84

The fourth estate


 

Walter Wymer considers the role of the press during an election campaign.

The point is that reporters who cover politics know the politicians, their style, and their priorities.  Rather than covering an election as if it were a horse race, educate voters on the leadership style of candidates, their political beliefs, and policies they will promote.  Buyer’s remorse among voters leads to apathy, an unrepresentative government, and a weaker democracy.


 

The fourth estate

  1. Mr. Wymer seems unclear about the actual role of the press. It's not to inform, but rather to bring viewers to the advertisements that pay them. As a professor of marketing, I would have thought that he, more-so than most others, would understand that.

    Attempting to educate voters takes far more work, and subjects the press to far more abuse from those who would prefer the public was not educated, than simply regurgitating what the parties put out, with a bit of spin added. More work means it takes more time, and in an era of competition for the "scoop", taking more time means you get less ad views because people have already seen the event you're basing your article on and are looking for the next "news" item.

  2. Mr. Wymer seems unclear about the actual role of the press. It's not to inform, but rather to bring viewers to the advertisements that pay them. As a professor of marketing, I would have thought that he, more-so than most others, would understand that.

    Attempting to educate voters takes far more work, and subjects the press to far more abuse from those who would prefer the public was not educated, than simply regurgitating what the parties put out, with a bit of spin added. More work means it takes more time, and in an era of competition for the "scoop", taking more time means you get less ad views because people have already seen the event you're basing your article on and are looking for the next "news" item.

    • A depressing but accurate assessment of the state of today's media.

  3. Maybe its time to put the Bull Meter on the presstitutes, of course we all know that there is not enough bulls to cover them adequately. A beer will buy a journalist but a steak and a beer will buy a good one.

  4. Maybe its time to put the Bull Meter on the presstitutes, of course we all know that there is not enough bulls to cover them adequately. A beer will buy a journalist but a steak and a beer will buy a good one.

    • There's not enough bulls in the world to cover the TO star or this blog.

  5. Absofriggenlutely….and I'd like to know when and where that takes place.

  6. A depressing but accurate assessment of the state of today's media.

  7. What a laugh. The role of the press is to try to mislead Canadians into voting for the candidates preferred by the press, by reporting things inaccurately, selectively choosing which news to report to distort the reality.

    Exhibit A: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/otta
    Article title: "Harper slips in leaders' poll after Liberals unveil platform "
    Actual fact: Harper's leadership slips 13% to 95 from its peak. During the same period, Ignatieff score rises 2% to 53.1.
    Harper's score is 1.78 times Iggy's, the gap having increased widely (from 1.61) since the beginning of the campaign, during which time Harper's score has risen and Iggy's has remained flat.

    Anyone who trusts the media analysis is a fool. In order to trust the media analysis, you have to know why media outlet and which reporter is doing the reporting, and you have to know their track record. http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/03/that-seventies

    It takes a lot of chutzpah for someone like Aaron Wherry to refer to something from the TO star about the analysis coming from the media.

  8. What a laugh. The role of the press is to try to mislead Canadians into voting for the candidates preferred by the press, by reporting things inaccurately, selectively choosing which news to report to distort the reality.

    Exhibit A: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/otta
    Article title: "Harper slips in leaders' poll after Liberals unveil platform "
    Actual fact: Harper's leadership slips 13% to 95 from its peak. During the same period, Ignatieff score rises 2% to 53.1.
    Harper's score is 1.78 times Iggy's, the gap having increased widely (from 1.61) since the beginning of the campaign, during which time Harper's score has risen and Iggy's has remained flat.

    Anyone who trusts the media analysis is a fool. In order to trust the media analysis, you have to know why media outlet and which reporter is doing the reporting, and you have to know their track record. http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/03/that-seventies

    It takes a lot of chutzpah for someone like Aaron Wherry to refer to something from the TO star about the analysis coming from the media.

    • What is misleading? Did Harper slip in leaders' poll after Liberals unveiled platform? Yes, yes he did. Did the Globe and Mail say "Harper plunges to the bottom of the pool in leaders' poll" or "Harper crashes and burns in leaders' poll" ? No, no they did not. They used the word "slips". A reaonsable person understands that word in this context to mean "reduces", which is exactly what happened. I mean, it isn't as if the headline was on one page and the article was on another page, and reading the articles tells you precisely how much Harper "slipped" by, and how he's still leading.

