Halifax Transit Bus Authority Censors Godless Ads – Local Media Silent

It’s a sad day when local newspapers fail to report on a local news item that has caused much debate nationally and internationally. Yet, some traditional journalists still lament social media for slowly eating away their influence as the only provider and controller of public information.

CBC.ca reported yesterday (Feb 2, 2009) that Halifax Metro Transit has refused to allow Humanist Canada to place ads on Halifax buses that said “You Can Be Good Without God”.

CBC reported that Halifax bus transit spokesperson, Lori Patterson, said “the transit authority would reconsider its position if Humanist Canada toned down its message.”

The story has garnered close to 300 comments in less than 24 hours. A similar campaign launched in England late last year sparked an important debate across the UK. The controversy led to 326 complaints from the public to the UK Advertising Standards Authority, which issued a precedent-setting decision in favor of the campaign and closed the case (see ruling here).

No God Bus Ad in England

This story is obviously of major interest to the public. So why the silent treatment from Halifax newspapers?

If local residents relied on local newspapers, they would have no idea that this debate is taking place, and would have no opportunity to express their opinions about how the transit authority, a publicly funded body, should deal with issues of freedom of speech and religion that are a given right to all tax payers in Halifax who contribute to subsidize the transit authority.

The media needs to ask the tough questions. Would the transit authority allow an ad to be placed on Halifax buses that advertise a ‘Three Wisemen’ or ‘Baby Jesus’ Christmas play at the local church? What if the local Muslim association wanted to run an ad to announce the opening of their new mosque and library and inviting all interested people to join them for an opening ceremony? What about free speech?

Where do we draw the line as to what is appropriate to say, and who gets to decide what a ‘toned down’ religious statement is? Lori Patterson of Metro Transit?

The answer is that unless there are clear bylaws (that were voted on by representatives of the people in this city) against allowing religiously-affiliated advertising in publicly owned facilities and services, then separation of church and state remains the defacto rule.

If Metro Transit was a private company, then they can decide to run whatever ads they want on their buses and no one but their shareholders (and the advertising authorities) can say anything. But the transit authority is publicly funded, and therefore it must conduct itself in the best interest of the public, following the established bylaws, and removing personal opinions and religious affiliations/preferences when determining what is appropriate to be shown on the buses to the public.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms lists that “Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms”:

  • freedom of conscience and religion;
  • freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
  • freedom of peaceful assembly; and
  • freedom of association.

Are we going to see the appropriate attention and debate take place regarding this issue? Will our understanding of applied freedoms be enhanced by this event? This is a call to the Chronicle Herald and other media outlets in Halifax. Please give this issue the attention it deserves. (Edit: The Chronicle Herald published the story a couple of hours after this blog was posted).

Related Articles


About Author

Issmat A.

(1) Reader Comment

  1. Please send a quick email to the Halifax Metro Transit Authority to let them know how you feel about their decision to censor the ‘Good without God’ ads.

    Send your emails to the general email (contacthrm@halifax.ca) and to Lori Patterson, Manager of Public relations (patterl@halifax.ca).

    It doesn’t have to be fancy or long, just let them know that the public supports free speech and the expression of alternative religious views. It is not ok for one group or person to apply their religious comfort zone and feelings to a public resource funded by our taxes.

    Feel free to use the email I sent, in part or in whole.


    I am a citizen of Halifax, a marketing and advertising professional, and a citizen journalist. I would like to express my utter disappointment at the decision of Metro Transit to turn down an ad based on the religious comfort zone of the person who decided this. The only rules that should govern this decision are those of the Canadian advertising authorities. The ad should have been accepted and displayed, and those who have a dispute have the full freedom to launch a complaint and appeal to the advertising authorities. If they have a legitimate case and can prove that the ad violates any existing bylaws, then Metro Transit can take it down. Otherwise, freedom of speech must prevail.

    I am a Muslim and a staunch believer in God. God does not want censorship of religious beliefs. The Canadian charter of rights and freedoms allows under section (2b) the “freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication”. Metro Transit is a public service funded by tax dollars from citizens who embrace all walks of life. It is simply unfair and a slight to our fundamental freedoms to have the religious preference of one person or group in Metro Transit dictate what is ‘appropriate’ religious messaging and what is not.

    A religious group challenged this exact same ad in England earlier this month and lost their case. The UK Advertising Standards Authority ruled in favour of the Humanist Association, despite receiving over 300 complaints from the public. The precedent set here is that it is not enough for something to be ‘controversial’ for it to be censored. The decision to limit a fundamental right or freedom guaranteed by the Charter should be based on very solid grounds with significant legal backing.

    Please reconsider your decision to withhold this ad from being displayed on transit vehicles funded by the public. The public demands fairness and that the rule of law, not ‘feelings’, be applied.

    With regards,
    Issmat A. M. Al-Akhali

Leave a Reply