Perspective Required from Cannuckistan Chronicles
A sting is a sting and the Libranos got stung. Suck it up... [Read More]

Tracked on June 1, 2005 1:33 PM

Shoot the messenger. Admit it, the Tories have problems.

Where are the Journalists that investigated and told us the story. Not their political view of what is happening. I think Canadians are a little more intelligent then 50 years ago. Let us make up our own minds.

Rick Mercer does better reporting of incidents with his Wand and TV then most of the main stream does now. He shows the people involved, He shows the events, He draws some connections and then let’s the viewer make up his mind on the matter.

Make a list with two columns. One with what the Liberals allegedly have done illegally and immorally and in the other place the same for the conservatives.

So why are the media bashing the Conservatives??

I see you're kind enough to cut far more slack to the narcissistic GTA scribbling clique than I am Kate. Having moved here ( Ontario) from Alberta I am constantly amazed at the irresponsible reporting, spn and eltist chiding these centralist media types reflexively hand out to anything that appears to be not status quo. The CPC and Harper have been targets for ALL of them since they hit town.

Wells is much like the rest...staus quo and always on a one sided attack mode ( although much more subtle).

Hey GTA: Keep drinking that stus quo politically neurotic Kool aid your media spews...it will eventually supply the more radical political solutionists the spark they need to disolve association with a Central Canada they deem too self interested and neurotic to run things for the rest of the country.

I'm almost at a point where I'm hoping that the eastern media schmucks continue to unjustly smear the CPC and Harper...so we can get on with the final reactionary stage of western alienation.

Kate you put it so well!
This morning I'm composing my mail to Mike Duffy. Last year I sent him a note sharing my opinions of Paul Celluci, the MDA and the liberal scandals surrounding Desmarais, Oil for Fraud, HRDC, Adscam, etc. He responded to me indicating agreement with my views. To watch him now taking the exact opposite position is utterly perplexing.
As you said Kate, why are they covering for this illegitimate, corrupt and incompetent government? WHY??

The Paul Martin Liberal tactics in a nutshell:

No one knew that we were doing it and this is the proof that we can do it," Murphy tells Grewal cryptically in one excerpt.

Noone knew. And the media Liberal apologists are helping the Liberals make sure noone knows. Imagine if the Conservatives get elected and audit the books.
There are many secrets here folks - and AdScam is small potatoes.
As long as this cloud of suspicion hangs over Paul Martin's Liberals we will never have a functional parliament.
They are consumed with secrecy and hiding the truth from Canadians. And, they lie with impunity and the media does not even question the lies - they make headlines out of them.
Truly a disgrace.
We need 1,000 deep throats...and even two honest principaled investigative reporters and at least one major media outlet to break through this code of liberal silence before we can begin to call ourselves a democracy.

"Shoot the messenger. Admit it, the Tories have problems."

Not THAT many problems. I know that Wells isn't incompetent, so I'm just going to assume that he's dishonest. How else can you account for the crap that he's been spewing lately?

See sycophants of the Emperor's court. They do not hear that the Emperor has no clothes. They will not say that the Emperor has no clothes.

http://hca.gilead.org.il/emperor.html

Good points, we'll see if there are any takers from the media. Glad to see someone else taking up the same point.

However, commentators such as Mr Wells also have a responsibility and right to comment on the oppositions', government in waitings, abilities to organize an argument and execute a strategy. I share Wells' criticism that the CPC leadership has apparently been unable to get a message out.

Kate, I am trying, I really am trying to find a coherent strategy on this one. I see Liberal talking points and I see Liberal Talkig Heads all over the media today. We saw the Liberal points coming last night, I noted in posts elsewhere. But nary a CPC spokesperson to be seen today, were they all at Hy's?

IF the CPC are pitching and being blocked by Liberal leaning reporters or editors then the full shame should be there. But I dont see the CPC trying. Perhaps your invite should be extended to CPC spokepeople who have tried and failed to get a message across, i doubt there will be any takers.

That being said, my complaint about the media is they are waiting for each side to pitch their stories and the media defence is the tories are just bad at getting their message out.

Kate, this is where I join you in full disgust mode. This is NOT a policy debate, these issues (Adscam and the "Grewaltape letters") cuts to criminality, corruption and the lack of moral compass at the heart of the Liberal Party. These are strong echoes of all of the points mentioned regarding Watergate. This is about how government functions and is conducted not about who is governing or how well one side is spinning and playing the media game.

Scott reid's comments saying this is the game, "We arent morons" is correct only to the extent that this is a game. Richard Nixon, Liddy and the others werent morons either. They were actually quite clever but they were out of the norm in terms of their morality, self defined as being the only possible choice of good versus evil democrats, hence everything was possible.

The Canadian 4th estate suffers from a severe case of client capture and Ottawa induced numbness that they are unable to seperate the offensive and unethical from the illegal. If it isnt illegal then it is correct, according to Liberal spin. Hence the media's blindness to breaking of constituional conventions, conventions arent written so you cant point to an actual borken rule.

Lazy media fall back on who has pitched me best to help me meet my deadline....good reporters see the real story, despite the spin, despite the pitch and despite friendships.....if they want to call themselves "professionals", which the media dearly wish to do, then media in this country have the story of a lifetime to capture here. For goodness sakes Woodward was a Republican but that didnt stop him from doing his job!

I am not holding my breath for any media confessionals, anonymous or not. I hope I am wrong and kudos to you for making the offer.

What a difference a border and 30 years make.

A number of commenters in the U.S. (e.g., Glenn Reynolds) have pointed out that the strong lefty bias in the mainstream media has worked to the advantage of conservatives and disadvantage of the Democrats. The conservatives faced regular, even constant criticism, so that if their ideas were not clearly expressed, or the logic of their argument was not strong, they could get that feedback and improve. Meanwhile, the Dems enjoyed the chorus of MSM approval, and lost the discipline that political combat induces. Having lost the ability to do politics, the lefties use the courts to get the policies they want, which tends to make them even less popular, politically.

So, theoretically, the same thing should happen here - conservatives should respond to criticism of their ideas, where appropriate, by improving those ideas or their exposition. The Liberals, meanwhile, will continue to show no interest in the idea that they should get better at what they do. So long as the CPC does get better, and the message gets out in spite of the MSM, good things will result.

Of course, that may not work in Canada even though it works in the U.S., because Canada is fundamentally a less grown-up country than the U.S. is. But one can hope!

Kate - these are EXACTLY the questions I want answers to, as well. What justification can be offered which would allow us to believe anything other than that our media has completely abrogated any claim to merit or integrity???

If what we are seeing is the only level of journalism they can rise to, please stick to covering Hollywood gossip and leave political journalism to those who are prepared to give it the attention, integrity, effort and honesty it deserves in a democracy!

If you're not terribly bright, and those publicizing your ideas aren't terribly bright, you end up sending out a stupid message. And the populace, being significantly brighter than the politicos or the media, gets the message you're an idiot. Well, 51% of them anyway.

"There has to be a logical explanation . . ."

Obviously dogma outranks integrity to some people.

Its so simple. The MSM is funded largely by the lieberals in many ways. They will never bite the hand that feeds them.

The cliche "don't bite the hand that feeds you" surely applies in most instances re the so-called journalist's down on their knees attitude to their employers, i.e, the MSM. The power of a regular pay cheque trumps integrity and critical thinking.
The servitude evidenced by the the chokehold of the MSM on their writers is appalling; we do not live in the days of Hearst & etc. Welles's Citizen Kane is the best story ever of the rise/fall of a MSM empire.

There are pundits (journalists) to which this does not apply. They may have been granted "freedom of speech" in the contracts they have entered into with the MSM.
The rest must write as their editors (MSM owners) dictate, as the Russian word has it: diktat, or else you are out, fired, gonzo, history, hit-the-road,Jake, & etc.

