As long as we're looking back to coalition anniversary moments, one year ago today was the day the Harper government went hat in hand to the Governor-General to beg her to prorogue parliament and save him from a confidence vote he was certain to lose.
And one year ago this morning, while we waited for the GG's meeting with the PM to play out, John Baird went live on CBC Newsworld with the great Don Newman, who proceeded to kick the crap out of him on national television, while Baird desperately looked around for an exit.
Vintage Newman, and certainly one of my favourite moments of last year's drama:
Friday, December 04, 2009
One year ago: Don Newman depants John Baird
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
thanks for posting that Geoff!
Off topic:
Thank you for a classy comment on the air about a great site Pundit's Guide.
I think it is also a great site.
off topic #2:
CBC journalists have an obligation to point out (correct) statements that are not true?
It is the end of the tape. Is this true Jeff?
cs, I'm sorry but I don't follow what you're asking in your second comment.
NP,
The Journalists in the end of the clip were justifying their challenges of interrupting or "correcting" the position (talking points) of the Government representatives during the coalition crisis as an obligation that journalists have.
Do you agree journalist have a responsibility to report and correct (false) statements in providing the public with the truth?
Ah. Yes, I think they do. Unfortunately, not many do.
For too many journalists, balance is one shrieking person from the left and one shrieking person from the right. True balance does require letting both sides present their arguments. But, while it is dicey for the media to step in, if something one side is saying is just not true, they absolutely do have an obligation to say so. I'm not talking about opinion here, but rather facts. The sky is blue, not purple, stuff like that.
The Newman/Baird interview was a great example of what we don't see enough of today: a journalist calling-out a politician on their false talking-points, rather than just let him prattle on unchallenged, and then bring on another opposite politician to prattle on their own false talking-points for "balance."
Do you accept the excuse they will be 'frozen out' or a lack of resources for the MSM to not investigating/reporting the "facts" on more stories?
Post a Comment