Margaret Wente's sincere flattery

159 posts / 0 new
Last post
onlinediscountanvils
Margaret Wente's sincere flattery

Foot in mouth

onlinediscountanvils

Margaret Wente (ostensibly) wrote:
When I was a kid…if you were caught plagiarizing, you got a zero.

 

[url=http://mediaculpapost.blogspot.ca/2012/09/margaret-wente-zero-for-plagia... Wente: ‘a zero for plagiarism’?[/url]

onlinediscountanvils

[url=http://torontostandard.com/the-sprawl/why-so-silent-what-the-margaret-we... So Silent? What the Margaret Wente Accusations Say About Canadian Media[/url]

Quote:
The time has come for media owners to make some tough calls: Will they be accountable to the public interest and journalistic standards, or cash in with royal boobs? Based on the lack of response to the Wente accusations, I fear that judgment day may have already come and gone, and, ultimately, the public has lost.

autoworker autoworker's picture

onlinediscountanvils wrote:

[url=http://torontostandard.com/the-sprawl/why-so-silent-what-the-margaret-we... So Silent? What the Margaret Wente Accusations Say About Canadian Media[/url]

Quote:
The time has come for media owners to make some tough calls: Will they be accountable to the public interest and journalistic standards, or cash in with royal boobs? Based on the lack of response to the Wente accusations, I fear that judgment day may have already come and gone, and, ultimately, the public has lost.

From what I've seen, nothing is upholding either.

Catchfire Catchfire's picture
lagatta

Catchfire, I'm not on twitter, so I can't read the last one.

Not only plagiarism, but mendacious cant.

Lachine Scot

The G&M public editor has responded. Sort of.

We investigate all complaints against our writers

Anonymous blogger, mmhmm..

 

 

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Honestly, as someone who thinks about plagiarism a lot, I don't think Wente is guilty of anything except being a deliberately divisive, antagonistic hack who is paid not for the intelligence of her analysis or originality of her prose, but for her ability to disseminate the ideological talking points of her rulers and to provoke any sensibly thinking person into a rage.

That's enough for me, though.

onlinediscountanvils

I agree with you about her being a divisive, antagonistic hack in the service of the ruling class. It certainly looks like plagiarism to me, but admittedly, I don't know where the media or academy set the bar when it comes to this stuff.

 

[url=http://www.vice.com/en_ca/read/everyone--hates-plagiarism-except-the-can... Hates Plagiarism, Except the Canadian Media[/url]

Quote:
On Friday (September 21), The Globe’s public editor, Sylvia Stead, issued an online response to Wainio’s post. In her statement, Stead concedes that “there appears to be some truth to the concerns but not on every count.” However, she addresses only one of the seven allegations that Wainio has published specifically. Sylvia Stead and Margaret Wente did not respond to several phone calls placed by VICE.

Carol Wainio posted a retort to Sylvia Stead’s response on her blog this past Friday  that challenges the claim that Wainio is an “anonymous” blogger; “Ms. Stead was aware of who I was.  That is because all, or almost all, of the issues identified here over the past year and more were sent to The Globe under my name, almost always before they were posted.”.

As far as Stead’s defense of Wente, she goes on to say “it’s hard not to assume that editors did not simply put their fingers in their ears.”

Stead twice infers that she has completed her investigation (investigation is referred to in scare quotes within Mainio’s response) of Wente. Somewhat paradoxically, she acknowledges that she has not read all the original documents referred to in Wainio’s post. Wait, what? That’s right, the public editor of The Globe and Mail has declared finished an investigation into plagiarism against one of the most prominent columnists in the country when all evidence has not been assessed.

Stead dismisses the charge that seven sources were plagiarized -- not from any position of reason, but because she finds it “highly unlikely.” Wainio wrote that she finds it “astonishing” Stead did not address the instance of the nearly identical paragraph in Wente’s article that appears to be lifted from an older piece by Dan Gardner.