      There are lots of misleading media examples (such as Waterloo Region's 570News not mentioning where Ignatieff was going to be the day he was in Waterloo Region, and just mentioning where Harper and Layton were going to be, then ending that story.) This isn't one of those examples.

      • The point is, he hasn't slipped. He's increased his lead in the leadership poll from 1.61 times Iggy's, to 1.78. His leadership score has increased since the beginning of the campaign.

      • Oh, so funny. They even changed the picture! Now they've chopped off the part showing his leadership score increasing for the last two weeks, so they only show two days! I suppose I was not the only one who thought the headline was bizarre! But instead of changing the headline, they changed the picture.

      • Click on the link http://beta.images.theglobeandmail.com/archive/01
        and try to tell someone with a serious face that you see Harper's leadership score slipping.

        If you go back just one extra day, it's easy to see the score has not dropped whatsoever!

        • What are you talking about? The article is about a rolling poll done by Nanos. Therefore, it concerns itself with that particular day only. Ibbitson isn't saying this is the be-all and end-all poll of the campaign or anything, he's just reporting on it. Why he's concerning himself with polls is another matter entirely, but you guys seem to enjoy them most of the time, so I can't see that as your issue. You say yourself, in your first post, that Harper has dropped 13% and Ignatieff has increased 2%. How you get Harper has increased his lead from those "actual facts" as you say, is beyond me. Sure, he's increased his leadership score over Ignatieff prior to the campaign and up to this point, but we already knew that and it was reported at the time. Surely, you expect news media to report NEW news.

          Relax, s_c_f, nobody is saying Harper doesn't lead in the leadership polls. Not Ibbitson, and certainly not me.

          • Normally the writers don't choose the headlines, so I doubt that Ibbitson had anything to do with it.

            Frankly, the summary is this: If a tracking poll has shown gains for 4 of the last 9 days and an overall gain of 15% in that same time, and it has also remained flat over the last 3 days, the length of the tracking session, you don't write a headline claiming the score has slipped.

            It's like having snowfall for 6 days and sunny on the 7th, and writing a headling claiming the recent weather has been sunny. People would look at you like you had a stroke.

          • Uh, yeah, you do, if you have already reported that the overall gain was 15% in the time-frame right before that. Now, I haven't read the Globe and Mail much lately and have no idea if they did report that, I just assume they did since they seem to follow polls (my experience is that all newspapers and other media follow polls, so I don't think I'm going out on a limb here)

            Here in Waterloo Region, we've had fairly cool days until one day when it was quite warm. You bet we were talking about spring was here! Then it snowed that night as a nice surprise. I think that was yesterday (tax season does a remarkable thing with time. It seems to stretch out so you can't tell whether a thing happened this morning, or last week) Point being of course you report the weather has been sunny!

  9. There's not enough bulls in the world to cover the TO star or this blog.

  10. My experience with the media so far in this campaign is that I see a headline negative about the Cons and/or their polling, then I check the facts behind the article to discover how wrong the headline is.

    It takes a lot of effort to sift through the BS being spewed by the media to find out the actual reality.

    In fact, I don't think I've ever seen the media more dishonest than in this campaign so far. It's worse than ever before, the worst offenders being the G&M, the TO Star, and CBC, which really seem to be going overboard trying to get their readers and viewers to vote Liberal.

  11. My experience with the media so far in this campaign is that I see a headline negative about the Cons and/or their polling, then I check the facts behind the article to discover how wrong the headline is.

    It takes a lot of effort to sift through the BS being spewed by the media to find out the actual reality.

    In fact, I don't think I've ever seen the media more dishonest than in this campaign so far. It's worse than ever before, the worst offenders being the G&M, the TO Star, and CBC, which really seem to be going overboard trying to get their readers and viewers to vote Liberal.

    • Feel free to post any concrete examples.

  12. What is misleading? Did Harper slip in leaders' poll after Liberals unveiled platform? Yes, yes he did. Did the Globe and Mail say "Harper plunges to the bottom of the pool in leaders' poll" or "Harper crashes and burns in leaders' poll" ? No, no they did not. They used the word "slips". A reaonsable person understands that word in this context to mean "reduces", which is exactly what happened. I mean, it isn't as if the headline was on one page and the article was on another page, and reading the articles tells you precisely how much Harper "slipped" by, and how he's still leading.

