what you need to know about what comes next. Globe and Mail.

Aversa

Cleave

Jacobson

Hernandez

Dizonno

Macdonald

(2023). Rollin’ papers: Newspaper coverage of cannabis legalization in Canada. Newspaper Research Journal, 44(2), 154–173. https://doi.org/10.1177/07395329231157765

Aversa

Jacobson

Hernandez

Cleave

Macdonald

Dizonno

(2021). The social media response to the rollout of legalized cannabis retail in Ontario, Canada. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 61, 102580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102580

Baekkeskov

(2016). Same threat, different responses: Experts steering politicians and stakeholders in 2009 H1N1 vaccination policy-making. Public Administration, 94(2), 299–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12244

Bennett

W. L.

(1990). Toward a theory of press-state relations in the United States. Journal of Communication, 40(2), 103–127. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1990.tb02265.x

Bennett

W. L.

Lawrence

R. G.

Livingston

(2006). None dare call it torture: Indexing and the limits of press independence in the Abu Gharib Scandel. Journal of Communication, 56(3), 467–485. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00296.x

Blidook

(2008). Media, public opinion and health care in Canada: How the media affect “the way things are.” Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue Canadienne de Science Politique, 41(2), 355–374. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008423908080426

Block

(2017). Marijuana business workers most common news source. Newspaper Research Journal, 38(2), 187–197. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739532917716171

Bowie

(2017, December 13). New pot law will fail in its objectives. Toronto Star.

10.

Bright

S. J.

Bishop

Kane

Marsh

Barratt

M. J.

(2013). Kronic hysteria: Exploring the intersection between Australian synthetic cannabis legislation, the media, and drug-related harm. The International Journal on Drug Policy, 24(3), 231–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2012.12.002

11.

Cloutier

Tremblay-Antoine

Dufresne

Fréchet

(2022). Highs and downs: A scoping review of public opinion about cannabis, alcohol and tobacco in Canada. Drug and Alcohol Review, 41(2), 396–405. https://doi.org/10.1111/dar.13372

12.

Cook

F. L.

Tyler

T. R.

Goetz

E. G.

Gordon

M. T.

Protess

Leff

D. R.

Molotch

H. L.

(1983). Media and agenda setting: Effects on the public, interest group leaders, policy makers, and policy. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 47(1), 16–35.

13.

Crépault

J.-F.

(2018). Cannabis legalization in Canada: Reflections on public health and the governance of legal psychoactive substances. Frontiers in Public Health, 6, 220. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00220

14.

Daly

(2018, June 29). Bull run. Globe and Mail.

15.

Doug Ford’s pot plan. (2018, August 15). Globe and Mail.

16.

Eversman

M. H.

(2013). Harm reduction and illicit drugs in U.S. Newspapers. Journal of Drug Policy Analysis, 6(1), 19–39. https://doi.org/10.1515/jdpa-2012-0005

17.

Gagnon

Gudiño

Guta

Strike

(2020). What can we learn from the English-Language media coverage of cannabis legalization in Canada? Substance Use & Misuse, 55(8), 1378–1381. https://doi.org/10.1080/10826084.2020.1741639

18.

Giovannetti

(2018, June 27). Doug Ford eyes more private sector involvement in sale of marijuana; The province’s outgoing Liberal government had planned to give the LCBO a monopoly on the sale of recreational cannabis, but the premier-designate says he is open to changing his predecessor’s plans. Globe and Mail.

19.

Golan

G. J.

(2010). Editorials, op-ed columns frame medical marijuana debate. Newspaper Research Journal, 31(3), 50–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/073953291003100305

20.

Government of Canada. (2018). Cannabis Act, S.C. 2018, c. 16. https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-24.5/

21.

Gray

(2017, October 20). Holes emerge in Toronto’s crackdown on marijuana dispensaries. Globe and Mail.

22.

Gunning

Illes

(2021). Coverage of medical cannabis by Canadian news media: Ethics, access, and policy. The International Journal on Drug Policy, 97, 103361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2021.103361

23.

Haines-Saah

R. J.

Johnson

J. L.

Repta

Ostry

Young

M. L.

Shoveller

Sawatzky

Greaves

Ratner

P. A.

(2014). The privileged normalization of marijuana use—An analysis of Canadian newspaper reporting, 1997–2007. Critical Public Health, 24(1), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/09581596.2013.771812

24.

Hathaway

A. D.

Erickson

P. G.

(2004). A tale of two stimulants. Canadian Journal of Communication, 29(1), 61–80. https://doi.org/10.22230/cjc.2004v29n1a1404

25.

Hughes

C. E.

Lancaster

Spicer

(2011). How do Australian news media depict illicit drug issues? An analysis of print media reporting across and between illicit drugs, 2003-2008. The International Journal on Drug Policy, 22(4), 285–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2011.05.008

26.

Kim

S.-H.

(2018). Framing marijuana: How U.S. newspapers frame marijuana legalization stories (1995–2014). Preventive Medicine Reports, 11, 196–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2018.07.003

27.

Langer

A. I.

Gruber

J. B.

(2021). Political agenda setting in the hybrid media system: Why Legacy media still matter a great deal. International Journal of Press/Politics, 26(2), 313–340. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161220925023

28.

Lenton

(2004). Pot, politics and the press—Reflections on cannabis law reform in Western Australia. Drug and Alcohol Review, 23(2), 223–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/09595230410001704226

29.

Loriggio

(2018, April 13). Wynne wants answers on how cannabis store location ended up near Toronto school. Globe and Mail. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-wynne-wants-answers-on-how-cannabis-store-location-ended-up-near/

30.

Lucas

Boyd

Milloy

M.-J.

Walsh

(2021). The impact of non-medical cannabis legalization and other exposures on retention in longitudinal cannabis research: A survival analysis of a prospective study of Canadian medical cannabis patients. Journal of Cannabis Research, 3(1), 34. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42238-021-00089-7

31.

Lynch

(2021). Themes and tones of cannabis news reports and legalization outcomes. Media, Culture & Society, 43(3), 570–581. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443720960905

32.

Mach

K. J.

Salas Reyes

Pentz

Taylor

Costa

C. A.

Cruz

S. G.

Thomas

K. E.

Arnott

J. C.

Donald

Jagannathan

Kirchhoff

C. J.

Rosella

L. C.

Klenk

(2021). News media coverage of COVID-19 public health and policy information. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 8(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00900-z

33.

McCombs

M. E.

Shaw

D. L.

(1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176–187. https://doi.org/10.1086/267990

34.

McGinty

E. E.

Niederdeppe

Heley

Barry

C. L.

(2017). Public perceptions of arguments supporting and opposing recreational marijuana legalization. Preventive Medicine, 99, 80–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.01.024

35.

Our News Principles. (n.d.). The Canadian Press. https://www.thecanadianpress.com/about/our-team-values/our-news-principles/

36.

Overview of Results: Spring 2021 Study. (2021). Vividata. https://vividata.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Vividata-Spring-2021-Overview-of-Results-PUBLIC.pdf

37.

Owram

(2018, October 27). “Response has been pretty unbelievable”; Licensing delays cause snag early on in legalization. National Post.

38.

Potter

(2018, September 14). Planning to smoke up in the park when cannabis becomes legal? Here’s what the police say. Toronto Star.

39.

Priest

Roberts

Woods

(2002). An overview of three different approaches to the interpretation of qualitative data. Part 1: Theoretical issues. Nurse Researcher, 10(1), 30–42. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr2002.10.10.1.30.c5877

40.

Sato

(2003). Agenda setting for smoking control in Japan, 1945-1990: Influence of the mass media on National Health Policy Making. Journal of Health Communication, 8(1), 23–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730305731

41.

Silverman

(2010). Addicted to distortion: The media and UK drugs policy. Safer Communities, 9(4), 26–31. https://doi.org/10.5042/sc.2010.0582

42.

Sorensen

J. L.

van Draanen

Shingle

(2022). Legalization of cannabis in Canada—Local media analysis. The American Journal on Addictions, 31(2), 148–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajad.13263

43.

Sznitman

S. R.

Lewis

(2015). Is cannabis an illicit drug or a medicine? A quantitative framing analysis of Israeli newspaper coverage. The International Journal on Drug Policy, 26(5), 446–452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2015.01.010

44.

Tieberghien

(2014). The role of the media in the science-policy nexus. Some critical reflections based on an analysis of the Belgian drug policy debate (1996–2003). International Journal of Drug Policy, 25(2), 276–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2013.05.014

45.

Warmington

(2019, April 4). Illegal pot shops will get burned; Fedeli warns cops will bust unlicensed dispensaries. Toronto Sun.

46.

Wester

Pleijter

Renckstorf

(2004). Exploring newspapers’ portrayals: A logic for interpretive content analysis. Communications, 29(4), 495–513. https://doi.org/10.1515/comm.2004.29.4.495

47.

Yanovitzky

(2002). Effects of news coverage on policy attention and actions: A closer look into the media-policy connection. Communication Research, 29(4), 422–451. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650202029004003

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.17 MB