Ah Kady. A fine example of Canada's media children. Just what do you do with teenaqers these days? Harper making the media twist is just fine entertainment. Let's hope the tough love helps the media GROW UP.

Kady's just so damn cute when she's pretending to be all righteous.  ;-)

Someone should axe her some hard questions.

Do you think that maybe this is a case of "you reap what you sow"???? How many insults have the MSM cast at anybody who was involved with Reform/Alliance/CPC? I know that I have personally been called a racist, bigot, nazi, fascist and mean. Excuse me if I do not agree with the garbage that spews from moonbats and dippers(most of the MSM). If I had my way, those MSM idiots would have zero access, and I would force them to go do their job. You know, investigate and report.

What is a "McLean's Magazine"?

"We are the fourth estate. We do not have to justify our existence, or our need for independence, to anyone. We are not a tame lion. If this goes ahead, it's time to roar.
"
Their existance? It's dying,thankfully. Their independance? This teeny-bopper owes me a new keyboard after spewing my coffee reading that! Since when is being dependant on leftards for a job "independence"? This bleached blonde doesn't even know the meaning of the word. Maybe she should go back to Mommy's basement, without the Goracle hook-up to the rest of the world.

Now isn't that the pot calling the kettle black? As if the majority of the MSM have used their vast powers to actually REPORT in a balanced and fair manner any C(c)onservative motives and initiatives over the decades. The MSM are a powerful, self-serving, toddler-like—“We didn’t do it! It's not our fault!"—cabal who deserve the contempt of a government they've treated with the utmost contempt. (For Kady: there's a French aphorism. "That dog bites! Well I guess so, if you keep kicking it.")

An example of media navel gazing and self-aggrandizement: at the latest Gemini Awards, October 15, the all (L)liberal, all the time CBC—though it has a tiny market share with about a $BILLION of the taxpayers' hard earned cash—won five major newscast/documentary awards. Tony Burman, who headed the CBC for many years and never detected an ounce of bias, was awarded the Gordon Sinclair Award for Broadcast Journalism. What a sick joke.

People like Kady just don’t get that the MSM certainly don’t speak for the people of this country. The MSM speak for a small, arrogant, insulated, out of touch elite, of which they are card carrying members.

Go, C(c)onservatives, go!

Love the media or hate 'em, she does have a point about Harper ordering the purchase of a whole new building, off the hill, to house the media. Makes very little sense when there is an adequate facility onsite.

Here's a question: did the Western Standard work on behalf of the people?

Teeny-bopper? Leftards? Can you possibly hold back the childish personal insults until at least the 20th post?

God, what is wrong with you people?

Kady dear, where were you during the Chretien/Martin/ Gagliano decade and Adscam rape of Canadian taxpayers?
I accuse the Canadian MSM of being enablers rather than "working on behalf of the people" during those years.
Thank God for the internet, shining light into a "profession - ? " whose members moved like greased lightning from journalism to Liberal MP assistants if not to Senate seats.
That game is up, and for the good!

I don't see her complaining about the cost or the duplication of the new media centre - her complaint seems to be that it's yet another blow to her puffed up sense of self-importance.

Perhaps she should ask herself why it is that there exists "the seemingly bottomless pit of emnity that our very existence elicits from the Prime Miniser, and his cabal of co-conspirators at PMO communications."

She should also ask herself why the general public is turning away in droves from traditional media.

But she won't. She's too important.

Buffoonette Kady writes, "we may as well just hand over our press passes, turn in our BlackBerries and move on, en masse, to some other profession; one, perhaps, not quite so unessential to a functioning democracy." Yah, a real job will open thine eyes!

'God, what is wrong with you people?'

Perry, a more apt question would be...what is wrong with people like you?

No matter how bias our media is you defend it. Only because you agree with it's attacks, principles be damned.

Personally I think the Canadian media is a national disgrace. The fact that someone as unprofessional as Ms. O'Malley is a member speaks volumes. But then again, look at her role models.

Kady writes: ..."bottomless pit of emnity that our very existence elicits from the Prime Miniser, and his cabal of co-conspirators at PMO communications."

Sounds like that comment is coming from the fourth rung in Hell, from a fifth columnist!

I think the Prime Minister was very clear that Canadians only have enmity when it comes to ice hockey.

Meanwhile the Iranians are being warned by Pres. George Bush not to go angling for World War III.

Kady get over yourself, your small scribblings will not SAVE CANADA nor the planet for that matter. Thank your for your "heroic hubris".

Hans-Christian Georg Rupprecht BGS, PDP, CFP

Commander in Chief

Frankenstein Battalion

2nd Squadron: Ulanen-(Lancers) Regiment Großherzog Friedrich von Baden (Rheinisches) Nr.7(Saarbrucken)

Knecht Rupprecht Division

Hans Corps

1st Saint Nicolaas Army

Army Group “True North”

Define "Professional":

1 a: of, relating to, or characteristic of a profession b: engaged in one of the learned professions c (1): characterized by or conforming to the technical or ethical standards of a profession (2): exhibiting a courteous, conscientious, and generally businesslike manner in the workplace

Last I heard, there is no certification to become a journalist. No set standards, no code of ethics, no discipline if you break that code of ethics, and no requirement to even have a degree, let alone a journalism degree.

If you profess to be a profession, then ethics and propriety go hand in hand. Apparently the irony of her statements didn't sink in with her though. Those who report OBJECTIVELY shouldn't be having "quiet drinks" with those they are reporting on. The appearance would, rightly or wrongly, cause someone else to think that the reporting is less than objective.

What the PPG doesn't understand is that to be objective, they ARE a mouthpiece, and one for anyone who chooses to speak. This doesn't mean that they shouldn't ask questions and seek to understand what their subject is speaking about, but it does mean that they have to act in the same manner for all subjects, regardless of feelings. This is all that any government should expect.

Why does it always come back to drinking and partying with the MPs like the "old days"?????

Obviously it is more important to the press gallery to have their meals and drinks paid for by the gov't than it is to report the news.

Instead of a new press theater, maybe they would treat the gov't with more respect if they just built them a bar with free peanuts.

A letter to Ms. OMally-

Ms. O Malley:

Fact is, You don't work for the 'People', you work for the partisan media.

As an aside, the CBC does 'work for the People', as we see them paid by tax dollars.

To be considered the 'Fourth Estate' you must do factual reporting, not the biased cherry-picking of partial facts as you do now, effectively having become the 'Fifth Column' in the culture war, promoting Stalinist policies, 'for the children' when you know outright that children will be the first victims if you are the least sucessful.

Think back to your formitive days, when you wanted to 'Change the World'. By going into journalism, you became a voyeur whatching those of us who ran, got elected, and actually 'changed things' a few for the better, but most for the worst.

Ian Vaughan

Awwww Kate, you're stunning talent is revealed again in your headline. Kitten Spit. Speaking of spit, that's what I did with my coffee when I read that. Good thing I have a Mac, it still works.

"That dog bites! Well I guess so, if you keep kicking it."
Another brilliant metaphor from the smartest gang of commenters on Canadian blogs....... I inhaled what remains of my coffee. Thanks for that Lookout.