Writers in the Sun chain do have freedom of speech.

The MSM demands dhimitude; on your knees, brothers and sisters; on your knees, infidels; or, it's off with your hands. (We already have your tongues removed, heh, heh.)

CBC, CTV, are now state-run propaganda mouthpieces for the Liberal/NDP/National Socialist regime in Ottawa/Toronto/Montreal.

The blogs/bloggers/commenters have broken the hegemony of the MSM.

Power to the blogs.

Long live freedom and democracy and free speech.

to call wells, ibbitson, simpson, wente and the rest of the hacks that make up the canadian MSM "journalists" is a slap in the face of all of the members of this profession that have tried to make a difference.

the problem with most of the canadian "journalists" is that they all seem to be legends in their own minds. wells in particular strikes me as being so full of himself that i would hate to be a mirror in his house.

irrespective of what MSM says, it was infinitely better to wait for two weeks to release the tapes. two weeks later, the issue is still here, and not muddled in the confidence vote/belinda, as the libs would have wanted.

now it's standalone and everyone talks about it! take that wells!

I'm starting to hear the rightous indignation that I'm so looking for in Bruce Cheadle's article "Martin was fully briefed on negotiations to poach Tory MP, transcripts show".

http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=56fed95d-3594-4bd1-a383-515cf48c5366

Over at the Globe and Mail, Blatchford and Ibbitson seem to agree that Grewalgate is too stinky to warrant closer examination. No deep analysis, colour commentary only.

Bravo! Kate!- Essential comment. Well said and well placed!
The Conservatives and Stephen Harper have an uphill battle because every word they utter is so constantly put down, suppressed and belittled.
While the press and msm are doing that they are consistently skewing polls and ignoring the indignation that HAS to be in their inboxes. Along with every major newspapers and television stations in the country.
I do NOT believe that ordinary Canadians are not outraged by this.
The admiration I now feel for Gilles Duceppe and the Bloc is not because they are avowed separatists but because they are outraged Canadians. AND they say so.
The NDP and the Independents, ( even Kilgour, who was willing to send Canadian troops to certain death to sell HIS vote and only changed his mind when he didn't get what he wanted) have sold their souls for profit.
Adscam proves how the Liberals operate.
It shows without doubt they do not belong in Ottawa as a party. They should be de-registered and then prosecuted. AS SOON as POSSIBLE.
Unless and until we electorate get that mad and make it known without doubt that we will NOT tolerate this outrage it will not stop.
They will stop at nothing and will buy everything with our money to keep themselves in power.
We will deserve them as our masters if we don't turf them out and turf them out now.
The ONLY vehicles to do so are the Conservatives and the Bloc.
While we are impressing our outrage on the Liberals and the media we should be contacting our brothers in Quebec ( never thought I'd say THAT!) and let them know how much we share their outrage and also determination to rid ourselves of this putrid mess the liberal party has become.

GallaPlacidia that would be the same globe and mail that says the majority of canadians shouldn't be involved in the political process because they are Christian?

Hope you're still getting more hits than Wells Kate.

Yeah they don't want to look at it because the PM should step down, Reg Alcock should step down, and the comfy rug guys Ujjal Dosanjh & Tim Murphy too.

Course they won't for this is Kanuckistan. No depravity is too low to be unacceptable and if Harper is upset that martin spent billions well then all of gomery is his fault too.

Paul Wells deserves all the credit of any blogger who refuses to let people comment on his posts.

BTW...why is Coyne so quiet...very few updates since he stopped taking comments? It has become a very slow page. Any insight anyone?

Stephen posted
I share Wells' criticism that the CPC leadership has apparently been unable to get a message out.

Interesting that the MSM has been able to pick up the CPC "hidden agenda" at a critical juncture. There seemed to be little problem in getting that message out. Although it was rather lacking in details.

Stephen, Coyne's article "You can almost hear them winking" is excellent. I actually subscribed to the Post just to read it. His blog just hasn't been the same since he removed the peanut gallery.

ward,

The hidden agenda item is just journalists being lazy and following liberal talking points and not thinking any deeper than what to have for lunch and how long do they have till deadline.

Someone pointed out jane Taber said essentially the same story as Warren kinsella about Chretien...and Ibbitson talked in almost the same terms as Stan Keyes, just drop it, it is doing harm to the system ( To be fair, I doubt Ibbitson is a Liberal toady so maybe Keyes heard him earlier and stole his line)

We are in violent agreement that the media doesnt naturally take the CPC side. My point is that apparently the CPC isnt trying very hard right now. More than enough blame for everyone involved.

Paul Martin's recommendation to Stephen Harper yesterday to read what the media were saying about the tapes pretty much sums up life in Canada. The Libs can do what they want without fear of being called to account. Harper was good at today's press conference, pretty much pointing out that the media's handling of Inky Mark's announcement was what prompted Grewal to tape things. And he also pointed out that had Grewal been serious about a deal, there would be no tapes. Can't understand why the media are having such a hard time recognizing this. I think it has more to do with not wanting to believe that their adored Libs could really be so sleazy. They're as dumb as the electorate.

I truly hope Alberta and other western provinces threat to separate. It's seems to matter little anymore that the french province wants to break up, so maybe Ontario will wake up if the english west wants out.

Yes, the irresponsible MSM are a lot to blame, but if you and I can read through the lines and truly see what's happening to the democracy of this country, then one would think that there's an awful lot of citizens in this country, because of their apathy that maybe do not deserve to live in a free country.

Time for drastic measures.
Make some noise ALBERTA!

In the same manner that Gomery got legs after going to Montreal, the CPC strategy has provided legs to the Grewal tapes by releasing them when BS (the person, not what we are being fed) is not front and centre.

MSM is clearly getting concerned despite all evidence to the contrary. Listened to the national at 8 MST on Newsworld, thought "here we go again spin, spin spin" Because I missed the start I watched it at 10. In the category of a picture is worth a thousand words, the look an Keith Boag's face said it all.

There was no giggling last night, no "Bad day for the Conservatives". Maybe I am being hopeful or naive or both, but I think Harper may have learned his lesson, if the Natural Governing Party is going to implode on itself get out of the way and let it happen rather than push them.

Paul Wells used to take a fair amount of abuse from certain of Andrew Coyne's readers in Coyne's now sadly defunct comments section. Perhaps the reason people get irked by Wells is precisely that he's not an "MSM hack", but rather that he's one of the very few Canadian journalists who clearly has the ability to think for himself, even if he doesn't always do so. When Jeffrey Simpson, Margaret Wente, Roy Macgregor, Lawrence Martin, or that living exemplar of raw intellectual ability Edward Greenspon publish things that sound like they were simply taking dictation from the PMO, no one really expects them to do any differently. Nor, frankly, do any of them ever demonstrate that they could do any differently, that they could think their way out of a GTA Liberal wet paper bag, so to speak. (I know, I know, how do they get jobs? We'll leave that for another day.) But Wells is clearly different. Much of his stuff is very good, which is why I'm still among those boosting the hit counts of his blog, despite that one piece in four of his that sounds like Liberal Party spin. No one's saying you have to be a cheerleader for the CPC, Paul, but you can do better. And how about a comments section on your blog?

Jane--"I don't have no Deep Throat"--Taber's next column:
"Grewal a secret evangelical Christian

High-level Liberal insiders say..."

Mark
Ottawa

As Edmund Burke once said, "No passion so effectually robs the mind of all its powers of acting and reasoning as fear." If you dig under all the reasons put forward for the revolting show of MSM groupthink, I think you'll find fear. This fear takes many forms, but fear of change is one of the biggies.

Re Watergate: I think that U.S. history has resulted in Americans being made of sterner stuff than Canadians. It wasn't always so. When Trudeau forced a wedding between the French republic and the Westminster systems of government and socialized all he could get his hands on, he all but guaranteed the future complacency of the populace. Once the government becomes the 'giver of all good things' -- especially our 'rights' -- it's game over.

Actually, Galla I disagree about Blatchford-while she's disgusted by all parties, she seems to want some answers.

The media and the Liberals are one.....they are de facto members of the ruling party, and they aren't going to give up their rightful place as our betters and rulers, are they?

I liked Stephen Harper's comments today about taping conversations:

"All Parliamentarians should conduct business as at all times as if everything they say and do is on the record."

AMEN

Wait until King Ralph retires (next year or so). I think then there will be potential for noise to be made. For all the good that Ralph has done in his time, federally speaking, he's too much like the guy who's always buying the round of drinks in the bar -- we're all be good buddies together, right? Hey, let me get this one! If Ted Morton becomes our new premier, things might be different. (Ted was one of the authors of the Alberta Firewall proposal.)

Howie Meeker wrote

"and they aren't going to give up their rightful place as our betters and rulers, are they?"

as Scott reid said "we arent morons". I think the proper answer to your question Howie is No.

So as Churchill said "Nag, Bite and Gouge" Its the only way to get rid of them. But then again thats the Official Opposition's job.

Changing topic slightly, if Harper indicated that he supported Germat because of the media reactions to Inky Mark's statements....i.e. howls for proof....then I think he hit the target.

You wanted proof, well here is proof.

BTW, is it wrong for Germat to tape this and ok for the citizen who taped his conversation with the police OK? (according to the media) Or should the man who taped an apparent incident of DWB (Driving while Black) also be exorcated for recording a conversation.

One final question, does all of this mean that the Liberals think Germat is higher up the "gene pool" than Inky? Certainly it means Belinda is in their opinion.

The CBC, Toronto Star, Macleans magazine with all and sundry of its "troops" are nothing more than EXTENSIONS of the government.
Same thing in the US.
The so-called msm are branches of the government...always have been.
Nothing new here my naive friends.

Kate;
Adscam could never have happened if there were an Canadian equivalent of FOX News in Canada. Canadians should still be concerned about the Liberal government simply watching the spin given the Grewal story and not to mention the shrugging attitude toward the corruption involved in Adscam.
" Everyone does it" . . . ."The public will have forgtten about it by elction time" . . . blah . . blah . . blah . .

"Same thing in the US"? If our MSM is an extension of the government, why are they so anti-government?

Your media is bought and paid for. Where do you suppose those ad agencies placed their ads with your stolen money? Who owns your media outlets? Whose party card do you think is in the wallets of the vast majority of your media managers and staff? Not to mention your state press. Their complicity has been bought and paid for with your own money. Linda has probably tied up the loose ends, those not owned by the Liberal party are intimidated by their lawyers. I do hope this is gotten to the bottom of. I would bet the complicity and collusion runs deeper than you imagine.

In watching The National last night, I heard Senator Peter Mansbridge, when talking to Keith Boag, say, "And what does this say about Grewal?"
WHAAAT?
Another classic example of the Liberal owned CBC trying to protect the Liberals.

Um, folks, has anyone seen Wells LATEST comments?

I'll admit, P-Dub can be maddening, and he may have missed the BIG reason the tapes took so long to hit the press (the GG-UD convos had to be translated from Punjab to English), but his admittedly correct comments on the Tories' tactical blunders has not distracted him from the real problem.

Par example: his posts SINCE his criticism of the Tory handling of the tapes:

2:33 PM 5/31
Everything I've said about the manner of the Tories' rolling out the Grewal tapes still obtains. It could hardly be a more complete schmozzle. The tapes and transcripts, however, are now public, and here is one of the key moments.

The Conservative Party says this excerpt comes from a meeting among Grewal, Ujjal Dosanjh and Tim Murphy on Tuesday, May 17 (I have minimally cleaned up the punctuation to make this excerpt more comprehensible):

Murphy: Absolutely, I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to preclude that if obviously you have to feel where you are comfortable doing and where your personal stake is and what holds you and your wife, let me make it absolutely clear that we are a
welcoming party; we will do everything we can. Obviously for us continuing to expand our base in BC and in prominent communities in this country is a political priority for us. It is a welcoming mat that has a lot of nice comfy fur on it.
(Laughs.)

Dosanjh: I think what Tim is saying about trust is that most of these things do have our trust and you have to feel comfortable with that. And at the end, of course if Chief of Staff say that certain conduct ought to be rewarded in due time, that trust is kept 99.9% of the times. Sometimes you can’t do it — circumstances will kill you. I told him about my conversation with the PM.

—————————————

Fun game: try to find Grewal refusing to take 'No' for an answer in this excerpt. There is no truth to the rumour that Liberal election placards in British Columbia will read, "A Welcoming Mat With a Lot of Nice Comfy Fur."

Seven hours later (tell me he doesn't have the G&M pegged):

Globe headlines, Wednesday to Saturday

June 1, lead editorial:
MR. GREWAL'S ODD TAPING FETISH

June 2, banner head:
'SCARY' CONSERVATIVES REFUSE TO BANISH GREWAL

June 3, banner head:
OH FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, JUST VOTE LIBERAL

June 4, Page 2 column:
HOW 'SCARY' CONSERVATIVES SNUCK REFERENCE TO GOD ONTO OUR FRONT PAGE

I've read Wells for well over 5 years. His main beat was the Parliament, so tactics mean more to him than most, but he has hit the bullseye on the reaction of the Canadian people.

I might also add that when it does come to policy, he is one of the few willing to say Canada needs private health care (which Andrew Coyne refuses to admit) and was one of Reform's most consistent defenders outside of Western Canada.

Don't confuse his criticism of the Tories' campaign tactics with acceptance of the Grit party line. I'm 1500 miles from Canadian territory, and even I'VE seen Kinsella rip after him several times, and that was when the PM was someone WK liked.

Keith Boag is the worst actor CBC has had thus far as a Parliamentary correspondent. The look on his face last night was priceless. It screamed "are they really gonna buy this load of crap I'm offering"?

Sorry Candace, but I won't let Blatchford off the hook today. She needs to get her hands dirty in this sordid mess. From the first line in her column "Let us get this one thing straight: Gurmant Grewal is not the story" one would assume that a good tongue lashing was on the way for "Team Martin". But Grewal seems to get the worst of it leading me to speculate that perhaps the story really is about him after all.

"The Conservative MP for the British Columbia riding of Newton-North Delta emerges as a slippery, self-aggrandizing weasel." That's a wollip. Or how about:

"In fact, so transparently loathsome is Mr. G. that you would have thought that Mr. Murphy would have seized any pretext -- "Excuse me, sir, but I am in keen need of a shower" -- and run for the hills, leaving Mr. Dosanjh, who after all is a fellow British Columbian and also an Indo-Canadian and who arguably owed Mr. Grewal some greater courtesy, to say, "Thanks, but no thanks."

Although she is critical of Murphy and Dosanjh, they seem to escape the personal insults that that "dreadful fellow" warranted.

Hey, what's a little backbencher to do to bring down Goliath?

so what would happen if Grewal subjected himself to a lie detector test and came out to be telling the truth about the whole thing? What awould happen if the same test was done to the Liberal side? The questions of course would be. Did you approach first? did you intend to offer/accept a deal?

point taken, Galla

Maybe the MSM will be retooled when they realize that if the Libs are removed from Govt. there will be thousands of hours of breaking news storys about how Canada has been Hoodwinked for years.
Then they will be stumbling all over each other trying to scoop the other.
Go figure, no don't, "Figures don't LIE but LIERS sure can FIGURE"

The closest news source that "canada" has to compare to FOX News would be The Western Standard.