Sylvia Stead has worked for The Globe and Mail since 1975. She knows everyone, she’s friends with everyone. She has a vested interest in The Globe brand, and is hardly a force for independent accountability like the public editors at major US newspapers.

“I never thought it was appropriate for The Globe to put a Globe lifer in the position of public editor,” said Colby Cosh, an assistant editor at Maclean’s. “What's most clearly demonstrated here, I think, is that the experiment of Sylvia Stead as public editor won't work. It was a joke from the start. They are literally better off without one than with an obviously compromised, defensive one. Wente should at the very least be called upon for a personal apology, to actual human beings, and since her workload is apparently part of the problem (if Stead is to be believed), it should be reduced explicitly to the level at which it can be handled without ugly ethical transgressions. Zero would be one such level. And the Globe's stated policy of "curing" plagiarism by annotating the material after the fact is pretty untenable.”

Jeet Heer, a cultural critic and journalist, told us that “Stead's statement was a whitewash and incoherent... What does ‘some truth’ mean? Is Wente 35% a plagiarist? 45% a plagiarist?”

“Frankly, the Stead column makes no sense at all,” said Mark Bourrie, a National Magazine Award winner who wrote features for The Globe and Mail from 1981 to 1989 and now lectures history at Carleton University in Ottawa. “Normally, a paper puts a good investigative reporter on a case like this to hunt down any evidence of plagiarism or fabrication that exists. The Ottawa Citizen did that when a medical writer was accused of fabricating sources and quotes, and that’s what’s been done at papers like The Boston Globe and major magazines in the U.S.”

 

[url=http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2012/09/24/margaret-wente-plagiarism-scan... Today: The Margaret Wente Plagiarism Scandal[/url]

Quote:
However, in total, the evidence is fairly strong. While it may not be enough by itself to condemn Wente as a plagiarist and end her career, it’s more than what Maureen Dowd was accused of in 2009 and even more than what Jonah Lehrer was accused of at the beginning of his investigation (back when it was just content recycling he was accused of).

But what I find egregious in this case is not the allegations of plagiarism themselves, which may or may not be a part of a systemic problem with Wente’s work, but The Globe and Mail’s response to it.

The job of the public editor is to be a liaison between the newsroom and the public, an ombudsman representing the public on matters of integrity and quality of reporting. The position was created by The New York Times in 2003, in the wake of the Jayson Blair scandal. Other newspapers have also adopted the practice, including The Globe and Mail.

Stead’s response, however, has been completely inadequate. First, by Stead’s own admission, she posted her response and took action before the her investigation was complete (She has not read one of the works involved as it is on order). Second, she showed clear favoritism to Wente, referring to her as “high profile columnist” and Wainio as an “anonymous blogger” (though other publications were able to locate and publish her name).
However, more seriously, there was no investigation as to how the passages got into the article and no examination of other content by Wente, not even a small, random sample. This means we do not know how serious these allegations really are nor do we know if there are other example.
Fareed Zakaria, for example, was suspended and investigated deeply for far less than what Wente is accused of. He was only allowed back to work after his other work was cleared.

While Stead is right that there are great challenges involved in investigating such an old column, it seems as if Stead simply gave up, accepted Wente’s word and didn’t look deeper. That is likely a terrible mistake because, as the scandal grows, others will be looking into Wente’s work, very deeply, and additional discoveries of plagiarism would hurt less if they came from her employer and not another “anonymous blogger”.

NorthReport

cbc radio just did a story on it
so it is obviously perculating
but reflects poorly on Canada

DaveW

oh boy:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/globe-takes-action-on-alleg...

The Globe and Mail has taken disciplinary action against one of its high-profile columnists, who the paper says fell short of its journalistic standards when she failed to make it clear she was quoting someone else’s work in one of her own pieces.

Margaret Wente, who writes three columns a week, wrote a column in 2009 that contained similarities to one published in the Ottawa Citizen a year earlier. The similarities were highlighted by Carol Wainio in a post last week on her blog Media Culpa and quickly spread through social media.

