Saturday, October 02, 2010

Do we need Michael Chong to reform the At Issue panel?

On Thursday evening I was on a United flight somewhere over south-western Ontario, so I couldn't watch the week's At Issue panel on CBC's The National. I could read the transcript though, which is often more amusing than the live video anyways.


It seems on Thursday Chantal Hebert and Andrew Coyne really went at it over the Maclean's Quebec corruption issue. And understandably so, given where each of them is coming from.

As I read the transcript though, I was reminded of a bit they used to do on the Daily Show: great moments in punditry as read by children. They would take a particularly ridiculous segment from Crossfire or one of those shows, give the transcripts to children, and have them read it out. It really seemed to add a certain perspective.

I think this exchange between Coyne and Hebert would be a really good fit for a punditry as read by children segment:
ANDREW COYNE ("MACLEAN'S"):

... But to suggest this is some sort of beyond the pale and an assault on Quebecers' dignity or that it has no foundation, as Chantal said, I just think does not itself have any foundation.

CHANTAL HÉBERT ("TORONTO STAR"):

Well, you… then I guess the onus…

ANDREW COYNE ("MACLEAN'S"):

Hang on, let me finish, please. Let me finish, please. Let me finish, please.

CHANTAL HÉBERT ("TORONTO STAR"):

No, no, but the onus is…

ANDREW COYNE ("MACLEAN'S"):

I'm sorry, I'm going to finish.

PETER MANSBRIDGE (HOST):

One at a time, one at a time.

CHANTAL HÉBERT ("TORONTO STAR"):

No, no, no, no. You've had the stage all week.

ANDREW COYNE ("MACLEAN'S"):

I'm going to finish. I'm going to finish, Chantal, I'm going to finish...
Somehow I think reading this exchange in transcript-form really underlines the absurdity. And where's Michael Chong when you need him? Clearly we need comprehensive reforms to bringing civility back to the at issue panel!

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

10 comments:

AC said...

There's some context you're missing. They had both taken major, lengthy whacks at Maclean's (not at Parliament, for its presumption, or the Quebec political class, for its calculated display of outrage, still less the problem of political corruption in Quebec...)

I had barely begun to reply when Chantal jumped in to interrupt. I'm quite prepared to give way ordinarily, but when my magazine's reputation is being smeared I think I'm entitled to one-third time.

kitt said...

Maclean's really, really sucks and I am SOOOOOO glad that I did NOT renew my subscription :p

CanadianSense said...

Andrew was correct in defending his magazine.

Many of us have no difficulty in giving the media the benefit of the doubt in making up a story.

The critics did not refute the facts, they did not like having the number one ranking.

If not Quebec, who is number one? That would be a great question.

marie said...

AC, Andrew you are as guilty of interrupting conversations as anybody so quit the complaints for goodness sake. Everyone knows where your partisan belief stands and it is not with any of the opposition parties either. That only leaves one and it is not the Progressive Conservatives that once were. If McLean’s magazines reputation is being smeared, I think you need to look at who's guilty of smearing it. You would think that you would have known better than attack Quebec to the media and in front of Chantal and not get an argument over that. In my book they call that motor mouth speaks before thinking without giving the ultimate consequences of your mouth any thoughts.

Sorry Andrew but your not as popular or knowledgeable as you seem to think you are. You are desperately trying to keep your job because you could not keep your partisan views out of your job.

Quebec is a province that is part of Canada and your ideology will not matter one iota because Canada as a whole is what we all want. No... But off subject, I won't mind see Alberta split because I don't believe that the Red Necks even want to be part of Canada. After all, they seem to think that they have all the oil and that’s all that matter to them it seems. So running Quebec down is like running yourself down which apparently you have done. Further more; there’s a lot more oil in all the Prairie Provinces that have never been tapped. BTW, Alberta will never to able to speak for the prairies. They seem to believe that the west stops there in Alberta. Oil they may have lots off but at the scale that’s going across the US border, it will run out and when is out Alberta will have almost nothing to sustain them
I would never ever subscribe to a paper such as the one they have become and not even if they offered it free.

jay said...

So it's Macleans that got its reputation smeared.

Gletscher Eis said...

I've even heard that some Albertans need a lasso thrown to them, in order to keep from getting sucked into that big hillbilly vortex.

Tof KW said...

Oh this is a new CS classic...

"Many of us have no difficulty in giving the media the benefit of the doubt in making up a story."

So 'many of you' (I assume people with IQ's below the common house plant) have no problem with magazines making up BS and publishing it as fact? Well CS, being you consistently post threads of pure conjecture and opinion without a shred of evidence to back up your claims, I'm not surprised you would approve of Maclean's Quebec corruption issue. Oh, by the way, your own dear leader & his political party denounced this article in Parliament last week.

"The critics did not refute the facts"

That was the whole problem with the Maclean's article, there is no 'fact' that Quebec is the most corrupt province in Canada. You can't refute something that is solely opinion.

"If not Quebec, who is number one?

I'd say BC could give Quebec a good run for it's money. I can't remember a single Social Credit or NDP government in my lifetime that wasn't involved in some sort of scandal near the end of their respective times in office. And while on that train of thought ...fine if Bill Vander Zalm isn't in jail, shouldn't he be banned from any political involvement anymore?

CanadianSense said...

Clyde,
Right turn.

Defending the acts of political corruption by hanging your argument on the word "most" in the title demonstrates how important it is to change the channel away from the political class in Quebec.

"Most" corrupt?

2/3 At Issue Panel have a problem with Andrew using the same brush on governing elites?

A few Liberal bloggers don't like words "most" in the title?

The horror!

Not as catchy as the opposition narrative in parliament or MSM obsession: "Planes, prisons, photo-ops".

Tof KW said...

I'm not Clyde, Patsy. You suck as a stalker.

"Defending the acts of political corruption by hanging your argument on the word "most"..."

Oh that's a beauty too! So I support corruption by using the title 'most corrupt province'? Right! That means Macleans supports corruption because the title clearly printed on their cover is "The Most Corrupt Province in Canada".

You really should give up while you're behind. But because you enjoy beating your head against a brick wall, I know you will add to you 'brilliant' commentary thus far.

CanadianSense said...

Clyde,

Can't refute your talking points as BCL as decided to remove only my posts "as boring".

The echo chamber is all yours. Enjoy!