Good to see such a diversity of opinion in this comment thread (I'm being sincere here, for once). One assumes my critics, especially the ones who have a hard time spelling, won't change their minds soon, and that's fine. As for those who ask why I don't have a comment board, you might have your answer if you read Coyne explaining why he abandoned his.

A gentle answer to Kate: In 2000 and 2001 and 2002 and 2003, when I had colleagues getting *fired* because they dared to criticize the Paul Martin regime-in-embryo, I gently suggested to Martin Liberals what I have been gently suggesting to Conservatives this week: you may well get the big job — certainly I will have zero influence on whether that happens, whatever wild paranoid theories you may entertain — but your flaws will surely bring you down, *especially* if you refuse to recognize you have any.

Martin's flaws were incoherence, secrecy, inability to improvise, and a bullying streak a mile wide. Harper's, today, include insularity and a serene conviction that his organizational catastrophe is the fault of anyone who dares to notice it. Insularity: It is a bit rich to complain about accusations of a hidden agenda when you're hiding your agenda. Organizational catastrophe: the 13 days we just lived through.

Harper has his choice about when to fix his flaws. He can do it now, or he can do it in the middle of catastrophe because he hasn't bothered to fix them before stumbling into power. At the risk of offending some of you with a flash of my legendary ego, I've covered about 30 new governments in various provinces, at the federal level, and overseas in the past decade. Their problems were *never* a surprise to anyone who had been paying attention, and it wasn't their various amen corners that had done them any favours by blowing sunshine up their asses until the moment trouble hit. Their critics did a lot more to toughen their hides -- or would if any of them had had the strength of character to address valid criticism. Paul Martin never did. Stephen Harper may well. One thing's for sure: if he only ever listens to his cheerleading squad, he'll never get the big job, and it sure as hell won't be my fault.

Paul - thanks for your comments, and as one other person pointed out, you're hardly a one trick Liberal pony which is why I still actually bother reading what others write about you.

There is a saying that- "not everyone who criticizes you is an enemy, and not everyone who flatters you is your friend."

The problem in Canada is that our news reporters seem to have forgotten that it is not their job to provide either criticism or flattery.

All we ask for are the facts, and if opinions are required (on legal issues, for example), get us someone whose opinion means something.

Back in the 80's after Mulroney won his massive majority, someone in major media (I forget who) said in an interview, that, in the face of such a weakened opposition, it was up to the media to assume that role.

It really wasn't about opposition to government though - it was opposition to party. Today, in the face of a weakened government, they have assumed the role of apologist and protector.

They were Liberals then, they are Liberals now. When Liberals are out of government, the media are out of government. It's really that simple.

I dont know if Paul will come back to read the follow up....if not then no answer is expected, and even if he does, well probably no answer expected :-> but I am going to ask a couple anyway.

1) My apologies Paul I dont know your career, were the fired colleagues at MacLeans? A conservative like Ted allowing that? Mind you they have him over a CRTC barrel dont they?

2)You indicate organizational issues within the CPC. Is it too many chiefs with different visions or is it too centralized and SH needs to make all of the decisions.

3) Do you think the agenda is hidden or non existent?

I will say I have been amazed by the absolute artlessness of the CPC on this issue, this should have been "shooting fish in a barrel" time. I feel the way I do when the Leafs have a 5 on 3 and the other team scores a goal. We see the symptoms whats the cause, personalities or things indicated in # 2

Stephen: (1) No, not at Maclean's.

Kate: You may ask for facts, but I'm paid for my opinion. Any facts in my journalism got there by mistake and will be quickly eliminated as a matter of policy.

As for those who *are* paid for facts, they include Daniel Leblanc and Campbell Clark, who worked on this story, in Daniel's case from 1999, long before Sheila Fraser had ever heard of any of it. It never ceases to stun me how often the vaunted blogosphere forgets this.

Ah, but they were all alone, poor lads: Can anyone seriously claim a political story in Canada has had *one-tenth* as much page-one space in *any* Canadian newspaper as Adscam has had since Feb. 10, 2004? I spent a month at Gomery: there are 30 reporters in the media room all day, every day. I write 10 snarky lines on a blog that, as Kate gleefully pointed out here, gets half her traffic, and she swoons dead away like a Merchant Ivory character. It's a bit rich.

I wasn't including you, as a columnist in my comments about news reporting. Nor was I speaking specifically of you in the last couple of paragraphs of the original post, but of the general quality of reporting - I thought that was self evident, but I apologize if it confused you.

But here's the problem - when someone like me can spot a documentable lie by Paul Martin in a clip from Question Period, only to listen to a so-called "political analyist" allows it go by unquestioned, something is _wrong_.

I'm speaking as a general consumer of news, who listens to my national newscasts and feeds to local radio and compares what I hear to what I read in transcripts.

If there were 30 reporters in the room during hearings, then pray tell, why do 95% of them select the same brief portions of testimony, the same 7 second sound bites, the same talking points in their coverage every night?

Why did ANY of them choose the Chretien golf ball stunt as the highlight of his testimony? Much less _all_ of them.

And the blogosphere is accused of being an echo chamber....?

Mr. Wells - I enjoy reading you. In fact, you often make my day with your wit and often unique way to make quotable salient points.

I agree - the Gomery/AdScam has captured lots of press - many of the the editorial writers do capture facts and report in a balanced fashion.

Then , along come the headline writers: For example - there may be an extremely damaging allegation made within the story and the headline will read instead "Paul Martin denies..."

Knowing that the masses are primarily headline readers that is often where the bias exists.

Do you agree?

Paul,

You seem to be confusing quantity with quality. Consider the number of stories about Gomery where the subject/focus/headline, wasn't on the significance of the Liberal impropriety, but on Harper, how he's too "angry", parroting of Liberal talking points, stating the Liberal defence while belittling what the Liberals are defending against. The list goes on and on.

As for those folks you mentioned who broke the story - that's great, good for them. Where was the rest of the media? Why were they not all over this, digging into the facts, asking for answers. It took Shiela Frasure and a whole lot of opposition pressure for this to even come to the forefront.

The real hero for even getting a Gomery type inquiry was Gilles Duceppe.

26 times in the house he demanded an inquiry after Martin shut down the public accounts committee.

THEN, Martin called an election before Gomery. THEN we find out Gomery cannot name names or assign blame.

Where are the media headlines on this bait and switch scam.

And. PS: Martin said on National TV during his Infomercial that the first thing HE did as PM was to cancel the Sponsorship program.

WHERE are the headlines after Goodale revealed at Gomery that HE in fact cancelled the SP under Chretien.

Nop accountability - allowed to lie with impunity and the media turns a blind eye to all of this.

Allison's post goes a long way toward explaining why I'll go back to my day job now and leave you all to your endeavours.

(1) Duceppe couldn't ask for a Gomery-type inquiry after Martin shut down the public accounts committee because Gomery was appointed on the same day the question was referred to the committee: Feb. 10, 2004, the day Fraser's (not Frasure; sorry Jeff) report was made public. Duceppe did raise dozens of questions about sponsorship activities in 2001 and 2002. Almost every single time, he was asking about articles in the morning's Globe or La Presse or the previous evening's Radio-Canada national news.

(2) The first thing Martin did as PM was to cancel the sponsorship program. Well, I suppose he had dinner and breakfast first: the program was cancelled during a cabinet meeting the day after Martin became PM, so Dec. 13, 2003, if my memory about dates is accurate. Goodale testified what has been widely known, was reported in dozens of newspapers at the time (2002) and is, in fact, posted on the Public Works website: that he *froze* the program *before later reinstating it after substantial administrative reform*.