Down in the United States I cannot think of a major publication that allows its people to blog while drunk. McClean's toleration of that is pretty impressive.

Still, whatever happened to standards? Or maintaining standards only a Brit thing?

You're most welcome, geothermal!

Newsflash for Kady. Since you work for me, get out and give me some unbiased reporting sans your opinion. All the public needs is factual reporting. We're plenty capable of making up our own minds without your spin and BS.

And some thought the PPG didn't belong belong on this list. In hindsight, maybe they were not high enough.

Kady is the reason why we go to the blogs, because the msm DOESN'T speak for us!
They truly are an arrogant, self serving bunch who think they always know what is right and proper, and if you disagree with them, you must be uneducated and ignorant.

Bang on Kate. That's an interesting idea: let's elect our journalists. We already "vote" for them with our discretionary spending on newspaper & magazines anyway, why not make it official and let them formally declare their affiliations?

Then we can have at least transparency, if not objectivity, in reporting.

So Kady thinks the MSM might as well turn in their press cards and blackberrys and find another line of work.

To which I would say, "Don't let the door slap you in the butt on your way out". Or maybe, "Here's your hat what's your hurry". Or else, "Don't go away mad; just go away".

By the way just who is Kady, I've never heard of her before. I quit reading Mcleans when Trudeau was in power.

Did you see the update she posted? Clever girl!!

/sarcasm off

From today's Calgary Sun:
Brief from privy council

RE: Greg Weston's Oct. 16 column stating government documents "reveal substantial plans" to create a new prime ministerial briefing centre. Since we didn't receive a call from Weston for comment, I am writing to clarify. Due to its proximity to our offices, the Privy Council Office looked at the vacant space in question for several possible uses. Preliminary analysis was done in 2006 and last fall, at an early stage, it was decided for a variety of factors -- accessibility and cost -- not to proceed. The PCO is not proceeding with this initiative and this decision was taken a year ago.

Marilyn MacPherson

Privy Council Office

Ya when you're right, you're right Kaye...this Macleans scribbler must have a hard time getting her bloated head through a normal door way. Check this hubris:

""If this double plus Machiavellian madness actually comes to some sort of fruition, and WeThePressGallery consider going along with it for so much as a nanosecond, we may as well just hand over our press passes, turn in our BlackBerries and move on, en masse, to some other profession; one, perhaps, not quite so essential to a functioning democracy. ""

Hmmmm Macleans and the 4th estate "watch dogs of democracy" didn't seem to have a problem with Chretien and Trudeau taking their closed-door cabinet meetings to expensive Quebec resorts (renting out the entire resort for a couple days at tax payer expense...and shunning newsies .

I really get off on these ego tripping gasbags in the Ottawa 4th estate thinking of themselves as democracy's watch dogs.....most of these crypto Fabian statists wouldn't know a functional civil democracy if it came up and bit them on the smelly little digit they sit on all day.

Wonder how well Kady would hold up if her "blog"(?) met the citizen journalist's common practice of being comments enabled?

The old media speaks for us, the new media hears from us. It's a no brainer as to whom is going to be extinct eventually in the new paradigm.

Here's a good laugh, the day before the NYT's took the severest of financial blows to date - Morgan Stanley dumped their stake of 7.2% of all outstanding NYT's shares(the stock now at a ten yr low) - the Times announced a new feature, an editor's blog.

NYTimes.com announced today that it launched "The Board" (http://theboard.blogs.nytimes.com/), a blog written by members of The New York Times editorial board, providing commentary and background on each day's editorials.

Andrew Rosenthal, editorial page editor, The New York Times said, "We are excited about starting this blog for the editorial board. There's so much that goes on during any particular day that we can't get to on the editorial page, and so much we can add to our editorials by using the power of the Internet. We hope that our readers take up the invitation to join us in a dialog about the issues of the day -- large, small and just plain strange."

Morgan Stanley speaks for me. Way to go.

Poor Kady, she actually believes that the PPG is an opposition party. The opposition is elected Kady. You have to know that to be a political reporter.

I guess if you're on the Librano$$ payroll that makes you an extension of the opposition party. Since she is not on their payroll but depends on the Librano$$ to keep slipping her news stories to make her job easier and that makes her look "informed" you could say she is part of those opposed to good government vs. corrupt government. This would then make her opposed or in opposition.

Here' a tip for your Kady, we already have a gossip columnist with a hot/cold list posing as a "reporter".

Now ask yourself these questions, Kady: why would this Prime Minister not trust you and your colleagues to tell the truth; why would this Prime Minister want to talk to Canadians directly so that the message is not filtered and distorted; why have we come to this low level in media reporting that the Canadian people really don’t care if your nose is out of joint when the Prime Minister talks to us directly; and finally, do you every seriously question your self-righteous to actually think that the rest of us are so stupid as to actually believe that you give balanced and unbiased reporting?

Where does it say this new media center would only be available to conservatives. Guess the libs know that if this comes to pass they might be asked tough questions and lying would be exposed. Guess Kady is admitting that the liberals are out of power for decades, and would not be able to control the news.
The BBC is getting rid of over 2000 employees.
NYTs got rid of severy hundred.
Other biased papers are also cutting staff.
Magazines have laid off hundreds.
Maybe if these fourth estate icons had been more unbiased, refused to run phony stories, apologized in public, and punished the phonies, they would still have readers and subscribers.
I wonder how many would survive if they did not have mailing subsidies, (which the Western Standard refused).
We need a report on how much every publication gets/year in mailing subsidies, and what other groups get a subsidy of some sort to keep in business. Remember, subsidies are paid with taxpayers money, and we only hear about subsidies to farmers.

First time I've read this "reporter" Kady, & it appears she went to the Delacourt/Travers school of journalism. The anger & venom spewed by her & her ilk, over the fact that the Tories dared to be elected, boggles the mind. Whatever will they do when the P.M. gains his well-deserved majority, in the near future? I predict they'll decend further into the slime, turning over every rock, in an attempt to embarrass, discredit & generally slag the Party, the P.M., his family, & supporters.
They pine for "the good old days" when the Libs filled their egos with a sense of self-importance.
Get used to the outside children, it's going to be a few more years of noses against the window panes!

Penny:

"The old media speaks for us, the new media hears from us..."

Very good.

Apart from the obvious bias and acrimony that plagues much of the output from the press gallery, it seems many have forgotten how to write clearly and succinctly as well.

How many overwrought metaphors and hyperbolic adjectives and adverbs can be stuffed into a single blog post?

When a reporter thinks it's more important to appear clever rather than make sense, yes, you really do need to seek out another profession.

Poor Kady writes:...we may as well just hand over our press passes, turn in our BlackBerries and move on, en masse, to some other profession; one, perhaps, not quite so essential to a functioning democracy.

Yup, ya better get used to saying "Want fries with that?" a lot. That seem to be the correct lateral "professional" move she can ponder, although it's probably more essential to a functional democracy than her current role.

Pity Kady, because a sinecure is a terrible thing to lose!

Andrew Coyne and many others have recently lamented the low quality of political discourse in this country.

I would argue that the drop in IQ in the political narrative in this country over the last 20 years is entirely due to the admittance of affirmative action hired women - women like Kady O'Malley - in the media workplace.

