Rafe's article is a romantic walk down the memory lane of Vancouver reporters, but he doesn't understand the realities of media and the internet today. Canwest and the media in general doesn't serve the left or the right side of the political spectrum. Each side has good reason to be outraged at unfavourable coverage.

Rather, today's media is largely owned by four or five publicly listed, multinational conglomerates who serve only one god: quarterly profits. A media outfit driven purely by profit will follow the news story that generates the biggest near term viewership/readership, which boosts numbers and drives ad revenue. So witness how the channels piles onto a story like OJ or JoBenet Ramsway like zombies over a fresh piece of sirloin. Political opportunity, left or right, is chewed up like fresh meat, spit out and then attention shifts to the next victim.

The journalists that Mair admires are like versions of Eric Severaid and Murrow. They were more than journalists, they were arbiters of fact and truth and the public followed them with that level of expectation. However, today's news audience is highly balkanized. Viewers want their version of the truth: left or right. FOX News is popular for that very reason. No one can be a Cronkite anymore, professing to know THE truth. Content has become commoditized and as such only exists for the moment. Look at how young people download, mix and remix music then dispose of it for the next sound.

The internet and the blog is the new, free media. Everyone is a reporter, commentator, polemicist such that no one can be an iconic or authoritative commentator. We all seek and desire our own version of the truth in this technologically empowered world. For some it is a tragedy and for others, it is a brave new world and opportunity.

Who was it that said control the media, control the masses.

Absolutely Rafe. I actually took on the CRTC and Sirius in a piece in the The Province and won back in the end of January but it was a fluke for a free speech issue to even get into the papers - the ed-in-chief liked Howard Stern and I made it happen. Other issues, the ed-in-chief wasn't interested....

But yeah the printed word is controlled by what I would call third generetation-censors. Even since the two world wars the media have increasingly grown less likely to tackle government and controversial ideas.

So now it is not even necessary to have censor boards for papers, the HR and editors can find staff who simply agree that state censorship is a good thing - too much information, naught bits, words and all that.

I tell you there is a great hunger out there for non-politically correct hard hitting, not market-captive news.

I wanted to start a new national weekly to tap into this but I need about 30k to get it off the ground, 100k would be great. Perhaps one day I will have the resources.

Hell I could start it for a few thousand but to be sustainable (and for me to live) across the continent would realisticaly require a bit more.

But each issue could be produced for pennies per issue. I've been working in digital and print media since 1987 and I know a way.

As well being the product of ancestors fleeing both Staling and Hitler I have a keen interest in keeping the flame of liberty burning bright. ..

peace out

Well done BobbyPeru.

Back to basic journalism stuff we were reminded on The Tyee recently:
"The role of a reporter should be to confort the afflicted and afflict the comfortables". It seems somehow to have gone "Afflict the afflicted and confort the confortables" in our Brave New World/Orwelian world. There is far more money doing the latter unfortunately for the "professional" reporters leaving plenty of room for citizen-medias.

In regards to Rafe's inquiry on how will they put the lid on the Net, The Tyee and likes, the totalitarian state like China and many others are leading the way in monitoring the web sites people are accessing. Others like the US feed the masses with a lot of junk. Sounds like the Stadzis shortly before the Iron Curtain was taken down.

Rafe has hit a subject that we all know is true. If the media does the digging and were allowed to report what they find, we wouldn't be spending our time sending links to each other. I'm still surprised our present governments haven't found a way to cancel Hansard available for those who actually want to know what the politicians are doing. And waht they are all doing is. Doing it to us.

Culture jamming is the new mantra.

Exponential change is upon us.

Mainstream news media is in a coma and on life support. Mass news media was fractured beyond repair years ago. Craigslist recently put the biggest nail in the coffin, but it is up to you to seal it shut.

Simply complaining about mainstream news media is a colossal waste of time. Spend more time doing and less talking and you will be part of the solution. Your actions have to be governed not by what you know, but by what you do. Make new rules.

Targeting staff of news media companies is the new communication strategy. It worked for Washington politicians over the last two elections, and it works for industry and social commentary too. Can you imagine what will happen if you replicate their tactics and use it for something good?

If you don't like what mainstream news media is saying, target your own market online and "fix it." All you have to do is expose how they operate and let the public figure it out themselves.

If the public you target is too stupid to figure it out, find a smarter public. There is no benefit in trying to convert the hopeless, but I can assure you there are more smart people out there than you can imagine. Unfortunately they are hard to find because they are tired of being manipulated by mainstream news media, and unlike many people who comment here, they have become complacent and apathetic.

However, if you reach them, they will respond.

Also, do not allow members of mainstream news media to operate in a vacuum. Let them know that you are dissatisfied by making sure you share with "all of them" what "some" of their less ethical colleagues and bosses are doing.

Do not play by their rules. Make new rules. If you do not like what your local mainstream news media publishes or produces don't stupidly fall into the trap of complaining to them through channels they set up, i.e. "Letter to the Editor," instead, track down email addresses to everyone in their organization (they are listed online in public areas made available by the news companies in question) and let everyone in the entire organization know that you are not happy. It's not spam if they put their addresses online and invite the public to use them. News media companies invite communication from you, so take them up on it. If they don't like your message then they can remove themselves from the online network -- their loss.

If you take the time to assemble an "inside mainstream news media email list" share it with people who share your perspective. Make sure that even the junior staff in the "subscription department" knows that you know what is going on. Send the same message to sales and account managers responsible for selling advertising, and also make sure they know you are copying your friends and colleagues. They will get the message faster than you can imagine.

Send your message to every journalist or producer in the organization you can find, whether they are connected to the story or not. Let them talk about your message at lunch or over the water cooler. The point is to get them talking amongst themselves. Many people do not realize that journalists today operate in a secular world -- they work from home and do not have access to the in-house rumour mill. Fill the gap.

