small dead animals: Have You Stopped Beating Your Kids, You Fascist?

February 12, 2006

Have You Stopped Beating Your Kids, You Fascist?

As mentioned earlier, I spent a few hours at Saskparty convention events this weekend - my media accreditation a gesture from the party that I hope they go further with. Unfortunately, I had other commitments this weekend, so was only able to take in Brad Wall's luncheon address today. If there's enough interest, I'd suggest they go a step further next year and set up a "bloggers row", as was done at last years RNC. There was a lot of interest and curiosity about the rising influence of the blogosphere, though not a lot of understanding of the phenomenon. Certainly, everyone I talked to had heard of or read SDA, I'm certain I'd have had a long line of volunteers for real time interviews had there been connectivity provided.

In general, the crowd were in good spirits while I was there, and there was certainly a lot of enthusiasm. Wall's speech was well received - he's a very good, very funny speaker - and it sounds like they're moving smoothly into pre-election mode, retiring around $800,000 in party debt in the last 2 years.

(I should have more on the speech itself in a later post).

When I arrived at the Bess last evening, the prevailing buzz involved the success of the SaskParty launch of the new youth wing;

At least one of them sported a name more familiar in NDP circles than among the Saskatchewan Party. Travis Lingenfelter, the son of former NDP Deputy Premier turned Calgary oil executive Dwain Lingenfelter, said he was attracted to the Saskatchewan Party by its leader, Brad Wall, and its free enterprise economic message.

Which is why what I witnessed today in the (small) media scrum after the luncheon left me scratching my head.

As this was my first time at one of these things, I chose to just sit back on a chair to watch. I was frankly more interested in the people holding the microphones. For the most part the questions seemed topical and fair.

In his speech, Wall had mentioned NDP premier Lorne Calvert's meeting next week with US Vice-President Dick Cheney to promote Saskatchewan's energy resources - including uranium. There's a very public divide in the NDP on the issue, and a strong contingent of old school greenies who steadfastly oppose uranium development and nuclear power. Apparently, the youth wing of the party had also taken the 'anti' side. His criticism suggested that it's hard to be taken seriously as a reliable trade partner with the US when the party in government continues to send such mixed messages.

CBC's Stefani Langenegger chose that point as pretext to launch a line of questioning that quickly established she really had no interest in the nuclear power issue or criticism of Calvert's trade mission. Instead, she was moved to challenge Wall on the implications his criticisms had for the future of the new youth wing of the SaskParty.

I actually wrote "Huh?" in my notes.

Paraphrased, her questioning proceeded in this vein;

"Are you sending a message to your new youth wing that they should fear that when they bring resolutions forward, you'll ignore them? Should they be worried about your heavy-handed approach to youth? Your party has been criticized as "top down". It sounds as though you don't like different points of view. Is this democracy? What's wrong with having debate about it?

Wall repeatedly countered that the comments in his speech were directed to the mixed message from the NDP government on nuclear power and that he didn't think it was helpful for the province. He felt a clear message should come from a party's caucus. Langenegger couldn't be dissuaded from this logic-impaired line of questioning - becoming more and more strident.

I began to wonder when she was just going to cut to the chase and ask "Have you stopped beating your children, you fascist?"

After considerable back and forth, Wall finally said he didn't agree with her position and moved to another reporter who changed to a more relevant line of questioning premised on the temperament of cats. (That's not a joke).

If I spot her report online, I'll post a link. I'm really curious to see where she goes with it.

Posted by Kate at February 12, 2006 1:35 AM

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/3499

Comments

Stephani.... nice name... do you think that "i" has a heart over top of it???

I'm sorry... I just couldn't resist. :)

Posted by: litre at February 12, 2006 12:44 AM

I asked someone who should know, and they said she's one of the brighter Sask reporters. No evidence of that today.

Posted by: Kate at February 12, 2006 12:46 AM

"Stefani has two degrees, one in political science and the other in journalism, both from the University of Regina. After graduating from the School of Journalism in 1992 and completing her internship at the Canadian Broadcasting Company (CBC), Stefani was hired as an associate producer for CBC Saskatchewan. Throughout her journalism career she has continued to work for CBC and is currently a legislative reporter.
...
During our dialogue, Stefani outlined some common qualities of those who share her profession. Basically, there are two types of journalists: those who tend to be individualists, striving to remain as impartial and unbiased as possible, and those who sensationalize stories. Stefani is the former, more objective type of journalist who takes her job very seriously. �We are encouraged to be skeptical,� says Stefani. And along with this skepticism comes critical thinking, intellectual precision, and a commitment to telling the truth as objectively as possible rather than putting a �spin� on it.

Stefani made it clear to us that some negative misconceptions surround journalism. She believes the public tends to view journalists as sensationalist paparazzi who will do anything for a story. But Stefani points out that only some journalists are �ambulance chasers.� Most journalists value credibility, knowing that sensationalizing only creates tension between a journalist and interviewee. A common misconception of the CBC in particular is that it holds a left-wing bias. Stefani thinks that journalists do tend to be liberal in a small �l� sense, but that this is in no way a requirement for the position.
...
Stefani was the ideal first guest to visit our class. She gave us advice on how to interview upcoming visitors and some of the types of questions we could ask. Front-loaded questions, meaning those that include our own opinion, shape the answer into becoming what we want to hear. We learned that to conduct a successful interview, we should ask open-ended questions. Stefani finds she has received some of the best answers when she asked simple questions such as �What do you mean by that?� and �How so?� One of the biggest lessons she has learned is humility. She describes this humility as being able to admit that she does not understand something and then to ask for clarification rather than drawing a conclusion based on an assumption."
http://www.uregina.ca/arts/lead/speakers_05-06/main.htm#Langenegger

Hansard:

The Speaker: � I recognize the member for Melfort.
Mr. Gantefoer: � Mr. Speaker, CBC journalists Stefani Langenegger and Geoff Leo decided to find out why Stan Szostak and other prostate cancer victims are not being advised of all their treatment options. And here�s how Ms. Langenegger, an experienced legislative reporter, described her
attempt at getting answer from the NDP�s (New Democratic Party) health system, and I quote:
. . . it�s an exercise in total frustration . . . I (can) . . . only imagine how you�d feel if you were a patient . . . It took two of us 3 solid days . . . we talked to people (at) . . . the
Department of Health, the Surgical Care Network, Stan�s specialist, 2 health authorities and no one gives you exactly the same answer twice."

Mr. Speaker, if two experienced reporters are that frustrated by the NDP�s health care system, how in the world can the minister expect ordinary citizens of Saskatchewan to deal with
the bureaucracy he�s created?
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:FzTI-WRkSyIJ:www.legassembly.sk.ca//Hansard/25L1S/040526Hansard.pdf+Stefani+Langenegger&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=12&client=firefox-a

You can see Stefani asking a SaskParty member a series of increasingly annoying questions here: http://ndpcaucus.sk.ca/headline-174.html

When it comes to Saskatchewan siphoning more cash from Ontario she's pretty ballsy, I'll give her that:

"Moments ago Ralph Goodale was taking calls on Saskatchewan's John Gormley Live talk radio program about the fiasco in the Commons. Intrepid CBC reporter Stefani Langenegger called in and directly asked whether Saskatchewan would get a new equalization deal like the Atlantic provinces.

Goodale responded with a good, old fashioned fillibuster. He rambled on about how "complex" the issue is, and how it was about "building the economy" (funny how it wasn't too complex to sign deals with Atlantic provinces and Ontario).

Langenegger adroitly concluded: "I'll take that as a 'no'""
http://taxpayersfederation.blogspot.com/2005_05_08_taxpayersfederation_archive.html

Posted by: Batoche at February 12, 2006 12:59 AM

"When it comes to Saskatchewan siphoning more cash from Ontario she's pretty ballsy, I'll give her that"

that money is what is siphoned from sask resource revenue to ottowa. ontario is not the only province that gets screwed.

Posted by: travis at February 12, 2006 1:38 AM

I think what she meant to ask was:

What do you think of the youth wing's stance on nuclear power and uranium mining in Saskatchewan, considering they appear to conflict with the rest of the Sask Party's policy?

In her version of questioning, she's fishing for a flashpoint or a sound bite. Attempting to inflame one side over another in this way can be construed as sensationalizing. If journalists are truly "unbiased" (which is impossible) they'd ask pointed questions in ways that seek answers, not arguments. They'd basically play both parties of a story the same way.

One wonders if she questioned the youth wing in the same confrontational manner that she questioned Mr. Wall.

By the way, has she at any point stated who is criticizing the party as "top-down", or is this just another "unbiased" journalist using fellow "unbiased" journalists as pundits and sources?

Posted by: Saskfishtales at February 12, 2006 1:53 AM

She was talking about the youth wing of the NDP, not the SaskParty. My impression was that the SaskParty youth are pro-nuclear development. if they have one at all - they've just formed and elected a president. I"m not even sure they've had time to pass any formal resolutions, but that's only a guess.

Posted by: Kate at February 12, 2006 2:07 AM

Browsing through the Saskparty's policy book and seeing Wall's light approach to opposition, I think this party is trying too hard to be "the-everything-for-everybody-party".

I look at the justice, resource and provincial sovereignty policies and see nebulous feel-good sentiments with no real commitment and leadership. It appears to me that people who are tired of the deteriorating mediocrity of the status quo in Sask better get their ass into this party and shape its politicies and steer it towards a more definite goal.....otherwise you will be plagued with sarcastic left wing cub reporters from CBC defining it for the public.

Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at February 12, 2006 8:17 AM

NDP gives Buzz the boot

Here is the buzz on the buzzard from the NDP: Jackboot of the fascist/socialist NDP in Buzz's face. Not Welcome in the Party, Buzz; discipline,party line, doing a turner, doing an Ignatieff: the jackboot in the face as described by George Orwell:

George Orwell: changing the climate by David Pryce-Jones
A jackboot would be stamping on the human face for ever, in George Orwell�s
unforgettable image. Franz Kafka is the only other writer to have given his name ...
newcriterion.com/archive/19/nov00/orwell.htm - 14k -

NDP gives Buzz the boot
Veteran union leader says he's `shocked' at his expulsion for endorsing some Liberals
But he says he'd do it again
Feb. 12, 2006. 07:45 AM
TONY VAN ALPHEN
STAFF REPORTER
http://www.rapp.org/url/?7RBWAN9Y

Posted by: maz2 at February 12, 2006 8:33 AM

"It appears to me that people who are tired of the deteriorating mediocrity of the status quo in Sask better get their ass into this party and shape its politicies and steer it towards a more definite goal.....otherwise you will be plagued with sarcastic left wing cub reporters from CBC defining it for the public."... WLM Redux

I'd agree with that. If the SP doesn't take more defined positions on issues, the voters will never understand what they stand for, being further confused by Vast Left-Wing Stupidity reporters like Stefani. Under such circumstances, a clear alternative wouldn't seep into the minds of voters and they'd just park their votes with the Nudies.

Posted by: Canadian Sentinel at February 12, 2006 9:38 AM

Sign me up... it's gotta be more exciting than using my rusty French to watch the Olympics on French CBC, because the English CBC is too busy interviewing has been atheletes to bother tuning in to the now.

Posted by: WilliamMacdonell at February 12, 2006 1:36 PM

"NDP gives Buzz the boot"......

Having had direct dealings with Mr. Hargrove during my past life, firstly I have to say... he is a sharp individual. While I haven't spoken directly to him for some time now, his presenting Martin with his own CAW jacket, I must admit, caught me a little by surprise. It made quite a photo-op and a statement. The undercurrents run deep with this one. It will be interesting to see how this one plays out. Oh to have been a fly-on-the-wall for the executive strategy discussions.

Posted by: Garry P. at February 12, 2006 1:37 PM

Interesting site !!

Posted by: Ted Ross at February 12, 2006 2:04 PM

Never having attended journalism school, I'm left to wonder what methods, if any , are used to teach objectivity. Persons I know who attended law school, mentioned an exercise that sounds like it would be a good idea to institute in journalism. Students are given a case, then 2 of them present the argument , one for the defence, one for the prosecution, or plaintiff/defendant. After vigourously arguing their side, the prof. stops the proccedings, then reverses their roles. Is anything like this done in journalism?

Posted by: dmorris at February 12, 2006 2:28 PM

Kate,

Would this be one of the, if not the first media accreditation to a significant political event for a Canadian blogger? I might be way of base with that point, but I think that's great the party was so welcoming to a blogger--though I hesitate to say the NDP would be as accomdating to you.

Good point about setting up a "bloggers row." Perhaps due to the influence blogging had on the recent election we'll see more and more bloggers attending conventions, rallies, and other assorted events.

Posted by: Jeremy at February 12, 2006 2:42 PM

I am so tired of my tax dollars being used by these socialist CBC hacks to promote their left wing agenda. The CBC doesn't even attempt to present a balanced approach to reporting. Harper should appoint Peter Kent the president of the CBC and let him manage some serious downsizing (or better yet the privatization so I don't have to continue to fund the promotion of ideals that I do not support).

Posted by: pravda at February 12, 2006 2:54 PM

Interesting idea, dmorris.
I'll confess to attending both those schools, and I don't remember an exercise like that at J school.
Every reporter I ever met was at least slightly left of centre, and the scary part is none of them knew it, including me.
And then a few more years went by...

Posted by: nazz rune at February 12, 2006 3:01 PM

Kate, Jeremy:

There are some journalists who are run blogs, but I don't think that all those who run blogs are journalists. It would be interesting to see where one makes the cut in deciding which of those who run blogs are journalists. What would be the requirements? Would one be Objectivity?

I completely agree that bloggers are part of the media, however. They seem to be more likely to strongly support the political right to me but maybe I have not seen enough blogs.

Its interesting that a blog with that might have a relatively small group of special interest users can make stories gain so much traction because professional media people are fishing around for stories.

I would like to see some research done on blogs so people can start to understand this new dimension of communication and participation.

Posted by: unbloggled at February 12, 2006 4:55 PM

I attended the convention as a youth delagate. Definately a lot of enthusiasm from the other youths attending. Serge Leclerc gave a great presentation, wow! very powerful; followed by a not so great Chief Alphonse Bird :S. very interesting time though, met a lot of MLA's and even MP's and others associated with federal conservatives.

Posted by: �an at February 12, 2006 5:02 PM

Off topic:

Check out the headline at Nealenews re "Liberals Predict Quick Return to Power After Chaos in Tory Ranks:
http://www.nealenews.com/

This prompts some interesting conjecture about the rockly road ahead for the minority Conservative Govt. Here's hoping some very positive actions knock some of that cockiness out of these types of predictions.

Posted by: WildRose at February 12, 2006 5:24 PM

Just saw the NDP's Pat Atkinson's rebuttal to Brad Wall on SK evening news: "the Saskatchewan Party wouldn't do any better given the events beyond our control affecting our economy":
The NDP have given SK the highest corporate taxes in North America: is it any wonder it's losing people and jobs?

Posted by: Bushman at February 12, 2006 7:52 PM

re:Liberals contemplate quick comeback after disastrous first week for Harper

Since when did journalism become creative writing? According to Yahoo, PM Harper is going to hell in a handbasket because of last week. Maybe I'm too old to get it right but didn't I hear that a majority of Canadians polled gave their approval of the new government? I find it hard to believe that after a dozen years of Adscam, "so whats a few millions", and the other 200+ documented Lieberal scams and scandals, that Canadians are ready to let the inmates run the asylum anytime soon.

Posted by: Texas Canuck at February 12, 2006 8:16 PM

I suspect that you are right on the money, Texas Canuck. The Liberals are crowing too soon here.

Posted by: WildRose at February 12, 2006 11:42 PM

I attended both the Youth Convention and the main convention this weekend. The Sask Party Youth's position in regards to nuclear energy is entirely consistent with that of the rest of the party. A motion for the Sask Party to support the refinement of uranium and for to conduct a feasibility study of setting up a nuclear reactor in Saskatchewan were put forward today by the Sask Party Youth. Both motions were endorsed by the greater membership and the convention.

Posted by: Kevin at February 13, 2006 12:39 AM

Hey Kate
Heres a pic of Stefani walking a CBC picket line.

http://jenkew.blog.cyberlogic.net/blog/Photos/LockedoutReginaCBCworkers/_archives/2005/9/23/1252474.html

Posted by: Jon at February 13, 2006 11:35 AM

Ya nuclear power..........very expensive. To keep the costs affordable most power plants depend on huge government subsidies. Can we afford it? Not likely.Has anybody in the Sask Party actually looked into the cost? I don't think so. Maybe down the road we can have Atomic power. The Sask Party can froth off at the mouth all they want. They have nothing to lose. Their programs are even more costly than the NDP's social net. They want the government to spend like their heroes Devine and Mulroney. Spend ourselves into oblivion. Spend ourselves into massive debt. I just had a deja' Vu............

Posted by: ok4ua at February 14, 2006 2:27 AM

Posted by: Ledch at February 21, 2006 9:19 AM