Just another day in Ottawa…

So, this tweet stream caught my attention yesterday,

Okay, now I'm intrigued. Anyone else seeing backdrops, etc. being brought into #HoC committees? Is it permitted? #cdnpoli
Maybe @DenisCoderre can tell us whether there was any discussion at #CIMM about the backdrop behind @kenneyjason. #cdnpoli

(5 minutes later, Coderre raises a point of order)

Hey it seems @DenisCoderre heard us! He's now complaining about the "advertising" behind @kenneyjason at #CIMM #cdnpoli

and then Candice Malcolm, Jason Kenney’s Press Secretary, sent me this note,

Looks like the Liberals are having trouble with their more limited budgets these days.

Comments

comments

  • James

    And the band played on… These people are so out of touch with reality it’s just sad.

  • http://twitter.com/CanadianSense CanadianSense

    Liberals like to hear and read their own copy. The bubble they inhabit was reduced on May 2.They don’t realize they have not hit the floor yet. They can’t fathom being reduced to zero. (Wait for it)

     The left wing media can continue to provide their talking points: we only ask the taxpayer stop being asked to pay the bill.

  • Liz J

    Liberal media hacks are really desperate.

  • batb

    O.M.G.

    When is Susan I’m-Having-a-Bad-Hair-Day-Again Delacourt going to get over herself and her political party of choice (seeing as her brother used to work for Joe Volpe)?

    There’s a time to hang it up and move on. But, Suzie doesn’t get it. No one really cares what she thinks.

  • Matt

    So what was the actual explanation/justification for the backdrops, beyond the jab at the Liberals and the mainstream media? Or was that the end of it?

  • DougM

    SusanDelacourt  “Is it permitted?”+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    An informed “political” reporter would know.  A competent one would have found the answer before exposing  their ignorance…..

  • DougM

    There is a codicil in the media where they put exclamation marks around descriptions they have to report but don’t believe.   Delcourt’s exclamation marks around “Statesman” for the PM in describing this article speak volumes about her integrity.   Still the article is better, more reasoned and better supported than one gets in Canadian media.   They do call it right

    http://phillipsblog.dailymail.co.uk/2011/11/a-statesman-for-the-west.html

  • DougM

    There is a codicil in the media where they put exclamation marks around descriptions they have to report but don’t believe.   Delcourt’s exclamation marks around “Statesman” for the PM in describing this article speak volumes about her integrity.   Still the article is better, more reasoned and better supported than one gets in Canadian media.   They do call it right

    http://phillipsblog.dailymail.co.uk/2011/11/a-statesman-for-the-west.html

  • Gabby in QC

    Journalist, media critic, and philosopher Walter Lippmann “argued that people—including journalists—are more apt to believe “the pictures in their heads” than come to judgment by critical thinking. … 
    Though a journalist himself, he held no assumption of news and truth being synonymous. … A journalist’s version of the truth is subjective and limited to how he constructs his reality. The news, therefore, is “imperfectly recorded” and too fragile to bear the charge as “an organ of direct democracy.” [From Wiki]

    Note the number of “journalists” that focused on the use of backdrops rather than on the substance of Minister Kenney’s presentation:
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/why-does-jason-kenney-need-props-at-committee/article2247872/
    Gloria Galloway
    Colin Horgan
    Kady O’Malley
    Susan Delacourt
    And perhaps others.

  • Liz J

    As far as I know they’re all presenting themselves as neutral,  so unless they purposely ignored the substance of the presentation for reasons we can guess, they all need a refresher course in journalism.

  • batb

    Both Gloria Galloway — husband in her case — and Susan Delacourt — brother in hers — have personal connections with the Liberal Party of Canada. How do I know? Is it because they’ve  disclosed it?

    No.

    I know because I’ve Googled them and discovered these connections. I call this dishonest journalism, utterly lacking in integrity — and they expect us to listen to them? They expect us to give them credibility?

    Dream on, ladies (using the term lightly).

  • Gabby in QC

    Well, personally, I wouldn’t conclude the two mentioned are Liberals because their spouse/sibling are Liberals. Opposites DO attract, like the famous American couple James Carville (Dem) & Mary Matalin (Rep) prove.  

    Just because the two journalists you mention are married to or related to Liberals doesn’t make them Liberals. Jack Layton’s father started out as a Liberal activist and ended up as a Progressive Conservative cabinet minister.

    Even Stephen Harper did not start out as a Conservative. “Harper became involved in politics as a member of his high school’s Young Liberals Club.” [Wiki] 

    What they themselves say/do rather than on their personal relationships is what informs my opinion of people, be they journalists or whatever else.