    There are lots of misleading media examples (such as Waterloo Region's 570News not mentioning where Ignatieff was going to be the day he was in Waterloo Region, and just mentioning where Harper and Layton were going to be, then ending that story.) This isn't one of those examples.

  13. Feel free to post any concrete examples.

  14. Iggy has an economy destroying cap on energy in his platform,

    but what does the press go berzerk over?

    An apparent Liberal supporter being ejected from a Conservative rally.

    The press actively campaingning for Iggy and against Harper has reached a fever pitch.

    A magnifying glass to the right, a blind eye to the left.

    The scandal of our generation

  15. Iggy has an economy destroying cap on energy in his platform,

    but what does the press go berzerk over?

    An apparent Liberal supporter being ejected from a Conservative rally.

    The press actively campaingning for Iggy and against Harper has reached a fever pitch.

    A magnifying glass to the right, a blind eye to the left.

    The scandal of our generation

  16. Norman Spector had a great tweet a few days back that went something like:

    Harper continues his lead in the polls. Ottawa press must redouble efforts.

    And consider this: the very press that tried to make a "scandal" out of the CPC spending their own money, actively utlizes their owner's corporate resources to propagandize for the Liberals.

    Imagine what a full front page ad in the Globe or Star would be, but the Liberals get it for "free" day in and day out.

    Truly a scandal of epic proportions.

  17. Norman Spector had a great tweet a few days back that went something like:

    Harper continues his lead in the polls. Ottawa press must redouble efforts.

    And consider this: the very press that tried to make a "scandal" out of the CPC spending their own money, actively utlizes their owner's corporate resources to propagandize for the Liberals.

    Imagine what a full front page ad in the Globe or Star would be, but the Liberals get it for "free" day in and day out.

    Truly a scandal of epic proportions.

    • You claiming that QMI and its massive chain of dailies and tabloids are in cahoots with the Liberals? That's pretty funny, chet.

      • Every study and poll on the matter,

        every single one,

        shows that "journalists" are overwhelmingly left leaning. As in 90 plus percent.

        It effects everything in the reportage, from what is covered to what is not, to the premise of stories and to the hostilities to the "incorrect" party.

        The proof in the pudding is every leftist defends the press while those on the right have contempt for them. Why, because they are literally on the leftist's side.

        A corruption scandal of our lifetimes.

        • Every study and poll on the matter,

          every single one,

          shows that "journalists" are overwhelmingly educated. As in 90 plus percent.

          It AFFECTS everything in the reportage, from what is covered to what is not, to the premise of stories and to the hostilities to the party attempting to take advantage of the dull-witted and credulous.

          The proof in the pudding is every educated person defends the press while those on the right have contempt for them. Why, because they are literally on the educated person's side.

          A corruption scandal of our lifetimes.

          • I would have liked your reply better if you would have quoted the whole piece but only changed the spelling error.

          • That's aces, I really wish I'd thought of that now.

        • "A corruption scandal of our lifetimes"

          Try not to be so melodramatic and tell me if you seriously include QMI in this over over-the-top claim.

    • So… what did the press miss in failing to heap scorn on Iggy? Just wondering. I mean, if the media is being too tough on the PM, I'm curious to know what they're leaving out in order to 'actively campaign' for the Liberals.

      Harper and his team have shot themselves in the foot a couple of times in the last week, chet. Iggy's done pretty well. Admit it, get over it, move on. Still lots of election to go, buddy.

      • I would want the press to ask Iggy what he signed in 2008 when he promised the BQ a Permanent Mechanism for Consultation. What did Ignatieff and Layton have in mind, exactly, when they signed such a deal with the BQ?

        No one has asked Ignatieff or Layton. But the campaign is still young. Still lots of time to ask important questions.

        • Two years ago called.. they're done.

  18. You claiming that QMI and its massive chain of dailies and tabloids are in cahoots with the Liberals? That's pretty funny, chet.

  19. So… what did the press miss in failing to heap scorn on Iggy? Just wondering. I mean, if the media is being too tough on the PM, I'm curious to know what they're leaving out in order to 'actively campaign' for the Liberals.

    Harper and his team have shot themselves in the foot a couple of times in the last week, chet. Iggy's done pretty well. Admit it, get over it, move on. Still lots of election to go, buddy.

  20. Every study and poll on the matter,

    every single one,

    shows that "journalists" are overwhelmingly left leaning. As in 90 plus percent.

    It effects everything in the reportage, from what is covered to what is not, to the premise of stories and to the hostilities to the "incorrect" party.

    The proof in the pudding is every leftist defends the press while those on the right have contempt for them. Why, because they are literally on the leftist's side.

    A corruption scandal of our lifetimes.

  21. Every study and poll on the matter,

    every single one,

    shows that "journalists" are overwhelmingly educated. As in 90 plus percent.

    It AFFECTS everything in the reportage, from what is covered to what is not, to the premise of stories and to the hostilities to the party attempting to take advantage of the dull-witted and credulous.

    The proof in the pudding is every educated person defends the press while those on the right have contempt for them. Why, because they are literally on the educated person's side.

    A corruption scandal of our lifetimes.

  22. I would have liked your reply better if you would have quoted the whole piece but only changed the spelling error.

  23. I'd like to see Paul Wells write every piece for every paper. Can we do that?

  24. I'd like to see Paul Wells write every piece for every paper. Can we do that?

  25. "A corruption scandal of our lifetimes"

    Try not to be so melodramatic and tell me if you seriously include QMI in this over over-the-top claim.

  26. That's aces, I really wish I'd thought of that now.

  27. The point is, he hasn't slipped. He's increased his lead in the leadership poll from 1.61 times Iggy's, to 1.78. His leadership score has increased since the beginning of the campaign.

  28. Oh, so funny. They even changed the picture! Now they've chopped off the part showing his leadership score increasing for the last two weeks, so they only show two days! I suppose I was not the only one who thought the headline was bizarre! But instead of changing the headline, they changed the picture.

  29. Click on the link http://beta.images.theglobeandmail.com/archive/01
    and try to tell someone with a serious face that you see Harper's leadership score slipping.

    If you go back just one extra day, it's easy to see the score has not dropped whatsoever!

  30. What are you talking about? The article is about a rolling poll done by Nanos. Therefore, it concerns itself with that particular day only. Ibbitson isn't saying this is the be-all and end-all poll of the campaign or anything, he's just reporting on it. Why he's concerning himself with polls is another matter entirely, but you guys seem to enjoy them most of the time, so I can't see that as your issue. You say yourself, in your first post, that Harper has dropped 13% and Ignatieff has increased 2%. How you get Harper has increased his lead from those "actual facts" as you say, is beyond me. Sure, he's increased his leadership score over Ignatieff prior to the campaign and up to this point, but we already knew that and it was reported at the time. Surely, you expect news media to report NEW news.

    Relax, s_c_f, nobody is saying Harper doesn't lead in the leadership polls. Not Ibbitson, and certainly not me.

  31. Tonight, the lead-in headline on the cbc 6pm news was:

    "Conservative campaign off message" because two students were removed from a Conservative rally.

    That is the most important news of the day? Bizarre!

  32. Tonight, the lead-in headline on the cbc 6pm news was:

    "Conservative campaign off message" because two students were removed from a Conservative rally.

    That is the most important news of the day? Bizarre!

  33. I would want the press to ask Iggy what he signed in 2008 when he promised the BQ a Permanent Mechanism for Consultation. What did Ignatieff and Layton have in mind, exactly, when they signed such a deal with the BQ?

    No one has asked Ignatieff or Layton. But the campaign is still young. Still lots of time to ask important questions.

  34. Oh, and after reading Walter Wymer's article, I was wondering why only Bush's results were reported on, and not Al Gore's.

    What happened to Al Gore, since the debates Mr.Wymer was talking about.

    If Bush did the exact opposite as had been promised, did Al Gore not do the exact opposite also?

    I wondered why the reversal of Gore was not mentioned in the article. To me, such ommissions point to selective reporting.

  35. Oh, and after reading Walter Wymer's article, I was wondering why only Bush's results were reported on, and not Al Gore's.

    What happened to Al Gore, since the debates Mr.Wymer was talking about.

    If Bush did the exact opposite as had been promised, did Al Gore not do the exact opposite also?

    I wondered why the reversal of Gore was not mentioned in the article. To me, such ommissions point to selective reporting.

  36. Normally the writers don't choose the headlines, so I doubt that Ibbitson had anything to do with it.

    Frankly, the summary is this: If a tracking poll has shown gains for 4 of the last 9 days and an overall gain of 15% in that same time, and it has also remained flat over the last 3 days, the length of the tracking session, you don't write a headline claiming the score has slipped.

    It's like having snowfall for 6 days and sunny on the 7th, and writing a headling claiming the recent weather has been sunny. People would look at you like you had a stroke.

  37. Uh, yeah, you do, if you have already reported that the overall gain was 15% in the time-frame right before that. Now, I haven't read the Globe and Mail much lately and have no idea if they did report that, I just assume they did since they seem to follow polls (my experience is that all newspapers and other media follow polls, so I don't think I'm going out on a limb here)

    Here in Waterloo Region, we've had fairly cool days until one day when it was quite warm. You bet we were talking about spring was here! Then it snowed that night as a nice surprise. I think that was yesterday (tax season does a remarkable thing with time. It seems to stretch out so you can't tell whether a thing happened this morning, or last week) Point being of course you report the weather has been sunny!

  38. Two years ago called.. they're done.

  39. What's remarkable about this faux scandal ("removing people from Campaigns!!!"), is not just how obvious it is that the press is trying to gin up a scandal,

    but how obvious it is that the exact thing is sure to happen in Liberal campaigns. Imagine if someone showed up with an "I Love Stephen Harper" sign at a Liberal rally. It's obvious. Indeed it likely happens regularly. Hecklers are a real concern at rallys, it can kill the mood.

    The "rules" are fundamentally different for the CPC than Liberals, and it's clearly reported oppositely. While one gets a blind eye, the other has "Scandal!!!" plastered all over it.

    The scandal of our generation to be sure. A scandal the press would dare not self report about.

  40. What's remarkable about this faux scandal ("removing people from Campaigns!!!"), is not just how obvious it is that the press is trying to gin up a scandal,

    but how obvious it is that the exact thing is sure to happen in Liberal campaigns. Imagine if someone showed up with an "I Love Stephen Harper" sign at a Liberal rally. It's obvious. Indeed it likely happens regularly. Hecklers are a real concern at rallys, it can kill the mood.

    The "rules" are fundamentally different for the CPC than Liberals, and it's clearly reported oppositely. While one gets a blind eye, the other has "Scandal!!!" plastered all over it.

    The scandal of our generation to be sure. A scandal the press would dare not self report about.

  41. "We will work with the provincial governments and our partners to develop and implement a North America-wide cap and trade system for greenhouse gases and an effective international protocol for the post-2012 period."

    – (Conservative) Speech from the Throne, 2008.

  42. "I haven't read the Globe and Mail much lately and have no idea if they did report that, I just assume they did since they seem to follow polls"

    OK, you just gave me an idea for a fun little exercise. Let's test that out. I don't intend to do an extensive survey of Globe articles, but it's rather easy to look at the list of headlines from the campaign notebook, from whence this article originated.

    We'll go back to April 1 and see if the campaign notebook has reported any such gain in Harper's leadership score. In fact, I'll rate each headline as positive or negative about Harper/Cons (+-H) and positive or negative about Ignatieff/Libs (+-I) and also Layton/NDP (+-L). I'll ignore info posts like "where the leaders are".

