2022 CPC Leadership Discussion: Et tu Redeux

[Halifax Tar]

Day 3, actually.

View attachment 73555

I say again:

Never put it past the Cons to miss an opportunity to step on their own who-ha's.

Sometimes the incompetency they show is astounding.

 

[Lumber]

I would assert a person with, what I suspect, are your biases will see that connection. No offence meant, just my opinion and observation. You're free to disagree.

Just to be clear, my bias is not toward the LPC or away from the CPC. If I have a bias, I have a bias away from anything that is not based on logic and facts, and away from those (i.e. PP) who would take advantage and espouse these things (whether they believe them or are just taking advantage of them). I.e. a bunch of people who go around screaming that Trudeau is a tyrant and that we have no freedom in Canada. I'm sorry, I've spend too much time travelling the world and studying world politics to know how far from the truth that is. So when someone like PP latches onto the fervor surrounding that message, I'm out.

 

[IKnowNothing]

PP didn't make it this way, he is just playing the game as its being played now. And the game plays both ways.

The game is played by taking the unique position of being completely sheltered from "live" scrutiny, questioning, and contrary thought? The leader of the official opposition doesn't get to hide on twitter and communicate solely through prepared statements.

As unprofessional as Akin's outburst was, PP is whining about bias because he didn't want to have his series of canned messages diluted by having to face questions. It's just as unprofessional and leagues more petulant.

 

[Lumber]

The game is played by taking the unique position of being completely sheltered from "live" scrutiny, questioning, and contrary thought? The leader of the official opposition doesn't get to hide on twitter and communicate solely through prepared statements.

As unprofessional as Akin's outburst was, PP is whining about bias because he didn't want to have his series of canned messages diluted by having to face questions. It's just as unprofessional and leagues more petulant.

I'm actually going to defend PP here. I saw the video (but correct me if I'm remembering incorrectly), he said he would answer questions at the end, and Akin started heckling him at the very beginning of PP's initial statement.

 

[IKnowNothing]

I'm actually going to defend PP here. I saw the video (but correct me if I'm remembering incorrectly), he said he would answer questions at the end, and Akin started heckling him at the very beginning of PP's initial statement.

As far as I know the "terms" of the press conference are announced upfront, and this one (like the one before it) allowed for no questions. The heckling lead to an at the podium audible from PP to allow 2.

 

[Good2Golf]

I'm having a little trouble following you, so I apologize, but my responses might miss the mark based on an incorrect foundation:

It's only the CBC that received direct compensation. Everyone else is independent, so why are they considered biased as well?

CBC gets the lion share of direct compensation, but there is also a significant amount of direct partial funding through the Canadian Media Find, the Canadian Periodical Fund and indirects through highly incentivized tax-rebates.

This is the part I'm most uncertain about what you're saying. Are you saying that our politicians are a bunch of nazis, horrible people, all not worth of being considered consistent with Canadian values, or are you saying that the "bombast" that our politicians espouse is that PP and his ilk are nazis, horrible people, etc (I think you mean the latter).

No, but that Trudeau and Co. directly impugn a wider group of Canadian’s based on the single Nazi/white supremist flag and dig deep into his theatrical background and broad brushed a far wider swath of Canada than was at all warranted.

Yes. But you can do both. I have lots of free time.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Just to be clear, my bias is not toward the LPC or away from the CPC. If I have a bias, I have a bias away from anything that is not based on logic and facts, and away from those (i.e. PP) who would take advantage and espouse these things (whether they believe them or are just taking advantage of them). I.e. a bunch of people who go around screaming that Trudeau is a tyrant and that we have no freedom in Canada. I'm sorry, I've spend too much time travelling the world and studying world politics to know how far from the truth that is. So when someone like PP latches onto the fervor surrounding that message, I'm out.

Its not my intention to chase you out of a conversation. My apologies if that was your perception.