Quite apart from that there exists a lot of data in the public domain strongly suggesting that women in the media have a disturbing propensity to not only sleep with their bosses but also their interview subjects. Not an opinion, but a statement of fact.

Does Kady's employer know she works for someone else?

Who recently accused the MSM of Liberal bias when he wrote "I can assure Mr. Dion of one thing: The national media are not fans of the current Conservative regime..."?

Link here to reveal an obviously biased conservative: http://tinyurl.com/23cslf

PS if you people knew who Peter Mackay is sleeping with (a senior private sector female media personality) you'd shut up about how biased CTV is against the Afghanistan mission. Again, not a rumour but a well known north-of-Queeensway fact: Canadian women in the media sleep around - a lot.

"The old media speaks for us, the new media hears from us..."

Make that, the old media speaks TO us, the new media hears from us.

Why is it that when non-conservatives "argue", all they do is quote back the criticisms they've received from conservatives -- and that's it?

To them, our words are self-evidently, de facto proof of... something. They don't bother mounting substantial counter arguments, usually because they can't. They've never considered an alternative viewpoint and are startled that such things even exist.

Move over Reagan: the new "scariest words in the English language" are:

"We're from the MEDIA and we're here to help you."

I get a kick out of young journalists who "want to help The People." What does some pretentious, brainwashed twenty-something kid have to teach me about _anything_?

Notice how Kady O'Malley operates.

First, she misinforms the public. The Toronto Star article that she uses as her 'factual base' was a rabble-rousing agenda of misinformation. There is no 'private Harper's Media Room' planned or being worked on, yet Ms O'Malley bases her whole attack on such a fiction.

The PM's office clearly rejected this fiction, yet, Ms O'Malley doesn't bother to inform readers of this. She prefers fiction - fiction that can be used to attack Harper.

Equally, she rejects dialogue that criticizes her misinformation, by further misinformation. She defines SDA critique of her post as only personal ad hominem and therefore, beneath her notice. But, if she would read the posts here, the majority are talking about her, and the MSM's tactic of misinforming the public, of not providing facts, of operating within a clear Liberal and anti-Conservative bias.

Ms O'Malley's claim that a free press is essential to democracy is accurate. The problem is, our current MSM is not free, is not democratic, and deserves our criticism of its acting as a basic propaganda tool of one particular political ideology.

Apparently Ms O'Malley got some e-mail!

She also does not get the point ..." You DO NOT represent or speak for the public Kady ! "

Well just shut the hell up Kady OH! Since you work for me , YOUR FIRED!

Eyes-Wide-Shut Kady writes, in response to these posts:

"Since I also not infrequently am the object of equally angry accusations of being C/conservative hack, I'm going to hope that this means I'm pretty much balanced.

"Honestly, this has to be the only profession [sic: politicians?] where if everyone is mad at you, it means you're doing a good job. (And, for the record, I wouldn't have it any other way.)"

Sheesh! First of all, WHERE on earth did Kady learn to write (sic)? To make her first quoted paragraph coherent, standard English, I'd edit it this way: "The fact that I'm frequently the object of equally angry accusations of being a C/conservative hack would suggest I’m actually balanced.” (No charge, Kady.)

If Kady had any sense of irony, her response to us might be a little bit of fun.

But, when she says, “ . . . [everyone is mad] . . . means you’re [sic] doing a good job. ( . . . I wouldn't have it any other way.)", she really means it.

Eyes wide shut, all right!

Kady is just upset that her real job is to sell advertising space so the magazine can make a profit for the owners. Journalists are just sales hacks with a keyboard as their sales tool.

Too bad, so sad.

Let the delusion that journalism is a profession, that journalists matter, continue to roll around in her empty little head.

She actually thinks she is important.

Here's a question: did the Western Standard work on behalf of the people?

Perry: No. The Western Standard worked on behalf of itself and its readers that voluntarily paid to read their magazine.

Apparently there are not enough of their readers who were interested in reading their work, so they had to cease publishing. Notice there's not a single conservative demanding that the government step in and pony up cash to ensure that conservatives get equal hearing on tax-payers' dime?

Hey socialist trolls, if you are so proud of your little kitten, why don't you ask here a simple question: If she indeed represents the people, why won't she allow "the people" to post comments on her "so-called blog?" Because she might get dirty from the unwashed masses?

You Marxists are all alike.

Shaidle:"They've never considered an alternative viewpoint and are startled that such things even exist."

And this is why I sometimes hate conservatives more than socialists: whenever I argue with a socialist, often a brown person or a woman or a homosexual, it quickly becomes apparent that I am the first person ever in history to call them on their BS. Come on, folks, please chip in a bit and help put these socialists in their place. I have to work with them and share the roads with them and by giving them a free pass you're harshing my vibe.

Well, that didn't take long. Andrew is once again spitting his hatred against a section of the populace. Last week, it was Jews. This week, apparently, it's female reporters.

Grow up, dude. You probably have a good head on your shoulders, but the bigoted drivel you post makes every one of us tune out.

I actually appreciated the young woman's recent post reflecting some misgivings about a couple of "controversial speakers" being denied access to the Parliament Buildings in a rare show of Parliamentary solidarity, or at least shared self-righteousness.

One, apparently, "has come under fire for supporting people accused of racism." How McCarthyesque can you get and at least she noticed: http://tinyurl.com/36tg9z

FWIW I hope her summary of SDA reader responses was grossly exaggerated. Nobody's going to encourage anybody else to re-examine their his or her own beliefs by spewing venom at them.

Anybody who listens to Rush Limbaugh, for example, knows how unfailingly courteous he is to callers.

Anyway, she looks like an attractive young woman to my old eyes and there's no reason to be abusive if one's arguments are sound.

Kady - You (and your colleaques, especially the CBC) should, in my opinion, not blithely dismiss the comments posted here. They reflect the reality you must have seen yourself: the mass exodus away from MSM to blogs. I could be much more inflammatory, but the others have done a good job of speaking for me. Ignore us at your peril.

Pearl
Toronto

John Geddes (sp?), also of Macleans, was just on Bill Good's morning show on CKNW. His angry rant was all about how Stephen Harper put the nation in a tizzy with all this speculation about the possibility of the government falling re the throne speech. How Stephen Harper is manipulating everyone. Excuse me? Who was doing the rabid speculation? THE MEDIA! He also did everything he could to defend the Liberal-dominated senate. When Bill Good mentioned that Stephane looked weak during all of this, he disagreed somewhat. Hmmm, I wonder why I cancelled my subscription to Macleans last year.

Kady O'Malley? More of the same.

Some timorous baby boomer writes: "Grow up, dude. You probably have a good head on your shoulders, but the bigoted drivel you post makes every one of us tune out."

If I don't get called a bigot at least once a week by a pussy whipped baby boomer then somebody is getting a free pass. Stick your shock and outrage up an orifice of your choosing, crypto-commie, it's Harper Time and your feigned offence doesn't play anymore.

Heck, with Andrew, people are always flung into identity sets.

Notice his ever-present egoistic self-praise; he says that he is 'the first person ever in history' to confront someone on their views.

