There has been a lot of discussion in the media surrounding the federal government’s decision to drop the mandatory long-form census in favour of a voluntary household survey. We’ve seen front page stories in The Toronto Star where the head of StatsCan has resigned, refusing to support this decision.

We’ve seen the Globe and Mail report how the voluntary system would introduce bias and reduce the reliability of data collected, therefore hurting everything from libraries to public transit, from health planning to teacher hiring.

We’ve seen articles stating that nearly all the provinces and territories have now voiced their opposition to this decision.

Yet despite outcry from experts, dissention within our municipal, provincial and federal governments, as well as protest from some of the most respected and influential leaders in the private sector, why is the general populace not paying attention?

Because, just like a bad advertisement, people who are against this decision are trying to deliver too many messages.

Meanwhile, the federal government has used what we marketers know is the key to any powerful and effective communication: repetition. With the precision of a Slapchop Ad, they’ve driven home the message that the long-form census invades the privacy of Canadians.

They have remained on message and cemented the privacy “benefit” in the mind of their “consumer.”

And while the press has shown this claim is greatly overblown, critics have yet to develop a clear and easy-to-understand retort that will make the public (i.e., the everyday Canadian) care about this topic.

But what could possibly unite people across Canada and get them to care about a bunch of statistical data that will eventually impact economics, education and healthcare in Canada?

I’m thinking hockey.

Let’s face it, we live in a country where the possibility that a kid might not be able to play hockey is more important than whether there will be a doctor to help if she suffers a broken neck from getting hit from behind.

If the data gathered from the mandatory long-form census is used to help decide where money goes for libraries, schools, hospitals and other public institutions, how many hockey teams will fold or never get a start because the funding for coaches, resources, and arenas has completely disappeared?

Or even better, maybe leaders in the private sector need to step up and show how without
accurate data, a city will never be able to convince the NHL to bring us a 7^th professional hockey team. I’m looking at you, Jim Balsillie.

Look, I’m not saying this is the best solution, or even a hundred percent accurate. I’m just saying that if the critics started saying, “scrapping the mandatory long-form census will hurt hockey in Canada,” people would pay a lot more attention because it speaks to the hearts of Canadians. It’s a common issue that everyone can understand. In short, it’s accessible.

And unless someone comes up with a simple reason why Canadians should care about the mandatory long-form census, Canadians will simply ignore it. Because it’s just plain easier to believe that it’s an invasion of your privacy.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to go post some lewd photos on Facebook, updated my exact location on Foursquare, email my bank information to a Nigerian Prince, and post an embarrassing video of my children on YouTube.