Blogging Tories launches Facebook applications

Blogging Tories was the original political blogroll/aggregator in Canada and today it continues to break new ground.

As many readers already know, the Facebook phenomenon is getting blanket coverage in the media and among bloggers and it is the largest online social network assembled in the history of the world (that may sound like hyperbole… but it’s true). People have reconnected with old buddies from high school, are announcing social get-togethers across their network of Facebook friends and are associating and assembling among shared groups with common interests.

The last time I checked, Facebook had over 9 million users and has recently edged out eBay for daily page-views. (I just re-checked. Facebook has 20 million users)

So, what does this mean for the future of the Internet? I’m not sure, but like Blogging Tories, Facebook is inherently community-based and it would be useful to bridge both media. That’s why when Facebook opened up it’s web architecture to developers and other nerds, I got going trying to figure it out so that Blogging Tories could leverage the ‘other Internet’ that is Facebook.

I’ve developed two Facebook applications. The first application displays the most recent five Blogging Tories postings from the BT aggregator. Now you can add the most recent news and gossip from the Blogging Tories bloggers into your Facebook profile page. There are also useful links into other facets of the BT community available from the application.

The other Facebook application is a “I support Stephen Harper” image switcher. A set of images is contained within the application and the installer of the application can switch to a favourite image and fix it in place for visitors to their profile. Simple yet functional!

Ipperwash contradictions

The final report from the Ipperwash inquiry was released today. The report aims to explain the events surrounding the death of native protester Dudley George by an OPP sniper’s bullet at Ipperwash Provincial Park in 1995.

Perhaps I’m being selective in my reading of the report, but from the “conclusions” section of the report it is written,

The evidence demonstrated that the Premier and his officials wanted the occupation to end quickly, but there is no evidence to suggest that either the Premier or any other official in his government was responsible for Mr. George’s death. — Page 675

So, is it unreasonable to be a bit put off by this CBC headline?
cbc-ipperwash-headline.jpg

“Harris government, OPP errors led to Ipperwash death, inquiry finds.”

This headline implies that the Harris government and OPP are responsible for Mr. George’s death.

This headline from the Toronto Star goes a little bit further:
torstar-ipperwash-headline.jpg

As I read the very important conclusion from the Ipperwash report above (the one about there being “no evidence to suggest that either the Premier or any other official in his government was responsible for Mr. George’s death.”), I’m surprised that the Toronto Star has found otherwise. The Star explicitly states fault (ie. responsibility) for the “Ipperwash death”.

Here’s the headline from the National Post:
post-ipperwash-headline.jpg

This headline is truthful about the findings of the Ipperwash inquiry. The inquiry itself did find fault in the approach of the police, and the province in the handling of the Ipperwash protest (it is easy to conclude that the approach was “wrong” because somebody died… not the ideal conclusion to any event), but the inquiry did not find fault in the provincial government for the death of Mr. George.

It is easy to see why some confusion occurs when reading the conclusions of the report for the report also reads:

The federal government, the provincial government and the OPP must all assume some responsibility for decisions or failures that increased the risk of violence and make a tragic confrontation more likely

The report concludes that the federal and provincial governments along with the OPP did contribute to an atmosphere which may have heightened tensions.

But responsibility for George’s death?

“Mike Harris cleared of responsibility for Ipperwash death”

would have been an honest headline (since it’s actually the conclusion of the Ipperwash report)

The problem with these media summaries and with the Ipperwash report itself is that each tries to invest too much into associating the final event (the death of Mr. George) with distant policies, circumstances and unfortunate, immutable realities instead of between the direct action and final result. The report connects the failed land claims process and the provincial government’s preference (but not direction) for a quick (quick!) resolution to lawbreakers breaking laws to the events that led up to Dudley George’s death. However, neither Mike Harris nor the federal government are culpable for Mr. George’s death and the report indeed states this finding. One surely cannot assign blame for death to something so distant as failed land claims processes!

New Conservative Ads

The Conservatives have launched their second barrage of ads this morning along the “Stephane Dion is not a leader” line.

This time, the Tories are focusing on Dion and the Senate and the obstructionist tactics that the Conservatives alledge the Liberals are using there.

NotALeader.ca was also launched today by the Conservatives and it features the blog of Kyoto the dog. Kyoto’s site is sure to be one of best Liberal blogs. The site also features the ads that were released today.

On the main Conservative.ca website, e-cards are featured and you can send your friends a flash animation of the Dion’s Senate tactics.

The ads have been launched to mark the dubious one year anniversary of Senate bill S-4, a bill to reduce the terms of senators to 8 years.

Conservatives, in the ads point out that senators can serve up to 45 years (until the age of 75).

Stephane Dion is on the record supporting limited Senate terms, however, he has been unable to get the bill passed by his own senators for one year now. Is Dion ineffective, or does he really favour the status quo.

Canadians have been interested in democratic reform, not the status quo and they’ve been interested in change for quite some time. The Liberals are obstructing legislation in the unelected, unaccountable Upper Chamber. Are the Liberals more interested in protecting entitlements instead of respecting the desire for reform?