  • http://twitter.com/EnoughHarper Enough Harper

    funny, because what caught everyone else’s eye was the big, gigantic signs that had been set up directly behind him. They were set up to…. wait for it…. grab attention.

    I know you conservatives like your blinders so you don’t need to see anything that you don’t want to; where can I get a pair? How much do they cost? I figure if you have an extra pair or two lying around you can give them to the evil liberal media (all of whom endorsed your party during the election) so that maybe next time they wont see the BIG, GIGANTIC signs.— my understanding is that big/gigantic things often go unnoticed, especially when they are new.

  • batb

    Gabby, I’m not saying they’re Liberal$, but it you’ve read Susan Delacourt or heard both her and Gloria Galloway on CBC panels, it’s pretty clear they’re not Conservatives either! In fact, they both appear to have a mighty animus towards PM Harper and his party.

    You’ve got to admit that James Carville and Mary Matalin are quite an extraordinary couple and somewhat an exception.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_NHQAE2ZEBY7GEEPPX2I2URJS6M rastass

    EH! You want a big shiny sign too? You have the Toronto Star who formally endorsed the NDP.

    All the other endorsement you breathlessly profess, were correctly, and preciently for the Conservatives.

    The “editorial boards” of most newspapers all across Canada endorsed the Conservatives, wisely. 

    The majority of opinion columnists within those papers were nowhere near as supportive. They were outright antagonistic towards the Conservative candidates. The vast majority of  the Ottawa-centric press gallery led that pack, along with their useful periodic left wing academics at UofO, York, Concordia and on and on.

  • Liz J

    Forget the “gigantic signs” eh EH!,  you may want to grasp the more ominous signs concerning the Liberals and the NDPQ. Neither are in any way fit or prepared to govern in the foreseeable future.
    Accept we are in good hands under the leadership of Stephen Harper, he’s not perfect, he’s got a lot of stuff to clean up after the Liberal romp. We’re still dealing with Trudeaus’s handiwork.

  • Gabby in QC

    Batb, and all I’m saying is that one cannot immediately conclude that because one’s spouse, sibling, or parent/relative is of a particular political persuasion, then one is sure to be the same. That is what I understood from your previous comment. The journalists I mentioned as having focused on the trivia rather than on the substance of the committee hearing surely have arrived at their own political persuasion, independently of their hubby or sibling.

  • batb

    I totally agree with you that it’s not a given which political way a person will swing simply because their brother or husband supports a certain party. It’s just that in the case of Delacourt and Galloway, I’ve been listening to their opinions for a very long time, which weigh heavily in favour of the Liberal$ and contra the Conservatives.

    I wasn’t referring specifically to the committee.

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    I’ll be deleting this thread soon.

  • Liz J

    Anything to do with niggling?

  • batb

    My goodness, Stephen. I just realized that all of my comments have been deleted, plus a few by others. I said nothing that wasn’t factual. I did have a little fun with Susan Delacourt’s appearance — at least, I thought it was fun. Obviously, you didn’t.

  • batb

    I tried, Liz, to explain some of the reasons why some of the journalists mentioned by Gabby might not be neutral, but my comments have been deleted.

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    Let’s raise the bar.

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    This isn’t the place to gossip about the personal lives of others.

  • batb

    Excuse me, Stephen. Nothing I said was gossip. It was fact. What I said about Gloria Galloway and Susan Delacourt and their connections with the Liberal Party of Canada is well-documented.

    I’m sorry and disappointed that you construed factual comments about Canadian journalists as “gossip.”

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    Keep the personal stuff off the site, please.

  • batb

    Please explain to me, Stephen, what’s “personal” about family connections which journalists have with political parties? The connections I pointed out are well-documented and, IMO, have a direct bearing on the credibility of what these journalists write about politics in Canada. The journalists I mentioned are political commentators, for pity’s sake.

    If they wrote columns on cooking, for instance, or book or movie reviews, their connection to a particular political party would be completely irrelevant. When they write columns, however, on politics, political connections which might prejudice their opinions are game for fair comment.

  • batb

    Please explain to me, Stephen, what’s “personal” about family connections which journalists have with political parties? The connections I pointed out are well-documented and, IMO, have a direct bearing on the credibility of what these journalists write about politics in Canada. The journalists I mentioned are political commentators, for pity’s sake.

    If they wrote columns on cooking, for instance, or book or movie reviews, their connection to a particular political party would be completely irrelevant. When they write columns, however, on politics, political connections which might prejudice their opinions are game for fair comment.