Notice his definition of a socialist. A socialist is both an ideology AND a genetic characteristic, ie, skin colour (a brown person); gender (woman); and sexuality (homosexual). Now - what does that say about Andrew's cognitive (genetic) characteristics?

Andrew is either a fourteen year old or has the mentality of one. Intellectual immaturity of that calibre does not make for a very good or entertaining troll. BTW, your claims of knowing everything that goes on "north of the Queensway" is BS, sunshine. Now go do your homework or tag a classmate's locker or something

"Since I also not infrequently am the object of equally angry accusations of being C/conservative hack, I'm going to hope that this means I'm pretty much balanced."

Or it could mean that the left has become so radicalized and anti Conservative in their views, that anything not anti Conservative hurts their ears.

As such unless its all negative conservative all the time,the left thinks that the reporting is "biased" and they write their letters which Kady so deftly uses as a barometer of balanced reporting, therby actually finding the middle ground between the arsonist and the fireman.

Nice work Kady

Andrew, I have to admit I like your attitude, but there's absolutely no clarity to any of your points.

"We are the fourth estate. We do not have to justify our existence, or our need for independence, to anyone."

No, but you should have to validate your facts. Talk about the height of arrogance.

Kady, here's a little tip regarding the fourth estate. You will only have credibility when you are truly objective in your observations. Unless you are truly objective, you are only propagandists.

The PPG sold themselves outto the Liberals years ago. This shunning by the PMO is that whole Reap and Sow business.

Please don't link to her anymore. She just doesn't seserve the attention. Paul Wells has been trying to pump her traffic for a while now, but she never has anything relevant or interesting to say. That, and she stilla has that annoying "flirty picture" A cocked head and a come-hither smile, yuck. In any case, that waste of a post(See Norman Spectors blog for the lowdown on the shoebox project that was shelved a year ago)is defineitley not worth linking to.

Jeepers I thought she worked for a mag. That would be a business wouldn't it? Owned by someone who tries to make a PROFIT? She ought not try to dress up what she does. She works at a job doing what her bosses want and nothing more. Puts on her panties just like the rest of us, one foot at a time I would think.

Never heard of Kady before and probably never will again.

Kady, thank SDA for your 15 minutes of fame.

PS: way to go, Andrew.

I respect the collected wisdom of SDA readers, particularly because they tend to be older and more accomplished than me.

I do question how engaged some folks are in life though: do you people have actual jobs? Becasue I work with a thousand Kady O'Malleys. I deal with people like her every day. It's not like they wake up one morning and decide to be asshats; their asshattery is the sum of a lifetime of free passes, free passes given by me and, more frequently, you. And aforementioned asshattery is getting old.

O'Malley and Kinsella. They "work" together so well. XOXOX

Kinsella admits(advises) media must be sucked-up-to in order to win elections;

[Press: As the Post's freelance media observer, I can assure Mr. Dion of one thing: The national media are not fans of the current Conservative regime. As one former prime minister once said to me: "In this job, you don't end up liking the media very much. The key is to never show it." For reasons best known to himself, Mr. Harper shows it. Mr. Dion, therefore, needs to coddle and cajole the press corps whenever and however possible. It may sound hokey, but it'll work. Like everyone else, journalists do not want to be treated like criminals for doing their job.]WK

Can you believe he would say that ?? Put it in print ??

coddle and cajole aka suck-up

"journalists do not want to be treated like criminals for doing their job" WK

Altered photos, imaginary sources, out of context, guilty by omission, selected guests.

Act like a crimminal --- be treated like a criminal.

Could that be the reason citizens often cite journalism as one of the lowest of the lows ?? You got it.

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/columnists/story.html?id=1e515591-174c-428b-b4b0-d7c85485a612

Kady; I had a Macleans sub for years, not for the last 15 or so. What makes me so mad was that it took me so long to see through the professional misconduct ----- crimminal even. A dentist/optometrist office read is enough. Laughable, compared to my choices on the web.

Methinks Kady is either dealing with a soured relationship, or misapportioned her Baily's in her coffee.

Too many ultra violent video games, also I bet....

".. we are unaccountable..etc"? Just look at circulation figures, you're unaccountable alright.
Keep on passing wind...

Glad you noticed my post ron in kelowna. I too thought it was revealing.

What's also unconsciously amusing about Kinsella's advice supposedly from a former PM is that the founder of Trudeaupia violated that rule throughout most of his career, and by doing so even earned the grudging admiration of some of us who weren't fans.

We are the fourth estate and we want people to listen to us.

It reminds me of some congressman who, in response to a reporter claiming he repesents the people, retorted "No, I represent the people; you are a reporter"

Hey y'all.

I just went on-line to my investment portfolio and sold any and every mutual fund that contained any stock in any media, paper manufacturing or news conglomerate.(/b>

This is a dying industry (the dead tree gang) I suggest reinvesting in banks, gold, WestJet, or other commodities that don't include dead trees.

That is the best way to reduce the strength of newspapers and magazines. That will hasten the lay-offs of people like Kady.

If you still subscribe to any of those rags, cancel that immediately.

The best way to vote against these idiots is to vote with your wallet. That, they will understand better than a denigrating blog entry.

Do it now!

Andrew a professional is someone who does it for the money.

Wimpy Canadian, that was Mitt Romney who gave that response to a reporter who seemed to be getting pretty snippity. It was a great response in that it reminded us of something that the media tries to blur, that We, The People, elect the MPs to speak for us. I have never voted for a reporter and never will.

Simple solution everyone:

Don't suggest that reporters who claim to "represent the people" run for office.

Rather, suggest that it's time to have democratic elections in order to become editors and reporters.

What do you suppose the Marxist/elitists will say to that?

Sort of reminds me of the very public shock that Buzz Hargrove expressed after he could not get an appointment to see the new PM. You should at least try crossing some bridges before you start burning them.

Let's consider two methods of receiving information:

1) the prime minister speaks, reporters ask questions, reporters choose what's important and write story, public passively reads story.

2) the prime minister's speech is provided in text and video online and the comments section is opened to allow argument for and against, supported with links to background data and other information.

Which method is more useful? Which one do you think will be around in 10 years?

'DUMB-IT-DOWN'

That is how most media handle their reporting of the news.

It is a HUGE problem in the world today.

There must be a jounalist out there who has gone through J-school ---- just what goes on there ??

I refer Kady and everyone here to AbClipper at 10:45.

I saw this letter to the editor and variations of the same in more than a couple "news" papers today.

The one glaring point in them is that the reporters/columnists never bothered to actually contact the PMO or the Privy Council to ask.............

Methinks dear Kady...is just put off by the fact that more people read SDA, than read her ramblings.

Fact is, Kate...is far superior when it comes to informing the public, than Kade will ever be.

Kate has not been infected because of attendance at a journalism school. Just sees everything like it is. Has never been taught how to spin.

Kady's foolish self-importance aside, I'm inclined to side with Chip - Kady's rant scans like sandpaper across one's eyes. She could at least learn how to write well.

Andrew, I guess I'm the youngest baby boomer in the history of the world. I'm also nowhere near a communist, socialist or any other -ist except capitalist.