Remind them that "you" are the customer, and it is not, as they foolishly think, their advertisers.

One last comment, do it often and keep doing it until you notice a change, then do it some more.

Cheers,
Maurice Cardinal
Editor OlyBLOG.com

P.S. If you want to start today to make a change, email a link and a line or two of this Tyee article to every person you can track down at your favorite local mainstream news agency, and do not forget to send it to the subscription department as well as the owner of the company.

Many years ago I recieved Hansard for free. I phoned Ottawa recently and was informed it would cost me about $600./year if I wanted to subscribe. Subscribe? I was quite shocked at the amount and wondered what was up with that. In my little fantasy world I expect to get Hansard for free or a nominal fee because I am a tax paying citizen of this country. I labour under the illusion that what happens in the House is my business. Sure I can watch the House sittings on TV, but who has the time to watch? And, who wants to watch the buffoons in living colour? I'd rather read their ramblings and not be distracted by the antics. The current cost of the Hansard is just another tactic to keep the masses at bay and firmly in their place.

why is it only when the generals retire do they speak of the futility of war ?

It would have been preferable to have had Mr. Mair say this years ago, when he had a platform and reached a broad audience.

I disagree slightly with BobbyPeru's suggestion:

"Rather, today's media is largely owned by four or five publicly listed, multinational conglomerates who serve only one god: quarterly profits."

The late 80s and early 90s were all about leveraged buyouts and news as entertainment. We seem to have moved onto to a new phase in all this. People like Rupert Murdoch and the Aspers seem willing for forgo profits in order to promote their own personal agenda. Since the media game is now consolidated they don't have to worry too much about competition. They're ramming their bias down our throats.....and getting away with it.

Great write Rafe!
MyBrainIsOnFire try this site http://www.iwtnews.com/home
Now if we can just get rid of the garbage in Victoria & Ottawa, what a great country we could have again!
Make Corporations pay their FAIR share of taxes

If, as you say, both "sides" of the BC Legislature have major complaints against CanWest media, how come we hear virtually nothing about Basi and Virk ... while we heard a veritable barrage of persuasion about a certain back porch which was supposed to have criminal implications?

Last year, I clipped and saved a slanderous item about "Comrade" Joy MacPhail on the occasion of her marriage in Los Angeles where, it said, she had gone because booze was cheap there. Ever see that kind of comment about the premier who spent the night in a Hawaiin drunk tank?

What I'd like to know is: can a newspaper or TV station be held accountable for knowingly publishing abuse intended to harm the public interest? Just like a person or a corporation is held responsible?

Thanks, Rafe, for opening up this kind of discussion. We need much more of it ... and a plan for dealing with it.

Right on BC Mary. Let's no forget how the media just happend to be staking out the Clarke yard as the cops decided to go raid the place. How often did we get to watch the picture though the window showing the premier of the day looking serious? Often enough to convince him he had to go. It's time to start showing the present premier's pictures in the drunk tank and of course his little section on being truly sorry. Sorry, like heck, he wanted to keep the job so used the standard. "I'm sorry routine."

By the way, for the person wanting to read hansard. The provincial one is on the net and last time I looked so was the Ottaw edition. and as you said, who wants to watch them, you just want to know what they were saying. To get a paper edition is going to cost money for sure, but how much? I don't know as it never entered my head to ask for it

Dead right Rafe!

The news media is no longer media but an advertising game. I'm afraid Rafe just got too close to the truth of the vast corruption of government and private enterprise - fishfarms, RAV, etc.

The Georgia Straight is good, but lately seems caught in the political correctness trap.

The Sun and Province are a joke, with news about 48 hours too late and I will not be renewing my subscription. The Seattle P.I. and Times are far better reads.

CORUS Brand-X is now just a libramercial show, I stopped listening to it.

The CBC is another joke, so politically correct they are next to useless as a news agency.

The local TV stations are again jokes as American news stations are far more informative and watchable. Anymore indepth looks on how our ecconomy is exploding and I'll puke too!

Do the public care, I doubt it as they are not watching/ listening to it.

As for Rafe, it is your wilderness years, time that the Locusts hath eaten. When the chips are down (ratings) you will see Rafe again.

History will show that this generation will be of shame and disgust, where many people will ask, where was the media?

A footnote:

The RAV project is not only one of the most expensive projects being built, but one of the most corrupt. It seems now that Translink was set up soley to build SkyTrain/subways in Vancouver and now with RAV it is done, so the provincial government is widing it up and planning for highways instead.

Where is the media on this one? No where!

Come on Beers, do something or is the Tyee just part of the problem!

News Media, Unplugged

While there’s a certain amount of truth about the media being “defanged,” especially when you consider the gum-flapping that poses as writing/journalism in our two local papers, the threat of censorship is about as tired and refried as most opinions from rantin’ Rafe. The web and blogs have proven that NO story can be suppressed or left unchallenged (think Dan Rather two years ago).

Getting fired. Not having a radio talk-show to host. Being relegated to B-list guest status at CBC. This is decidedly not evidence of “censorship.” It’s ol’ Rafe doing his usual shtick of, in his words, “not complaining on my own behalf” ... only to proceed for the rest of his article at full it’s-all-about-me speed.

But at least there was a nugget of truth within his resume-reminiscing. A few years ago, Michael Powell, former head of the FCC, said that “thought control isn’t the big problem with media giants. It’s money grubbing, which causes more blandness than bias.”

All papers, most reporters, and certainly all editorial writers and columnists SHOULD have a bias. Whether we admit to it or not, most readers look for it. (What we’re not very patient with is the writer or paper whose views are “predictable,” usually categorized as hyperventilating ranters.)