You could look it up.

So Allison sprays unadulterated bullshit in every direction, then demands that "the media" comfort her wildly inaccurate version of the facts. I'm going to finish my column now. Cheers.

I defer Paul to your handle on the absolute facts. I don't ever mean to spread manure where the ground would not be fertile or where only unwanted weeds would grow.

I certainly don't ever mean to mislead. However, might you admit that the public is being "somewhat" insulated from the whole scope of what our federal government has become?

And, that this insulation may be in part because of various powerful media?

We, also meaning me, only get our facts from the media for the most part. If I am misinformed then so perhaps are millions of other Canadians.

So if Allison can't tell shit from shinola, it's "the media's" fault. Why, CTV was so eager to hide the truth about Goodale's activities that it broadcast this story on the national news and maintains it, three years later, on its website — how sneaky can you get?

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1024857783742_20266983/

Dear Mr Wells,

Why cannot the media focus on the simple fact that, whatever Mr Grewal may have done, he is only an opposition MP with no institutional power? Although perhaps the transitory possibility of preferment and very temporary "power" to help save the government.

Those talking to him, and clearly promising--however coded--place for action, were representatives of the state (one a minister, one the PM's headman) with authority to fulfil (barely implicit) offers with long-term substance. Equating the two sides is simply nonsense.

Mark
Ottawa

Agree Paul - I don't have the benefit of all of the sources at my fingertips. I may be one of those "headline readers" in many cases.

I believed Paul martin on his infomercial that it was only he who shut down the Sponsorship program.
Then, after Goodale testified that it was in fact he and Chretien there was a perceived misconception.
Do I apoligize for A: being uninformed or B: being wrongly informed.

The reason I read your column is because I want to be C: honestly informed.

There just seems to be too little of that around these days.

Dear Mr Wells,

To put it at its simplest: which should be the greater concern:

a) a potentially corrupt opposition MP? or
b) a potentially corrupt government?

Discuss why the media, for the most part, fail to point out the difference.

Mark
Ottawa

For one tiny example of why so many of us on the right are increasingly frustrated with the not so subtle partisan slant in the Canadian media, this post from over a year ago should provide some insight;

http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/000037.html

Also, in the matter of the Sponsorship freeze debate, why wasn't this front page news in the wake of Ralph Goodale's testimony a few days ago?

http://705blue.blogspot.com/2005/05/goodale-gave-groupaction-million.html

"Goodale Gave Groupaction Million Dollar Contract for Defence Ads After "Sponsorship Freeze"

"For well over a decade, Duranty's influential reports from Moscow described a Soviet Union run by a tough, but dedicated, elite, who could, he conceded, be cruel, but only in the cause of improving the lives of the people. As the Times man liked to say, "you can't make an omelet without breaking eggs."

To Duranty, Stalin ("the greatest living statesman") represented progress and the chance of a better future for the once benighted masses. In one typical passage he gushed that, "Stalin and his associates have carried with them the strongest and most intelligent elements of the Russian people, and have created a national unity and enthusiasm which the Tsarist Empire never knew. They have learnt by their own errors and pulled themselves up by their own bootstraps, and the nation has followed them." It was, he wrote, "a heroic chapter in the life of humanity."

That this "heroic chapter" was to prove fatal for large numbers of that same humanity did not seem to trouble Duranty too much. "I'm a reporter," he explained, "not a humanitarian." In fact, he was neither, something that can be seen most clearly from his treatment of the Ukrainian famine of 1932-3. This man-made famine, a deliberate attempt to break the Ukrainian peasantry, is one of history's most terrible episodes (In his Harvest of Sorrow Robert Conquest estimates the death toll in the Ukraine and neighboring regions at seven million). Walter Duranty of the New York Times, however, did what he could to cover it up."

By Andrew Stuttaford- NRO.

More at:

http://www.ukar.org/putin/putin28.html

"The greatest liar of any journalist I have ever met." - Malcolm Muggeridge describing Walter Duranty, Special Correspondent of the New York Times.

Here's some perspective on reporting:

Why would there be any attention/scrutiny on the fact that the Conservatives/Harper are critical or otherwise outraged by the Liberals' conduct.

If the CPC is taken to task in the media for aggressively responding to the worst incidence of corruption in Canadian political history, aren't the media effectively saying that there is no scenario in which the opposition can hold the government to account?

The scrutiny should be on the ruling party at the best of times, let alone when they are awash in corruption.

The media's role in a healthy democracy is to act as a factual and informational watchdog. Their job is to inform the electorate.

We don't have a healthy democracy and we don't have an impartial media willing to hold the government to account. The two are directly related.

One of the main weapons in the hands of the active section of the population is, of course, propaganda, from which one cannot escape wherever one may go. In the train one reads in large letters: “Let us reply to the furious arming of the capitalists by carrying out the Five-Years Plan in four years. Across the streets large red and white banners are stretched upon which are inscribed: “The capitalist of the West are preparing war on the Soviet Union,” or “Let us destroy illiteracy.” Sitting in any co-operative restaurant one sees on all sides pictures of Lenin, Stalin and Kalinin, and such appeals as: “On May 1st remember the oppressed workers of the capitalist countries.” In a factory, besides excellent posters on health and accidents, there are such notices as: “God and the drunkard are the enemies of the Five-Years Plan,” or “All, all all, come to a meeting on August 1 to hear a report of a comrade of the Third International who has come from Germany and other countries.” Outside the Tretyakovskaya Art Gallery in Moscow the following slogan strikes the visitor: “Art is a weapon of class warfare.” Upon the House of Soviets the following words are written upon a banner: “To Capitalism, the international revolutionary movement brings not peace but the sword.” Finally, upon the china in the Hotel Metropole, mainly frequented by foreigners, are the words, “Workers of the world, unite.”

Besides posters, there are other more effective propaganda methods. The theatre is an implement for the socialisation of the country. The film industry, of whose success the U.S.S.R. is justly proud, has as its aim the spreading of Communism. The museums, which are artistically arranged and admirably kept, all teach one lesson, the evil of Capitalism and the glories of the revolution. Even such a minor institution as a shooting range must have its political use; thus the targets are the Tsar, a priest, a kulak (a peasant owning more than three cows), a Chinaman, and a drunkard.

###########################

The above by a contemporary of Walter Duranty:

Gareth Jones, a Welshman; in the Soviet Union at the same time as the above.

Gareth Jones's articles here:

http://www.rapp.org/url/?EVAU3UKD

I characterize the media as including a number of elements:

There is one group, which I loosely characterize as reporters, who will re-write press releases or transcribe some announcement. One can hardly blame this group for the purported failings of the MSM.

Another group, which I loosely characterize as commentators, typically have a regular feature column which is largely opinion-based analysis of various facts of the day. These individuals, among whom I include Mr. Coyne and Mr. Wells, generally provide thoughtful and insightful commentary, but by their nature commentators will typically lag "breaking news" by a day or more.

A third group, which I loosely characterize as journalists, who dig into a story to report the underlying facts and who avoid injecting personal opinions into their analysis. These in-depth activities can often take weeks or months of investigation before ink meets newsprint.

It's a fourth group, which I loosely characterize as analysts, who try some days to be commentators and other days to be reporters, and with whom I am most disappointed. When it comes to asking the tough questions, some choose the oddest opportunity to become mere "reporters" and so seem to display a bias: they come across as being very selective on whom to attack. Few will challenge the spinmasters; few have a deep enough grasp of the details relevant to the issue at hand to approach their job with authority.