I seem to recall we're about the same age... on the birth certificate, anyways. Maturity-wise, I'm pretty sure I've got you by a few decades.

Maybe once you catch up on the maturity angle you'll realize that your incessant pigeon-holing of people is ridiculous and makes you look stupid. If you're ever competent enough in your profession to rise to a position of power, you're a discimination suit waiting to happen. And frankly, you'll deserve it.

Yukon Gold at 1:53

Wow. What a great shot at Andrew. True too.

As a white person I am accountable for slavery and stealing of Indian land. Fine. As a guy I'm accountable for centuries of oppression of women. Fine. As a straight person I'm accountable for homophobia since time immemorial. Fine.

Accordingly, is it out of the question to hold other races, genders, and sexual orientations accountable for their actions today? I don't think so. And within that context I think we need to re-evaluate the contributions and duties of all identifiable groups in society and whether they are working as a collusive unit at a political level.

Put more plainly, a young woman like O'Malley would starve to death with her attitude were it not for Liberal mandated affirmative action programs and thus it is entirely reasonable to suggest that her and her kind - identifiable Section 15 victim groups - support the Liberals as a form of quid pro quo.

Great comment Andrew!!!!!11

There must be a jounalist out there who has gone through J-school ---- just what goes on there ??

My guess, not much, a few classes in styling the product, oh, the "ethics class" which must be a laugh. You can't be taught talent. You can't be taught to be honest.

It seems to me a modern construct allowing colleges to expand departments to fill the tuition coffers like the communications degree. When did Human Resources, payroll people, become a degreed thing?

It's all so meaningless. And when you read Kady's untalented but stylized drivel it becomes so sad.

What a drama queen.

As for MSMers moving to another profession, are the Libs hiring? I can't think of another job where lying and spinning would be considered good things on a resume.

Naw, Andrew, around here, we won't take you to task for the historical indiscretions of society.

We will, however, hold you accountable for your individual words and actions. You know, like a true libertarian would...

How many Andrews are there........?

Put more plainly, a young woman like O'Malley would starve to death with her attitude were it not for Liberal mandated affirmative action programs and thus it is entirely reasonable to suggest that her and her kind - identifiable Section 15 victim groups - support the Liberals as a form of quid pro quo.

But Andrew they represent you while listing off your great, great, great,....... forefathers offences.

Section 15 of the charter is pure racism. When did she ever say that to represent me I wonder?

"Represent me" that so ludicrous it's funny, like are they on crack?

SDA, Freedominion, DMB, mitchieville etc can represent me but not some champagne clinker who could care less how many white males lose jobs each year because of affirmative action.

At least Fenris would care,

Most of what I read by Andrew makes sense. What's the problem?

I can't think of another job where lying and spinning would be considered good things on a resume.

Communications VP at Enron,

When I was a socialist(barely 10 years ago), I believed I was responsible for every wrong on the planet.

(Or as St Paul said: "when i was a socialist, I thought as a socialist. I saw as through a glass darkly).

Now that I am a human, I think as a human and recognize that we are all responsible for our own lives and our own collectivities.

Andrew speaks as a true conservative and I applaud him.

Onya, mate (as we say in Oz).

Boil the ocean, and we see there is a simple contest for power between politicians and the media. Their sources of power are one and the same: the body politic. Politicians are imbued with power by our constitutional and democratic process. And the media? By the power of shaping opinion. However, in the case of the latter, the power is assumed.

It's the bare truth: the media is simply competing for power. Power is the media's drug of choice.

The problem is, when I vote, I willfully transfer power through the political process. The media assuming a similar transfer of power from me is a usurper.

I do not willingly transfer power to the media. Furthermore, to the extent that the media makes this assumption, I withdraw my financial support - my most effective leverage available.

The media has lost its influence over me, for the most part because> I am suspicious of and generally detest others that wish to wield their power over me.

Long live the blogosphere - an ecosystem of information and opinion.

when did opinion become news in the msm? everybody has one but most cannot back the opinion up.

I think Harper would like to censor the media and give them the right questions to ask. He's scared because the media asks him questions he can't answer.

well just about everything that can be said has been said about kady's crap, but andrew have you thought about getting help for your (i) trouble there's many doctor's that could assist you so you could move on with your life.

ok4ua - Did you watch the press conference a couple of weeks ago? I did. It went on for about 45 minutes with no restrictions as to questions asked. Harper answered all in detail. You've never seen anything like it from the other party leaders, and there were no complaints. You sir are full of it.

I have heard this reporter talk on TV, in a studio, In Canada. She appeared to have a runny nose the first time I saw her and he appeared very low maintenance. I thought that she had been caught on a bad day but as I have heard and seen her again and again - she always looks and sounds the same. Her contempt for her audience is staged. She is not pathetic. She likes the cutsy wootsy 'look at me, I don't care how I look because under this mess hides a cute gal'. She wants people to marvel at that mess spouting four syllable words.

I don't care what she does in her future.

I think she actually thinks that the corrupt Dipper/Puffin crowd will 'care'; they won't Kady. You are a 'useful idiot' as soon as you are of no use, they will toss you over for a man in a suit who will enrich them: they will turn to Capitalism when the 'bleeding heart' Bolshevik line fails to provide the lifestyle those Champagne socialists have stolen enough money from taxpayers, to indulge themselves in. Don't believe me...? Here is an example from the Puffin petry dish - the former Dipper premier of the Yukon has been buying up the town of Whitehorse and was named entrepreneur of the year by the Chamber of Commerce! Before he was voted premier he was a paid miner, after he became Premier he drove all entrepreneurs out of the territory though taxation and fanatical environmental regulations.

There needs to be a new 'line' in this country: "Ask not what you can do for the government (for favors); ask what the government can do for you so you can do for yourself!

ok4ua - I think Harper would like the media to report the truth and not shape it to reflect their Liberal Bias. The report I heard this morning on Global TV was the that "Stephi pulled Canada back from the brink of an election" - and if that isn't BS and slanting the news I don't know what is. The truth would have been "Stephi fearing an election did not defeat the Gov't and compromised his principals".
If the media started reporting honestly and without bias I think you would find that Harper would talk to them, but they readily admit that they do not support Harper and that they are pro Liberal and why talk to the enemy - self appointed as they are...

You sir are full of it.

Indeed! liberals always hate to actuially answer a question. Chretien would not allow questions on the GST,

a proof is da proof,.... here look at my golf balls.

He's scared because the media asks him questions he can't answer.
Name one that he hasn't answered already or go away,

ok4ua....ditto Dr Wright. Name ONE question he has not answered,after you finish your grade 3 math homework,of course.

Little story about the "media that works for the people". This one's about the CBC. Your tax dollars at work.

I was on CBC radio a few months back and gave a brief, off-the-cuff interview about an event ongoing at the time. Everything I said was valid. Later, on the National, they cut out part of my radio interview and pasted a file picture of me onscreen while playing part of the audio clip, to show who they were talking about, completely twisting (I'm talking 180° here) what I had said.