Our local papers are now predictably bland. Imagine a strict diet of melba toast every morning as your fuel for the day. That’s about the equivalent intellectual stimulation we get from Vancouver’s Setting Sun and The Provincial. But thanks to the Aspers, they’ve become tasteless by choice, not by accident. And for that “money-grubbing” they will pay the price of irrelevance. Remember that the opposite of love isn’t hate; it’s indifference. How many of us once loved (or at least enjoyed/tolerated) one of our papers, then grew to hate them, and now are indifferent?

For me, what makes our local papers only chance flip-throughs whenever I’m bookless at a coffee shop is to see how much worse they are at fulfilling one of their most fundamental purposes: and that is to connect with their community.

Pick up any of these papers right now and count the number of articles in each section that come from a local reporter and the ones from CanWest News service. I only have a recent copy of the Sun’s Business section handy (used as a mat to absurd muck from my work boots) and within it there are 23 articles, 16 of them wire stories. Can the third largest city in Canada muster only 30 percent of the business stories on a given day? (Yes, most biz stories are eye-glazing, so this isn’t the best example. But I challenge anyone to prove me wrong that anywhere from 60-75% of our entire “local” paper is written outside our community.)

We might have lost some good writers, reporters and commentators within the mainstream media, but the web has proven that there are many more out there. The problem isn’t so much that the news media has been defanged; it’s been unplugged.

And another thing ... Who's payin your bills?
As far as real truth Rafe is tops as you will see in the very near future!
You and your lot will be on the "Big Run & Hide" as the Real Truth comes out (BC Mary) about BC Legislature Scandal, the many shady deals done behind closed doors with realestate, money laundering etc.

You know, I'd really like to read Ron Bremner's policy on free speech from the 80's you mention.

Any chance somebody could dig up a copy and post it here?

The 'free' press of those days was a tremendously important check on the kind of misbehaviour politicians get up to on a regular basis. Without it, they are running amok.

Thanks for ringing this bell. People need reminding of the way things are supposed to work. The younger ones and the new arrivals are never taught it anymore, so are unlikely to ever stand up and demand it.

Without a vigilant and strong independent press, I despair for Democracy. I truly do.

Mair suggests that the blandness of today's media is due to the economic interest of (very few) publishers.

BobbyPeru likewise argues it's the economics that have changed.

But of course this is the same complaint that was made decades ago by A.J. Liebling, who suggested the key to better journalism wasn't journalism schools (then being established) but a school for publishers.
I don't think times have changed all that much - except that all the consolidations and mergers have just left us with a lot fewer traditional media outlets. The percentage of decent media is probably about the same. Fewer outlets however does mean less competition, which means media outlets can ignore their readers - which is usually (but not always) a bad thing, if quality is your goal.

BobbyPeru gets it absolutely right, siwash.rock. It's all about quarterly profits and Rupert Murdoch would be the last one on the planet to forego profits in order to foist any political slant on readers. He couldn't care less what his writers say just as long as he thinks it sells papers, and the fact that he's not making money on his net projects (myspace etc.) does not make him a saint either — he just hasn't figured out how to make people pay for that, yet.

Case in point: Murdoch appointed wide boy Piers Morgan as editor of News of the World because the "Moron" knew how to sell papers, with exclusive scandals — until Moron went too far, cost Murdoch money, and hence was sacked. From there the Moron went to the Daily Mirror (left-leaning, anti-war red-top) with bigger exposés until he published fake photos of British soldiers abusing Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib — huge uproar and subscription cancellations which resulted in Moron getting frogmarched out of Mirror's office by two security guards.

Rafe's view is a very narrow prism, but BobbyPeru is on the money. The big media conglomerates are prying as much return from their papers as they can by cutting way back on reporters, fact checkers and good copy editors and the like, then spending ridiculous amounts of money on idiots posing as columnists (Ms Coulter et al) in the mistaken belief that they sell papers for them. The upshot is that they then rely on shysters who provide shoddy or faked news coverage (ie the Moron's Abu Ghraib exclusive or that absurdly faked photo of a Lebanese ambulance that was supposedly bombed by the Israelis), and have no one on staff capable of (or allowed enough time for) smelling out the hoaxes. The owners and management fail to appreciate that readers are turned off by the shoddy work, hence the sales and profits are in inexorable decline.

If anything BobbyPeru is too optimistic about media's future.

Heading in the right direction, but I think it is wrong to think the gov controls the media - I think the Canadian elite control them both. There's some interesting ongoing commentary on Canadian media propaganda and other stuff at a place called Green Island Veritas at http://www.rudemacedon.ca/lgi/lgi-home.html .

thanks BC Dude - I'll check it out more over the next few

peace out

Here's a glimmer of hope: scientific journals are finally integrating web reviews for peer reviewing of science papers. While not directly related to news media, it is more evidence of how the web is shaking up the publishing industry. If stodgy publications like NATURE can help legitimize web publishing and fact checking then with luck we'll leave behind FOX NEWS and CanWest forever.

wired.com/wired/archive/14.09/start.html?pg=3

I love The Tyee and all sites like it. Liberal or Conservative, there are many sites where we exchange both ideas and insults. There is no Can Con governing us, no CRTC ( yet ). There is no suppression of ideas in our Western World. There is always a way of getting a message out, no matter how distasteful it is.
I have no time for the MSM, as far as anything but entertaining and sometimes useful.
We are already shut out of legally accessing even half of what Americans can. We have to get rid of the CRTC, a Liberal idea gone wrong.

Yup, Rafe is right.

Personally, I think that yeah corporations invariably control politics and their outcomes.

Simply just look at the growing housing bubble trouble in the States and the corporate medias reluctance to report the ugly truth because they do not want to offend their advertising real estate buddies.

Not only that, but readers of MSM are finally getting the financial relationship between local newspapers and the real estate business. Here’s an excerpt from a letter to the editor from today’s SF Chronicle…”I’m rather sad to see that our local press doesn’t have the gumption to report the true negative numbers that have come out about the local real estate market…How (and why) will you continue to spin it so that the average reader remains uninformed and makes a poor buying decision that could affect them harshly for many years to come…it’s time The Chronicle started informing its readers on this subject rather than pleasing its advertisers.” Bingo.

