Canadian journalists have spent the last couple days shooting fish in a barrel and congratulating themselves for it.

On Tuesday, The Rebel reported that its journalists were barred from several government events between January 29 and February 3 because Alberta’s department of justice ruled that the publication — started by Ezra Levant — does not produce journalism, and as such its reporters “are not entitled to access media lock-ups or other such events.” The government has now reversed its decision.

The 48-hour-long pat on the back began shortly after The Rebel‘s initial report, as journalists rushed to condemn the decision, claiming the government shouldn’t decide who is a journalist.

Their argument, of course, is accurate: you don’t need a degree to be a journalist, and working for an alternative publication does not mean you should be barred from events mainstream reporters can access.

The issue is that journalists made this point in the most self-aggrandizing manner, depicting it as if it was the beginning of a totalitarian crackdown on the press, and they were the only ones capable of stopping it.

The Globe and Mail published an editorial on the matter, writing, “This is beyond deplorable. It is not the place of a government to decide what constitutes a journalist or a media outlet. This is not Russia, not Egypt, not Iran – countries where government controls the media through bogus licensing regimes or outright censorship.”

In the Edmonton Sun, Lorne Gunter wrote, “Outrageous is an overused word in politics, but this is truly outrageous.”

Meanwhile on Twitter, journalists were trying to channel Voltaire.

Ezra Levant is a garbage human being and The Rebel is a garbage website but both still deserve journalist status & all that entails.

— Jeet Heer (@HeerJeet) February 16, 2016

@bruceanderson I can't say I've really ever appreciated what Ezra's contributed to the conversation, but I don't think it's for gov't… 3/n

— Alex Boutilier (@alexboutilier) February 16, 2016

@bruceanderson to stop his employees or contributors from attending press conferences. If the gallery allows it to stand for him … 4/n

— Alex Boutilier (@alexboutilier) February 16, 2016

With pretty much every reporter in Canada rallying to his defence I guess all there is to say is welcome, @ezralevant, to the media party.

— Paul McLeod (@pdmcleod) February 17, 2016

These articles and tweets perpetuate the myth that journalists are all in it together. In reality, Levant’s case is an easy one for reporters to congregate around, expressing outrage without any serious consequences or thought.

Meanwhile, earlier this year RCMP officers entered Vice Canada’s office in Toronto and Montreal to seize documents and notes, and there was very little outrage from journalists: no Globe editorial, no columns and few reporters coming to Vice’s defence on Twitter.

In 2015 I wrote that, “The executive director of Canadian Journalists for Free Expression, Tom Henheffer, defended Vice’s decision to fight the RCMP’s production order. ‘Journalists are not lackies for the police and to use us that way is a totally unjustifiable violation of free expression and privacy rights,’ Henheffer said, adding that ‘this sets a dangerous precedent for the free press in Canada that must not be repeated.’”

As such, the invasive methods used against Vice should be regarded as a serious threat to the future of adversarial journalism, especially in post Bill C-51 Canada. Journalists don’t deserve a pat on the back until these limits to the freedom of the press are challenged head on.

Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) officers entered Vice Canada’s offices in Toronto and Montreal in February. The officers served Vice with a production order–similar to a search warrant–demanding “any notes and all records of communication” between Vice reporter Ben Makuch and an ISIL militant.

Makuch interviewed the Canadian ISIL militant, Farah Mohamed Shirdon, through Kik Messenger to get a better sense of ISIL’s inner workings. Shane Smith, a Vice co-founder, also had an exclusive Skype interview with Shirdon.

After the interview was published, the RCMP charged Shirdon with the “commission of an indictable offence for a terrorist group,” as well as five other charges. The raid on Vice offices was part of the “process to collect evidence in support of this criminal investigation,” according to RCMP Const. Annie Delisle.

Vice was unable to report on the incident until this week due to a sealing order from court, where the media organization is fighting for their right to avoid turning over documents to the RCMP. An article from Vice head of content Patrick McGuire states that “Vice is contesting the production and sealing orders in court, on the principles of protecting any and all sources, protecting freedom of the press and to avoid the situation wherein the Canadian news media becomes a veritable investigative arm of the law.”

The executive director of Canadian Journalists for Free Expression, Tom Henheffer, defended Vice’s decision to fight the RCMP’s production order. “Journalists are not lackies for the police,” Henheffer said, “and to use us that way is a totally unjustifiable violation of free expression and privacy rights.” He added that “this sets a dangerous precedent for the free press in Canada that must not be repeated.”

McGuire and Henheffer are right: this is a blatant example of police forces unjustifiably throwing around their weight, damaging Canada’s autonomous journalism in the process. Despite this threat to Canadian journalism, which is now heightened since Bill C-51 was passed in June, there has been little response from traditional Canadian media outlets. No statements of support, editorials or even any opinion columns. The most that has come out of the event so far are articles rehashing the original Vice article announcing the ordeal.