 

NorthReport

I'm sure the Globe is hoping this story will disappear from the radar soon, and it probably will, but what a black eye for the Canadian establishment, and eventually the Globe will pay the price for this whole disgraceful process.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2012/sep/24/canada-plagiarism...

lagatta

It is important to keep this in the public eye. Will she really stop plagiarizing? I guess she'll be reduced to talking about herself and repeating "sensible" right-wing nostrums.

Jacob Two-Two

I honestly don't think she is capable of real journalism or original thought. This might well be the end of Wente, no matter how much the G&M wants to keep her on, because she won't be able to stop cribbing other people's columns, having no thoughts of her own, and now every comments section under her writing will be full of people calling her out and detailing where she stole her latest column from. At a certain point the shame of it will make firing her inevitable.

lagatta

Given her age (62), a more gracious exit could also be arranged.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

I don't recall having read anything by Wente. What kind of writing does she do - political commentary?

josh

. . . . of the right-wing variety.

6079_Smith_W

The Q media panel should be interesting this week.

 

lagatta

Boom Boom, as well as a lot of smug pontification and talking about herself. Rather different from straight "right-wing political commentary".

There was an interview with the guy who does the Guardian media blog on As It Happens this evening.

radiorahim radiorahim's picture

CBC has decided to "suspend" their freelance relationship with Wente on the "Q" media panel

Unionist

Well, time to be a contrarian again.

My disdain for Wente stems from my disdain for the regressive, anti-people opinions that she flaunts everywhere. The sins embodied there are far graver than the "sin" of plagiarism.

In fact, I don't get all the shock and horror going around about plagiarism. That's got to be the least of the crimes committed by the mainstream media.

It's like firing Bev Oda over a $16 glass of OJ. Or getting Al Capone on tax evasion.

 

 

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Unionist wrote:
Or getting Al Capone on tax evasion.

Ha! Great minds, etc. I posted on a certain progressive news website editor's facebook page that this was like getting Capone on tax evasion if he had neglected to pay vice tax on three cartons of cigarettes.

To clarify my remark above, I think what Wente did constitutes plagiarism, but that some of the backlash comes from the overinvestment institutions like universities have imposed on the word. Plagiarism isn't an on/off crime; it's a continuum. What Wente did was pretty far on the tame side of that spectrum--I agree that there was "no intent to decieve," that it was mostly lazy, rather than sinister. We're conditioned to think that plagiarism is THEWORSTTHINGEVROMG, but in reality, most things we learn from other people involve some sort of plagiarism. I think that's also why many journalists didn't report on this story, even those who would love a chance to tear a strip of Wente. I mean, she should know better, but why should we expect perfect journalistic practice from a sycophantic hack?

Fotheringay-Phipps

Bravo, Unionist.

Ms Wente undoubtedly has a profitable knack of enraging thoughtful people with her flabby argumentation and smugness. Most columns seem to consist of her saying that her circle of moderately educated and monstrously self-regarding friends all agree on something. It follows that those who disagree are so deluded they're not even wrong: they've been cast up by the tides of history to gasp out their arguments on the sands of irrelevance. Yeah, she does get up my nose a bit.

But plagiarism? It pales in comparison to her offences against simple generosity of spirit. And I have to wonder about the periodic seizures of righteousness in journalism. When most commentators are drinking each others' bathwater it seems finical to urine-test them for similarity of output.

Free advice to Ms Wente: claim you're down with the cut-and-paste ethic of the post-authorial age. Sneer at kids who think they're entitled to be paid for original research and thought. Remind them those days are over and they're not coming back. Encourage them to get a job in wealth management. Your readers will applaud.

Jacob Two-Two

I agree in principle. As plagiarism goes it's pretty minor, but much like Capone himself, anything that brings her down is fine with me. Even nasty, self-serving conservative shills can still be intelligent, well-read, and form tight arguments. That this vacuous, sloppy, smug twit is such a prominent part of the Canadian media is an embarrassment to the whole country. I wouldn't even care if she was canned for something she didn't do as long she's gone. Heck, I'd fire her just for daring to call herself a journalist.