Same said for the weekend edition of the Sun’s new home guide and the advertising dollars invested there every weekend. Do you think they will be the first to warn Vancouverites of the impending real estate bubble pop? I think not!

thank you Rafe for another good article. I had forgotten what good newspaper coverage used to be. And thank goodness for the Tyee (I've given up on CBC radio for news coverage or substantive insights into Canadian life).

After three years of boycotting the Canwest papers I bought all three this weekend---that was crazy-making.

Articles demonizing the homeless. Articles lauding the cuts to welfare. No discussion of poverty. No discussion of the cuts to social housing, no discussion of the fact that over 25% of children in BC are living in poverty . . .

I wonder what the circulation is now for the Canwest fodder?

Canwests circulation in terms of Vancouver market share is 27%, as I recall, but falling.

Those of you who believe Mair either don't understand the media business today or you're engaged in hopelessly romantic nostaligia. You're longing for a more innocent and naive time in Vancouver when a media elite of so called established "name" reporters supposedly looked out for the public good and worshipped some sort of absolute truth. And when that era has passed you cry "right/left wing conspiracy". Well, the fact is that the political right claims the media is left biased and the left claims the media is right biased. It all depends on which side is aggrieved. So that argument simply doesn't work.

Now, Murdoch really understands the value of his media properties and is very close to his editors, publishers and other media managers. His political views are all about making money. FOX News was a stroke of genius to serve up the news for a target segment. Murdoch is very worried about the future of print news as craig list and the internet cut into traditional news reportage and ad revenues and subscribers. In an editorial, the NY Times argued that the news organization is not dead as people still need an organization to verify and work up stories. Indeed, it pointed out Google News doesn't develoop news, rather it gathers other outlets' stories. I guess the free market of readers- print and internet will sort out which business model works best.

And those of you who think media execs should be brave and lead the public good should realize how hard it is to recover from low ratings. And how easy it is to lose your job as a senior news producer or exec these days. Can you imagine CBS or CBC programming a live concert by Toscanini on Sunday nights? Does the truth mean anything if no one is around to watch it?

Counter-mainstream, intellectual, incisive news analysis still exists- it's on the internet, highly fragmented in the form of blogs and boards. It's just that you have to work harder at finding it. I'm sure that "kaybertoss" can find plenty of comments on the upcoming real estate bust on the net. But, it is harder than relying on the Vancouver Sun or cable news to do story. News today has become entertainment because the masses see television and media as an entertainment outlet.

But as I said earlier, the internet should be seen as a huge opportunity for seeking the news as everyone can be a media outlet, an arbiter of his/her version of the truth. Today's big media outlets no longer see themselves as guardians of public good. Rather they are multichannel distribution outlets for a broad array of products. Traditional journalist cringe at the thought of bloggers as journalists, but look at the increasing success and frequency of scoops by internet sites like Smokinggun and Drudge.

The problem with Mair is that like other traditional journalists, he only hangs out with traditional journalists so he sees the situation only through one lens. I wonder if Mair hangs out with young bloggers, internet news/gossip site managers and has experienced the new face of media?

Ironically, the today's media executives would say that many of the reporters that Mair admires: Fotheringham, Burns, Nichols, et al. are pompous, drunk blowhards full of overblown self-importance and ego. Way overpaid and way past their sell by date. Young consumers of media no longer open the paper to read Dave Barry- why do that when there's so much more funny stuff on the internet for those savvy enough to navigate the avalanche of information.

Who should decide what news is suitable for the public good? An elite of self-appointed guardians like Mair, Fotheringham, Nichols or the free market of media consumers? Younger people want to seek their own version of the truth; their music, videogames and other entertainment reflect their shorter attention spans and technology allows them to get only what they want when they want.

Young media consumers neither trust or admire these old media heroes. And our heroes die hard. We fear what we don't understand.

Brain;
Over 25% of people in Vancouver do what?
Subscribe to the National Post? Listen to CKNW Radio?
What information are you using?
What stats do you have to titillate us?

It's too bad that 27% of the people in Vancouver are so stupid...he's talking about circulation for Canwest papers Ron: The Province and the Sun. The National Post has so much free distribution across the nation (it's allegedly a national paper by the way) that its circulation figures are meaningless.

BobbyPeru: Nice close to the day. I’ve always considered editorials “secular sermons” of the readings of the day. If you don’t mind the label, yours was a good take on some of the good and some of the trash today, and raised it above the “Dude, you just gotta, like, tune out the …. zzzzzzz, and like zzzzzz …” [sorry, I can’t run that any further without my trousers falling from their secured middle-aged belt, at-the-hip position to an imaginary floral gothic thong.]

Mair asks who’s keeping the government’s feet to the fire. As watchers of the watchers, are we willing and able (Tyee included) to keep the media’s feet to the fire?

As also its provision of Toronto news as though it were of interest to Vancouverites, Calgarians, Winnipeggers, and no doubt across the Far North, weirdly enough. Mind you, the Sun and Province do that with the rest of BC...

I'm gonna have to read the whole comments forum before I make my blab, but I did want to ask Rafe if he ever had any run-ins with Ma Murray? Rafe? Didja ever meet the grand old gal? Just curious what might have gone down...

Has the media lost its teeth,yes I think it has,but its the media reporters themselves who are to blame for this nobody else.I gave up reading news papers years ago simply because the reporters don't report the facts as they are,they report them as they see it.
I think it was BobbyPeru above who said that "younger people want to seek their own version of the truth"What a sad state of affairs that is.None of us,old or young, should be looking for our version of the truth,but should be informed by the media of the real facts and then forming our own oppinion as to the merits of the story.I have often been to events that have been reported in the media the next day and wondered if I was at the same event as the reporter.
I emagine that many of you remember the Jack Webster show many years ago,which I must say that I thoroughly enjoyed.However that guy could crucify a person if he took a dislike to them,which made for good TV, but bad reporting.
The pendilum will only move if somebody pushes it and if they are smart they should make sure they are out of the way for the return trip.

Main stream media. Who cares about the news. A case in point is the article in Tyee this morning about the sell out of us all by Harper and Co. on the softwood lumber dealings. This is in the same period of time that Canada won another decision with the bunch that reviewes FTA deals. we may win decisions but give away our money, and resources anyway.Wonder how much slush money was passed around here in BC alone to get our government on side?
I haven't looked lately but figure the media and the politicians are pretty low on the list of respected people.

G West:

They gotta bring the price down furthur before I would insult my budgie by lining his cage with the waste of trees started by the criminal indicted in Chicago by that (I hope) hero of the common man - Patrick Fitzgerald.

I started boycotting the Sun and Province when Conrad bought it. In a discussion with friends I was told that boycotts were pointless, Black wouldn't miss my subscription. So I made a bet that he'd be bankrupt before I ever would be. hehe

Unfortunately all his lackeys have moved to other papers or Macleans.

The price of Hansard as discussed above seems a little high. But then if you think $600 for the year it sounds like less than 2 dollars a day. But then you remember these guys are virtually on vacation or campaigning 24/7/365 with the occasional brief visit to Ottawa so they can say they've been there and it starts to sound like a couple of hundred bucks a page.

I mean, does Parliament even meet ever anymore, and if it does, does it matter? Only a little bit, and then only if it is a MINORITY government. If this seems extreme think of how relevant debating and voting was regarding say the mission and commitment in Afghanistan. Maybe that nice building above the river could be put to better use.

btw, Frank, I wasn't referring to the porn or any associated activities when I chose the term "whacko" I was thinking more of the warped whacko vision of the fundie version of supposed Christianity. To do with the Head, not the hand and the other head.

Hey Frank. Lots of people boycott newspapers but as one old socialist told me. You got to read the enemy to understand why they think that way. If you have a subscription to nay of those papers you can access all the others in the chain. sometimes some good stuff is hidden away in the near the back pages. It's up to us to find it and pass it along. At least that's how I see it. Mind you sometimes you do get a better slant on things about events here , from European newspapers, or the Christian Science Monitor, or the New York Times. Nothing wrong with the Guardian either.

The tag line under the title of this piece says that Politicians, not too long ago, feared the press.

Does the fact that the Prime Minister feels he can't face the parliamentary press corps - bunch of ogres - without a script and an agenda mean he's afraid of the press still?

More likely, that he wants to 'use' the press to his own advantage. Seems to me this too is a clear indication of how badly things have slid of late where the ink stained wretches of the past have been replaced as shills for one government or another - compromised out of their independence and educated in journalism schools often sponsored by corporate empires.

Good point, Garth. We know that like his idol, the first fool, he hates to be in an uncontrolled environment with random peeples not necessariy drunk on Rovian kool-aid.
I think our pudgy little Stevie can actually think on his feet much better than the preznit, but it is soooo scary and he might accidentally let slip part of his true agenda. If he wasn't so busy trying to hide what he really stands for he wouldn't have any problems being spontaneous.

Stephen was dealt a much better brain than the (maybe)reformed drunken cokehead business failure in the White House of Shame. Unfortunately something is broken in that otherwise fine piece of equipment.

I do not buy any of the mainstream media and haven't for years, while I doubt they miss my small contribution the advertisers likely will as I have a tendency to boycott them even more then the media rags like the province or sun and crap like the alberta papers.

I look at the paper at the news stand corner store or wherever, to see what crap they are spewing and who is advertising.

rkewan
cheers my friend...I've seen no developments for a while on the Leg Raids business. I still think the utter black hole into which that story has dropped is very strange.

Any news?

Sure is strange my friend. For me, and Mary as well I think, it is the disappearance that makes it seem more important each day - almost. For now I get my fix by seeing what Mary has dug up. Maybe when (and if) anything starts happening on the Leg Raid front, the Shameful House will once again ring with the sound of clicking keys. Alas, I fear,it seems that for most folks, the masses, the "silent majority," out of sight = out of mind and never a moment to wonder WHY?

Most people are busy with their life, working, dealing with family issues, going to school, dealing with illness, you know what I mean. So if they ain't hearing about it, why wonder about it?

Now that deck in East Van, that was important, that's why the MSM kindly reminded us not to forget about it, at least not until after the voting thing, oh yeah election. Mebbe we can buy that house and turn the deck into a tourist shrine for neo-cons? Come on, halvies al the way, are you in?

btw - brand spanking lovely new grand daughter over here! Just couldn't keep it to meself any longer.

I read today that the Basi boys lawers were in court. That case is moving slowly but moving.

Tuesday, Aug 29, 2006
Lawyers involved in Basi, Virk corruption case appear in B.C. court

VANCOUVER (CP) - The next stage in the prosecution of three former B.C. government workers facing corruption charges is set for September, when the Crown and defence will try to sort out what evidence will be disclosed to the defence.
The trial of David Basi, Robert Virk and Aneal Basi, in connection with a raid on the B.C. legislature in 2003, is scheduled for Dec. 4. - three years after the search.

Special prosecutor Bill Berardino and defence lawyers Michael Bolton, Kevin Doyle and Kevin McCullough appeared Tuesday before Justice Elizabeth Bennett to discuss progress toward meeting the trial date.

The defence is requesting more disclosure and both sides will argue at pre-trial motions beginning Sept. 18 in B.C. Supreme Court.

Dave Basi and Robert Virk face several charges, including accepting a bribe, influence peddling, breach of trust and fraud. Aneal Basi faces two charges of money laundering.

Dave Basi was a ministerial assistant for former finance minister Gary Collins. Virk was an aide to former transportation minister Judith Reid. Aneal Basi was a public affairs officer in the Transport Ministry.

The three men are all related.

A summary of search warrant information made public alleges that Dave Basi and Virk traded government information on the privatization of B.C. Rail for job recommendations with the federal Liberal government.

Other public search warrant information alleges two lobbyists paid the three accused almost $30,000 in exchange for government information.

The two lobbyists, Erik Bornman, who had ties to the federal Liberals, and Brian Kieran, a former B.C. newspaper columnist, are scheduled to testify for the Crown.

DPL- you qualify as today's expert. Are you sure they were there representing those clients? At this rate even a lawyer could die of boredom representing only Basi or Virk.

Of course it doesn't seem out of the question that someone, someone say...high up with lots of bucks and lots of secrets, could be paying these guy's lawyers a lot of money to make sure as little as possible ever happens? That would explain a thing or two now, would it not?

Gotta go, the master, Mr. Mercer is going to appear on my TeeVee. I don't care if it's from last spring, old Mercer stuff never dies, it just reminds you that everyone in Ottawa (and elsewhere) didn't lose their marbles just yesterday afternoon!

Congrats, rkewan. Hope BC Mary is watching.
Later.

One thing Rafe didn't mention, and is worth remembering, is that Canwest Global, who are THE major media player in British Columbia, are huge donors to the provincial Liberals. Reported right here: http://tinyurl.com/gz225

Can we give Smythe and Palmer and Baldrey the benefit of the doubt? Maybe they wouldn't be quite so gutless if their bosses weren't in bed with Gordo and the gang?

Everybody here, by default, already appreciates how corrupt "mainstream" media has become. All this palaver is preaching to the choir.

So what to do?

First be very aware that as more and more people turn to alternative sources such as the Net, the more will these hugely monied enterprises try to subvert and control it. Power is never surrendered willingly.

Second, take Working Memory's comments to heart and tell everyone how to find sources of information not under the thumb of Asper and his ilk.

Thirdly, where the **** is someone gonna start an alternative paper? Or is this even possible?

I'm old I guess, but I just like my news on paper, screens just don't work for me in quite the same way.

"More disclosure" gives a big clue as to what's wrong with our system: indictment of high-ranking political officials in another country would be subject to sweeping public inquiry (perhaps not the UK, but nearly anywhere else that claims to be a democracy, including and most of all our much-maligned neighbour to the south).

In fact, in most democracies, a scandal of this kind would have resulted in the immediate resignation - and that includes in the UK. Even if the minister responsible had nothing to do with it. The point with such resignations is not because the minister may have had something to do with it, is to clear the air while the investigation is underway; especially, considering, these were political aides and not just high-ranking bureaucrats; i.e. political appointees rather than someone who'd worked (or whatever) their way up the bureaucratic ranks.

But the point of the open, transparent public inquiry in these other democracies is partly to prove that the minister didn't have something to do with it.

That this all involves the sale of a publicly-owned railway to a foreign firm which has since shown negligence and/or disregard for safety rules makes the details all more pertinent to the public interest.

In a real, open, democracy, the court ban and secret evidence thing that's going on would in itself be a scandal. Here the media and the lawyers line up meekly and request "more disclosure". Of what should have been from the very first PUBLIC FACTS.

Good points Skookum, would you mind if I quoted some of your comments elsewhere?

Look at the flap that occurred south of the border when the FBI searched Congressman Jefferson's office - everybody got so excited the preznit had to call a 90 day or so cooling off period, which should be up by now, come to think of it.

There's lots of delay and obstruction goes on down there though too, look at the snail like pace of the Plame investigation/prosecution and the way that Bu$hCo just shrugs off court rulings with which they don't agree. It seems somebody is going to have to just forceabably pry those criminals out of the White House and Congress, kicking and screaming all the way to Gitmo.

Until then judgements, laws and the Constitution are just crappy marks on fucking pieces of paper, not worth reading, much less paying attention to.

The best book I've read on the subject, which includes excellent background material on the Canadian broadcasting/media model (though it's written by an American).

Robert McChesney's 'Rich Media, Poor Democracy'

http://www.press.uillinois.edu/f99/mcchesney.html

Real News here for those who still have hope of breaking these oppressors of real freedom! http://www.iwtnews.com/home

http://www.basi.com.au/sponsors.htm

http://thetyee.ca/electioncentral/2005/05/16/canwest-gave-campbell-48400/

http://www.handsoffhydro.com/whosbehind.cfm

Why did the Deputy Minister of Health Penny Bellem resign?
Because she had a conscience & the Nads to break away from gordos evil grip, unlike the rest of his "Brown Nosier Lackeys"
http://www.cbc.ca/bc/news/060623_ballem.html
Boy when I have a boss who was is an Ahole, it was "Take This Job and Shove It"

Here's a suggestion: Given the shitty projections for some newspapers, why don't we buy a few back and put them into service? Or start a few new ones?
I'm not sure who 'we' would be. Would it be reporters? Connoisseurs of newspapers? Ordinary people fed up with what they perceive as bias?
Owning even one national newspaper and a few big city papers would put the fear of god back into shareholders and force them to settle for less cash or check out completely. (After I first started the Times I was oft told how much I improved our competition, four years later they are quite good.)
A zero net paper, built to serve - not profit - would keep the enterprise sustainable and competitors on their toes trying to compete. Readers of all newspapers benefit, just shareholder don't get to suck as much green out of the common good as they usually do.
Advertisers worry about effectiveness of ads, a spicey new publication with meat would sell and likely raise the level of literacy in the country. It's an adsalesmans dream. People want to sit down for 15 minutes and read something meaty interesting and important. No matter how impotent they actually are, like all of us they want the illusion that what is in the newspaper helps them make decisions that influence their lives and the world: In this country it could be a self fulfilling prophecy.
This enterprise depends on attracting the best in all fields of newspaperdom to a new company for the right reasons, balancing good pay with great work opportunities.
Most importantly this model would create some ideal situations for our heroes, reporters. Encouraged to thrive the dogs of hell could be unleashed once more on unsavoury politicians and those who overlook the common good by accident or by vice.
I dream about this model for my own newspaper. Has anybody been thinking about this? Anybody want to help set up a model of distributed ownership?
Andru McCracken

Well done, Rafe.