    So here we go:
    April 5:
    "Turn the page on Harper and his ‘goons': Ignatieff " -H, +I
    "Layton reaches out to Winnipeg as Red River rises"
    "Tories accused of following Tea Partier's script in new ad" -H
    "I'll be back, Ignatieff says after drive-by campaign stop in Quebec "
    "Harper slips in leaders' poll after Liberals unveil platform " -H
    "Ejections at campaign rallies a ‘staff' issue, Harper says " -H
    "What has Stephen Harper done for Canada's economy? "
    "Ignatieff trusts his campaign plane – but not his Tory rival "
    "Ottawa's fighter-jet estimate ‘all hogwash,' U.S. watchdog warns " -H
    "Elizabeth May takes her quest to join the leaders' debates to court "
    "Liberals narrow gap to 9 points – but is it a ‘bump or a blip'? " +I
    "The Bruce Carson affair: Notes on a scandal that won't stick " +H
    "Most Canadians want Elizabeth May at leaders' debate, poll shows "
    "Harper gets an earful from students: ‘Surprise. We are voting' " -H
    "Layton gambles on rally in defector's riding – and wins " +L
    April 4:
    "Music to Tory ears: Economy top of mind among voters " +H
    "Does Canada need next-generation stealth fighter jets? "
    "Peanut fight avoided as NDP incumbent crashes Harper campaign stop "
    "Jack Layton upbeat about health: It's ‘better every day' "
    "Majority won't spur change on abortion or same-sex marriage, Harper says "
    "Show me a conservative government anywhere in the world with a solid fiscal track record " -H
    "Harper on ex-PMO adviser's rap sheet: ‘I wouldn't have hired him' " -H
    "Bound for Newfoundland, Ignatieff hedges on Lower Churchill deal "
    "Can NDP replace old dogs with new tricks in Quebec? " -L
    "Tories enter second week with commanding 14-point lead " +H
    April 3:
    "Stephen Harper scores … in pick-up street hockey "
    "Harper decries vandalism of Liberal signs "
    "On Harper campaign stop, Jacques Demers slams hockey goons "
    "Group asks election candidates to sign 'civility' pledge "
    "NDP's Layton fends off questions about modest crowds " -L
    April 1
    "Ignatieff and Layton get a bump in popularity, but Harper still tops " +H +I +L
    "Nary a rotten tomato at NDP town hall in Sudbury " +L
    "Harper pledges to settle multibillion-dollar HST feud with Quebec "
    "Campus vote mob heeds Rick Mercer's call to arms "
    "Duceppe faces NDP call to expel incumbent over aboriginal misstep "
    "How are Harper and Ignatieff doing after a week on the hustings? "
    "Voters ‘yearning' for one-on-one debate, Ignatieff tells Harper "
    "Regional poll numbers could ‘turn over a lot of seats' for Harper " +H
    "Canadian leaders' debates could stand to be a little more American "
    "Ousted nuclear watchdog backs Elizabeth May in B.C. battleground "

    OK.
    The score is:
    5 positive about Harper/Cons, 8 negative
    3 positive stories about Ignatieff/Libs, 0 negative
    3 positive stories about Layton/NDP, 2 negative

    So, 8 of the headlines are negative about Harper/Cons, 0 are negative about Iggy/Libs. Hmmmm….

    As for your assumption they would have reported on Harper's gains in the leadership score… Nope. They did manage to bring themselves to report on who was in the lead, however. Good for them.

  43. They didn't report any ot the other polls? I find that hard to believe, since they reported this one, and I don't have the time to check your work. But good work, by the way.

    I find it extremely partisan of the Globe and Mail to cover 13 stories about the Conservatives, five stories on the NDP, and only three about the Liberals. :)

    But the other thing you need to keep in mind is that, and I know you'll not like this, but facts have a liberal bias. What I mean is that there is a lot of negative to report about Harper right now. You've got people being kicked out of campaign speeches, the Carson thing, the Military Complaints Commission thing, the F-35 price thing, etc.

  44. They didn't report any ot the other polls? I find that hard to believe, since they reported this one, and I don't have the time to check your work. But good work, by the way.

    I find it extremely partisan of the Globe and Mail to cover 13 stories about the Conservatives, five stories on the NDP, and only three about the Liberals. :)

    But the other thing you need to keep in mind is that, and I know you'll not like this, but facts have a liberal bias. What I mean is that there is a lot of negative to report about Harper right now. You've got people being kicked out of campaign speeches, the Carson thing, the Military Complaints Commission thing, the F-35 price thing, etc.

    • I find it extremely partisan of the Globe and Mail to cover 13 stories about the Conservatives, five stories on the NDP, and only three about the Liberals. :)

      Well, that's not entirely true, that's only the ones for which I gave scores, lots of others were neutral. But yes, I find it surprising that so little has been said about Ignatieff and the Liberals. There are elements to his platform that have not yet been reported at all (the resurrected carbon tax, for instance).

      And you mention the Carson thing and the campaign speeches and the military complaints commission, but are you aware that Ignatieff's current Liberal candidate for the riding of Manicouagan belongs to a white supremacist group? http://davidakin.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2011

      How about the fact that a former Liberal senator was convicted of fraud just two weeks ago? http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/11/liberal-senato

      How about the fact that a sitting Liberal MP has been charged and is awaiting trial for failing to cooperate with a police officer due to a suspected drunk driving incident? http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blogs/fullcomm

      I notice that these things have not been getting a lot of coverage. Seems as though few people wanted to report this stuff. Guess who discovered the Forbes issue? The NDP. Not the CBC, not the Globe, not any of the press.

      facts have a liberal bias

      Well, I thought you might say something like that, and of course I disagree, as you know. From my perspective the entire Liberal platform has a lot of negatives, but for details, refer to Andrew Coyne's article about it (that seventies thing it was called or something), or refresh yourself with the resurrected green shift.