IMHO, the better analysts will become specialists and rise up to become commentators; others may be reassigned as mere reporters. But in that analytical proving ground one finds many flaws. It is in their seeming inconsistency that I find frustration.

[Disclaimer: The names I've ascribed to these groups aren't formal, and others would be correct to suggest that they are inaccurate at best.]

What did Grewal do that was 'corrupt'? He played hardball, and worldy media pundits normally applaud such moxy.The Liberals still tried to buy him off, and yet he is the object of a coordinated character assassination?

I can sympathize with some of what Mr. Wells is saying. There are good journalists with the requisite curiosity and critical thinking skills, and it's unfair to tarnish them with generalizations.

But saying that, I don't think it's in dispute that the media are less eager to sink their teeth into a party that largely shares their values, than they would be if, say, it was Mr. Harper holding office.

Blogs like Kate's reflect the increased recognition that there is no such thing as an objective media. This phenomenon is having a profound influence on the media south of the border, and it's probably only a matter of time before it does here as well.

I realize there are people here who are trying vainly (and unsuccessfully) to kowtow to a certain Mr. Wells, and who seem to live in abject fear of offending his tender, yet massive ego-driven sensibilities. To each and every one of you, I apologize in advance for what I am about to say.

With respect to the spread of "unadulterated bullshit", I submit that Mr. Wells is a past master at spreading same. Poor Allison was simply trying to solicit an earnest response to her very reasonable question. What did she get for her troubles? An earful of nasty and inappropriate Wellsian crapola.

What we need to remember is that Well is a bought-and-paid-for-member-in-good-standing of the hyper-cynical Ottawa media corps, and I would respectfully suggest that his pompous boast of having covered "30 new governments" automatically disqualifies him from objective comment. News flash: Wells is not capable of commenting fairly on the system because HE IS PART OF THE SYSTEM.

Politics is all a game to little Paulsy. Governments come, they go, who really cares what they stand for? There will be another on on the way soon. Who's buying at the bar?

Cynical to the core, people like Wells happily disparage anyone with principle. The truth is, they simply don't understand it.

Much too easy to make fun of all concerned, isn't it?

I'll close with one last thought. The only reason Wells and his cohort frequent blogs like this is that they desperately need to have the feedback. Never underestimate their desire to be liked/respected/loved/admired/INFLUENTIAL. They need to believe their opinions matter, and they are not so confident of them that they wish to operate in a vacuum.

People: they need us far more than we need them. Remember that, and don't back down when challenged. Your opinion matters just as much or more than his.

What cohort? Who else frequents blogs like this, among my "MSM" "cohort"? If doing that makes me a loser, clear, I'm allllll alone. With you. Something I'm entirely willing to believe is possible. Kiss me, baby; it'll be legal soon.

Meanwhile: Is it that "governments come, and governments go, and they're all the same"? Or is it that I'm a bought-and-paid-for accessory to *this* government? Or did I just make your head explode by asking a logical question?

When you ask the logical question, Paul, I'll be glad to answer it.

By the way, don't play at being the reluctant virgin --it doesn't suit you. You know as well as I that many of your colleagues and employers are recognizing (and fearing) the power of the blogosphere as a powerful, alternate communications medium.

The monopoly's over, baby. Get used to it.

PS: don't be too sure of the legality of our belated kiss, my friend.

There's many a slip between the cup and the lip.

Mr. Wells, methinks you are living in a rose-colored world. You think Canadians are too stupid to think for themselves and must depend on the writings of jounalists such as yourself. The fact that you are trolling the blogs illustrates that your columns mean less and less. You and your colleagues are on the endangered species list. You've been usurped by far more intelligent, politically objective, ethical, and most importantly, unpaid citizens.

Come now, Old Mother. I'd hardly call anyone reading Small Dead Animals "objective." And you seriously overstate the effects of Canada's fledgling conservative blogging scene. When one of the Canadian conservative movement's most popular bloggers can't even put together a single post without glaring spelling and punctuation errors (yes, Mr. Staples, I'm looking at you), you know you've got a *long* way to go before you have a hope in hell of challenging the MSM.

As for the rest of you, let's be honest: the CPC's ability to spin and sell policy and everyday events in their favour is horrendous. Harper's inner circle has utterly failed to address a problem that is costing us votes every day - we SUCK at EVERYTHING. The CPC is getting outspun, outthought, and outsmarted. Paul Wells calls them on it, and they deserve it. And if we, as conservatives, continue to refuse to acknowledge that the CPC is being run by amateurs, we're not doing ourselves or the party any favours at all.

Continuing to blame the party, the electorate, and the media for problems that are of our own making will only ensure one thing: another decade in the wilderness. While I agree that there is media bias in certain corners (CBC, TorStar and G&M especially), it's a fact of life. Suck it up. If we haven't learnt how to deal with it now, we never will.

We've identified some problems here. Now who's going to man up and think of some solutions?

Must be nice to be a journalist and have the last word eh Paul. Apparently, that your position is the subject of criticism, must mean that you are failing in getting your message out.

Your responses to these criticisms seems to indicate that you are an angry white man.

The fact that you dissemble and ignore some of the key points brought to your attention must mean you have a hidden agenda.

Hope you're not recording any of this.

Apologies for lack of CP style in this post

Ok. just a real quick and it would seem to me blatantly stupid question. Why the hell would Gurmant Grewal knowingly tape himself, negotiating a deal with Liberal party members if it was not a sting? Also why the hell would he be fishing so damn hard, dangling the bait and wiggling it just so, in the hopes that one or more of his adversaries in the cat and mouse game would actually bite down on the sucker hard enough and long enough to set the hook?; if it was not a sting operation. Clearly it seems to my ears having just listened to the tapes my self that that is exactly what he was doing. In fact I would not be surprized to hear that Mr. Grewal had been coached somewhat by the RCMP about how to go about this. Regarding the possibility that Mr. Grewal had approached the Liberals, imagine A possibility with me for a moment. I am Mr Grewal and a bit ago I just heard about how one of my pals had been approached by an indiscrete member of the Liberals about crossing the floor for rewards. Inky Marks to jog your memories, I know that the frickin teflon slimy eels have effectively gotten away with it by spinning the media into a he said he said scenario; which the lazy ass boobs will graciously lap up off the liberal boot heel. So I am mad as hell about it, I know I have a mutual friend of a Liberal MP so I even call him to have a BBQ, tea or whatever, and in the ensueing conversation he gets an idea in his head that maybe I'm upset. This conversation of course would not be recorded because I'm not yet certain of the loyalties of my friend. I later learn just exactly where my "friend's" loyalties lie and more particularly where he thinks my loyalties lie; ie pure power for power's own sake. So I begin to record conversations with my friend and cautiously watch where it goes. The rest my friends is on the tapes.

Or is this just to implausible to be any where near reality.

Daryl who should have been a cop, considering all the stuff people tell me.

Useful Idiot
by Mark Y. Herring

Stalin's apologist : Walter Duranty, the New York Times man in Moscow,
by S.J. Taylor, (New York : Oxford University Press, 1990)

Reporters have gained a reputation almost as opprobrious as that of lawyers. For irascibility and truth telling, reporters, like lawyers, rank high on the one and low on the other. Among the respective parties, however, reporters and lawyers mutually assure the adoration of their peers, what we might call MAA - Mutually Assured Adoration. Reporters, to hear them tell it, are kind, considerate, only concerned with the truth of an issue, and could not be bought off for all the money Midas could make.

Those of us living in the post-Woodward and Bernstein world find this attitudinizing laughable. Reporters are, however, by virtue of controlling the communication media, still able to pull a fast one on the public (Bill Clinton comes to mind, for example). Even with the public's collective bad attitude against them, they keep repeating the same lies; and sure enough, someone other than a reporter begins to believe in them.