After having the Vancouver Sun delivered to my home for as long as I can remember, I finally cancelled it. I thought that I was going to get the weekened edition at least, but I said "screw that".

The Vancouver Sun keeps contacting me, and I have told them that the lack of balance is disturbing. For example, where did Campbell's Maui incident appear in the Sun the day the story broke. Not that I really like the idea of splattering someones personal life over the front page of the paper, but I did think back to the treatment of Glen Clark in the media.

I also had enough of Pete McMartin writing without really doing his research or exploring issues from other perspectives.

Cancel your subcription, it is liberating. And let them know why with specific examples. I went with the Globe and Mail instead. A little expensive, but more satisfying.

CANCEL YOUR SUBSCRIPTIONS! IT IS LIBERATING. At least for a while.... they will always call you back with a "deal" later if you really want it.

The problem with our news isn't that it's created by profit-focussed media with right wing agenda that they can use bridge audiences and advertisers, it's that the "news" is fluffy infotainment which is supposed to "matter to British Columbians", actually happens to be meaningless and trivial.

Here's a transcripted selection from Global's morning news featuring your trusted news source Steve Darling: "Hyuck hyuck... didja ever see that Austin Powers movie where he's running away.. hyuck hyuck.. from that steam roller and it's moving like a quarter of a mile an hour... hyuck hyuck..."

I hate to say it but ours is an adolescent culture with a distaste for intelligent and serious thinking.

Speedo,
The audience isn't demanding a dumbing down, There just isn't anything else to choose! In the absence of intelligent reporting we move on to the next brightest shiniest thing.
The challenge for Sun and Province journalists combing this blog for story ideas is this: Your reader is as smart or smarter than you are, do what you can to challenge them.

As far as I know this is public domain, so who cares? Just get the credit right - Skookum1 (Skookum-one, like a CB handle) - and let me know where (so I know whether to expect a knock at the door or not...)

Canwest "NO" http://www.iwtnews.com/home "YES"
Said and done!
"The Truth Only Hurts Those Who Do Wrong"

Andru, your last post is great

I'd like to add some depth to this quote by describing a confrontation I recently had with a senior local journalist;

I received a phone call from this media pro who was upset with me because I caught him reporting "half truths," and I pointed it out on my business blog. I regularly discredit mainstream news media for my business readers, but this time it was like shooting fish in a barrel.

The journalist, who demanded to remain anonymous, angrily chastised me for dumbing-down the reportage in my blog. (I do it so my readers (almost 10,000) can understand the complexity of the situation and so they can see how they are being manipulated.)

The journalist then told me he writes for a more intellectual crowd and implied that my explanation was too simplistic to have merit. In his frustration, he actually called me an idiot, because I assume, he didn't know how else to attack me. I was right and he got caught red handed, so he resorted to a personal attack instead of remaining objective and discussing it intellectually (like he purports to do with his audience). I caught him on two separate occasions regarding different issues, so you can imagine how mad he was when he finally picked up the phone to call me. (He resorted to the phone because I previously reported in my blog his first response to me via email regarding this particular issue -- I kept his identity hidden, as he very harshly demanded.)

Needless to say, I ate him alive in my next blog (anonymously of course). Even more interesting, during our phone conversation he foolishly told me that I could complain about him all I wanted, but it would not change the way he reports stories, and that he had no responsibility towards our community (this is a major mainstream news media company remember).

Well, within a month he had changed the way he reports stories, and since then it is obvious that he is now walking on egg shells, and has markedly improved his game.

Moral: You can make a difference, but first you have to challenge individuals in the mainstream news network, and make them aware that they cannot hide behind their bosses, because if they do, someone like me, or anyone on this forum, will bring to the attention of a wider audience that they are selling out the community.

If you want to get a rise out a journalist, accuse them of selling out their community. They will crawl down your throat and threaten you with strong-arm tactics in an effort to intimidate and keep you quiet. This particular journalist threatened to destroy my reputation. My retort was, investigate away, I don't sell out the community, and I have less to hide than you (we all have something to hide lol). To paraphrase his threat, “You don't want someone like me rallying my company's resources to malign you.” Truthfully, it momentarily scared the shit out of me, but when you're right, you're right, regardless of "libel chill." For a very brief nanosecond, he caused me to doubt myself. Fortunately I/we do meticulous research, plus I have extensive experience challenging and reverse engineering media messages and strategies, so the feeling subsided in my next breath.

Through business newsletters, I regularly advise high-ranking executives and politicians how to manage media in crisis situations (a dozen U.S. senators and thousands of CEOs and managers who are often perplexed by how media works). Posters on this forum might find it surprising, but the clients I describe here initially seem to have much less knowledge about what goes on than 90% of the people who post in the Tyee regarding media. Ironically though, many of you post like you were a lone-tree in a desert, and that what happens on forums like this is not important beyond the readership of the Tyee. Well it is.

continued . . .

continuation from above post . . .

Ideally, it would be great if everyone who posted here used real names, but I understand why some of you are intimidated to do so. Criticizing mainstream media is a scary proposition, but the bottom line is, if you have a comment, stand behind it and not only put your name on it to give your voice greater credibility, but also take the time to forward a link of this discussion to everyone you know, and don't know, including mainstream news media players. I mentioned this in an earlier post on this forum that the Sun, Province, and Global TV, and many of their advertisers publicly post email addresses for many of their staff. Take advantage of it right here, right now, today, and send them a link to this forum. You will have an impact. I guarantee it. It won't change past history, but it will affect how they do business in the future.

