Friday, January 11, 2008

Stupid is as stupid does - Updated with another MSM POV

Friday Update: Taxpayers deserve better from their national network - Calgary Herald via National Newswatch.

Why don't we dispose of any pretense, and get the powers that be to name the CBC as the Liberal party's official communication team?

The CBC is unique -- and therefore uniquely accountable to its viewers -- because it is funded by the state. As such, it has a particular mandate to present the Canadian story...

...The CBC ombudsman is apparently looking into the incident, but it isn't likely to be the transparent investigation that is needed to truly serve the public good.

There has been no word of any investigation within the Liberal party.

Yet, all of them remain on the public payroll...

Awesome letter in the Post - Media's silence is shameful by Bill Parish of Ottawa.

Check out Steve Janke's Karlheinz Schreiber Timeline to see why Pablo Rodriguez and any complicit others are on a fool's mission.

Excellent! Let's keep it going.

* * * *

(Original Thursday post)

Adam Radwanski weighs in on Pablogate - She just got caught.

According to Adam, "it's common practice for journalists to use MPs as they try to advance their stories." Apparently, the unfortunate part apparently is that one got caught - Someone who works for a publicly-funded broadcaster.

Adam calls it a stupid question - "For suggesting a really stupid question, the reporter deserves some flack. But for suggesting a question at all, she shouldn't get raked over the coals any more than a whole lot of other reporters."

Instead he puts the onus on the one(s) who actually went ahead and used the questions (in an Ethics committee).

I think Adam is making sense here. Is the person who asks someone to do something shady actually more in the wrong than the person who agrees to the idea and carries it out?

Of course not. Someone in the Liberal party obviously made a stupid, unethical, politically-motivated decision.

Time for Liberal party to step up to the plate and divulge the details. Who was in on this, and how high up the ladder of authority did it go?

SDA - Mr. Carlin: Tear down that wall! - with interesting comments and speculation why we're not hearing much about this from MSM. I guess the CBC will never hire me now.

Speaking of the CBC, check out The Tea Makers - Guest blogger: In the court of the crimson logo.


Alberta Girl said...

Exactly!! This is what I have been saying all along - it is fine for a reporter to try to get a story any way they can - the unethical people are the Liberals who actually decided to derail the ethics committee mandate in their ongoing attempt to smear the Harper Government.

Time for them to face up to their wrongdoing.

Tomm said...


" high up the ladder of authority did it go?..."


I'm just being facetious. The CBC question was clumsy, Pablo's delivery, clumsier, and the Chair caught with his weiney out.

But it is more funny than nefarious. The House should be literally rocking with the guffaws of all parties the next time Pablo steps up to ask a question.

His credibility, like a flaming ball of shit, has just exited out the freaking window. Clearly he (along with Karen Redman) are star cabinet material in a Dion Dream Cabinet. Right up there with the two folks that vaulted Dion over Bob Rae, Omar Alhambra, and Navdeep Singh Bains.

Pablo, "CBC sock puppet" Rodriquez. Kind of has a ring to it.


Anonymous said...

Uh. I guess the CBC can be caught doing a lot of things by this admission. (real conservative)

Ron said...

I'm glad to see this is getting some play outside BT -- conservative complaints are dismissed when they speak of
(L)liberal media bias so when there is undisputed evidence of the collusion it needs to be brought into the light of day. Don't be too quick to let the journalist off the hook though because it is quite apparent that she was trying to create negative news for the Conservatives not just report events occuring. I am curious also to know if there was any quid pro quo expected --- i.e. ask the question and you'll get good press from the CBC or if you give Dion an easy ride, we'll let you ask a question of Mulroney at the committee hearing. Politicians and journalists don't usually do things out of the goodness of their hearts - both are scratch my back type of businesses.

OMMAG said...

Picture this...
Two kids are in a convenience store eyeballing the candy.
One kid says to other I bet you can get away with stealing a few chocolate bars.
Second kid says ... wellll I dunno..
First one says .... go on I'll help cover for you.
second kid falls for it and pockets the goodies. Gets caught and guess who is long gone.

So who is to blame?

They're both little SOBs and both deserve to be taken to the woodshed.
BTW - AGirl ... did you think that the LIberals were going to do anything else than abuse this process from the getgo?

This is exactly what Liberals do ALL the time and the MSM helps out wherever they can.
It does not matter which media org or which tool got caught in the candy shop and Radwanski is displaying the typical relativism of the privileged. Just because he sees everyone doing it it's ok! Just blame the other guy who's not in your private club is the sentiment he expresses in his words.
There are NO innocents in this!
- The venal politics of the Liberal party deserve rebuke and contempt
- The failure of the MSM to seriously condemn the actions of either CBC (Erikson) or the LIberal MP's who participated deserves rebuke and contempt
- The actions and behaviour of the MPs deserve rebuke and contempt
- Radwanski for being a simple KNOB deserves it as well

As for the CBC - This WILL be just another nail in the coffin of that rotting corpse.

cherenkov said...

alberta girl: if you think what Krista (or whoever) did is okay, then I respectfully disagree. I don't think it's fine for a reporter to have political bias and to try to manipulate an event. Was she trying to "get a story" or create a story? Is this what we should expect from our public broadcaster? Funny how I respect the BBC so much more than the CBC.

missisauga tom said...

For a long time I have admired the committee's chair, Paul Szabo. He is he a very qualified person - C.A., MBA etc. He seems to be a very ethical person. But, in this case, I think there are a few questions that the media need to put to him.

First, was he in the loop when he allowed the CBC's question to be asked? The question was so far removed from the committee's mandate that it should have been immediately ruled out of order. Mulroney immediately protested and tried to have the terms of reference read into the proceedings. Szabo refused that point blank. Why?

Was Szabo tipped in advance that this might help the Liberals by trying to throw some mud that just might stick?

But we'll never know. The wagons have been circled. These questions just won't be asked.

Anonymous said...

rather than the Liberals step up to the plate and own this, where's the media and other parties chasing them down and forcing some measure of accountability.

The Lieberals will not volunteer.

Szabo, and the other Liberals on the ethics panel should be yanked.

Anonymous said...

better yet, the tampering with the ethics commission, Harper can now easily put an end to this ethics commission.

Seems also that the David Johnston report suggests no reason to further the Mulroney-Schriber enquiry....Harper says the report and his response due out Monday.

I say, waste not one more red cent on this enquiry and ship Schreiber to Germany asap

Greg said...

So what do you thing about Kinsella's charge that the Alliance and the Post were in cahoots over "Shawinigate"? Should Stock Day have to answer questions about ethics, or is this just bad when the Libs do it?

Anonymous said...

kinsella's the one to ask greg.

Anonymous said...

nice try Greg - nothing to do with this ethics committee.

and I use the term loosely.

Alberta Girl said...

"BTW - AGirl ... did you think that the LIberals were going to do anything else than abuse this process from the getgo?"

Absolutely not!!

And don't get me wrong - I think that the CBC and this reporter were in the wrong as it is evident that they are out to get Mulroney and hopefully Harper by taking this line of questioning.

My only concern is that the focus seems to be solely on the CBC and I think the Liberal party was more guilty in that their "ethics" said it was OK to actually use the question.

The candy store story sums it up quite nicely.

And Greg - if you have the same kind of "proof" that is available in this situation to prove your statements - then bring it forward.

Believe me, for every negative story slanted negatively towards the Liberals - I can pick out 100 negative slanted stories about the conservatives.
So if you want to get into that match - let's go......

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Kinsella's post is here, BTW.

You have to wonder about the authenticity of a story that is prefaced by the words, "And no one has ever, ever repudiated what I provide to you, below, as a public service."

nothing to do with this ethics committee.

Exactly. Nor with a publicly funded public broadcaster.

Anonymous said...

As a taxpayer and CPC supporter, I am not willing to excuse the CBC so easily.

Maybe if there was just the odd incident of bias. Perhaps if these poor judgment calls were not always against the CPC. Possibly if the CBC was more balanced instead of blatantly progressive. I suppose if they were a private broadcaster.

But that is not the case. These are not isolated incidents, they are a clear pattern. Worse is that they are using taxpayer money to help one political party. Yet at least 30%-37% of Canadians support conservative ideas.

Maybe they should cut funding by that amount since they are only catering to progressive Canadian. Well,OK, give them an extra percent or so in credit for Rex Murphy.


Anonymous said...

I think we have a problem here... What credibility will this "ethics committee" now have to investigate Mr. Mulroney?... The liberals have been saying all along, they only want the truth!!, well don't we deserve the truth as well?... It now looks like we have liberal members of that ethics committee who were in collusion with a member of a publically owned media - the CBC crafting questions to be asked in a House of Parliament committee, all trying to bring down our present Government!!.... WE all know the CBC spent millions of dollars trying to trash Mr. Mulroney in a "Fifth Estate" show, and this was just a carry over. We have liberal members of that committee, Mr. Thibault starting the questions off on Spectrum, and the Chair quickley ruled in favour of this line of questioning. He knew what was coming!... It always took him some time to rule on anything else... this was an instant decision on his part, no hestitation at all!..... We know Pablo could hardly read the English questions, certainly not comfortable for him, and now we know someone else made them up!... Now we have the story, maybe the CBC fired their reporter, but what about the members of the liberal party that were on that committee delivering those questions?...So we have the ethics committee stating up again, what does that mean, doesn't it only make sense, that those members who were in collusion with the CBC reporter also be fired!. How are we going to clean up this mess unless they are, what are they going to do, grab another reporter and keep on going... and laugh behind Canadians backs for allowing them to do so...We must demand answers before that committee starts up again in January.... or it will be continued to be infested with corruption!

Anonymous said...

Another question I have, how come the media never picked up on the story about Mr. Thibault VISITNG Mr. Schriver in jail several times before the hearings even started?... Dosn't that kind of seem like the jury meeting with the witness prior to tria?. Mr. Thibault was asked on T.V. if he visited with Mr. Schriber when he will still in prison, he said "yes", he had....No pick up from the media at all! imagine, if a Tory had gone and visited with him before this committee hearing even started, what would the front pages be saying? Doesn't this just start to smell in all directions...If the media is not infested with all liberals, tell me please why we don't get any negative coverage on them?

Anonymous said...

-Mike Duffy said that most MSM won't touch this because CBC "hires many of the country's freelance journalists"

- Although Cretin (To cut Martin's legs) changed the rules and Harper followed suit and cut out big size/corporation donations for political parties and as a result the Libranos are in financial dissaray they still have 1.5 B$'s a year of tax dollars via CBC they can count on...The Conservatives have no media promoters except TV spots attacks paid by their own grass roots. CTV seems to be slowly going towards the centre, so we get more balance but by no means not a Conservative mouthpiece.

"These are not isolated incidents, they are a clear pattern. Worse is that they are using taxpayer money to help one political party. Yet at least 30%-37% of Canadians support conservative ideas."

- There is no way Harper is going to try and shutdown the CBC with a minority...I doubt with a majority that he would even consider it as it would be reported as an unemployment creator (During a recession or not).
What might happen slowly, is more exposure of bias to wake up Couch potato/Simpsons watching Joe so that at least a major clean up could be launched within the Mother corp.
Another idea I would like would be to break up the 1.5B$'s into 2 separate entities.
CBC would have to make due with 750 M and finance the rest if they desire and a new public broadcaster (Right leaning) like Foxnews (Call it Lynx news for Canada) that could take half the CBC's current staff if need be.
At least Canadians would have a choice...BUT WAIT, THERE'S THE CRTC to contend with!...What a country!

Yep, Lynx news with Joanne as it's "Mansbridge"...SWEET!
Add Rex Murphy as a political commentator.


Grind a Grit

Greg said...

Let me get this straight. Is the issue that the CBC is publicly financed and so should not criticize or report critically on the government in any way? Is that true for all governments or just Conservative governments? Are you suggesting that the CBC just be the mouthpiece for PMO press releases? Would you feel the same way if the Liberals were in power?

I think you all have a strange idea of how journalism should work in a public broadcaster. Canadians do not want the CBC to be the equivalent to Pravda (and if you think about it, I doubt you would either), parroting the line of the government of the day. Non-partisan does not mean "Say what the government says because we like the party in power".

As for the relevance of the Kinsella bit, it speaks to the all pervasive nature of this activity on the Hill. Paul Wells has mentioned it too. So, if you are going to condemn the Libs and CBC for doing it, you have condemn all parties.

Anonymous said...

"Let me get this straight. Is the issue that the CBC is publicly financed and so should not criticize or report critically on the government in any way?"

ALL WE WANT IS B-A-L-A-N-C-E and F-A-I-R-N-E-S-S...Something I have very seldom seen from the Mother Corp when it comes to politics not to mention other topics like AGW for example.

Grind a Grit

Anonymous said...

I am not only talking about the CBC completely, but the CBC and liberal members of an ethics committee that is again going to be meeting this coming January have both been caught doing something not ethical! Now, the CBC is suppose to be doing something about their part... but what about the liberal members of that committee who were also part of the wrong doing?... Are we going to permit them to continue on in their role, knowing full well, they did something that is not right... and got caught!... and allow them to continue on with their corruptive ways, grabbing another reporter for Pablo and keep on going... or are we going to demand to find out and also have them fired?... Think about it, isn't it wrong to have liberal members of an ethics committee doing things that are not ethical....They should be fired as well! Let's have an investigation on them as well, before we continue to allow them to participate in a hearing and laugh about it behind our backs?

Anonymous said...

Hey, I like Grind a Grits idea. Of course the ultimate solution is to eliminate publicly funded broadcasters altogether. In the interim though a parallel but conservative public broadcaster would give many Canadians a voice. It would be interested to see what the ratings of each would be.

If successful, it would maybe open the door to give conservative Canadians a voice and choice in other public institutions.

For example, public education. In addition to the current progressive/socialist public schools there should be conservative/capitalist public schools. Schools that teach a more classic education with the 3 R's, competition, discipline and demanding high academic standards to graduate. Then give parents the choice of where to send their children (and tax money). Track the abilities and outcomes of each school system.

The beauty of the parallel yet still public systems would be that the progressive could not scream that it is private and elitist.


Swift said...

If I were an news editor and an competitor's reporter was caught with their hand in the cookie jar, I would likely headline the story. Unless, of course, I knew my own reporters were stealing cookies. Wasn't somebody quoted as saying "everybody does it?"

The first blow has been struck. it seems that AGW scientists may not even know how the greenhouse works. An alternative to the AGW bible has been presented at ClimateAudit. When will the next occur. Only the Shadow knows.

lanarklady said...

There is a crack in the dam and the pressure must be kept up. The true motives of the liberals have been exposed by their BBF's the CBC. There is zero use in extending this farce and like alberta girl i agree its time to extend the pressure to demand an explanation from the LPC. "there is something rotten in the state of denmark"

Anonymous said...

I do believe we will get to the bottom of things. Did I just hear correctly that Harper has heard back from Johnston and will go ahead with a public inquiry?

Why? Because the Liberals don't want it now.

Why? Because they're in it up to their eyeballs.

Why? Because then maybe the collusion and dirt that's cropped up will surface.

Why? Because all bets of a Liberal forced election would be OFF THE TABLE.

Why? Because Harper's a smart cookie.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Did I just hear correctly that Harper has heard back from Johnston and will go ahead with a public inquiry?