Having said that, if you're going to post in a public forum you can expect people to disagree with you and find fault with your positions. Its not personal. Your ideas are not you.

The game is played by taking the unique position of being completely sheltered from "live" scrutiny, questioning, and contrary thought? The leader of the official opposition doesn't get to hide on twitter and communicate solely through prepared statements.

As unprofessional as Akin's outburst was, PP is whining about bias because he didn't want to have his series of canned messages diluted by having to face questions. It's just as unprofessional and leagues more petulant.

I think we diametrically disagree about the existence of media bias in this country. I firmly believe that it is real and slanted away from the Conservative party, and its going to get worse.

 

[Lumber]

Its not my intention to chase you out of a conversation. My apologies if that was your perception.

No apology is necessary. That wasn't my perception.

Rather, what I've seen a lot lately is the propensity of people on this forum to assume that attacking one position/person/idea means support for the opposite (i.e. I attack PP therefore I must be a Trudeau loving liberal lacky).

Just trying to make my position, or lack thereof, more clear.

 

[IKnowNothing]

I think we diametrically disagree about the existence of media bias in this country. I firmly believe that it is real and slanted away from the Conservative party, and its going to get worse.

I'm of many minds on this. Gonna work broad to specific

All people and media carry some sort of inherent bias, it's simply human. (AP/ Reuters etc do a hell of a job cutting through it though, but being so sterile-y fact based limits utility)

Canadian MSM, as an entity, is fairly objective. There are leanings to both sides of the spectrum, but by and large the major outlets are very anchored in facts/ reality, with their bias primarily shown in word choice, headlines, story selection, then ramping up when you get to editorializing. No fake news and make believe, just the same things being seen and presented differently from differing perspectives. If you've done your due diligence on the outlets and can read things critically, you should be able to read/visit the news of any of the Star/CBC/Global/Globe/Post/Sun and come out more informed. None of them are CNN, none of them are Fox.

David Akin specifically, is a respected, long tenured, balanced but right leaning personality.

Overall I'd agree that more outlets lean away from the CPC than towards, but not to a degree worthy of shutting them out as a reader/listener, and certainly not to the point where it's acceptable for the leader of a mainstream federal party to refuse to engage with them for months, then throw a tantrum and take his ball home when they won't dance to his tune and give him airtime without questions.

 

[Halifax Tar]

No apology is necessary. That wasn't my perception.

Rather, what I've seen a lot lately is the propensity of people on this forum to assume that attacking one position/person/idea means support for the opposite (i.e. I attack PP therefore I must be a Trudeau loving liberal lacky).

Just trying to make my position, or lack thereof, more clear.

That's very fair. And I can admit I am probably part of that group. Having said that there is also a propensity for people on this forum to attack only one side and claim they are unbiased.

Personally, I have made it clear on these forums I am a conservative party member. With fairly fiscally conservative and socially liberal leanings. But I have no problem giving other parties kudos for good work and face palming myself when the Cons FUBAR something.

I'm of many minds on this. Gonna work broad to specific

All people and media carry some sort of inherent bias, it's simply human. (AP/ Reuters etc do a hell of a job cutting through it though, but being so sterile-y fact based limits utility)

Having a bias is one thing, and its human. But reporting on events and happenings unequally is not. I cannot imagine a Conservative government would get the same treatment that the current government does if they had been in power as long and committed the same massive errors. I may be wrong, we will never know.

Canadian MSM, as an entity, is fairly objective. There are leanings to both sides of the spectrum, but by and large the major outlets are very anchored in facts/ reality, with their bias primarily shown in word choice, headlines, story selection, then ramping up when you get to editorializing. No fake news and make believe, just the same things being seen and presented differently from differing perspectives. If you've done your due diligence on the outlets and can read things critically, you should be able to read/visit the news of any of the Star/CBC/Global/Globe/Post/Sun and come out more informed. None of them are CNN, none of them are Fox.