Next day, I was unavailable to talk to the media due to work commitments, and no less than **five** different reporters from CBC made **17** different requests for interviews with my colleague, who said that he can't speak for me and didn't know what I had said. Well, the good ol' CBC twisted what **he** said and made it look like he and I were at odds when, in fact, we were not. 10 reporters. 17 requests. One story. Twisted words. You wonder, Kady, why Harper mistrusts the media? Because a) they're agenda-driven (i.e. the story is written before they research it), b) they take quotes out of context, and c) they're inefficient. On behalf of the people my rear end.

Oh Kate. The comments for the NYT has gone the way of the dinosaur. Darn auto-posts :)

DrWright,

As I recall, the liars and spinners at Enron were charged. Some were convicted.

The liars and spinners in the MSM in Canada get Senate seats, GG appointments and/or the Order of Canada.

ok4ua's sophomo[ron]ic comments are par for the course for this person.

If ok4ua really wants to know what the PM's thinking, I suggest that he/she subscribe to the PM's daily press releases and speeches: they arrive via one's email Inbox. Really easy.

I, too, would like an example of a question our fine PM hasn't answered. (We're waiting, ok4ua.)

And even when he does answer, the MSM usually ignores the plain sense of the words and spins them. Not putting himself and his party in the clutches of the MSM's a very good strategy: sort of like the hen avoiding the fox's den. Very smart.

Noted...but understated was the importance of Mr. Harper's throne speech being delivered during Prime Time.

Working people were able to watch and digest for themselves. We didn't have to rely on regurgitated media crap.

Just another shrewd move by our Prime Minister!

Just to scare the Liberals...he is only 46 years old!!!

Johann: Lesson learned. Next time, when you speak to the media you tell them only on the condition that they play (or read) the finished copy of the production to you before it's aired (or printed). It's pretty standard in the business.

The whole issue of being a de facto mouthpiece is a great topic for O'Malley to write about. I remember wondering myself, after watching her appearance on The National a while back: "Why should O'Malley be a de facto mouthpiece? Why? Why?"

I couldn't come up with anything. I just couldn't help but notice that she seemed entirely pleased to be an obsequious mouthpiece for someone's idea to launch a suddenly-conceived negative soundbite campaign labeling Mr. Harper a "cut and run" man on National television.

The phrase "need for (journalistic) independence" certainly acquired a whole new range of possible meanings as I heard the specious, laughable, newly-drafted phrase being repeated eleven times, first in Paul Hunter's lead-in report and then in the panel discussion that followed. I remember asking myself "What will happen to journalism, which is 'essential to a functioning democracy" if "this double plus Machiavellian madness actually comes to some sort of fruition?"

And as a Conservative voter who believes in a free and fair press, I remember thinking "No more. This -- this monstrous plan, this must serve as our wakeup call."

Or words to that effect.

Now, in fairness, it's possible that Paul Hunter and Mansbridge and O'Malley and others all came up with the same phrase at the same time. And it's possible that Amelia Earhardt will land at JFK tomorrow afternoon.

"We work on behalf of the people..."

Yeah, well, most Canadians haven't met them.

I bet SDA sent the spitting kitten more traffic today than she usually gets in a month:) (I wasn't one of them, I boycott self-serving weenies)

The MSM is not about to die, but the heady days of power they once enjoyed are gone forever, thank G-d.

My granddaughter was soliciting magazine subscriptions for a school fund raiser so my wife, among others, chose a McLeans subscription.

Every week when it shows up in the mailbox, I keep dumping it straight in the garbage.

We may have had to support the fund raiser, but we don't have to read that drivel.

Oh and for you lefties, no I don't recycle them.

Ummmmmmm....must be time for mommy to give ok4ua his bath.Hasn't answered 3 direct q's in over 2 hours. C'mon now,Mommy Socialist/Leftard. Time to let the little schmuck out of the water before it shrivels and can't answer the question.

Harper would like the media to report the truth...the way he sees it. Much like Goebbels did:

"Not every item of news should be published.
Rather must those who control news policies endeavor to make every item of news serve a certain purpose."

Oh, and we can't forget this pearl of wisdom from Goebbels which warms the hearts of C(c)onservatives:

"It is the absolute right of the state to supervise the formation of public opinion."

clair voyant....my oldest granddaughter came to me with the same request. I gave $1000.00 directly to her school trip and told her teacher not to send her home with that socialist crap again! I know it may have not been a good lesson,but her school has stopped this stuff since the teach complained about me, and I went to the super. As I told him,I worked damn hard for that money,and if my granddaughter/class want a trip to Europe,they will earn it the same way I did in school....bake sales,etc. Mind you,our big trip was Sussex,N.B. to North Battleford,SK! But it was great.Enjoyed every minute.(still got the pics :) )

Fool that I am, I went to Kady's site: what a letdown! Or, should I say, she didn't disappoint my expectations, which were non-existent.

Pure, predictable clap trap. Watching her the other night on Newman, was it?, I wondered how the heck she got on camera at all.

'Must be a family connection. Most young "reporters" and "journalists," or young people posing as reporters and journalists, end up on the CBC because of nepotism: Avi Lewis comes immediately to mind, and Bill Graham's son, and a McIntyre talking head, etcetera, ad bloody cetera.

Don't worry, Kady. When you turn in your press card and Blackberry to find another line of work, we, the people, won't mind. You won't be letting us down. Honest.

So SDAers rely on smears, personal attacks and childish name-calling to make their point about Kady O'Malley.

Which is odd, I think, since that's what most people claim the MSM does with Harper.

You deplore the tactics until they suit your purpose, which makes you all a bunch of spineless hypocrites.

Like I said, it's odd. I'd have thought someone might have pointed that out sooner, but I can only conclude that most SDAers lack the smarts to see this.

The criticism of Kady's little 'fourth estate' temper tantrum is well deserved, but some of you are starting to sound a bit unhinged. Have any of you read Maclean's lately? Do the names Mark Steyn, Kenneth White, and Barbara Amiel mean nothing to you? It's no Western Standard, but it's hardly the doctrinaire lefty rag some posters here seem to think it is.

Who's Kady O'Malley? And why, precisely, does anyone care what she thinks?

The only time I pick up Maclean's - apart from a few weeks ago in England, and that was only to check whether that was REALLY a photoshoppe of Dubya in a Saddam costure on the cover of my "national magazine" - is to see whether Steyn has written anything that I haven't already seen on his website.

People who have an internet connection and don't have a puppy to train have no need to drop the equivalent of three double-doubles on that silly rag.

Want to do something for the environment? Stop encouraging the Dead Tree Media.

Hey Iberia, you friggin' idiot - I invoke Godwin's Law and you lose, moonbat :) Your opinion is now worth about as much as a dog turd.

The media are professional storytellers, bought and paid for. Their stories may follow reality, may be contrary to reality, or may have nothing to do with reality. Accurate history is usually boring journalism.

A story, to be a good story, should have a beginning, a middle, and an ending; a hero, and a villain; so unlike life, where events flow into each other, wihtout a clear beginning or definite end, and where one person may do both good and ill.

"Fourth estate" - I wonder if the Kady has the faintest idea whence the phrase came (Wikipedia has a good article on the matter). It is evident that these days the "Fourth Estate" largely coincides with the Blogosphere. Especially in Canada.

Factor in Paul Wells, who pushed almost as hard as Stephen harper AND Warren Kinsella to kick Martin to the curb, and I too find it hard to believe anyone thinks Maclean's is a socialist publication. But then, most people here seem to react, rather than read.

When you suspend any and all criticism of your leader, you wind up with a situation that's ripe for abuse.

Criticism of the government is good. Some of it's fair, and some of it isn't. But that doesn't mean you shut down the free press and have the government decide who gets to work as a journalist, as some people here have (unbelievably) pushed for.

I could introduce you to some of my journalist friends from the Balkans, who had fingers broken and were beaten raw with brass knuckles when they refused to cede control of their newspapers and magazines to Milosevic and Tudjman. Yeah, I get a bit upset when a bunch of self-satisfied sheep start bleating for an end to our free press.

You don't know how good we have it here in Canada, and how easily it can be taken away. Give your heads a collective shake, and smarten the f@ck up.

Perry writes, " . . . that doesn't mean you shut down the free press and have the government decide who gets to work as a journalist, as some people here have (unbelievably) pushed for."

Are we reading the same thread?

Please quote the words at SDA that prove your point.

Hey, Troll, is this personal for you? Who cares what Kady O'Malley cares about, 122 comments into this post, if the little vacuous journo slacker even allowed them, says none of us care what she thinks. The point.

Ya think Kady O'Malley and her ilk would ever have the courage of a Kate McMillan to face public scrutiny with a comments enabled blog? Have you got one?

"Illiterate rednecks"?, get a grip, compare and contrast the quality of posters comments with your own stupid drive-by. Loser.

Oops, one more thing, I notice McCleans syndicates Mark Steyn. We know he is a fan of Kate McMillan. Any chance Kady O'Malley's sophomoric drivel is even on his radar screen?

Was Kady O'Malley at the same Irish pub as Randi Rhodes the other night? Just asking...

BTW, her rant welcoming SDA readers was really (not) impressive. I imagine Iberia, ok4ua, and albatross38 were called for consultation of her choice of words and phrases.

"I could introduce you to some of my journalist friends from the Balkans, who had fingers broken and were beaten raw with brass knuckles when they refused to cede control of their newspapers and magazines to Milosevic and Tudjman."

Canadian journalists would roll over if they were force fed a cold latte so don't compare the two moron.

"Have any of you read Maclean's lately? Do the names Mark Steyn, Kenneth White, and Barbara Amiel mean nothing to you?"

Mark Steyn has weight, but I don't know who Ken White is and Barbara Emile is an elitist whose husband apparently is a really big crook.

I read Steyn is other venues. He give Macleans a bit of credibility and that is probably the only reason they are sending him cheques other than he is a Canadian sort of.

Canadians love to brag about their expats. It's just about our only claim to fame. Hardly anyone who anything special stays in this demented place.

I am familiar with Kenneth Whyte though.

Perry and ok4ua, I'm waiting to hear what you have to say re my requests that you substantiate your earlier claims: I'll take no response as proof that you can't.

Somebody quoting Goebbels the national socialist?

caveman:

Invoke away...governments that try to control the dissemination of information on their policies while sliming the opposition deserve the Nazi comparison. Perhaps a Soviet comparison would be better. Wasn't that a Pra(v)da shoe store?

penny: for old media, try "talking AT us".

lookout, her line:
Since I also not infrequently am the object of equally angry accusations of being C/conservative hack.
Orwell deals with this little pretension in a great essay on writing. It's quite sophisticated, you know.

This is what George Orwell had to say about this little pretension in Politics and the English Language:

"One can cure oneself of the not un- formation by memorizing this sentence: A not unblack dog was chasing a not unsmall rabbit across a not ungreen field."

Delicious, eh?

Sorry for garbled semi-edited post:

penny: for old media, try "talking AT us".

lookout, her line:
Since I also not infrequently am the object of equally angry accusations of being C/conservative hack.

This is what George Orwell had to say about this little pretension in Politics and the English Language:
"One can cure oneself of the not un- formation by memorizing this sentence: A not unblack dog was chasing a not unsmall rabbit across a not ungreen field."

Delicious, eh?

Mark Steyn; I read his article on the "Cold civil war"

If this thread is a metaphor battle in the "cold civil war", one side forgot their guns, and is attempting a sneak attack while wearing accordians.

www.macleans.ca/culture/media/article.jsp?content=20071022_110242_110242 - 63k -

de·lude (d-ld)
tr.v. de·lud·ed, de·lud·ing, de·ludes
1. To deceive the mind or judgment of: fraudulent ads that delude consumers into sending in money. See Synonyms at deceive.
2. Obsolete To elude or evade.
3. Obsolete To frustrate the hopes or plans of.

myopia
One entry found.

myopia

Main Entry:
my·o·pia Listen to the pronunciation of myopia
Pronunciation:
\mī-ˈō-pē-ə\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
New Latin, from Greek myōpia, from myōp-, myōps
Date:
circa 1752

1 : a condition in which the visual images come to a focus in front of the retina of the eye resulting especially in defective vision of distant objects 2 : a lack of foresight or discernment : a narrow view of something
— my·o·pic Listen to the pronunciation of myopic Listen to the pronunciation of myopic \-ˈō-pik, -ˈä-\ adjective
— my·o·pi·cal·ly Listen to the pronunciation of myopically \-pi-k(ə-)lē\ adverb

Kady "I-work-for-the-people" O'Malley was a guest on The National tonight.

Mansbridge: "I want to try and get a sense of how devastated (Dion's) party is surrounding him, and I know you (O'Malley) went last night -- they sort of have these weekly gatherings, Wednesday is always a big night for the parties -- you were watching them last night. The Liberals -- what did you notice?"

O'Malley: "Honestly, they were far less dispirited and filled with despair as you would assume reading the sort of legions of columns and editorials..."

You mean, the media wasn't working for the people, but were instead piling on?

"...The Liberals kinda started it by freaking out completely and sort of overblowing the results of that -- in my opinion -- to a degree that the media then noticed, we piled on, that made them more panicky, it's been sort of this weird symbiotic thing ever since..."

Symbiosis: the interaction between two different organisms living in close physical association, typically to the advantage of both; a mutually beneficial relationship between different people.

Hmm, "close association". Are the media -- "working for the people" -- she's referring to, then, really the OPG?

Ahem: "I mean, (the Liberals) don't seem quite as devastated as you would assume they would based on what we're writing in the press, AND, frankly, based on some of the comments that are coming from outside Ottawa..."

In reply to the apparent general assumption of many commentators that there is a liberal (or Liberal?) bias in Canadian media, I would suggest this is not only a faulty assumption, but may actually be the opposite of the truth.

I offer this for consideration: http://www.la-mancha.net/?p=1241

I don't post here often, but, despite disagreeing with Kate and most of her followers on most things, I'll take this opportunity to thank her for allowing a relatively free comments section. It does allow me to chime in occasionally.

Rumor, thank you. It's good to end a day with laughter.

lberia goes from an incorrect media story about the PMO creating a media centre (they're not) and PMSH apparently disliking talking to the press (I wouldn't either) to somehow claiming that the Conservatives are trying to shut down the media and manipulate the message.

