Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Canada (not) to the rescue | Main | Coren gets the hook »

Friday, November 25, 2005

A huge conflict of interest

Greg Staples noted what should be a huge conflict of interest that few people seem to be talking about, namely the fact that Charles Bird, described in Jane Taber's front-page column in the Globe and Mail yesterday as  "a lobbyist for Bell Globemedia," is serving as the Ontario campaign chairman for the federal Liberals. How does someone who lobbies the government get to run the campaign of the party in power? That's Mr. Bird's first conflict.

I also find it curious that the Globe and Mail ran the story about the Liberals getting ready to go negative in the soon-to-be-called election campaign and quoting Bird as a source. Bell Globemedia, of course, owns the Globe and Mail. Greg asks a number of questions including, "how can a campaign chairman for a party be allowed to work for the largest media conglomerate in Canada?" and how can Canadians "expect disinterested coverage from the Globe and Mail and CTV when one of their own employees is responsible for getting the Liberals re-elected in Ontario?" Especially when he's the main source for the Globe's front-page stories.

This story -- a story which results in two conflicts-of-interest for Charles Bird -- should be getting larger play. And the Conservatives should be raising this issue.

Posted by Paul Tuns on November 25, 2005 in Canadian Politics | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200d83424fc7d53ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference A huge conflict of interest:

» Good Questions from small dead animals
Paul Tuns quotes Greg Staples; "how can a campaign chairman for a party be allowed to work for the largest media conglomerate in Canada?" and how can Canadians "expect disinterested coverage from the Globe and Mail and CTV when one... [Read More]

Tracked on 2005-11-26 12:18:59 PM

Comments

You've shown your disdain for two identifiable groups (clowns and schizophrenics) in one sentence. What's next, defending the use of racial epithets? Oh wait, you've already jumped that shark...

http://www.commentsplease.com/collection/client/index.cfm?mode=entry&entry=C2910082-B964-B15C-9B3501205E9C4398

(via smalldeadanimals.com)

Posted by: surly | 2005-11-25 11:35:46 PM


McClelland with that kind of attitude your going to get the kind of country that goes with it.

The crimes will get larger your rights will dimish
and at some point they will turn on you because you are of no further use to them.

Posted by: Jeff Cosford | 2005-11-26 1:23:43 AM


It bears repeating, Canadian corporate mainstream media and fronted by the CBC have been for years and continue to be the servile supporters and gatekeepers for Liberal governments.
Could the Government corruption have thrived as it has for the past twelve years if the an equivalent of a BIll O'Reilly existed in Canadian media?
I think not!

Posted by: Joseph molnar | 2005-11-26 8:14:03 AM


CTV, Fair and Balanced?

Posted by: Alex | 2005-11-26 9:26:27 AM


Alex. I belive the answer to your question is NO.
Joseph molnar. Good thought but I doubt that any of the major media would have the gut to allow such a person go public.

Posted by: Rob | 2005-11-26 9:50:01 AM


I have an excellent solution to the issue of biased media in Canada: remove the foreign ownership restrictions and allow them to be bought by large US firms. I'm sure the CTV would be another jewel in Rupert Murdoch's crown.

The CBC will have a different fate: total and complete physical destruction. Nothing will remain but memories.

Posted by: Scott | 2005-11-26 12:04:05 PM


"When are you clowns going to clue in to the fact that nobody cares about your paranoid delusions?"

Poor Robert, to him everything is a "paranoid delusion" except of course those all-controlling Jews and their international agenda to take over the world. That's "real".

Posted by: Frappacino | 2005-11-26 2:04:39 PM


CTV's Travel Channel doesn't have a single Canadian program on it that doesn't rely on government grants and subsidies. CTV also owes a host of other channels. They tap into a large portion of the $4 billion per year that the federal Liberals offer to media companies in Canada. To think that there are people who think this kind of money doesn't result in bias? Unbelievable.

Posted by: ferrethouse | 2005-11-26 2:27:41 PM


Hey Amigos and Amigas.

Why don't we just blow this pop stand. We have more than we need in the west to go in alone. We would have a great friend to the south on our side.

What are we waiting for .. Acceptance by the East?

Wakie Wakie .. it's a new morning.

Duke.
and laugh with me at
http://dukemcgoo.blogspot.com

I would love a free and balanced WEST

Posted by: Duke | 2005-11-26 5:13:19 PM


I would too, Duke. We are at a crossroads and Ont. still is lumbering (er slumbering) with the Liberanos. Let them sleep.

Posted by: jema54j | 2005-11-26 5:42:45 PM


I'd love it too Duke! I'm leaving the Maritimes for Alberta next year.

Posted by: Charlotte | 2005-11-26 6:09:34 PM


In Latin LEFT means sinister.The lies and corruption will infect the ignorent until those who are not come together.

Posted by: mike | 2005-11-27 3:19:23 PM


TV people still watch that outdated liberal medium?

I don't I don't want my children to.

Too many immoral situtaions get condoned.

Posted by: ghollingshead | 2005-11-28 12:44:10 PM



The comments to this entry are closed.