No doubt that in Canada you can find right leaning media. But the big ones with the most opportunity to influence are left leaning. In Canada is not so much an overtly adversarial stance as its a lack of emphasis or rush to move on.

David Akin specifically, is a respected, long tenured, balanced but right leaning personality.

Maybe, I searched on this and nothing came up.

Overall I'd agree that more outlets lean away from the CPC than towards, but not to a degree worthy of shutting them out as a reader/listener, and certainly not to the point where it's acceptable for the leader of a mainstream federal party to refuse to engage with them for months, then throw a tantrum and take his ball home when they won't dance to his tune and give him airtime without questions.

The Canadian Conservative community is very suspicious of the MSM. Our media will try to pit PP as some evil being and equate him to Trump. The worst thing the MSM can do is give PP points to say "see, I told you so". And if they continue to then they have no one to blame but themselves.

 

[Navy_Pete]

As far as I know the "terms" of the press conference are announced upfront, and this one (like the one before it) allowed for no questions. The heckling lead to an at the podium audible from PP to allow 2.

Doesn't a press conference imply Q&A? Otherwise its just an announcement. If he wants press to play his bit on the news, there is a give/take relationship that includes asking questions as part of having a free press (otherwise it's just propaganda). This is a weird stance from a career politician and not sure why he thought he'd keep getting away with it.

 

[RangerRay]

I'm of many minds on this. Gonna work broad to specific

All people and media carry some sort of inherent bias, it's simply human. (AP/ Reuters etc do a hell of a job cutting through it though, but being so sterile-y fact based limits utility)

Canadian MSM, as an entity, is fairly objective. There are leanings to both sides of the spectrum, but by and large the major outlets are very anchored in facts/ reality, with their bias primarily shown in word choice, headlines, story selection, then ramping up when you get to editorializing. No fake news and make believe, just the same things being seen and presented differently from differing perspectives. If you've done your due diligence on the outlets and can read things critically, you should be able to read/visit the news of any of the Star/CBC/Global/Globe/Post/Sun and come out more informed. None of them are CNN, none of them are Fox.

David Akin specifically, is a respected, long tenured, balanced but right leaning personality.

Overall I'd agree that more outlets lean away from the CPC than towards, but not to a degree worthy of shutting them out as a reader/listener, and certainly not to the point where it's acceptable for the leader of a mainstream federal party to refuse to engage with them for months, then throw a tantrum and take his ball home when they won't dance to his tune and give him airtime without questions.

I would agree with this and add that we don’t have the diversity in thought in journalism as we did decades ago. This is more a case of a fish not knowing it’s wet because journalists now have more or less the same backgrounds. Instead of coming from the working classes like they did decades ago, now they come from the upper middle class, go to the same centre-left J-Schools and are raised and hang out in those same segments of society. After all, who can afford to intern for free in places like Toronto, Vancouver, or New York where our premier media outlets are located? But I don’t think this is a deliberate bias on the part of today’s journalists. More a case of people from narrow backgrounds not understanding parts of society they have had superficial exposure to.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Once upon a time, there was a special federal health-care funding measure which undertook to increase funding by 6% per year, for 10 years - Paul Martin's health care accord, colloquially known as a "fix for a generation". It had a start and an end. Martin's government did not outlast its commitment, but the subsequent (Harper) government kept it and extended it two years.

When the program terminated, activists branded Harper as "cutting health care". And the media dutifully reported that, in almost no cases bothering to explain - it would have taken only one or two sentences - that the cut was programmed in by Paul Martin's Liberals, or to credit Conservatives with extending it.

Media. Bias.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Doesn't a press conference imply Q&A? Otherwise its just an announcement. If he wants press to play his bit on the news, there is a give/take relationship that includes asking questions as part of having a free press (otherwise it's just propaganda). This is a weird stance from a career politician and not sure why he thought he'd keep getting away with it.

Bingo! The very word "confer" implies some verbal toing and froing, doesn't it?

