Saturday, August 27, 2011
Friday, August 26, 2011
NDP exploiting Jack Layton for political gain.
It seems that the NDP have been flat out busted exploiting Jack Layton for their political gain, and do you know what? Jack Layton would not have it any other way.
Before the hate mail starts flowing and I get piled on for being too insensitive or it being too soon after Jacks passing: I would like to point out that up until this post that I have refrained for the most part from making comment on his untimely death and the subsequent sometimes over the top coverage (msm,twitter,blogs), but
back to the topic at hand.
Who did not see this coming? Raise your hand if you honestly did not think that the NDP would use Jacks passing for their own gain. Somehow I doubt that there are many, if any, hands raised right now; not because you would look stupid sitting at your computer with your hand in the air but because if you are in any way familiar with the NDP and Canadian politics the answer is obvious; they would and in fact are doing just that.
When Ed Broadbent said on Wednesday: “We have to build on Jack’s legacy. And quickly.” he wasn't just sputtering nonsense because of his grief, he was telling the truth.
When Pat Martin tweeted: The only criticism Jack would have over the release of his letter is that there was no fundraising appeal at the bottom...I can say that... he too was telling it like it is and reminding us all about the real Jack Layton in the process.
The letter that Mr. Martin is referring to above was Jack Layton's message to Canadians, which a few days ago could get one tarred and feathered if they pointed out the obvious that it in part was political in nature.
We can expect to see plenty more and of course the inevitable 'Jack would' or 'wouldn't want' that is already making its way out into the political world.
That is politics. It is what it is.
I did not know Layton personally but I do know that he was a masterful politician that knew the game inside and out and one who clearly relished in it. You can believe what you would like to believe but he was a very smart man and IMHO to deny that as the time of his passing neared that Jack never gave thought about how his own death could help out the party that he had recently led to its greatest electoral success, is an insult to the mans political skills and acumen.
Layton the politician would do what it takes and that is the Jack Layton that I choose to remember. The consummate politician, right up until the end and as it now appears, beyond.
Rest in peace Jack.
As I wrote earlier' that is politics' and as I also wrote earlier, 'Jack wouldn't have it any other way'.
Update: The CP has something with an eerily similar feel: Politicization of Layton's death was what he wanted.
Saturday update: "this mass outbreak of recreational grief..."
Before the hate mail starts flowing and I get piled on for being too insensitive or it being too soon after Jacks passing: I would like to point out that up until this post that I have refrained for the most part from making comment on his untimely death and the subsequent sometimes over the top coverage (msm,twitter,blogs), but
back to the topic at hand.
Who did not see this coming? Raise your hand if you honestly did not think that the NDP would use Jacks passing for their own gain. Somehow I doubt that there are many, if any, hands raised right now; not because you would look stupid sitting at your computer with your hand in the air but because if you are in any way familiar with the NDP and Canadian politics the answer is obvious; they would and in fact are doing just that.
When Ed Broadbent said on Wednesday: “We have to build on Jack’s legacy. And quickly.” he wasn't just sputtering nonsense because of his grief, he was telling the truth.
When Pat Martin tweeted: The only criticism Jack would have over the release of his letter is that there was no fundraising appeal at the bottom...I can say that... he too was telling it like it is and reminding us all about the real Jack Layton in the process.
The letter that Mr. Martin is referring to above was Jack Layton's message to Canadians, which a few days ago could get one tarred and feathered if they pointed out the obvious that it in part was political in nature.
We can expect to see plenty more and of course the inevitable 'Jack would' or 'wouldn't want' that is already making its way out into the political world.
That is politics. It is what it is.
I did not know Layton personally but I do know that he was a masterful politician that knew the game inside and out and one who clearly relished in it. You can believe what you would like to believe but he was a very smart man and IMHO to deny that as the time of his passing neared that Jack never gave thought about how his own death could help out the party that he had recently led to its greatest electoral success, is an insult to the mans political skills and acumen.
Layton the politician would do what it takes and that is the Jack Layton that I choose to remember. The consummate politician, right up until the end and as it now appears, beyond.
Rest in peace Jack.
As I wrote earlier' that is politics' and as I also wrote earlier, 'Jack wouldn't have it any other way'.
Update: The CP has something with an eerily similar feel: Politicization of Layton's death was what he wanted.
Saturday update: "this mass outbreak of recreational grief..."
Monday, August 22, 2011
Jack Layton 1950-2011
“We deeply regret to inform you that the Honourable Jack Layton, leader of the New Democratic Party of Canada, passed away at 4:45 a.m. today,” his family said in a statement. “He passed away peacefully at his home surrounded by family and loved ones. Details of Mr. Layton’s funeral arrangements will be forthcoming,"
Layton was 61.
Rest in Peace Jack.
CTV
CBC Video tribute
CP
PM Harper: I know one thing: Jack gave his fight against cancer everything he had. Indeed, Jack never backed down from any fight.
Layton was 61.
Rest in Peace Jack.
CTV
CBC Video tribute
CP
PM Harper: I know one thing: Jack gave his fight against cancer everything he had. Indeed, Jack never backed down from any fight.
Monday, August 15, 2011
I wonder if Heather Mallick's employers have apologies pre-printed when they hire her.
Because it seems that they do have to make a few of them.
The latest comes from Mallick's latest employer, The Toronto Star:
"A column by Heather Mallick on July 28 contained a number of inaccurate statements about the well-known British journalist and author Melanie Phillips.
Ms. Phillips has expressed her horror at the slaughter at Utoya, Norway in a clear and unambiguous way, writing “there can be no excuse, justification or rationale whatsoever for the atrocity perpetrated by Anders Behring Breivik.”
The column made reference to Ms. Phillips’ writings in an entirely misleading and inappropriate manner.
The defamatory article has been removed from our website.
The Star and Ms. Mallick regret the errors and apologize to Ms. Phillips."
And here is a report from the CBC Ombudsman on a column Mallick wrote while she was an employee of the CBC. That too has been removed from the CBC website but is available to read here. Notice a trend?
HT to Blazing Cat Fur who has a screenshot of the text of the now deleted Star column which can be seen here.
The latest comes from Mallick's latest employer, The Toronto Star:
"A column by Heather Mallick on July 28 contained a number of inaccurate statements about the well-known British journalist and author Melanie Phillips.
Ms. Phillips has expressed her horror at the slaughter at Utoya, Norway in a clear and unambiguous way, writing “there can be no excuse, justification or rationale whatsoever for the atrocity perpetrated by Anders Behring Breivik.”
The column made reference to Ms. Phillips’ writings in an entirely misleading and inappropriate manner.
The defamatory article has been removed from our website.
The Star and Ms. Mallick regret the errors and apologize to Ms. Phillips."
And here is a report from the CBC Ombudsman on a column Mallick wrote while she was an employee of the CBC. That too has been removed from the CBC website but is available to read here. Notice a trend?
HT to Blazing Cat Fur who has a screenshot of the text of the now deleted Star column which can be seen here.
Saturday, August 06, 2011
What is CBC Policy on publishing the names of suspects... That depends.
What exactly is CBC News Policy on the naming of suspects?
Here is what CBC stated was their policy in regards to publishing the names/pictures of suspects
"CBC News' practice is not to name suspects, and therefore is not publishing the names or photos of the suspects at this time." (Note: The original wording in that story read "“CBC News is not publishing the names or photos of the suspects at this time” and it was changed sometime after the original story hit their website.)
Since that story hit the web others have found examples of CBC doing the exact opposite and naming suspects, but today the CBC has really outdone themselves and have hit the trifecta today with this story. "Edmonton police are searching for a 17-year-old woman who is allegedly having unprotected sex without disclosing her HIV-positive status."
Not only did they publish the photo and name a 'suspect', something they claimed they do not do, but this particular suspect is a 17 yrs old minor who now has had what most would consider to be her private medical information posted by the CBC on the internet!
I think we need a clarity act for CBC Policy.
BTW: I hope that Kirk LaPointe, the CBC Ombudsman, (whom I have great respect for) gets on this ASAP.
Here is what CBC stated was their policy in regards to publishing the names/pictures of suspects
"CBC News' practice is not to name suspects, and therefore is not publishing the names or photos of the suspects at this time." (Note: The original wording in that story read "“CBC News is not publishing the names or photos of the suspects at this time” and it was changed sometime after the original story hit their website.)
Since that story hit the web others have found examples of CBC doing the exact opposite and naming suspects, but today the CBC has really outdone themselves and have hit the trifecta today with this story. "Edmonton police are searching for a 17-year-old woman who is allegedly having unprotected sex without disclosing her HIV-positive status."
Not only did they publish the photo and name a 'suspect', something they claimed they do not do, but this particular suspect is a 17 yrs old minor who now has had what most would consider to be her private medical information posted by the CBC on the internet!
I think we need a clarity act for CBC Policy.
BTW: I hope that Kirk LaPointe, the CBC Ombudsman, (whom I have great respect for) gets on this ASAP.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
