Skip to main content

The Ambiguous Definition of Open Government: Parliamentarians, Journalists and Bloggers Define Open Government In Accordance With Their Interests

  • George W. Wootten (a1) and Simon J. Kiss (a2)

We present the results of a 2014 survey of Canadian parliamentarians, journalists and bloggers in which respondents were asked to rank competing definitions of open government. Overall, respondents preferred to define open government in terms of access to information and sources. However, controlling for age, ideology and language, we also found that respondents in the different positions ranked definitions of open government differently. Journalists are more likely than any other group to define open government in terms of access to information and sources. In contrast, parliamentarians who were members of a governing party were as likely to choose definitions of open government that emphasized public participation as they were to choose definitions that emphasized access to information. Opposition parliamentarians share more similarities with government parliamentarians than with journalists. These results suggest that key actors in the Canadian policy landscape define open government in ways that are consistent with their institutional interests. We suggest that these results reflect ways in which open government operates more like a buzzword, which helps explain the common pattern whereby opposition parties make promises to be more open and, after taking power, operate in less open ways. Moreover, these results raise questions about the extent to which open government can actually operate as an organizing principle.

Nous présentons les résultats d'un sondage mené en 2014 auprès de parlementaires, de journalistes et de blogueurs canadiens dans lequel on a demandé aux répondants de classer les définitions concurrentes d’un gouvernement ouvert. Dans l'ensemble, les répondants ont préféré définir le gouvernement ouvert en termes d'accès à l'information et aux sources. Cependant, nous constatons également que dans leurs prises de position les répondants classent différemment les définitions en fonction de l'âge, de l'idéologie et de la langue. Les journalistes sont plus susceptibles que tout autre groupe de définir un gouvernement ouvert en termes d'accès à l'information et aux sources. Les parlementaires du parti au pouvoir sont susceptibles de définir un gouvernement ouvert tout autant en termes d'influence du public sur le processus politique que d'accès à l'information. Les parlementaires de l'opposition partagent plus de similitudes avec les parlementaires du gouvernement qu'avec les journalistes. Ces résultats suggèrent que les principaux acteurs du paysage politique canadien définissent le gouvernement ouvert d'une manière cohérente avec leurs intérêts institutionnels. Nous suggérons que cela reflète la façon dont le gouvernement ouvert fonctionne davantage comme un mot à la mode. Cela contribue à expliquer la tendance trop courante selon laquelle les partis d'opposition promettent d'être plus ouverts et, après avoir pris le pouvoir, agissent de façon moins ouverte. De plus, ces résultats soulèvent des questions quant à la mesure dans laquelle un gouvernement ouvert peut réellement fonctionner comme principe d'organisation.