Such is the case with Walter Duranty, long held in high esteem as the consummate reporter - a reporter's reporter, if you will. So it is with some amusement that, once in a while, we are allowed to see a liberal icon bite the dust with such crashing force and noise, that the subsequent deafening sound and pother leaves us with some feeling of exhilaration. This should not be misconstrued as so much schadenfreude; rather, just the warm, almost alpenglow of happiness that we were right all along.

Duranty was a chain-smoking, Scotch drinking vulgar sort of man who made no apologies for his admiration of Stalin. He was held in awe by other journalists, especially young female journalists. He did not fail to use the awe to his advantage, or rather their disadvantage. As Fascism rose in Europe, and Japanese jingoism emerged in the East, Duranty wrote glowing accounts of Stalin's Five-Year Plan. Almost single-handedly did Duranty aid and abet one of the world's most prolific mass murderers, knowing all the while what was going on, but refraining from saying precisely what he knew to be true. He had swallowed the ends-justifies-the-means-argument hook, line and sinker. Duranty loved to repeat, when Stalin's atrocities were brought to light, "you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs." Those "eggs" were the heads of men, women and children, and those "few" were merely tens of millions.

http://www.ukemonde.com/news/usefulidiots.html

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

MAA - Who me?

Useful idiot? Who me?

A reporter's reporter? Who? Walter Duranty?

Schadenfreude? What in h is that? Who me?

Then there was the reporter who when he looked into his bathroom mirror every morning, said to himself, "One of you is a liar."

Bloggers look into their terminal; the liars are challenged immediately; they retreat to their lairs, those liars. (lairs, liars; what a difference a diphthong makes)

The hegemony of the MSM is shattered; a shift has happened; we all can be citizen reporters.

On with the blogging.

The task before bloggers in Canada:

Destroy the hegemony of the Liberal regime.

Go; go! We do not need wells of ink to do this; nor do we need ink from wells.

Paul Wells, if you come into a blog with guns a-blazing, don't be surprised if people shoot back.

I, for one, would be more interested in reading your stuff if you left the hyper ventilating and and tuquoque at home.

Otherwise, you just re-enforce their world view. But maybe you just wanted to do that.

I'll give Wells (and Kinsella) credit for playing on my turf - unlike others like Spector and Zerbisias who take their shots from behind an editors skirts.

Re: lack of objectivity

It's not a bug, it's a feature.

Lack of pretense about objectivity is a defining feature of the blogosphere. But what I would like to see is an overt declaration by editorial boards and columnists about their own.

I'd also challenge major media outlets to conduct internal polls of the reporters, editors, columnists on staff who identify themselves as Liberal, Conservative, NDP, "other" supporters, and publish the percentages represented.

Addendum - re: cohorts

There are a tremendous number of visits from government computers (federal and provincial) at SDA and a steady rate from media addresses. (thestar.com, cbc.ca) Of course, it's not (usually) possible to identify the actual people doing the surfing unless they choose to identify themselves in other ways.

When I ask for feedback, it's not a tongue in cheek request. I want to hear from you people, anonymously if you prefer.

In most industries, they call this customer service. That's who we are, after all - the people you are selling your product to. So many of you forget that.

Only in the media are dissatisfied constomers treated with such dismissive arrogance and distain.

I have to say - Justin has it right - the CPC has to start playing this game better. Whatever they are doing isn't working and it has to change.

Paul Wells was not wrong - and the CPC should be looking hard at why they aren't changing attitudes in Ontario. Duceppe is gaining ground every day and the CPC are stagnant.

Don't shoot the messenger - for once get the message and do something with it.

I agree MSM isn't making it easy for the CPC - but I haven't seen Harper and the gang doing a whole lot either.

All that being said, at this point it really doesn't matter too much to me. I'm hoping Ralph get replaced with Ted Morton (as the Firewall etc. will be the moderate position in AB - as opposed to separatism) and then we will see some real change, and maybe then MSM will finally get the picture out here.

We're not gonna take it ...

Exactly, Kate.

No one here has said they were purely objective. Most of us try to be, reading whatever we can on both sides in an effort to find the "truth". But we cannot avoid passing information through our own intellectual and emotional filters, and that is where we lose clinical objectivity.

That's OK, though, as you say. As long as we are aware of any writer's acknowledged bias we can put his or her comments in perspective. However it is laughable when reporters such as Mr. Wells attempt to declare that they are simply neutral observers and refuse to admit their obvious bias.

That is nothing more than an insult to our intelligence.

Paul Wells responds: "One assumes my critics, especially the ones who have a hard time spelling, won't change their minds soon, and that's fine."

Ouuuhhh..check the sticky elitism dripping from that barb. You forgot t' menshun us'ns bad spellurs is dumb, nukel-draggin' rasists, homofobes and westurn hey ceed hickz. We'uns izn't fit t' share t' same langwage with the feeloserfer-kingz o' the saintlee 4th eztate ;-)

Thank you Paul for confirming the ignoble hubris and clannish elitism that is quickly making the GTA MSM irrelevant to a whole generation of Canadian news watchers. We make a vast distinction between being properly informed as opposed to being preached to or chided for dissenting opinion.

And no, I don't see any reason to change my opinion soon as you so succinctly demonstrate.

Allison, nice going.

Wells is a really great speller admiited , but he has lost the fight in him against corruption and weak lieberal thinking since his move from the National Post to the last page of Macleans.

So proper spelling is key here to remaining objective and the insulting use of profanity obviously bolsters that.

Good for him to at least defend, I wish that Liberal Party Advisor Mike Duffy would get a pair.

SHEILA:

"I agree MSM isn't making it easy for the CPC - but I haven't seen Harper and the gang doing a whole lot either."

It is difficult if not impossible for any political party to get its message out with any clarity if the regional and national media outlets refuse to allow it or colour the remarks in a way they know will damage or undercut their cause. Conversely, it is very easy for a political party in bed with the media to have their positives sung from the rooftops and their negatives ignored or hidden from view.

I'm afraid there is not much any of us, particularly Harper and Co., can do about that.

WLYON:

"Thank you Paul for confirming the ignoble hubris and clannish elitism that is quickly making the GTA MSM irrelevant to a whole generation of Canadian news watchers. "

Thanks for saving me the trouble of calling Mr. Wells on his arrogant claims of grammatical (and therefore intellectual) superiority.

The intrinsic value of the ideas expressed herein and on countless other blogs have little or nothing to do with punctuation. To suggest otherwise is merely a cheap (and nasty)attempt to avoid addressing the issues at hand.

Come play in the arena of ideas, Paul! We won't bite, and it's OK if you leave your grammar books at home.

clear:

"However it is laughable when reporters such as Mr. Wells attempt to declare that they are simply neutral observers and refuse to admit their obvious bias.

"That is nothing more than an insult to our intelligence."

When have I claimed to be a neutral observer? I've been paid for my opinions, by a succession of employers, for 8 years. It's *really funny* to claim your intelligence is being insulted by somebody who's never said what you find so insulting. Oh, am I being elitist again? I can never tell.

capt. joe: I'm delighted when people fire back. But as for whose guns started a-blazin' first, you might want to look at the title of the post that kicked off this comment thread for a refresher. Kate asked that I wake up. I obliged. I have no intention of seeking the last word; I'm quite aware that's impossible on a comment board. It's one of the form's charms.

Mr. Wells:

" Any facts in my journalism got there by mistake and will be quickly eliminated as a matter of policy."

I stand corrected on your editorial position. It is certainly possible to be paid for one's opinion -- I should know, as my clients have paid quite handsomely for mine for over 25 years now.