And of course, as others have said, the lackadaisical attitude of the G&M regarding her offenses is a bigger story than the offenses themselves. It affects their whole credibility as a news outlet. If they won't hold their own writers to account there's no chance they can hold others to account. (I stole that last line from the G&M comments section) :D

DaveW

Wente gets her day in court, so to speak:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/columnist-margaret-wente-defen...

As for errors in my other work, I’ve made my share and then some. I hope that most of them haven’t been too serious.

And now, some necessary background. The current firestorm started with a blogger named Carol Wainio, a professor at the University of Ottawa and a self-styled media watchdog. She has been publicly complaining about my work for years. Her website, Media Culpa, is an obsessive list of accusations involving alleged plagiarism, factual errors, attribution lapses and much else. She has more than once accused me of stealing the work of other writers with whom I happen to share an opinion.

Globe editors have spent countless hours reviewing every complaint from her, and have been quick to correct the record when warranted. The Globe has also published a letter from her that was critical of my work. Her latest allegations, over a column that is three years old, were retweeted by a number of people who didn’t bother to think twice – or ask for a response – before helping her to smear my reputation.

I haven’t always lived up to my own standards. I’m sorry for my journalistic lapses, and I think that, when I deserve the heat, I should take it and accept the consequences. But I’m also sorry we live in an age where attacks on people’s character and reputation seem to have become the norm. Most of all, I regret the trouble I’ve created for my Globe colleagues by giving any opening at all to my many critics. In an ideal world, there wouldn’t be any openings. In the real world, there are.

 

DaveW

Boom Boom wrote:

I don't recall having read anything by Wente. What kind of writing does she do - political commentary?

thanks for the open door ....Wente has carved out her niche as the common-sense middle-class matron who looks down on the currently fashionable manias gripping the liberal media and academic worlds

if nuclear power is unpopular, she quotes an expert on why it does not contribute to global warming plus keep us warm in Canadian winters; if shortened school years are popular on op-ed pages, Wente wants longer ones, and quotes experts on the benefits of summer school, etc etc., Quebec students want lower tuition, she opines why this is disastrous and Quebec headed for Greek-style dissolution (OK, not too many experts quoted there, just straight from the hip)

So, a self-styled Tory contrarian vs the world, but with the bad habit of relying on single experts for long stretches, and as the media watchdogs pointed out, many unattributed contributions.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Arrgh. Just more reason to avoid The Mope and Wail. The only part of the G&M I bother to read more or less on a regular basis is Peter Cheney's car column.

MegB

Wente certainly isn't the first journalist to take others' ideas and analyses and present them as her own, but that's not always what constitutes plagiarism.  Mostly, it's regurgitation motivated by laziness and a lack of insight into the issues being commented on.  Wente's writing has always been defined by intellectual laziness and a lack of insightful analysis, so this current "scandal" shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone familiar with her pointedly inflammatory right-wing rants.

What I find truly hilarious is the bloviation from the Maclean's stooge about integrity at the G&M.  How long has the Baroness Black, aka Barbara Amiel, had a column with them? She's been a Wente clone for Maclean's off and on for an astonishing 35 years and is herself no stranger to questions of journalistic integrity.

The G&M response is indeed self-serving and cowardly, but what else would we expect from a rag who publishes someone of Wente's abilities?

6079_Smith_W

Rebecca West wrote:

The G&M response is indeed self-serving and cowardly, but what else would we expect from a rag who publishes someone of Wente's abilities?

I get that you are making a rhetorical point.

But to take it seriously, I expect more, and I should think there are a number of people inside and outside of that system who feel the same way. Of course it is corporate and full of hacks, but there are stil principles here worth fighting for, and as important as the alternative media is, we still need to challenge mainstream media and at least try to get them to do their jobs.