Do not assume that they are all reading this forum. They are busy, overworked, and pressured by their bosses the same way you are being pressured by your bosses. They also do not want to read about how they undermined their community in the name of keeping their jobs. It depresses them too. If you think mainstream news journalists go to bed happy you are mistaken. They are scared for their livelihoods, but they do not know what to do about it. Help them help you. Put pressure on media bosses by leveraging pressure through their staff and employees.

For clarity, don't shoot the messenger -- unless they get in your way. If they do, like the journalist I described above, remind them who their boss really is.

Every time a reporter produces a piece of work that delivers a half-truth, they will think of you.

And more importantly, their company will eventually get the message when they see dissention within the ranks. (Sun Tzu – divide and conquer.)

Cheers,
Maurice Cardinal
Editor - OlyBLOG.com

Excellent post, Maurice

Not to zoom in on one line (well to zoom in on one line)....

You wrote...

This is a bit idealistic, as telling a half-truth is a rhetorical device. All sides on almost any issue are guilty of it, especially when there is a "greater goal" in mind. Because there is so much information out there, and because information is so accessible, the half-truth in print media has become even more acceptable as a rhetorical device. Not that I can provide you evidence of this... as I may be have just offered you a half truth.

But what is the incentive for a reporter to change his or her style if she is influencing the right people. Ownership of the company is probably the only an abrupt change.

I cancelled my subscription to the Sun because I felt that there was some lazy journalism by well-read columnists. The columnists that do not really have to worry about their jobs (at the moment anyways). I also did not need two sections of "Driving" and "New Homes" every week.

Thanks Moat, if that is your real name.

You're right, the line you quoted is idealistic, but I think only in a general sense. I was trying to illustrate that traditional reporters often operate in a world that for the most part only includes direct feedback from their supervisors. If you make it personal reporters have little choice but to think of you when they report, especially when they see criticism of their work in alternative public forums -- like this one.

Some reporters attach their email address to their work, but many refrain because it creates too much frivolous traffic, and I don't blame them in the least, but maybe instead they should try harder to paint a broader picture.

This issue ties into the argument as to whether newspapers are becoming a dead medium. Anyone in the communications industry will rightly argue that new mediums don't kill off their predecessors; as in radio didn't kill newspapers, nor did tv kill radio, but each medium certainly does impact how the consumer regards past mediums.

Maybe newspapers will find a new centre by paying more attention to the fractured market. Reporters may have to assume more of a moderator's role in a field that includes the public if they want to prosper.

When young consumers caught on to MP3 it seriously undermined the music industry. There are many parallels to be drawn regarding the news industry.

My business expertise entails helping small and midsize companies leverage Olympic momentum. It is only because of the internet that my company exists. In the past, small companies couldn't sit at the table because it was too expensive to buy a seat and have a voice, let alone partake in the prosperity. All they could do was pay for the Games through increased taxes and a higher cost of living and doing business. Thankfully, it's a new era.

The Olympics continuously plunge regions into debt partially because local mainstream news media unconditionally play along. Regardless of the community's economic outcome regarding their Games, media are top money makers. They have great incentive to tell only the Olympic side of the Olympic story. Most people haven't a clue that local newspapers often become Olympic sponsors, which means they have a legal obligation to protect the reputation of the Games, even if it is to the detriment of the community. UBC prof Joel Balkan wrote a great book called "The Corporation" that explains this corporate/community dynamic in great detail.

If companies like mine are to effectively serve our clients, we first have to change the way our clients regard news media. (It was not in our business plan, but soon became a big part of our service.)

Our clients are usually quite surprised when they hear the "back story" regarding mainstream news media. Most do not initially understand how media really impacts their small businesses until they see the correlation we draw, and where they sit in the food chain (at the bottom).

Too many people think news media doesn't really impact them on a personal level, just like they think they will never get cancer or suffer a stroke.

The people who contribute on this forum get it. Many seem to have depth of knowledge that only comes from industry experience. The next step is to share this knowledge with a wider audience, and not just discuss it here among ourselves.

Maybe this is idealistic too, but it is necessary if we are to drive change.

Talk is cheap, in fact today even more so. We also need a bit of action.

http://www.killercoke.org/stopbstdp.htm

http://www.killercoke.org/

I haven't bought or watched Canwest bull for about 18 months now, as was stated who needs "New Homes" or "Driving", duh
Truth is not in Canwests vocabulary..
Owned and operated by the neo-nothings, as Canwest is/going down for being to cozy to the moneyed.
Campbell, stripping our hard fought for social network, our children are dieing, our poor and mentally challenged are becoming residents of the Crowbar Hotels (jails) more and more homeless are single parents!
2010 Winter Olympics, Why do we need this travesty of abuse of ordinary folk?
Let the rich pay for it and the highway of Gold for 2 weeks but 20-30 yrs to pay off?
Did you know that one of Killercoke.com board members also sits on the RBC boards, check it out!
The system is ROTTEN so lets stop buying big items and buy locally "WE HAVE THE POWER" people power no buy = no trade, go out to the private farmer and buy, the corner grocer, cancel Shaw to get rid of 80% of commercials (every 24hr of TV 6hrs of commercials and Reality Shows cost nothing to produce Shaw 4 has great intellectual programming no commercials etc.

Working Memory,

Of course Moat is not my real name. My occupation does not really allow me to comfortably take a public stand.

However, I do think that sometimes we give this forum too much credit for creating an impact. We may have some, but very little overall. Posters to these forums come and go.... think of all the names of the past on this board.

I really thought this article would generate more discussion, and sadly, it did not. It could be the time of year, but I think people are only willing to discuss what they are passionate about.

The Tyee is great, and I can see some Tyee writers going on to better things. However, the blog portion usually ends up with a couple of guys baiting the rest of the posters.

But I guess the Tyee is a fish.