    • Yes, Bruce Carson. Let's see what Ignatieff has to say:

      Ignatieff:
      ""I think we're in a very bad place when you've got a prime minister who does a background check on his audience, at a democratic crowd, and doesn't seem to do a background check on the people he hires in the Prime Minister's Office, like Mr. Carson.''
      http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/news/story/2011/04/05/c

      Michael Ignatieff, one day later:
      "As soon as I was apprised of past comments made by the Liberal candidate in Manicouagan, André Forbes, I immediately asked my staff to inquire about their validity"
      http://davidakin.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2011

      • Yup, nothing whatsoever different about one candidate in 308, and a guy in your office advising you day-to-day. You'll note I didn't bring up the Conservative guy in BC in my list, either. To make that point more clear: Do candidates need top secret security clearance?

        • So you're saying a minister of parliament should not be vetted by the party leader but a hired employee should be vetted? The leader vets his employees but not his candidates?

          And you're equating "top secret security clearance" with an individual who founded a group called "the Association for the Rights of Whites" and who calls natives "featherheads"?

          You have such high standards for the Liberal Party.

    • One more thing: check the latest leadership scores: http://www.nanosresearch.com/election2011/2011040

      Harper reached his highest score yet. One day after the Globe reported: "Harper slips in leaders' poll after Liberals unveil platform". Yet just three days after the Liberal platform was released, Harper hit his highest score ever in the poll.

      So, let's wait and see if they report this at all (hint: they won't).

  45. I find it extremely partisan of the Globe and Mail to cover 13 stories about the Conservatives, five stories on the NDP, and only three about the Liberals. :)

    Well, that's not entirely true, that's only the ones for which I gave scores, lots of others were neutral. But yes, I find it surprising that so little has been said about Ignatieff and the Liberals. There are elements to his platform that have not yet been reported at all (the resurrected carbon tax, for instance).

    And you mention the Carson thing and the campaign speeches and the military complaints commission, but are you aware that Ignatieff's current Liberal candidate for the riding of Manicouagan belongs to a white supremacist group? http://davidakin.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2011

    How about the fact that a former Liberal senator was convicted of fraud just two weeks ago? http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/11/liberal-senato

    How about the fact that a sitting Liberal MP has been charged and is awaiting trial for failing to cooperate with a police officer due to a suspected drunk driving incident? http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blogs/fullcomm

    I notice that these things have not been getting a lot of coverage. Seems as though few people wanted to report this stuff. Guess who discovered the Forbes issue? The NDP. Not the CBC, not the Globe, not any of the press.

    facts have a liberal bias

    Well, I thought you might say something like that, and of course I disagree, as you know. From my perspective the entire Liberal platform has a lot of negatives, but for details, refer to Andrew Coyne's article about it (that seventies thing it was called or something), or refresh yourself with the resurrected green shift.

  46. Yes, Bruce Carson. Let's see what Ignatieff has to say:

    Ignatieff:
    ""I think we're in a very bad place when you've got a prime minister who does a background check on his audience, at a democratic crowd, and doesn't seem to do a background check on the people he hires in the Prime Minister's Office, like Mr. Carson.''
    http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/news/story/2011/04/05/c

    Michael Ignatieff, one day later:
    "As soon as I was apprised of past comments made by the Liberal candidate in Manicouagan, André Forbes, I immediately asked my staff to inquire about their validity"
    http://davidakin.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2011

  47. Yup, nothing whatsoever different about one candidate in 308, and a guy in your office advising you day-to-day. You'll note I didn't bring up the Conservative guy in BC in my list, either. To make that point more clear: Do candidates need top secret security clearance?

  48. One more thing: check the latest leadership scores: http://www.nanosresearch.com/election2011/2011040

    Harper reached his highest score yet. One day after the Globe reported: "Harper slips in leaders' poll after Liberals unveil platform". Yet just three days after the Liberal platform was released, Harper hit his highest score ever in the poll.

    So, let's wait and see if they report this at all (hint: they won't).

  49. So you're saying a minister of parliament should not be vetted by the party leader but a hired employee should be vetted? The leader vets his employees but not his candidates?

    And you're equating "top secret security clearance" with an individual who founded a group called "the Association for the Rights of Whites" and who calls natives "featherheads"?