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Boom Boom wrote:

Arrgh. Just more reason to avoid The Mope and Wail. The only part of the G&M I bother to read more or less on a regular basis is Peter Cheney's car column.

You don't live in the GTA why would you read a Toronto newspaper?

She doesn't bother me one bit because I never read the MSM except maybe when I'm in a waiting room and even then I'll do the crossword before I'll read the bullshit they print. Just say no to right wing assholes. Don't give them any of your time.  Ignore them.  I find it helps keep one's blood pressure steady.

 

lagatta

What do you read to keep informed, kropotkin? I certainly wouldn't rely ONLY on blogs, or left/alternative papers alone, any more than I'd rely only on the bourgeois media. If only to know what the ruling class is saying, publicly at least.

I certainly look at the Guardian every day, Le Monde a faire bit, and give a cursory glance to the Globe and the Toronto Star - and a more than cursory glance at La Presse and Le Devoir, online. Some lefties I know also read the Economist fairly closely.

There aren't really any daily papers in either French or English on the North Shore - Le Soleil from Québec City covers the entire huge east and northeast of Québec, from Québec City.

Professionally, I have to keep up with current affairs in French, English and a couple of other languages. And I sure as hell don't want to make a habit of reading the Montreal Gazette...

MegB

Actually, while Toronto-centric, the G&M is a national daily.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Rebecca West wrote:

Actually, while Toronto-centric, the G&M is a national daily.

Yes of course and the GTA is the Center of our Canadian universe. 

I wonder how many papers it sells outside of Ontario when you take away the ones that appear outside hotel room doors for free.  There are no G&M boxes on my street corners and you have to know which stores carry them if you want to buy one because its not like the corner store will have them.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

lagatta wrote:

What do you read to keep informed, kropotkin? I certainly wouldn't rely ONLY on blogs, or left/alternative papers alone, any more than I'd rely only on the bourgeois media.

I read the Tyee ever morning and often follow some of their links to MSM national stories. They have become my main daily news service.

I also read links provided here by various posters including MSM links.  I live in a big Canadian city so I get the MSM point of view in almost every public place including bank lineups with their news feed channels. The MSM oozes out everywhere.

 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

kropotkin1951 wrote:

You don't live in the GTA why would you read a Toronto newspaper?

 

 

We don't have daily papers where I live, so I occasionally look at the G&M online (mostly for the car and environmental articles) as well as the TO Star, The Guardian, the Tyee once or twice a year, and a lot of US papers and magazines online as well.

Don't forget, I live in a tiny, isolated community not connected by road to the mainland. I'm probably one of the most isolated persons on this forum, so by necessity I rely on having online sources for news and entertainment, as well as having my television turned on about six hours every night. I use almost 250 hours of Internet time on my computer every month - including daily Facebook news feed updates from friends.

Slumberjack

6079_Smith_W wrote:
But to take it seriously, I expect more, and I should think there are a number of people inside and outside of that system who feel the same way. Of course it is corporate and full of hacks, but there are stil principles here worth fighting for, and as important as the alternative media is, we still need to challenge mainstream media and at least try to get them to do their jobs.

Principles worth fighting for are not to be found in an entirely compromised mainstream environment.  To expect more out of them is to be caught unaware of their true purpose when the methods are revealed.  It means the shit still works on people who should know better.

6079_Smith_W

While they certainly are imperfect, I don't think we can ignore the fact that mainstream media have resources that alternative media do not - both in terms of international coverage, investigative reporting, teaching the craft, and taking legal action when necessary. We may not like their politics in a lot of cases, but think about how much the altermative media makes use of their information and their work.

It is ALL valuable and important as far as I am concerned - even the National Post, and even Fox News (since I am not sure in what dream world those voices and perspectives do not exist). Certainly, I am thankful that Carol Wainio decided to take action rather than ignoring things in this case.

 

NorthReport

 

;;

Slumberjack

6079_Smith_W wrote:
While they certainly are imperfect, I don't think we can ignore the fact that mainstream media have resources that alternative media do not - both in terms of international coverage, investigative coverage, and taking legal action when necessary.

