Archive for ‘Politics’

February 19, 2017

Fake Nooz? Incomplete and irrelevant perhaps

I thought I’d weigh in on #fakenews.

I think covering an election rally when the election was several months ago is #fakenews. Or at least irrelevant, but that’s perhaps an elitist word. So I’ll be part of the hoi polloi and simply say #fakenews.

I think a news item that REPEATEDLY tells me that only 12 of the 14 leadership candidates were at the debate but spending most of the news clip on only one of the two no-shows – no mention of even the name of the other one is #fakenews. Or at least incomplete and biased. None of the 12 who are showing up were mentioned by name!

Hello! news people.

February 6, 2017

#LOL – new hastag Also #progressiveswhocareabouttheconservativepartyleadershiprace

OK, So I’m betting my proposed hashtag #LOL for Leitch and O’Leary. As in, let’s have less #LOL on my facebook feed, will be catchier than #progressiveswhocareabouttheconservativepartyleadershiprace but so far no one’s proposed something shorter that says it. I’ve rejected #progressiveconservatives as I’m #progressive but not #conservative.

But I *am* concerned about the CPC Leadership Race. After all, all of us will be impacted by the Leader of the opposition.

So I’ve been following coverage and feel there’s too much #LOL. imho. fwiw. btw.

Here’s an edited (just shortened not changed) email exchange I had when I objected to what I saw as an increasing coverage — esp with photos of #LOL or #OL in particular.

Read from bottom up. Otherwise it makes little sense.

I feel comforted. And looked at some of your other columns online and see what I perceive as more balance there.

May it be so!

Take care,

On 2/6/2017 11:25 AM, JOURNALIST wrote:

It is not similar to the coverage of Trump. He was on every  American’s TV, on many channels, 24/7. Most Canadians would not recall there is a Conservative leadership campaign on right now.

But the point is that writing occasional political columns about a candidate is normal. That’s what I do in every leadership race. Putting them on e-talk and morning shows is not.

—–Original Message—–
From: Mary Bennett []
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2017 1:58 PM

Subject: Re: no more O’Leary and Leitch features please

Thanks for your quick response. You are not the only journalist I’m sending a message to.

And I hope it will not be similar to the US coverage, but that’s what I’m seeing so far across the board.

Take care,

On 2/6/2017 10:55 AM, JOURNALIST wrote:

Thanks for your note Ms. Bennett,

I understand your sentiment, but I think it is misplaced. It’s one thing to bemoan the attention that Donald Trump got in constant coverage on 24-hour news channels and in nearly every medium. It’s another to moan about an article about a leadership candidate’s performance in his first debate. I write columns about politics, and that includes writing columns about aspiring prime ministers and candidates who might win the leadership of one of the country’s major political parties. Mr. O’Leary is exactly that. It’s not unusual. It is relevant, and it’s not gratuitous. And it’s not comparable to the wall to wall live coverage of Mr. Trump.


—–Original Message—–
From: Mary Bennett []
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2017 1:18 PM

Subject: no more O’Leary and Leitch features please

Re: your column along with the 5×8″ photo of my least favorite candidates.

Although I don’t vote conservative, I’m aware that the Leader of the Opposition has impact on the country and at least the media. I watched the entire CPC debate and have been following some of the candidates.

IMHO O’Leary and Leitch are among the least suited to this role and many of us are bemoaning the attention that Trump got through media in the months leading up to what many of us thought was an unthinkable election, inauguration and executive orders left and right.


So far my favorites are Michael Chong and Lisa Raitt with Deepak being the most adorable.

Andrew Scheer who I don’t agree with on much is the candidate who has received the most endorsements by fellow MPs.

Surely professional journalists can find something newsworthy beyond those two!

December 8, 2015

What to call “those people”? Thank you, CBC. Da’esh it is. Now for an adjective!

I was listening to CBC The Current yesterday about the connotations for the choices on what to call “those people” and will henceforth use the acronyn Da’esh instead of ISIS (An Egyptian goddess, and a cool one at that) or ISIL (Rhymes with Lysol and makes me think of a household cleaning product).

Here’s the podcast.

Now I’m looking for direction on adjectives. I notice using “extremist”, “radical” and “fundamentalist” are used in front of “Muslim” or “Islamic”.

Here are some selected definitions of these words. I think we need something different. Suggestions?

extreme: utmost or exceedingly great in degree: e.g. extreme joy. 

radical: forming a basis or foundation.

fundamental: being an original or primary source: e.g. a fundamental idea.

Admittedly other definitions give more of a whiff of the connotation that this might not be such a good thing, after all, but I’m looking for an adjective that makes it clear that most Muslims do not subscribe to the interpretations and conclusions of Da’esh.

How about “wrong” or “bad” for starters?

Notes: here are some helpful links I found that supported the idea of using the word Da’esh:–bkC822p_zl

(from 5 months ago – some excerpts below).

Daesh, an adapted acronym of their Arabic name – Dawlat al-Islamiyah f’al-Iraq w Belaad al-Sham – is similar to another Arabic word – das – which means ‘to trample down’ or ‘crush’, which could therefore be the source of their dislike.

Lord hall dismissed a letter signed by 120 MPs demanding that the BBC stop using the term on the grounds it gives undue credibility to the Islamic extremists, saying the BBC would “redouble our efforts” to use caveats such as “so called Islamic State group”.

And recently on BBC


In the Arabic-speaking world, where the use of acronyms is otherwise uncommon, Daesh is used widely but with pejorative overtones.

The label has gained currency despite or perhaps as a direct consequence of the irritation it causes the group, and is now used widely across the world by politicians and in the media.

“Frankly, this evil death cult is neither a true representation of Islam, nor is it a state,” UK Prime Minister David Cameron told Parliament in December 2015 when announcing that his government would be joining France in calling the group “Daesh” rather than “Isil”.

Daesh also sounds similar to an Arabic verb that means to tread underfoot, trample down, or crush something.





%d bloggers like this: