Categories: Capital Read, Inside the Queensway

UPDATED: ITQ to Little Shop of Tories and Not So Rapid Response: Uh, guys? Anyone awake out there?

by kadyomalley on Monday, September 22, 2008 12:40pm - 42 Comments

UPDATE: And a mere two and a half hours later, we’re told that John Baird – yes, John Baird, not Jason Kenney – will offer his slightly delayed reaction to the Liberal platform at 3:30 p.m. The bad news? He’s doing it out at Lancaster Road, so presumably, they don’t actually want reporters there — other than the duty cameras from the two news networks, which will probably run the post-rant Q&A live, at least. But where is Jason Kenney? Isn’t he the go-to guy for the Permanent Tax on Everything? Don’t tell me they’re actually going to debate the Liberal proposals on an environmental basis, are they?

It’s been an hour and a half since the Liberal platform was released, and we haven’t gotten so much as a “Bah, humbug” from the denizens of the Conservative War Room, who usually manage to whip out Just The Factses on an hourly basis even without a motherlode of new material from the opposition. And yet, so far, it’s been listservio silence from the Tories. Meanwhile, the NDP have offered up Peggy Nash to respond to the Liberal plan, although she’ll be doing so from Toronto, where she is busy trying to fend off the advancing forces of one Gerard Kennedy in Parkdale High Park.

Tags: conservative war room, hello world?, liberal platform

More by kadyomalley

http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

“He’s doing it out at Lancaster Road, so presumably, they don’t actually want reporters there — other than the duty cameras from the two news networks, which will probably run the post-rant Q&A live, at least.”

It amazes me, Kady, how you blithely write about how reporters are some of the laziest popinjays in Canada. It takes some kind of reporter to think, ‘sure it’s news but I can’t be assed to go because I might have to travel 20 minutes to cover it’.
http://www.macleans.ca Kady O’Malley

The thing is, in this case, it wasn’t actually news; it was a reaction to news. As such, it’s up to the party to come up with something sufficiently interesting to get reporters to spend an hour and a half travelling to and from a non-event, and unfortunately, simply offering live-action delivery of a press release that can just as easily be sent out via email simply isn’t enough to pull a crowd. Especially when a broadcast reporter can simply run a clip from the pool footage, or get a one-on-one exclusive interview. There’s a reason why no other party has followed in the Conservatives’ footsteps as far as holding these daily non-news conferences; it just doesn’t work.
Sean S.

Why can I hear Jean Chretien in my head, saying, “You know, da news is just that. It’s da news. Da news is da news is da news…” [or however he tried to explain what a "proof" was]
Brian

Kady:

You are a liberal hack. Why would the liberals need press conferences when they have you and the CBC?
RyanD

Brian- Let me be the first to say that with comments like the above you are a real class act buddy (if only you could hear the full depth of the sarcasm on my end)! If she is so bad why do you bother reading? No…wait…don’t bother answering…I just don’t care.
Brian

Ryan:

The truth hurts. A Ryerson study of bias in journalism released in 2005 suggests that people that work at the CBC are five times less likely than to vote for the Conservatives than other Canadians.

Did I need the Ryerson report to conclude that the CBC is a state-funded liberal mouthpiece? No. Just like I don’t need them to provide analysis on Kady’s coverage. Its obvious to everyone but you and Jason Cherniak.
http://economics.about.com Mike Moffatt

I had no idea the CBC owned Macleans!
keith by the Bruce

The CBC keeps baby calves in little plastic barns ?
http://economics.about.com Mike Moffatt

They have to; the calves would escape otherwise.
RyanD

Brian- there are several flaws with your points.
1- I don’t care what any study shows- coming out and calling someone a “hack” with no prelude and without a VERY strong reason is classless plain and simple.
2- You are assuming that the Ryerson study is accurate which is highly questionable considering that many people, especially those working for a publicly owned media outlet, would be hesitant to share their voting preferances. Thus I’d imagine the level of cooperation they recieved would make the study suspect. I’ll admit I’d have to read it to have a truely informed opinion on that though.
3- Even if the study is accurate that does not necessarily prove bias. “people that work at the CBC” could include any number of people who have little or no influence on news coverage. They do lots of other stuff besides the news at the CBC and there are lots of people who work as support staff etc… . Even if that were a poll of the journalists you are presuming that they are unproffessional and can’t vote one way while keeping their bias in check on the job. Assuming that all journalists vote, does that mean we should listen to none of them?
4- None of those points about Ryerson or the CBC have anything to do with Kady. You insulted her professionalism and character without pretext or explanation.
5- If “it” (whatever “it” is) was obvious to everyone but me and Mr. Cherniak then nobody would read this blog OR (like you) everyone but me and my pal Jason would be flooding the site with nasty attacks on Kady…hmmmm….funny I don’t think I have seen that happening.
Jack Mitchell

How’s this for a News Flash? “Lots of Tory bloggers are paranoid maniacs.”

Believe me, it’s well sourced. I’ve been studying the phenomenon for several weeks.
kody

Sean S: liberal “healthy surplus”

Today’s Liberals: the more of your money idling in their hands,

the “healthier” it is.
Brian

RyanD:

Save the smugness and sense of superior morality. The fact that you named several flaws with the the Ryerson study after admitting you had never bothered to read it suggests that your own self-righteousness gets in the way of both logic and reason.
Brian

I have no idea why I feel the need to make the case for bias at the CBC. There are literally hundreds of examples but here is one:

As for Kady’s bias, its also obvious to me and the fact that we are debating this on her blog entry and site thats essentially dedicated to mocking the conservatives is a tad ironic.
Sisyphus

So much to mock. So little time.
RyanD

Brian- I admitted I hadn’t read it because I am actually interested in honest debate rather than name calling. If I was smug and I wouldn’t have admitted my lack of knowledge about the report at all, nor would I have bothered to justify my criticism of your comment. I simply would have spoken from on high and presumed my own righteousness. I guess that’s what honest gets you these days.
As for your beloved study, my criticisms were speculative and I admitted as much. I’m not sure how you expect me, or anyone, to be able to respond to comments you make about a study which you never named or provided a link to. Should I have scowered the Ryerson archives, given the study a thorough reading and then got back to you with my specific and more informed criticisms a week later?
Pingback: » Assorted campaign thoughts on Nanos, Liberals platform, and the CPC War Room Scott’s DiaTribes: My personal opinions on social and political issues from a progressive standpoint.