Last week, copies of Our Toronto landed in mailboxes across the city. The 24-page colour publication aims to offer information on municipal programs and services as “well as the City’s position on emerging issues important to residents.”

But even before it hit the streets, Our Toronto was in the crosshairs of critics, who called it no different “than the Pravda of the old days” and “a self-promoting newsletter taxpayers don't need and didn't ask for.”

The $848,000-a-year publication has drawn the ire of columnists, citizens and city councillors alike, who have panned it as both “a narcissistic waste of money” and merely a vehicle for City Hall “to get their news out exactly how they want to – unfiltered and masked,” undermining the traditional role of journalists to inform citizens about their city.

However, Mayor David Miller has defended Our Toronto, which rolls three previous city-wide publications - Waste Watch, Water Watch and City Routes – into one, for about $400,000 more than before.

“I have long felt that the City needed a publication such as Our Toronto,” Mayor Miller said in a press release. “This gives us another opportunity for a direct dialogue with Torontonians. Our goal is to make it easier for residents to understand how the City works, how to access services and programs, to learn about the issues and decisions City Council is making, and how to get involved.

RyersOnline’s Samuel Dunsiger asked Ryerson School of Journalism professor April Lindgren to weigh in on the debate. Lindgren worked for more than 25 years as a journalist, and recently came to Ryerson after working as Queen’s Park bureau chief for CanWest News Service. Throughout her career, Lindgren has specialized in covering politics and economics, and her research at Ryerson focuses on media and urban issues. 

Lindgren said the publication “borders on thinly disguised boosterism for the mayor.”

It is useful for what it is, she says, acknowledging that the list of phone numbers for Torontonians to call in certain situations on page 13 is necessary. “In some cases, they’ve done exactly what a newsletter should do, which is provide information.”

But in other cases, it strays close to telling one version of the story, she said. The piece on Mayor Miller's transit city plan -- on pages four and five -- is one example. She remarked that they explain the basic details of the plan, but they don’t admit “that they don’t have all the money to do it. They don’t tell the whole truth.”

According to Lindgren, provincial legislation requires the Auditor-General to approve all advertisements to make sure they’re non-partisan. The law bans them from including any messages or images from any executive members including the Premier and any Cabinet ministers. “If that’s what [Our Toronto] would do, I think they’d be on safer ground,” she said, adding that the city should have a similar law in place.

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation compared the publication to Pravda -- the Soviet-era newspaper of the Communist Party, but Lindgren gives it more credit.

“I would say it’s one part Pravda and one part perfectly justifiable information,” she said.

“But they shouldn’t be mixing the two.”