Free Advice

Last week, while I was watching the Liberal attack ads on the computer, my four-year-old son climbed up onto my lap. After a minute he slid off and walked away.

“I don’t like that – it’s too scary.”

Then yesterday he saw a Conservative TV ad, the one with this image:

“Daddy, who’s that?”

“That’s our Prime Minister.”

“Ohhh.”

I thought I’d see if the Conservative ad was as scary as the Liberal one.

“Hey Douglas, does he look like a nice man, or a mean man?”

“No… he looks sad.”

“Yeah, I think he is.”

Early this morning, CBC.ca ran a story with this headline:

“Canadian soldier killed, 3 others injured in Afghanistan”

The story included this quote from Prime Minister Paul Martin:

“I would like to express my sincere condolences to the families of the dead soldier,” Martin said.

That story is no longer available.

Now both CBC.ca and CTV.ca are running stories that have been updated in the past half-hour (10:30am and 10:51am) with news the Canadian fatality was a civilian.

Current CBC.ca headline:

“Canadian killed in Afghanistan”

Somewhat interestingly, the quote from the Prime Minister has changed.

“On behalf of all Canadians, I want to express my condolences to the family of the individual who was killed…”

Both quotes were reported to have been made at a campaign stop in Laval, Quebec.

Now I’m not going to nitpick whether or not Paul Martin initially identified the dead Canadian as a soldier. That’s not really important. All of us, every day, have to make decisions based on the best information we have.

What I find interesting is that neither CBC.ca nor CTV.ca will show their earlier versions of the story. Was the quote from Martin misreported? Did he make a later statement, to correct his initial, incorrect one? We don’t know, because neither source allows us to see which parts of the story have been updated.

This is one area where I think blogs have an advantage over the mainstream media.

Blogs are often wrong (mine especially) but when an author amends a story, they typically update their original story with a note explaining what has changed, and why.

The MSM might think making their revisions public would undermine their credibility, but I disagree. Today, people are demanding more transparency from government, corporations and media.

Perhaps only a small percentage of the population currently read blogs, but this is one of the reasons that am one of them.

I am utterly gobsmacked. The Globe has endorsed Stephen Harper and the Conservatives, albeit grudgingly.

Their argument is defensive, as if being made to a hostile crowd, and in a telling break from their own tradition of titling their endorsement editorials for the favoured party (e.g. “For The Liberals”, “For The Conservatives”), today’s piece is headlined “Three reasons why it’s time for a change.”

They make their case in three points. Here are the money quotes (ellipsis mine):

1. While the past 12 years have been relatively good ones, the law of diminishing returns has been eroding Liberal effectiveness since at least the 2000 election…

Lacking firm policy anchors, a heavily politicized Prime Minister’s Office bobs from issue du jour to issue du jour, neglecting enduring challenges in favour of quick hits that hold out the promise of instant gratification…

Fresh thinking is demanded, but the same old elected officials supported by the same old circle of advisers naturally come up with the same old solutions.

2. Then there is this matter of the culture of entitlement that has taken deep root within the Liberal Party…. The Liberals have simply become too accustomed to power, and the elites in various sectors too accustomed to the Liberals. When even Ralph Goodale thinks it’s all right to investigate yourself, you know you’re in trouble.

Mr. Martin, a modest and honourable man personally, has done little to challenge this culture… In conducting business with the government of Canada, the question of ‘who do you know in the PMO?’ remains regrettably relevant.

3. Change is essential in a democracy. A perpetual lease on 24 Sussex Drive fuels the sense of entitlement that blurs the line between private gain and public good…

Today, Canadians clearly are ready for change. If not now — if not after a painfully incoherent minority Liberal government, if not after a succession of scandals, if not after four full terms of deteriorating government — then when? When is change acceptable if not now?

And finally, a conclusion that reads like a limp handshake:

It is hard to endorse him and his party unreservedly. We worry about his seeming indifference to the need for a strong central government in a country so replete with runaway centrifugal forces. We worry about him teaming up with the Bloc Québécois to weaken the federal government’s tax-raising capacity and its advocacy of national programs. We worry that he might have to strike retrograde compromises with social conservatives in the party’s midst. We worry that he may prove heavy-handed in wielding the considerable powers of a prime minister.

But we also know that public opinion in an information-enriched society provides a natural check on immoderate policies and behaviour. Political parties are in the business of currying public favour; a governing party, even an unnatural one, will not stray too far, too frequently, from the social consensus. The dynamic of democratic change keeps competitors for power within reasonable bounds. So it will be for Mr. Harper and his Conservatives.

Okay, one more reference to the Globe, and then I’ll move on to other things.

I haven’t seen this commented on elsewhere, but the Globe editorial board live-blogged Monday’s second English-language debate, and revealed how personal and sincere their feelings for Paul Martin really are.

Mary Janigan, 8:54 p.m. There are times when I listen to Mr. Martin when I see poignantly the PM he might have been. And sometimes is.

Marcus Gee, 8:55 p.m. That’s the tragedy of it. He’s terribly sincere and well meaning and even passionate about making the country a better place. But does he have the leadership skills to take us there?

Then later:

Marcus Gee, 9:46 p.m Again, Martin impresses with his passion for wanting to make Canada a better place. You can’t say he’s faking it when he gets fired up about Canada’s potential.

Mary Janigan, 9:47 p.m. I liked the real PM that we just saw, sketching the future. …

Marcus Gee, 9:52 p.m. Martin really does believe in setting great national objectives for the future and rallying people around them. Perhaps if sponsorship hadn’t come around he would be leading a majority govverment now and doing just that. Instead, he’s fighting for his life — and losing. Politics can be awfully cruel.

Mary Janigan, 9:52 p.m. Yes. I agree. There really is a rather sad, wistful undercurrent to this debate.

I’m not going to criticize this – in fact I think it’s great that the editorial board would provide this window into their thinking.

It’s a reminder that editorials aren’t created by robots, but by human beings, and that their opinions may be a product of feelings as much as of facts.

When laying out their front page to reflect the top story of the day, Globe editors had an embarrasment of riches to choose from.

• Martin admitting he personally approved attack ad
• Liberals openly discussing possibilty of defeat
• Jack Layton using a private clinic

So what story gets the most real estate on the front page, especially above the fold?

That’s right – today’s top story, EVOLVED?, brought to you by Jane Taber, is that Stephen Harper and actor Rob Wells “are descendents of the same great-great-great-great-great grandfather.” That’s the story. I’m not making this up. I’m not allowed to, yadda yadda…

As if the negative appeal of this photo collage to the Globe’s 416 base wasn’t transparent enough, the article procedes to describe Mr. Wells as if he is the character he plays on television:

For those Canadians who may not know, Mr. Robb is the potato chip and pepperoni-stick-consuming character living in his car in Nova Scotia’s fictional Sunnyvale trailer park. Profane and overweight, he steals the pepperoni sticks from his father. He is also the dumb one.

So dumb he can’t tell the difference between real news and junk, or between an actor and a character?