In your drug-fuelled hallucinations only, dude... you're completely foolish to suggest that.

Rumor (I assume you're American with that spelling), I would suggest that you go beyond research done by a left-leaning organization such as a university and do a little experiment of your own. Go to each newspaper and read only the first news articles (not the editorials, but the news articles) in each of the major dailies (Toronto Star, Toronto Sun, Globe and Mail, and National Post) about the Throne Speech and highlight only the adjectives and adverbs used in reference to the Conservatives, Liberals and New Democrats.

I posit that the adjectives and adverbs used in relation to the Conservatives will be generally sharp, harsh or negative and those used in relation to the others will be mostly neutral.

I have no problem if the newspapers want to spout their biases in editorials, but just watch how they "flavour" the purportedly unbiased news articles with adjectives and adverbs. The Sun line is generally pro-Conservative, but the others are moderately to vehemently anti-Conservative.

I'm fairly certain that with a bit of Googling, I can find another "research paper" that claims the opposite of what the McGill study found (probably American, though). I know it is easy to find quotes from old-time news reporters and even the newspapers themselves that point out that the print media is overwhelmingly liberal in philosophy, with many owners being overt Liberal supporters.

Do your own research and see with your own eyes. Then come back and tell us there is no bias.

lberia: "...governments that try to control the dissemination of information on their policies while sliming the opposition deserve the Nazi comparison."

Hey, you could be talking about the Librano$. They controlled the dissemination of information by schmoozing with and doling out perks and privileges to the members of the MSM, day in, day out. Their friends in the media got seats in the Senate (cash for life) and all sorts of other bon-bons.

You could say that the Canadian MSM is, by and large, in the Librano$' pockets. They're now discovering what a small, dark, cramped place that is--but they're not quite sure how to extricate themselves, except to slime Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his CPC.

What a show! 'Sweet for those of us who figured out this Librano/MSM Schmooze Fest a long time ago.

PMSH basically is giving the MSM and the PPG enough rope to hang themselves. He understands, like most of the rest of us, that he is NOT beholden to the members of the MSM. He's accountable only to the electorate of Canada.

Get your facts straight, lberia. It seems like you're spinning in the wind and grasping at straws. 'Not a position of strength or a place from which to pontificate.

Rumor, please read batb's expose on the Liberals' buying of the MSM with Canadians' hard earned tax $$.

I'm frustrated by the drive-bys of people like you, ok4ua, and Perry (neither has answered my question), all apparent lefties who never provide anything but generalizations. 'Not good enough, guys, for a proper discussion. Put your cards on the table. Provide your evidence--that means facts, not just vapid, usually dead wrong, opinion.

If your posts were term papers, you'd all get F. Let's have a rewrite from all of you with some meat.

MND, thanks for the Orwell! (And reading Kady's comments on the CBC news, it seems she can't even string together an oral sentence: she sounds semi-literate. F for her too!)

LBeria,

Since you don't like governments sliming the opposition, you must have been livid when Trudeau, Chretien and Martin not only slimed the opposition but slimed their supporters, fellow Canadians, as well. Then again, maybe you weren't.

Democracies can't function without a free press; Constitutions understand that and provide for one. However, nowhere does any Constitution require the government to do the work of the free press and hand everything to them on a platter. The ink-stained wretches are pissed at Harper because he's making them do their own damn jobs. Boo friggin' hoo to the lot of them.

Well, Rumor, the more positive stories about the CPC are likely a result of the more solid message they provide. Sometimes even the liberal media have problems putting a negative spin on a story.

How I interpret the 1% net positive media rating for Harper that you reference, is that if the media saw Harper walk on water, the number who reported it accurately would only be 1% more than the number who titled it "Harper can't swim".

Rick ---- that's about it.

Canadians say PMSH walks on water for them.

G&M Headline

* Harper Can't Swim *

If Kady's a kitten, then I guess, you're a coug.

Good old Lloyd, down in the gutter with the rest of his buddies.
You immediately smell lib troll when Lloyd pops up with his witty and well researched comments /sarc off....
What is really strange is all the trolls pile on here and do exactly what Kady accused SDA readers of. Which strangley enough was not what was happening in this post until the Trolls came in and did it to Kate....

So fascist anonymous posters who heap sexist slurs on O'Malley are Good People, while someone who turns Kate's sexist headline back upon her is a Bad Person?
I just love the logic of you loonies.

One time at band camp, I held a loon in my palm.

"One time at band camp, I held a loon in my palm"

Good for you Lloyd Fister, might I suggest you go find the loon and ask it if it will trade brains with you again.

Hey, Lloyd, my friend, "anonymous posters", get real, and you are really "Lloyd Fister"? Got a valid ID you can hold up to the screen for us? Any clue as to how idiotic you are, I mean, this is the internet after all, perhaps you are poor Kady's mother. Who knows. Who cares.

The only thing that really counts in a dialogue on the internet is substance. Try to hold that thought for a few minutes. And, "fascists", so hackneyed, so over used. The last province of a second class mind. Try harder, my friend.

Watch it Penny! You'll have Lloyd crying and heading up from the basement to tell his mommy...

Special kudos to the mouth breathers who accuse Kady of being "statist" when she's actually arguing against state power over the media.
But as long as its Tory state control and not Liberal state control it's OK, right?
Right?
Me, I prefer press freedom.

You all can't see me but he has me punching the air...vive la press!

The media 'dumbs-down' the news for the dumb.

Lloyd Fister,

Congrats you steaming pile. You managed to right the world by being sexist from the left. Because of idiots like you we are able to balance the universe. Anon idiots critique Kady's article by referencing things other than her opinions... but it's ok, because you've come to save the day by slurring someone who wasn't making the comments.

How does someone like you actually manage to get up in the morning? I mean really... you must have something incredibly wrong with you to have so many warts on your personality.

Back to the post at hand:
The Government of Canada is "The Conservative Government" when the Conservatives are in charge. It was "The Conservative Government" when the PC was in charge. But strangely, somehow, it's just "The Government" when the liberals are in charge.

I suggest you open your eyes and read something by Peter C. Newman and realise that the former editor of the Globe actually and actively tried in his former tenure to swing opinion for the Liberals. Maybe you should listen to the CBC and watch Christina Lewand take Harper's indifference to the Jewish Canadian Community and spin it as indifference to the war in Lebanon.

You could also pull your head out of your ass and realise that there are many people here who form cogent opinion based on years of interest in politics.

Good night and good luck.

Actually, Jon, I was sniping at Kate's headline, "A Kitten Spits". I doubt she would use that headline talking about a blog posting by Warren Kinsella.
Now, about Globe editors being in pols' pockets. Come back and tell me all about it when the name "William Thorsell" means something to you. He was editor of the Globe in the 1980s. He was also so far up Mulroney's ass he needed a flashlight to find his way home.
I don't sleep as well as I used to. It's because I know my history, and I've seen what happens when fascists bend the will of the press to their agenda.

Lloyd, I invite you to read the link, in which Ms. O'Malley refers to journalists as "lions".

When you've returned, I'll be waiting here for your retraction and apology.

Say, what ever happened to that blogger "Mark Bourrie?", it's been awhile since we shook hands with him, eh Lloyd?