Corresponding author
*Corresponding author. Email:
Hide All

The data sets and R scripts to replicate these results are available at

Hide All
Aitken, Kent. 2017. “Open(Ing) Government.” Policy Options. (September 25, 2017).
Allison, Paul D. and Christakis, Nicholas A.. 1994. “Logit Models for Sets of Ranked Items.” Sociological Methodology 24: 199228.
Alwin, Duane F. and Krosnick, Jon A.. 1985. “The Measurement of Values in Surveys: A Comparison of Ratings and Rankings.” Public Opinion Quarterly 49 (4): 535–52.
Belgrave, Roger. 2013. “Open Government Consultations Departure from Old Town Halls: Milloy.” BramptonGuardian.Com. (September 25, 2017).
Bennett, W. Lance. 1990. “Toward a Theory of Press-State Relations in the United States.” Journal of Communication 40 (2): 103–25.
Benzie, Robert. 2013. “Kathleen Wynne to Launch ‘Open Government’ Push to Boost Transparency | Toronto Star.” Toronto Star, October 21. (September 25, 2017).
Breton, Charles, Cutler, Fred, Lachance, Sarah, Mierke-Zatwarnicki, Alex et al. 2017. “Telephone versus Online Survey Modes for Election Studies: Comparing Canadian Public Opinion and Vote Choice in the 2015
Brieva, Antonio and Martin, Verity. 2014. “Trudeaumania Floods SLC.” Imprint, September 12.
Canada. 2017. “Canada's Action Plan on Open Government 2012–2014.” Government of Canada. (December 8, 2017).
Canadian Association of Journalists. 2012. “Harper Government Wins Code of Silence Award, Again.” Canada Association of Journalists.
Chapman, Randall G. and Staelin, Richard. 1982. “Exploiting Rank Ordered Choice Set Data within the Stochastic Utility Model.” Journal of Marketing Research 19 (3): 288.
Chase, Steven. 2016. “Transparency a Casualty in Arms Deals with Saudis.” The Globe and Mail, March 13. (September 1, 2017).
Clarke, Amanda and Francoli, Mary. 2014. “What's in a Name? A Comparison of Open Government Definitions Across Seven Open Government Partnership Members.” JeDem: eJournal of eDemocracy 6 (1): 248–66.
Converse, Philip E. 2006. “The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics (1964).Critical Review 18 (1–3): 174.
Cox, David R. and Oakes, David. 1984. Analysis of Survival Data. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
Epps, Daniel. 2008. “Mechanisms of Secrecy.” Harvard Law Review 121 (6): 1556.
Esser, Frank and Pfetsch, Barbara. 2004. Comparing Political Communication. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Fengler, Susanne and Stephan, Ruß-Mohl. 2008. “Journalists and the Information-Attention Markets: Towards an Economic Theory of Journalism.” Journalism: Theory, Practice & Criticism 9 (6): 667–90.
Francoli, Mary. 2016. “Canada Progress Report, 2014–2015.” Open Government Partnership.
Franks, C. E. S. 1987. The Parliament of Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Galtung, Johan and Ruge, Mari H.. 1965. “The Structure of Foreign News The Presentation of the Congo, Cuba and Cyprus Crises in Four Norwegian Newspapers.” Journal of Peace Research 2 (1): 6490.
Gandy, Oscar. 1982. Beyond Agenda-Setting: Information Subsidies and Public Policy. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
Gans, Herbert J. 1979. Deciding What's News. Chicago: Northwestern University Press.
Giasson, Thierry, Jansen, Harold, and Koop, Royce. “Blogging, partisanship, and political participation in Canada.” Political communication in Canada: Meet the press and tweet the rest (2014): 194211.
Hall, Chris. 2016a. “A Tale of Two Conventions.” CBC Radio Canada.
Hall, Chris. 2016b. “Liberal Fiscal Plans Less Transparent than under Harper, Kevin Page Says.” CBC Radio Canada.
Hall, Peter A. and Taylor, Rosemary C. R.. 1996. “Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms*.Political Studies 44 (5): 936–57.
Hausman, Jerry A. and Ruud, Paul A.. 1987. “Specifying and Testing Econometric Models for Rank-Ordered Data.” Journal of Econometrics 34 (1–2): 83104.
Holbrook, A. et al. 2007. “The Causes and Consequences of Response Rates in Surveys by the News Media and Government Contractor Survey Research Firms.” In Advances in Telephone Survey Methodology, eds. Lepkowski, James M. et al. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Inglehart, Ronald and Abramson, Paul R.. 1995. Value Change Across Three Generations. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Jay, Anthony and Lynn, Jonathan. 1980. “Yes, Minister.” British Broadcasting Corporation.
Jennings, M. Kent. 1992. “Ideological Thinking among Mass Publics and Political Elites.Public Opinion Quarterly 56 (4): 419–41.
Kaufer, David S. and Carley, Kathleen M.. 1993. “Condensation Symbols: Their Variety and Rhetorical Function in Political Discourse.” Philosophy & Rhetoric 26 (3): 201–26.