  • Liz J

    Agree with you batb, those who follow politics closely are well aware of the situation with our political journalists/commentators, their biases  seem to always seep through.   Conflict of interest comes to mind if they’re posing as neutral. May be an entrenchment, a chummy familiarity resulting from long  terms of Liberal power.

    At this point all we can do is consider the sources of all info and do our own checking.  It’s obvious they’re not happy with Stephen Harper, he gets his greatest accolades from foreign press. It always amuses me to hear how Stephen Harper doesn’t like the media even from those who still idolize Pierre Trudeau who also didn’t like the media. We don’t elect a person to be chummy with, we elect a person to take care of the affairs of the country to benefit us all.

    Sun News network is an  example of investigative journalism in action. Some probably tag them as “tabloid” or “gossip” and compare them negatively to Fox News in the US.

  • batb

    Exactly, Liz. It’s the conflict of interest that concerns me — and if pointing it out is “gossip,” well, blow me away! I consider it a public service.

    We all know, for instance, that Ezra Levant once ran for the Conservatives and that his political proclivities colour his political commentary. It’s often helpful to know the back story of issues — isn’t that what this blog is about? — so, pointing out what might explain apparent biases in the media is hardly gossip. The Left, when dealing with those with whom they disagree or who disagree with them, seeks to silence journalists on the right side of the political spectrum (see http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/featured/prime-time/867432237001/know-your-enemy/1295692307001) whereas those on the Right use arguments to point out the fallacies and weaknesses in their political opponents’ arguments.

    Freedom of expression doesn’t just mean voicing concerns the way others want you to. Pithiness of expression, it seems to me, is also an option. This is Stephen Taylor’s blog, so he’s entitled to delete any comment he wants, but I’m disappointed and somewhat dismayed.

  • Liz J

    Well, batb you and I have been commenting on Conservative blogs for many moons, we sort of feel we are among friends  and can speak about how we perceive a given situation.

    We can’t always ignore the elephant in the room, doing so we risk being our own worst enemies.

  • batb

    Again, ‘agreed, Liz. Unacknowledged elephants in the room tend to take up all of the oxygen. My best bet is to step outside for some fresh air …

  • batb

    Again, ‘agreed, Liz. Unacknowledged elephants in the room tend to take up all of the oxygen. My best bet is to step outside for some fresh air …

  • Liz J

    Before I also go for fresh air on this beautifully mild late November day let me say I am very appreciative of our great Conservative blog hosts who give us a forum to discuss issues of the day that affect our interests, they are tops.  It’s hard work and dedication but commentators are an integral part of the equation.

  • Liz J

    OOPS, should read “commenters” are an integral part …….

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    If Sun News is your example of investigative journalism in action, you should update your “who is married to ‘Liberal bias'” scorecards.

    I think it’s also quite disgraceful for the Ottawa Citizen to write about which MP is shacking up with which staffer, etc.

    People are people. This town is small enough. Many things colour our bias. Marriage is a financial relationship where a couple can file a joint tax return and share assets, so I am sympathetic about this as a topic of discussion re: bias.  However, it is still somewhat offputting to critique a professional via their spouse. I think it is disgusting it when some ignorant fools in the media critique our elected officials via their spouses and families. I am certainly not pure on this either, but I think I’ve found an appropriate balance that is well-regulated by the fact that I put my name on everything I write.

    I have, however, found that Ottawa is violating its self-imposed restriction on discussing these matters, of late. Perhaps it’s because Frank Magazine has left a vacuum.

  • Liz J

     Understood. I concur.

  • batb

    Stephen, I wasn’t critiquing any “professional” via their spouse — or, in one case, their brother.

    I was questioning the professionalism of these journalists and was, I believe, making a fair criticism of them as, over the years, they have demonstrated a rather consistent animus towards both the Conservative Party and its leader. I pointed out that their biases might have something to do with the fact that intimates of theirs have official connections to the Liberal Party of Canada, and I fail to see how this is “gossip.” If you define gossip as “idle talk or rumor, especially about the personal or private affairs of others,” that is not what I was doing. Mentioning the well-documented connections with the Liberals is fact, not idle talk or rumor.

    I fail to see what is unfair or below-the-belt about this comment. It’s a factual statement of where their bias could conceivably come from, seeing as the topic of this thread seems to be media bias via Tweets — and how the media is providing not only questions but points of order for the Liberals.

  • http://drdawgsblawg.ca Dr. Dawg

    Well, kudos, Stephen.

  • Anonymous

    Hah! You’re busted.

  • CM

    Ministers frequently testify in committee with visuals. Be it charts, graphs, decks, etc., it is nothing new. The Liberals merely complained because the chart’s colour “looked partisan”. It was blue.