One's opinion, in order to be relevant, is necessarily based on careful interpretation of the facts at hand. And that must be preceded, of course, by a diligent effort to uncover any and all facts pertinent to the issue.

The point I have been trying to make is that you, and most of your colleagues, have shown yourselves to be too deeply ensconced in the corrupt and surreal Ottawa nutocracy to rationally observe and provide meaningful comment. By becoming both monolithic and myopic, the media is now in danger of making itself irrelevant.

I suppose jaded insider jokes and clever wordplay can substitute for journalism in a pinch, and over time you might even convince yourself that you're making a difference. What I'm telling you in no uncertain terms is that many Canadian citizens are tired of your cynicism and relativism. Quite frankly, we're tired of rolling around in the muck with you. We expect and hope for something better -- more pure, more principled and certainly less patronizing.

In the fullness of time, people and organizations will step up and provide that for us. Thankfully, Andrew Coyne (another "opinion giver" ) is already blazing a path in that direction. I have no doubt that more will follow.

Your choice is crystal clear, my friend: either start calling a spade a spade or find yourself unceremoniously demoted to a jazz aficionado and wannabe critic whose readers visit solely for the purpose of finding out about the grooviest Sonny Rollins CD.

Maybe that's all you care about anyway. That's fine, too. But if you just learned the difference between wise and wise-ass, you'd be capable of so much more.

Mr. Wells:

" Any facts in my journalism got there by mistake and will be quickly eliminated as a matter of policy."

You are right, I apologize and I stand corrected on your stated editorial position. It is certainly possible to be paid for one's opinion -- I should know, as my clients have paid quite handsomely for mine for over 25 years now.

However, one's opinion -- in order to be relevant on any level -- must necessarily be based on careful interpretation of the facts at hand. And that must be preceded, of course, by a diligent effort to uncover any and all facts pertinent to the issue.

The point I have been trying to make is that you, and most of your colleagues, have shown yourselves to be too deeply ensconced in the corrupt and surreal Ottawa nutocracy to rationally observe, uncover the facts, and provide meaningful comment. By becoming both monolithic and myopic, the media in Canada (and the US) is now in danger of making itself irrelevant.

I suppose jaded insider jokes and clever wordplay can substitute for journalism in a pinch, and over time you might even convince yourself that you're making a difference. What I'm telling you in no uncertain terms is that many Canadian citizens are tired of the collective cynicism and relativism. Quite frankly, we're tired of rolling around in the muck with you and your media buddies. I know this may be hard to belive, but we expect and truly hope for something better -- more pure, more principled and certainly less patronizing.

In the fullness of time, people and organizations will step up and provide that for us. Thankfully, Andrew Coyne (another "opinion giver" ) is already blazing a path in that direction. I have no doubt that more will follow.

Meantime, your choice is crystal clear, my friend: either start calling a spade a spade or find yourself unceremoniously demoted to a well meaning jazz aficionado and part-time critic whose readers visit solely for the purpose of finding out about the grooviest Sonny Rollins CD.

Maybe that's all you care about anyway. That's fine, too. But if you and the mainstream media just learned the difference between wise and wise-ass, you'd be capable of so much more.

Apologies for the double post, Kate.

The first time I pressed "post" a response window appeared indicating a time delay was in place and instructing me to post again later. I did so, but perhaps the first one was already in the system...

Paul Wells,
I for one understand the subtext of your earlier message when you mentioned how your colleagues were getting fired for criticizing Paul Martin. You made the *choice* not to end up like them, and suppressing whatever integrity you might have, you decided to write your opinion columns in ways that favour the Martinites.

So, hey all, we should cut Mr. Wells et al some slack, afterall, they're just behaving this way or they'll lose their jobs. And Christie Blatchford said Grewal should make people feel like having a shower.....

Everything I have read here just confirms the statement I made at the top of this blog. It appears to me that Mr. Wells thinks truth is not as important as the money.

Free Medicare or FREEDOM (pick 1)

A man with a gun is a citizen
A man without a gun is a subject.

CANREV:

I guess it's always important to know what side your bread's buttered on...

Mind you, if I want pre-cooked, half-baked, or even warmed over versions of Liberal talking points I can go directly to their site. I don't need to pay good money or waste precious time receiving the partially digested version spewed out in great lumps by our fine Canadian journalists and opinion leaders.

Kate, love your blog, and I really enjoyed this string of commentary. Paul, appreciate your participating, shows that this medium, while it has I agree some growing up to do, is in fact becoming an important source of "News" for many. As for Kates original premise, that we lack serious journalists in this country, and that the MSM is a paid political supporter of the Liberals, I believe that your (funny by the way) posting of the next 4 or 5 days headlines of the Globe aptly demonstrates that you largely agree with her.

Kate,
If they lose the Mantra that Canada is morally superior to the US what theme would the Canadian MSM then have to inform their commentary?

The Libranos MUST BE SUPERIOR to those US cowboys; or We're not.

Has anyone read Lorne Gunter's latest blog - quite apropos.

foods that increase sperm count increase sperm count http://fraerok.gopstop.ddns.co.kr/7/count_low_man_sperm_vitamin.html build count sperm improving sperm count http://vlad-pidor-i-gorlum-blya.dynam.ac/7/count_motility_sperm.html and .... sperm count procedure count in low man sperm http://fraerok.gopstop.ddns.co.kr/7/sperm_count_average.html low sperm count causes sperm count marijuana http://vlad-pidor-i-gorlum-blya.dynam.ac/7/improving_low_sperm_count.html count low remedy sperm sperm count test http://vlad-pidor-i-gorlum-blya.dynam.ac/7/vitamin_to_increase_sperm_count.html.Thanks.

count low man sperm vitamin count kit sperm http://vlad-pidor-i-gorlum-blya.dynam.ac/7/improve_sperm_count.html build count sperm marijuana low sperm count http://vlad-pidor-i-gorlum-blya.dynam.ac/7/count_herbal_low_remedy_sperm.html and .... check count sperm low sperm count http://vlad-pidor-i-gorlum-blya.dynam.ac/7/count_sperm_vitamin.html count higher sperm increase naturally sperm http://vlad-pidor-i-gorlum-blya.dynam.ac/7/how_to_increase_sperm.html count dew mountain sperm how to increase sperm motility http://fraerok.gopstop.ddns.co.kr/7/male_sperm_count.html.Thanks.

how to raise sperm count count male sperm http://vlad-pidor-i-gorlum-blya.dynam.ac/7/count_pregnancy_sperm.html count increase male sperm count low sign sperm http://vlad-pidor-i-gorlum-blya.dynam.ac/7/alcohol_sperm_count.html and .... sperm count marijuana what causes low sperm count http://vlad-pidor-i-gorlum-blya.dynam.ac/7/count_low_man_sperm_vitamin.html no sperm count low sperm count infertility http://vlad-pidor-i-gorlum-blya.dynam.ac/7/increasing_sperm_count.html count infertility low sperm what lower sperm count http://fraerok.gopstop.ddns.co.kr/7/count_sperm_vitamin.html.Thanks.

low sperm count pregnancy iui sperm count http://fraerok.gopstop.ddns.co.kr/7/improving_low_sperm_count.html count high sperm improving low sperm count http://vlad-pidor-i-gorlum-blya.dynam.ac/7/increase_sperm.html and .... low sperm count count increase pregnancy sperm http://vlad-pidor-i-gorlum-blya.dynam.ac/7/sperm_count_test.html boost count sperm increasing sperm count http://fraerok.gopstop.ddns.co.kr/7/improve_sperm_count.html yellow 5 sperm count iui low sperm count http://fraerok.gopstop.ddns.co.kr/7/count_improving_low_sperm.html.Thanks.