This is a shame. An attack on Vice’s right to freedom of the press is an attack on the right to freedom of the press for all, and journalists must unite to oppose this governmental encroachment. Journalists can’t do journalism if they can’t protect their sources. Vice will be going to court on January 11 next year to fight the RCMP orders. In the meantime, journalists must raise their voice to defend Vice and, by extension, defend Canadian journalism.

As a studio arts, fibres and material practices student at Montreal’s Concordia University and having worked in the fashion industry, Serah-Marie McMahon wasn’t able to find the insightful fashion writing she craved as a reader. While skimming through newsstands, she found nothing she could relate to in traditional fashion magazines. So she created Worn Fashion Journal. “I was experimenting with what I liked,” says McMahon. “I said to myself, ‘I can make it and don’t have to wait for someone else to create it.’” For 10 years, as editor-in-chief, McMahon documented what fashion could be—focusing on reporting, not just trends.

But last November, Worn ceased publication after 20 issues. McMahon says it was her choice to shut the doors. The magazine’s longevity depended on factors such as time, funding and resources. But while its print run of 5,000 was small, the dedication of its readers proved that some people want an alternative to mainstream fashion publications.

Fashion journalism covers clothes, style and trends in both service pieces and analytical features, but Canadian magazines have relied heavily on how-to lists and glossy centrefolds. This means readers get little analysis—adding fuel to the classic debate about whether fashion journalism is real journalism. But today, despite the closing of Worn, tried-and-tested formats are being challenged. Some determined fashion writers are trying their hand at heavily-reported cultural trend pieces that blend fashion and current events. VICE, for instance, reported on what it’s like for minorities to work in the industry. And in November 2014, Flare Magazine ran a controversial online piece about how appearance affects impression in Jian Ghomeshi sexual assault case. These publications are trying to lead with balanced service journalism and solid, well-written articles, but the formula hits a roadblock when magazines still feel the pressure to appeal to consumers.

Creating an in-depth fashion magazine isn’t easy because editors and writers still have to cater to advertisers. A concern for what sells can overwhelm a publication. “There needs to be more of a separation between advertisements and editorials because of how melded they are together,” says Sabrina Maddeaux, fashion and design editor at Now Magazine. “It all comes down to how independent the publication is.”

Editorial content can seem like promotions in disguise. Even a series of photographs with a narrative and a theme can reinforce the stereotype that the genre relies on sell-heavy visuals. “Editorials are not taken seriously, it’s no surprise,” says Nathalie Atkinson, culture critic and columnist for The Globe and Mail. The images are a huge part of the problem, but the visual content gets the most recognition. At the National Magazine Awards in 2013, Flare won gold for fashion and silver for best art direction for its November 2013 issue. ELLE Canada won gold for best beauty shoot, and Fashion Magazine won silver for still photography. The majority of the awards these magazines won went to the visual content rather than the writing.

But according to ELLE Canada features director Kathryn Hudson, fashion journalism is undergoing a shift. Photography will still have a place in fashion magazines, but it will have to share space with stories that deserve equal attention.

Meanwhile, there is a “serious or not” debate between bloggers and journalists. Bloggers are a vital part of fashion coverage, but readers see them less as journalists and more like social media gurus. As fashion magazines try to adopt a more serious tone, though, bloggers have been left a platform to establish their voice and keep fashionistas informed, blurring the ethical lines by producing both good pieces and PR-related content. Both serve different purposes and borrow from each other, although it can be hard to tell them apart. “It’s become a question of, are you a fashion journalist or not?” says Atkinson. “Bloggers want to call themselves journalists and have to behave with journalists’ standards. They’re not less than fashion journalists—they’re just different.”

Elio Iannacci, features editor for Fashion Magazine, says the industry is too exclusive. “We have fashion television shows, good and bad, discussing fashion and great magazines and blogs,” he says. “That whole old world thinking is outdated and unfashionable, it doesn’t make any sense to think that way.”

Fashion publishing has been depicted as a harsh industry in popular movies such as The Devil Wears Prada. This world is full of well-dressed people who will do whatever it takes to get to those higher places. “The fashion industry is portrayed as cruel, cold and soul-crushing, and something our heroine has to overcome,” says Haley Mlotek, a former Worn publisher. “That idea has seeped into our real-life interpretation of what fashion journalism is.”

But today’s journalists are trying to push past these stereotypes and return to the standard investigative style that Worn started. Its last issue hit stands in November but it remains an example of how fashion magazines can be a hybrid of both beautiful visuals and quality storytelling.

Illustration by Harrisson Joseph