Candis Callison, who's Tahltan and an associate professor in the Graduate School of Journalism (working at Princeton University for a year), teaches media ethics and leadership and requires all of her students to read Seeing Red.

"It’s vital for journalists to understand the history of how Indigenous people have been represented in Canadian media, and the ways in which colonial narratives have been actively supported and reinforced since before Confederation right up to the present," Callison wrote in an email. "These representations create a sedimentation that newer narratives and stories run the risk of repeating if journalists aren’t aware of the ways in which stereotypes persist and endure, even with all this shiny new digital media."

Callison said one of the main mistakes older media outlets make when reporting on Indigenous peoples and communities, is starting with a deficit model and/or "wanting to be the saviour that sheds light on what the Indigenous problem really is." She said perpetuating a victim/deficit-based narrative centers a colonial gaze and reproduces the notion that Indigenous peoples are the problem, not the systems put in place to eradicate Indigenous cultures, lands and lives.

"The other huge error is glossing over the fact that Indigenous people are diverse with different languages, cultures, and historical relationships with colonialism. Yes, there is commonality, but specificity matters just as much as (and sometimes more than) the commonality," Callison added.

Callison said reporters need to recognize Indigenous peoples as the experts to their own situations, rather than calling on researchers, professors or anthropologists to interpret Indigenous histories, environmental conflicts, social challenges, political change, or any other topic.

As associate editor of the tribal affairs desk at High Country News, Ahtone works with a team of mostly Indigenous reporters well versed in media ethics. His assistant editor is non-Indigenous, he said, but a fantastic reporter who has come to learn which spaces are reserved for Indigenous peoples, that she shouldn't be in. This "knowing when to step back" might be counterintuitive for a lot of reporters, he said, but he sees it as a strength — knowing when to delegate stories to people who come from those areas of expertise.

Ahtone also worked with PBS Newshour and has freelanced for well-known media outlets like National Geographic, where he has said might get ten times the amount of page views to other stories, but he puts in ten times the amount of work to describe "what an Indian is" to larger audiences. Ahtone said painting Indigenous people in a negative frame is a way to put the responsibility on those most impacted by colonialism and imperialism.

Painting a person, community or nation in a negative way makes people less inclined to care and makes it seem like people got themselves into their own mess, or might even to be blame for their situation, he said. Like all media, framing and tone impact both the conscious and subconscious mind.

"It's the same thing as thinking about certain countries that we cover around the world," he said. "Which countries does mainstream bother to cover? The ones that have pretty sites and the ones that are security threats. All the rest are like... who the hell knows?"

The original gaslighting

Moya-Smith agreed, calling Canada and the United States, "the original gaslighters." Gaslighting, a fairly new term to the public lexicon, is a form of psychological manipulation that makes a targeted individual or group of people question their own memories, perception or sanity.

"We usually use gaslighting in reference to relationships — a boyfriend or girlfriend gaslighting their significant other, making them feel like they’re crazy, even though they’re probably being pretty damn logical and human," Moya-Smith said. "When you present facts, you’re either going to get humble acceptance of the information or aggressive denial. There are going to be people that humbly accept the information — the incontrovertible data, evidence, research, history, stories — but you’re also going to find people that aggressively deny it."

Presenting facts as facts is one of the more difficult tasks for Indigenous journalists, Moya-Smith said. Journalists are expected to present accurate information and to identify trustworthy sources and expert evidence, but there are often conflicting worldviews at play.

What may seem to be an established fact for a settler can be different from the reality experienced by Indigenous people.

"As journalists, we’re supposed to report what is accurate, we're supposed to report the facts, he said. "The fact is, that we're not talking about pilgrims or settlers, we're talking about invaders, but you can’t use language like that, it’s uncomfortable for people."

People forget, journalism is a business, he added.

"At the end of the day, the New York Times, NBC, PBS, it’s all a business and they have to be able to sell their product. If they can’t sell their product, because there’s something that makes people uncomfortable, they’ll be afraid they’ll lose readers and losing readers means they’ll lose ad-dollars," he said. "That's a concern for me, that at the end of the day, it’s still a business where they’re looking at the bottom line."

Moya-Smith said one of the ways Indigenous journalists are prevented from presenting factual information is the way in which they are asked to qualify certain evidence. One example he used was the name of the Washington football team, which he would not say aloud.

"The R-word is a dictionary-defined racial slur, which the American Psychology Association has called out and said these mascots need to be repealed immediately. But in journalism, they say 'Native Americans believe…,' Moya-Smith said. "Excuse me, jackass, we don’t just believe it’s a slur, it’s a dictionary-defined slur. What other word do you do that with? How can you make that argument it’s our belief when it’s dictionary-defined?"

Qualifying information that hasn't often appeared in mainstream news coverage, which might incite feelings of discomfort or challenge dominant narratives, goes back to protecting a colonial agenda, he said.

"That's why they put people like me in the opinion section," he added.

I live for the day when stories from Indian Country stop getting relegated to the 'Opinion' section and just become news. Important piece here... https://t.co/t22v5jFlfA — Jenni Monet (@jennimonet) December 6, 2018

Some of the interviewees said when Indigenous journalists aren't named opinion, they're often named 'advocacy journalists' or 'activists,' or told they are 'too biased' and unable to report with a degree of partiality, or without a conflict of interest, in order to uphold their objectivity.