It's quite impossible to ignore unless one takes up permanent residence in the forest, and even then there's no guarantee.

Quote:
We may not like their politics in a lot of cases, but think about how much the alternative media makes use of their information and their work.

Yes, it seems to me as well that some Indy media spends far too much of its time chasing the tail of something that never ceases to chase its own tail.

Quote:
It is ALL valuable and important as far as I am concerned...

I frequently use it to brighten the day of my partner's miserable house pet with a fresh litter box liner.  Far too frequently imo.

Lachine Scot

kropotkin1951 wrote:

I read the Tyee ever morning and often follow some of their links to MSM national stories. They have become my main daily news service.

I also read links provided here by various posters including MSM links.  I live in a big Canadian city so I get the MSM point of view in almost every public place including bank lineups with their news feed channels. The MSM oozes out everywhere.

There's no need to be so condescending in your posts about reading the MSM. There are sadly few newspapers in Canada, so we all have to read stuff that is not ideal. If you get everything through the filter of The Tyee, you are not going to hear about the majority of stuff going on nationally or internationally. At least use Google News or Reddit.

Unionist

Slumberjack wrote:

I frequently use it to brighten the day of my partner's miserable house pet with a fresh litter box liner.

Consider yourself fortunate that it's not very discriminating. Our fussy animal friends insist on progressive literature printed on recyclable material.

 

MegB

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Rebecca West wrote:

Actually, while Toronto-centric, the G&M is a national daily.

Yes of course and the GTA is the Center of our Canadian universe. 

I wonder how many papers it sells outside of Ontario when you take away the ones that appear outside hotel room doors for free.  There are no G&M boxes on my street corners and you have to know which stores carry them if you want to buy one because its not like the corner store will have them.

Just stating the facts. No need to be rude about it.

6079_Smith_W

Funny, because I thought the whole purpose of the media was to provide information and perspectives that you might not be aware of.

If someone doesn't want to read any ideas that don't jive with what is going on between his or her ears, it begs the question of why one should bother reading at all.

autoworker autoworker's picture

Wente's predicament reminds me of the Maureen Dowd scandal.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Rebecca West wrote:

Just stating the facts. No need to be rude about it.

I laughed because I fundamentally dispute the "fact" that it is a national daily.  Just because you say it is so doesn't make it so. Just because you and the G & M say it is still doesn't constitute empirical evidence of anything except that your beliefs are in alignment.

Please tell me your definition and what it takes to become a NATIONAL daily.  I would have thought that at least one of the criteria is that it would be readily available for purchase throughout the country and read by significant numbers but it is not.  How few readers can a newspaper have in many regions and still claim the title of a national paper.  I don't have a definitive answer but I believe that neither the G & M or the NP make the cut.  In terms of readership they don't even qualify as major media in the BC market. 

Please try not to take offense at a little light humour poking fun at your belief in the Globe and Mail.  Does it really mean that much to you?  Since you are a moderator I feel compelled to say that I am sorry for not respecting your workplace and instead treating you like any other poster.

MegB

kropotkin1951 wrote:
 

Please try not to take offense at a little light humour poking fun at your belief in the Globe and Mail.  Does it really mean that much to you?  Since you are a moderator I feel compelled to say that I am sorry for not respecting your workplace and instead treating you like any other poster.

I wasn't expressing a belief.  The G&M is, in fact, a national daily.  I really don't care whether it is actually read nationally or not. That's irrelevant. 

Now, how about we get back to the actual topic.

Grandpa_Bill

Rebecca West wrote:

Wente certainly isn't the first journalist to take others' ideas and analyses and present them as her own, but that's not always what constitutes plagiarism.  Mostly, it's regurgitation motivated by laziness and a lack of insight into the issues being commented on.  Wente's writing has always been defined by intellectual laziness and a lack of insightful analysis, so this current "scandal" shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone familiar with her pointedly inflammatory right-wing rants.

Unfortunately, there are journalistic sins worse than plagiarism.  One such is reported by Steven Staples on ceasefire.ca:

ceasefire.ca wrote:

A recent Canadian Press article quoted George MacDonald regarding concerns about the impact of the Libya campaign on Canada’s current fleet of  F18s, referring to MacDonald simply as a “retired lieutenant-general” and “former vice-chief of defence staff”. (Murray Brewster, “RCAF fretted over Libya bombing campaign’s wear and tear on F18s,” Canadian Press, 9 September 2012). MacDonald had said:

“There’s no doubt the replacement fighter (program) needs to get going in the fairly near future if it’s going to replace the CF-18 in a reasonable length of time…”

Crucially, the journalist who wrote the article, Murray Brewster, failed to mention MacDonald’s new post-retirement role as a defence lobbyist.  This was highlighted in a letter to the editor written by Rideau Institute President Steven Staples. Although every newspaper that ran the Canadian Press story received the letter,  only the Montreal Gazette printed it:

It is not surprising that retired lieutenant-general George MacDonald thinks that the government should move quickly to replace Canada’s fleet of CF-18s. According to the Canadian government’s Lobbyist Registry, he works for CFN Consultants, the firm that represents Lockheed Martin, which wants to sell Canada a fleet of F-35 stealth fighters for billions of dollars.

But it is surprising that his client, Lockheed Martin, wasn’t mentioned in the article.

You wouldn’t print a story letting a tobacco salesman comment on the health effects of smoking, so why leave out the fact that an arms lobbyist is telling us which fighter jet is good for us?

Most other reports, including this 2011 article by Postmedia reporter, Lee Berthiaume, have mentioned the MacDonald-Lockheed Martin link.  Even Sun Media reporters  haven’t left it out.

Some might say it’s not surprising that the respected journalist who wrote the article would neglect to mention the link, given that he accepted a $2,500 media award from the Canadian Conference of Defence Associations, an organization that counts MacDonald as a member of their Board of Directors.

onlinediscountanvils

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Rebecca West wrote:

Just stating the facts. No need to be rude about it.

Please tell me your definition and what it takes to become a NATIONAL daily.  I would have thought that at least one of the criteria is that it would be readily available for purchase throughout the country and read by significant numbers but it is not.  How few readers can a newspaper have in many regions and still claim the title of a national paper.  I don't have a definitive answer but I believe that neither the G & M or the NP make the cut.

What makes them a national daily is not who buys their newspaper. [It's 2012. Who buys newspapers? Tongue out] What makes them a national newspaper is that they are not primarily a local paper. You don't turn to the G&M to read about the fire on Main St last night, or the ongoing rezoning debate at City Hall. Instead, they focus on things that are supposedly of interest to people across the country. Not saying they're good at it, but that's what makes them a national newspaper.

I agree with Rebecca and Lachine Scot - the rudeness is unnecessary.

Pogo Pogo's picture

National Daily depends on how flexible you are with the term.

6079_Smith_W

Oh Jesus. Or you could say that what The Sun is depends on how flexible you are with the term "newspaper". This is an annoying and pointless tangent.

The Grope and Flail has different editions depending on where you are in the country, and despite its current downturn it still has a national status that many city dailies do not. If you want a real demonstration, look at the scope of its advertising.

That is who really pays for newspapers. Surely this is a savvy enough bunch that you know the readers are the product, not the consumer.

And it kind of begs the question of why there is so much concern over the minutae of mainstream media when we make a point of not paying any attention to them. I assume that is what this is all about, no?

Pogo Pogo's picture

Look at the advertising.  Particularly careers.  Want a job in Toronto or Ontario or perhaps the Nunavit look in the Globe and Mail.  It is a Toronto Newspaper trying to make extra dollars by having sales outside of Toronto and paying lipservice to regional stories outside of Ontario.

I remember when Time magazine added a 'Canadian' page so it could qualify for the magazine subsidy.  Did that make it a Canadian magazine?

Pages