Kiss, Simon. 2014. “Responding to the ‘New Public’: The Arrival of Strategic Communications and Managed Participation in Alberta.” Canadian Public Administration 57 (1): 2648.
Kozolanka, Kirsten. 2006. “The Sponsorship Scandal as Communication: The Rise of Politicized and Strategic Communications in the Federal Government.” Canadian Journal of Communication 31 (2).
Krosnick, Jon A. 1991. “Response Strategies for Coping with the Cognitive Demands of Attitude Measures in Surveys.” Applied Cognitive Psychology 5 (3): 213–36.
Krosnick, Jon A. et al. 1996. “Satisficing in Surveys: Initial Evidence.” New Directions for Evaluation 1996 (70): 2944.
Lambert, R. D. and Curtis, J. E.. 1993. “Perceived Party Choice and Class Voting.” Canadian Journal of Political Science-Revue Canadienne De Science Politique 26 (2): 273–86.
Lee, Gwanhoo and Kwak, Young H.. 2012. “An Open Government Maturity Model for Social Media Based Public Engagement.” Government Information Quarterly 29 (4): 492503.
Liberal Party of Canada. 2015. “Real Change.” Liberal Party of Canada. (September 25, 2017).
Lipset, Seymour Martin. 1986. “Historical Traditions and National Characteristics: A Comparative Analysis of Canada and the United States.” The Canadian Journal of Sociology / Cahiers Canadiens de Sociologie 11 (2): 113–55.
Mulgan, Richard. 2014. Making Open Government Work. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Nevitte, Neil. 1996. The Decline of Deference: Canadian Value Change in Cross-National Perspective. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Obama, Barack. 2009. “Transparency and Open Government: Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies” (September 5, 2018).
Open Government Partnership. 2011. “What is the Open Government Partnership.” (September 5, 2018)
O'Neill, Brenda. 2007. Indifferent or Just Different. Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Networks.
Pritchard, David, Brewer, Paul, Sauvageau, Florian. 2005. “Changes in Canadian Journalists’ Views about the Social and Political Roles of the News Media: A Panel Study, 1996–2003.” Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue Canadienne de Science Politique 38(2):287306.
Punj, Girish N. and Staelin, Richard. 1978. “The Choice Process for Graduate Business Schools.” Journal of Marketing Research 15 (4): 588.
Quinn, Thomas. 2012. “Spin Doctors and Political News Management: A Rational-Choice ‘Exchange' Analysis.” British Politics 7 (3): 272300.
Reese, Stephen D. 2001. “Understanding the Global Journalist.” Journalism Studies 2 (2): 173–87.
Roberts, Alasdair S. 2000. “Less Government, More Secrecy: Reinvention and the Weakening of Freedom of Information Law.Public Administration Review 60 (4): 308–20.
Roberts, Alasdair S. 2005. “Spin Control and Freedom of Information: Lessons for the United Kingdom from Canada.” Public Administration 83 (1): 123.
Roy, Jeffrey. 2017. “Open Government—Progress and Impediments in the Digital Era.” Canadian Public Administration 60 (3): 438–42.
Russell, P. A. and Gray, C. D.. 1994. “Ranking or Rating? Some Data and Their Implications for the Measurement of Evaluative Response.” British Journal of Psychology 85: 7991.
Serrin, W. and Bennett, W. L.. 2000. “The Watchdog Role of the Press.” In Media Power in Politics, eds Graber, D. A. and Graber, . Washington: CQ Press.
Small, Tamara. 2014. “The Not-So Social Network: The Use of Twitter by Canada's Party Leaders.” In Political Communication in Canada: Meet the Press and Tweet the Rest, eds. Marland, Alex, Giasson, Thierry and Small, Tamara. Vancouver: UBC Press.
Taras, David. 1990. Newsmakers: The Media's Influence on Canadian Politics. Toronto: Nelson Canada.
Taylor, Charles. 1993. Reconciling the Solitudes: Essays on Canadian Federalism and Nationalism. McGill-Queen's Press - MQUP.
Tuchman, G. 1972. “Objectivity as Strategic Ritual: An Examination of Newsmen's Notions of Objectivity.” American Journal of Sociology 77 (4): 660–79.
Wu, Zheng and Baer, Douglas E.. 1996. “Attitudes Toward Family Life and Gender Roles: A Comparison of English and French Canadian Women.” Journal of Comparative Family Studies; Calgary, Alta. 27(3):437452.
Yu, Harlan and Robinson, David G.. 2012. “The New Ambiguity of ‘Open Government.’” UCLA Law Review 59 (178).
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique
  • ISSN: 0008-4239
  • EISSN: 1744-9324
  • URL: /core/journals/canadian-journal-of-political-science-revue-canadienne-de-science-politique
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *



Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed