Conrad Black smacks the Conservatives around some more on crime

Following-up on a previous column where he called the Conservatives dumb on crime and opposed mandatory minimums for marijuana proposed by the Harper Government, Conrad Black is again laying the smack down on Conservative crime policy, putting paid to the "liberal judges" taking-point:

The underlying suspicion of Stephen Harper's government -which is that the bench is infested with softies and that it is right to punish crimes more severely than they have been in the past -is a reactionary and brutish reflex that is presumably aimed at a political constituency unlikely to stray into the arms of this government's opponents anyway. Hand-cuffing the judges merely makes justice more unlikely. And simply raising the sentences for everyone, which is essentially what is recommended, is not justified by the recidivism rates in many categories of offence. It also would legitimize the repugnant concept that criminal penalties should exceed that which is necessary to expiate the past and discourage a return to crime.

Interesting the perspective some time inside the criminal justice system can give someone.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Conrad Black thinks the Conservatives are wrong on marijuana, and dumb on crime

Perhaps Conrad Black's time in U.S. prison has mellowed his thinking on criminal justice. But when even the died in the wool conservative who poured millions into launching a national newspaper to cheer-lead for the Canadian Alliance and try to take down a Liberal Prime Minister (ok, and maybe also to gain a publication in the country's largest media market and allow his chain to offer a comprehensive national advertising package) thinks your criminal justice policy is, well, pretty dumb, then you may want to take note.

In a recent column in his old paper, Conrad harshly condemns Conservative policy on a national securities regulator, larger prison construction, blindly harsher sentencing and crime in general. He also offers a fiscally conservative argument for why increasing the prison population with non-violent offenders instead of rehabilitation/treatment is bad policy and speaks out against mandatory minimums; particularly for, believe it or not, marijuana possession.

The most recent leaps backwards have been on mandatory minimum sentences, harsher marijuana laws and extension of almost all sentences -- all bad, unjust and expensive mistakes. Mandatory Minimum Sentences deprive judges of any discretion and pre-sentence convicted people without regard to individual circumstances. It is a politically catchy method of avoiding the perceived problem of soft-hearted judges letting people off lightly. It has been a catastrophic failure in the United States, from which the designers of the Roadmap have cribbed it, and emulating it in Canada would be an outrage. This is especially true when minor marijuana offences are penalized doubly harshly, as is proposed, and addiction treatment is de-emphasized in the prisons. It costs $57,000 in the provincial systems and $88,000 in the federal system to house a prisoner for a year. There is no rationale or excuse for confining those who are not physically dangerous, nor for reducing their access to treatment, which is cheaper, more effective, and more humane than prison, though less likely to appeal to knuckle-dragging deadbeats of the jail 'em, flog 'em, hang 'em school.

He even goes on to echo Liberal talking points on Conservative crime policy, describing as "apt" Michael Ignatieff's characterization of Conservative policy as dumb on crime, and accuses the Conservatives of bad policy and shabby politics.

I've never found myself this much in agreement with something Conrad has written before. It's kind of scary. It should be for Conservatives too.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

The National Post can't stand alone

Speculation on the possible sale of the perennially money-losing National Post has been running rife of late, with far more people than those that actually read it mulling over its fate.

Lawrence Martin says the Post’s sale would be politically ground shaking, particularly if a Liberal such as Senator Jerry Grafstein picks it up, given the Post’s long-held Conservative bent (it tried single handedly to bring Jean Chretien down with the manufactured Shawinigate scandal – Jean actually gained seats in the next election). But then again, we heard the same thing when the Liberally-connected Aspers bought the Post, so who knows.

And in the Post itself, Jonathan Kay says the death of the Post will somehow be the death of print journalism, and the opening of the drawbridge to the unwashed blogging hordes. Actually no Jonathan, the death of the Post won’t be the death of print journalism. Heck, as much as I’d wish it so, the death of the Post won’t even be the death of really bad print journalism. Just the death of a really bad newspaper.

If I could put my business journalist fedora on for a moment though, I have trouble seeing a standalone sale of the National Post being likely, even for peanuts, as I just don’t see a business case. No one is likely to write a cheque if they can't see a path to profitability.

Now, one part of Conrad Black’s decision to found the National Post, after Thomson wouldn’t sell him the Globe and Mail, was definitely vanity. He wanted a national pulpit to take on, and take down, the dastardly Liberals and to espouse all his closely-held Conservative ideals, such as, oh, delicious irony, cracking-down on crime and attacking lenient judges and sentencing.

Vanity aside though, while I’m no Conrad fan I wouldn’t consider him a dumb businessman, and the Post was about business. Mainly, advertising business. Southam owned most of the daily newspapers across the country, and at least one (sometimes two) in every major market except one, the biggest one: Toronto.

More than vanity, the Post was about getting a foothold in the Toronto market and allowing Southam’s ad sales teams to be able to sell advertisers a national ad package in papers from coast to coast. To be taken seriously, that package had to include Toronto.

The National Post was a national newspaper in name only. That’s even more true today, with the Post having disappeared from many markets. It has always been a Toronto paper. And it has failed to compete in this market, which was already saturated before it arrived.

Even though it has lost money from day one, in the context of a Southam or a CanWest, the Post made some sense as a loss-leader, given the already discussed advertising considerations and the prestige factor of being in the nation’s largest market. For CanWest today though, given the tightening media market overall, and the Post’s continual cash hemorrhaging, clearly the losses now outweigh benefit of having a Toronto paper in their ad package, unless they hope to work out an ad sales deal with the new ownership.