Yes, I heard that too. I wonder if it will include the Chretien era.

Anonymous said...

right joanne! Having this inquiry is beautiful strategy on Harper's part.
This could tie the opposition up for months, and months, and why not, the opposition have nothing else do they?

paulsstuff said...

Note to Kinsella.

1. The Post is not a publically funded entity, the CBC and any other institution run with taxpayer funding should be non-partisan.

2. This is not the first time the CBC has been caught misleading the Canadian public.

3. Uh, Warren, Shawinigate was indeed a scandal. Chretien lied in the HofC for two years about approaching the head of the BDC. And you do realize the former head of the BDC was found to have been harrassed and found to have been the target of Chretien cronies trying to destroy him finacially as well as his reputation. I'll be happy to provide a link to the judges decision. And hey, whatever became of that soiled paper napkin where Jean sold his shares, the ones he realized years later he never got paid for.

4. Again Warren, Adscam was real, and the Liberal Party of Canada was found to be involved in an illegal kickback scheme.

5. You state on your blog the Alliance knew in advance of what the story in the post would be ahead of time. I'm assuming that this means the post was not giving Stockwell Day the questions then, that the Conservative and Alliance members were bright enough to come up with their own questions, unlike one Pablo Rodriguez.

6. How would you feel if the Liberal's interfered in say, Canada Post, or the Canadian Mint operations to benefit themselves.Ooops, oh yeah, back to that Gomery guy again.

7. How is Lawrence MaCualey coming along with clearing his name?(Wilson ruled former solicitor general Lawrence MacAuley breached conflict of interest rules by directing government projects and contracts to friends and family, leading to MacAuley's resignation.)

8. And hey, how is Art Eggleton enjoying that senate job.(He was re-elected again in the 2000 election, but ran into trouble two years later when it was revealed that he gave a government contract to his ex-girlfriend Maggie Maier a $36,500 contract to write a report on post-traumatic stress disorder and environmental illness among Canadian soldiers. The deal was discovered by the Ottawa Citizen. It was one of a series of minor scandals affecting Liberal ministers at the time. On May 26, 2002, Eggleton was dismissed from Cabinet as due to the revelations. Another misstep in January 2002, when Mr. Eggleton as Defence Minister omitted to tell his Liberal colleagues that Canadian Forces in Afghanistan had detained persons and transferred them to the United States (who ultimately put them in Guantanamo Bay) led to questions about his competence in the House, and a widely reported rebuke from the PM. His career never recovered from this error.

As a backbencher, he became critical of Chrétien, and expressed his support for Paul Martin. Despite this, he was not returned to cabinet when Martin became Prime Minister in December 2003. On May 13, 2004, Eggleton announced he would not be a candidate in the 2004 federal election making way for the nomination of Ken Dryden as the Liberal candidate in York Centre. He was appointed to the Senate by Paul Martin on March 24, 2005.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Good one, Paul.

Möbius said...

I think you all have a strange idea of how journalism should work in a public broadcaster. Canadians do not want the CBC to be the equivalent to Pravda (and if you think about it, I doubt you would either), parroting the line of the government of the day. Non-partisan does not mean "Say what the government says because we like the party in power".

I ask myself why any broadcaster, in a world of many privately supported broadcasters, is reporting the news on the government dime. It's an anachronism, and should be disbanded.

The fact that it's liberal-biased is secondary.

Anonymous said...

It's time for Canadians to decide the fate of CBC. Let's put it to a referendum with the next federal election.

Let the people tell the gov't how they want their money spent.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

The fact that it's liberal-biased is secondary.

Now there's a good point too.

Greg said...

It's time for Canadians to decide the fate of CBC. Let's put it to a referendum with the next federal election.

I dislike referendums as a rule because the no side always has an unfair advantage. I would rather the CPC run openly on the privatization of the CBC.

Anonymous said...

yes, I agree. privatize the CBC would force it to compete for viewers. No CBC.

Would that hold true for the provincial gov't and TVO?