But he's not the real master of this art - that's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, the announcer-in-chief. Ask a rude question - say about clean drinking water for First Nations - and you'll be given the bum's rush by the PM's security service (‘Unacceptable and offensive’: Trudeau gets called out over sarcastic response to Grassy Narrows advocate - APTN News).

 

[Halifax Tar]

Bingo! The very word "confer" implies some verbal toing and froing, doesn't it?

But he's not the real master of this art - that's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, the announcer-in-chief. Ask a rude question - say about clean drinking water for First Nations - and you'll be given the bum's rush by the PM's security service (‘Unacceptable and offensive’: Trudeau gets called out over sarcastic response to Grassy Narrows advocate - APTN News).

From what I saw, posted here, PP never had a chance to state his point(s) and he was instantly let into by Akin. With Akin trying to talk over PP from the get go.

If that's the reception I received, I wouldn't stick around for questions either.

 

[Remius]

That's very fair. And I can admit I am probably part of that group. Having said that there is also a propensity for people on this forum to attack only one side and claim they are unbiased.

Personally, I have made it clear on these forums I am a conservative party member. With fairly fiscally conservative and socially liberal leanings. But I have no problem giving other parties kudos for good work and face palming myself when the Cons FUBAR something.



Having a bias is one thing, and its human. But reporting on events and happenings unequally is not. I cannot imagine a Conservative government would get the same treatment that the current government does if they had been in power as long and committed the same massive errors. I may be wrong, we will never know.



No doubt that in Canada you can find right leaning media. But the big ones with the most opportunity to influence are left leaning. In Canada is not so much an overtly adversarial stance as its a lack of emphasis or rush to move on.



Maybe, I searched on this and nothing came up.



The Canadian Conservative community is very suspicious of the MSM. Our media will try to pit PP as some evil being and equate him to Trump. The worst thing the MSM can do is give PP points to say "see, I told you so". And if they continue to then they have no one to blame but themselves.

David Akin: David Akin - Wikipedia

Covers where he’s worked, NP, G&M and CTV among a few notables. But was also working for the short lived sun media cable news channel. Hardly left leaning.

That being said. He was out of line and didn’t do him or his profession any favours.

 

[Remius]

From what I saw, posted here, PP never had a chance to state his point(s) and he was instantly let into by Akin. With Akin trying to talk over PP from the get go.

If that's the reception I received, I wouldn't stick around for questions either.

I think the stage was set before with them saying there would be no questions.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Another bleed-over from US politics. Biden-style press exposure.

 

[Remius]

Another bleed-over from US politics. Biden-style press exposure.

Not so sure about that. Harper had a contentious relationship with the media during his tenure.

Harper refuses to explain limits on media queries

By Mark Kennedy

nationalpost.com

 

[Blackadder1916]

David Akin specifically, is a respected, long tenured, balanced but right leaning personality.

Maybe, I searched on this and nothing came up.

@IKnowNothing's description of David Akin as "right leaning" may be a bit of a stretch but "balanced" is not. (i.e., balanced is not a stretch in describing him) Maybe I'm having an aluminum mess tin moment, but I seem to recall Mr. Akin commenting (or seeking information) on these forums a few times in the past (maybe distant past, since I'm unable to find him in the membership, he likely hasn't visited since we migrated to this platform).

In a post from 2015 Mr. Akin was characterized by one of the most respected members of this community as:

Caveat lector: David Akin, of Sun News is a member, here and is known by some members. He is, very generally, pro-Conservative, or, at least, not part of the anti-Harper movement.

One of the best commentaries about David Akin's "conservative credentials" that I have read was in Maclean's from 2015 by David Akin.

David Akin: In defence of Sun News

Sun Media's national bureau chief weighs in on what was missing from coverage of the Sun News Network's demise

www.macleans.ca

While he's not perfect, if most of the journalists in this country (and a few others) had his standards we would be better for it.