    You have such high standards for the Liberal Party.

  50. Uh, I expect the vetting is done in proportion to the snowball's chance in hell of the candidate becoming a member of parliament. Obviously a Minister in government is another step beyond that.

    Security clearance, s_c_f. Remember the security clearance.

  51. Carson was not a minister in government either.

    And frankly, I think any serious leader would care if he has a white supremacist running for his party, regardless of his chances. The fact that Ignatieff fired the guy today would suggest so.

    So, where do you draw the line? Would it still be OK if the Liberals had a serial killer running in one of the ridings? How about a simple murderer? Shoplifter? Clearly a racist is OK in your book, no need to vet for that. You seem to be thinking no vetting is required, so anybody would be just fine.

    Let's see, on the one hand, you're saying
    "What I mean is that there is a lot of negative to report about Harper right now. You've got people being kicked out of campaign speeches.."
    and then you're saying it's no big deal that the Liberals had a white supremacist running for office.

    A few people being kicked out of rallies.
    White supremacist.

    OK.

    I'm having trouble believing that if Harper had a white supremacist running for office, and some people were kicked out of a Liberal rally, that you would be claiming that the Liberals had the negative thing going on.

  52. Carson was not a minister in government either.

    And frankly, I think any serious leader would care if he has a white supremacist running for his party, regardless of his chances. The fact that Ignatieff fired the guy today would suggest so.

    So, where do you draw the line? Would it still be OK if the Liberals had a serial killer running in one of the ridings? How about a simple murderer? Shoplifter? Clearly a racist is OK in your book, no need to vet for that. You seem to be thinking no vetting is required, so anybody would be just fine.

    Let's see, on the one hand, you're saying
    "What I mean is that there is a lot of negative to report about Harper right now. You've got people being kicked out of campaign speeches.."
    and then you're saying it's no big deal that the Liberals had a white supremacist running for office.

    A few people being kicked out of rallies.
    White supremacist.

    OK.

    I'm having trouble believing that if Harper had a white supremacist running for office, and some people were kicked out of a Liberal rally, that you would be claiming that the Liberals had the negative thing going on.

    • Well, obviously it isn't good. It also isn't good to have a guy who can't stay within his budget as the Conservatives appear to have had (no, I'm not comparing the two–the white supremacist is by far the larger concern). I am just saying that what looked good with a cursory review turns out not to look good in more depth. It's a problem when you have so many candidates needing to be confirmed in a very short amount of time. But you know that.

      The minister in government was because you said "minister of parliament" and I was trying to cover all the bases in case you meant minister and not member.

      This is a good conversation we're having, except I'm dropping the ball. I'm sorry about that. I just don't have the time I'd like to respond fully. The Rodriguez thing bugs me, too, for example.

      But this last post of yours wasn't part of that "good conversation" so much, since it puts words in my mouth (admittedly I haven't been doing that myself so you maybe had to, but you know those aren't the words I'd choose) ignoring the coverage of this white supremacist while complaining about him anyway, etc.

      Can we take it up again around June?

      • "since it puts words in my mouth"

        My apologies, you're right. I was over the top.

        "I just don't have the time I'd like to respond fully"

        Yeah, that's fine… I think we've exhausted this issue anyway, at least for the time being.

  53. Well, obviously it isn't good. It also isn't good to have a guy who can't stay within his budget as the Conservatives appear to have had (no, I'm not comparing the two–the white supremacist is by far the larger concern). I am just saying that what looked good with a cursory review turns out not to look good in more depth. It's a problem when you have so many candidates needing to be confirmed in a very short amount of time. But you know that.

    The minister in government was because you said "minister of parliament" and I was trying to cover all the bases in case you meant minister and not member.

    This is a good conversation we're having, except I'm dropping the ball. I'm sorry about that. I just don't have the time I'd like to respond fully. The Rodriguez thing bugs me, too, for example.

    But this last post of yours wasn't part of that "good conversation" so much, since it puts words in my mouth (admittedly I haven't been doing that myself so you maybe had to, but you know those aren't the words I'd choose) ignoring the coverage of this white supremacist while complaining about him anyway, etc.

    Can we take it up again around June?

  54. "since it puts words in my mouth"

    My apologies, you're right. I was over the top.

    "I just don't have the time I'd like to respond fully"

    Yeah, that's fine… I think we've exhausted this issue anyway, at least for the time being.

Sign in to comment.