Which is why a sale makes even less sense. Well, getting rid of it makes sense. But, subtract the need to have a Toronto paper in a national ad buy, who would want to buy the National Post.
Perhaps another chain needing their own Toronto media market, but what chain would that be?

With consolidation there are few other conglomerates of any size left in the print world. The only one with national scope is Bell GlobeMedia, and they have the Globe. On a more regional level there’s TorStar, but they have the Toronto Star. Black Press is confined to the West. The Irvings have some papers in the Maritimes.

That leaves the possibility of operating the Post as a stand-alone entity. And as I said, it’s essentially a Toronto paper, and in this market it’d be going up against the Star, Sun, Globe, and subway freebies. And in every other market, it would now have to compete with the Canwest dailies (Ottawa Citizen, Vancouver Sun, Montreal Gazette, Calgary Hearld and so on). And a new owner would have to hire staff across the country if it wanted to continue pretending to be a national paper. The Post relied heavily on content from its Canwest cousins. Either that would change, or a healthy fee would be extracted by CanWest for “wire” access.

If the Post wasn’t a viable business in the context of a national chain needing ads in the Toronto market, its far less viable as a standalone paper. Just what would the business model be?

As much as it pains me as a journalist to say this in an era when jobs in my field are scarce, it makes more sense to just shut the doors and sell the assets. Not with a bang, but with a whimper.

EDITED TO ADD: One scenario that could possibly work: buy it cheap, dump everything but the business section, and revert to being the Financial Post. That's what the paper was before Conrad bought it and wrapped news, sports and arts around it. But could a business daily survive in the Internet age, and in Canada/Toronto? I frankly doubt it. It would be a slightly less crazy scenario though.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

How about Conrad?

While I think that Dr. Henry Morgentaler is more than deserving of joining the Order of Canada, I wasn’t planning on commenting until I read this silly editorial in the National Post today where they express their opposition:

Conferring this award on Dr. Morgentaler was a mistake -- one we expect will be greeted by many long-standing Orderholders returning their medals and pins. One wonders whether the Order of Canada will ever reclaim its former prestige.

I think we should all watch for what, I’m sure, will be the coming deluge of Order of Canada holders turning in their pins in protest. I bet there are hordes running to Rideau Hall right now. Hopefully the good folks at the Post will keep us regularly up to date on all the names.

And the first one, I hope, should be the guy that founded the National Post, Conrad Black. Or does the Post not think that having a guy in the order that has been convicted of fraud and obstruction of justice, serving 6 ½ years in prison, does a little to hamper its prestige? Perhaps not, since they've defended him every step of the way.

Really though, I think the Morgentaler appointment was just cover for this guy:

The CBC's Peter Mansbridge is to become an officer of the Order of Canada, according to a list of 75 appointees released on Canada Day by Gov. Gen. Michaëlle Jean.

Mansbridge, the chief correspondent of CBC News, anchors the flagship nightly news program The National and also hosts Newsworld's Mansbridge One on One.

The dreaded CBC! Where are the howls of protest? Thank goodness the right-wing hordes are busy elsewhere. But good for Peter.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

CTV omits global warming/environment from top stories list

I'm back in the Comox Valley, B.C. for the the holidays after managing to escape the East before the storm hit. I did a semi-mileage run on the way out, flying from Buffalo through Philadelphia, Baltimore, Phoenix and Vancouver to ensure I'd have enough miles to re qualify for Aeroplan Elite with Air Canada next year. Because I need my Maple Leaf Lounge. Amazingly, every leg went off without a hitch (really tasty steak sandwich in Phoenix) until my Vancouver to Comox leg, which was delayed four hours by strong winds on Vancouver Island.

I'm here now though, and I was watching CTV Newsnet this morning. 'Tis the season for year-end list stories, and CTV is early out of the gate with its list of the top Canadian news stories, as follows:

1. The high-flying loonie

2. Canadian casualties in Afghanistan

3. Media baron Conrad Black's legal saga

4. Chinese product recalls

5. The deadly, and controversial, use of tasers

6. The trial and conviction of Robert Pickton

7. The hunt for Canadian pedophiles in Thailand

8. RCMP shootings

9. Multiple births -- sextuplets, quadruplets -- recorded this year

10. The scandal surrounding former prime minister Brian Mulroney

I'd take issue with at least one of these choices, but first to one of the stories omitted. The Newsnet anchor had CTV News president Robert Hurst on to discuss the list, and she (I think rightly) gave him a hard time about the multiple births one.

More interesting though was when she asked why the environment/global warming wasn't on the list. It was certainly a big story this year, from Conservative fumbling on the file to Bali and the UN conference to Al Gore's Nobel prize and the rise of the Green Party. Hurst, however, said CTV editors were “skeptical of the importance of global warming” as an issue on the top ten list.

If we were just talking the size of the news made as criteria I'd cut Hurst some slack, although I'd still disagree with him. But he made the criteria importance. And yet, and here's where I take issue with the list, he included the Conrad Black trial?? Generated lots of coverage? Yes. Important story? Hells no. And more important than climate change? Not a chance.

I continue to be surprised by the Canadian media's obsession with all things Conrad. As a journalist myself I naturally have mild interest, as this is a guy that for better or worse largely helped to reshape the industry in which I work, but my interest isn't enough to warrant the media orgy that has surrounded the trial. I'm of the firm belief though that average, non-journalist Canadian doesn't give a crap about Conrad and Babs. It's a case of the media's own interests driving their coverage, and not the public's.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers