I agree.
It's almost as disconcerting and silly as the claims of media control leveled at Harper, by NDP supporters, while they deflect and ignore a serious abuse against the fifth estate, like the one perpetrated by the NDP's lawyers.
Now this is a real attempt, to control the media...
- Thread starter CDNBear
- Start date
It's almost as disconcerting and silly as the claims of media control leveled at Harper, by NDP supporters, while they deflect and ignore a serious abuse against the fifth estate, like the one perpetrated by the NDP's lawyers.
Maybe the underlying story, where the NDP`s legal team attempted to stop the story (to demonstrate their moral righteous indignation) and Layton held them back (to demonstrate he was above the allegations)?
Or am I just too cynical about politics?
All politicians attempt to control the media. The media sources want to sell news, and the politicians want to frame their message. Our current government has in my opinion taken us off the rails in their micromanaging of information, but that just means there's a new record to break.
He stated he was holding them back, until after the election.
There's no such thing as too cynical, when it comes to politics.
Ya, you can try and dress up that pig, all you want. But even under that pretty orange dress, it's still just a pig. Layton and company tried to silence the media, not merely control what sound bites they themselves make.
HUGE difference.
Well, shutting down reputable reporters like Terry Milewski was a good start.
The only power over our government that we have as citizens is the media. We complain so that the media can complain so that the government can respond.
When a reporter can't even finish a question without getting lashed out at by conservative drones, it's a sign that we're beginning to lose our control over government. They don't even realize that they're fighting against themselves - that's lunacy.
What would happen if this government continued to maintain the long gun registry, and you didn't have a voice Colpy? As much as I disagree with your stance, I would never hold you back from expressing your desire for that freedom. If we can't get the government to answer to reporters; or they dictate the amount of questions reporters can ask; or they even dictate what questions are asked - then even you wouldn't have a voice to make a change.
When did PMO become unaccountable to the public?
See ... what Harper is overlooking is people want to know and press have to sell a story. Wouldn't you prefer it come from the horse's mouth as opposed to the other end?
Just a quick question, which do you think is worse, trying to stifle the media with threats of litigation, or being shouted down by Conservative supporters, for asking a question out of turn?
When he decided to go into politics. But that isn't what Colpy is talking about.
That's all well and good MF, but...
1, It doesn't answer my question.
2, His post is an erroneous opinion, that simply supports your position, without fact.
So I ask again...
Which do you think is worse, trying to stifle the media with threats of litigation, or being shouted down by Conservative supporters, for asking a question out of turn?
There is no single pig to dress up, they all do it, that makes them all pigs.
Conservative supporters talked over a reporter with their boos? So what? That appears to be fine with a small subset of the voting public here in Canada. They are all guilty of it. Martin threatened to sue Harper, Harper threatened to sue Dion, and now the NDP threatened.
So you can show me a news story, of Harper, Iggy or May, threatening a news outlet with litigation, over a news story?
Yes, poor form, but not Harper, and that hasn't stop ideologues like MF from blaming Harper for it.
I'm not arguing the smear Ton, I'm arguing the fact that ideologues like MF will pin any silly thing that can on Harper, but just watch him dance around reality when his party steps in it. As we can see in this very thread, where he ignores the seriousness of Laytons actions, and emphasizes minor actions by the Conservations.
Go on, finish that statement. Threatened who?
No, but I don't think that matters. Whether it's shouting loud enough so someone's voice can't be heard, or intimidation using lawyers (press or otherwise), or controlling what information our scientists are allowed to give to reporters who have questions about climate change, I don't see any material difference in the end. All are attempting to control information.
I think it does.
Only one is attempting to stifle the fifth estate directly.
And I don't support the Conservative limitations on information. But than again, the freedom of information act, has taken care of most of the issues you cited.
Man are you ever obtuse.
You'll give anything away as along as your guns are safe.
Guys like you are the real danger to this country, why not move to the US where your ideals are better matched?
Because that is a direct attack on the fifth estate.
1, We aren't talking about supporters shouting some down for talking out of turn.
2, We're not talking about the PMO placing gags on his dept's to prevent some of them from eating their own feet.
3, We aren't talking about limiting the material made public by Federal bodies.
1, Outside Harper's control.
2, Right in line with typical party politics, as you have already said.
3, Circumvented by the FoIA.
All of which make the media work for their money.
But threatening the media with a law suit, is an attempt to shut them down. Full stop.
That simply rubs my opinion of free speech and freedom of the press, the wrong way. Whether I agree with the news worthiness of the report or not.
Ahh....the Media that the left claims Harper abuses so......
Chris Selley’s Full Pundit: Endorsement Watch 2011 ? darn that liberal media! | Full Comment | National Post
Read it.........most of them want a Harper majority..........
So, are they masochistic?
Or don't they feel "controlled"?
Chris Selley’s Full Pundit: Endorsement Watch 2011 ? darn that liberal media! | Full Comment | National Post
Read it.........most of them want a Harper majority..........
So, are they masochistic?
Or don't they feel "controlled"?
So much for liberal media bias....myth debunked by a con.
Still dosen't explain why the media is being given less access.
Tell me this Colpy.
If the cons are so open why do they insist that everything coming out from the minstry of the enviroment goes through the PMO first?
Maybe so a Federal body doesn't embarrass the Federal leadership?
Or even better, why does it matter when the FoIA overrides that?
And how is that better or worse than a direct attack on the fifth estate by your dear leader?