THIS MAGAZINE: BECAUSE EVERTHING IS POLITICAL

Search for:

• FEATURES
• THIS & THAT
• ARTS & IDEAS
• FICTION & POETRY
• LETTERS
• BLOG THIS
•  
• SUBSCRIBE
• BACK ISSUES
• SUPPORT THIS
•  
• ABOUT THIS
• CONTRIBUTORS
• CONTACT THIS
• ADVERTISE
• SITE MAP

Home » Blog This

October 27, 2008

A birthday message for the National Post

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 09:54 AM ET | Comments (1)

Canada's second mostly-coast-to-coast newspaper, the National Post, turns 10 years young today. It published its first issue on October 27, 1998, and has been keeping the country entertained with its amiably loony notions ever since. Despite corporate owner CanWest's current cash-strapped status, we hope you'll be around for many years more, scrapping and quarreling with us all the way. Here's the cake we baked for you with our best wishes on making it to the double digits:

(Click here for a larger version)

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

October 24, 2008

CBC, Media Democracy Day, and waking up with David Frum

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 11:06 AM ET | Comments (1)

I went last night to the relaunch of the new Rabble.ca, a pretty swank bash held at the Steam Whistle Brewery in Toronto. The main attraction last night was a panel discussion with Maude Barlow, Murray Dobbin, Jessica Yee, and Anne Lagacé Dowson, and moderated by Duncan Cameron. It was a pretty good discussion.

I asked a question during the Q&A (I think I may have barged in front of someone else, in fact — sorry!) about the CBC. The Corp. is under tremendous pressure right now, feeling skittish about the Conservative government that writes the cheques that keep it going. During the panel discussion, the panelists had said that the best way to keep the mainstream media honest was to complain when you saw or heard something you think is inappropriate; Duncan Cameron said off-hand that you could probably find something to complain about Peter Mansbridge every night, and that statement stuck with me.

I wanted to know whether progressives can still count on the CBC. In other words, for progressive citizens and social movements, is the CBC in its current siege mentality good, bad, or indifferent? Murray Dobbin made this insight, which I think is worth paraphrasing: No matter how many conservative commentators it brings in, and no matter how many softball questions CBC reporters lob at conservative interview subjects, he said, it's not going to save them from a Conservative agenda that fundamentally opposes the existence of a public broadcaster. They don't hate the CBC because it's an alleged den of socialists (although that doesn't endear them) — they oppose it because they don't believe there should be a publicly funded broadcaster in Canada. Period. So the CBC does itself no favours by trying to be friends with people who want it dismantled either way.

This came flooding back to me this morning when I turned on the radio and found that the CBC national morning news show, The Current, was being guest-hosted by arch-conservative David Frum, of all people. Former George W. Bush speechwriter, American Enterprise Institute fellow, beltway dweeb, inventor of the "axis of evil" David Frum. I listened for a while, and at first it made me angry. But on reflection, it just makes me sad. To watch the CBC futilely attempt to cozy up to people who actively campaign for its dissolution is just, well, pathetic.

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

September 02, 2008

To save CBC Radio 2, we must destroy it

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 08:32 AM ET | Comments (1)

Today CBC Radio 2 launches its new format, a controversial repositioning of the national broadcaster's commercial-free, all-music station. The overhauled lineup of programming reduces the amount of classical music and adds more jazz, pop, rock, folk, hip-hop — enough of a jumble, essentially, to make the station not really listenable for anyone.

The changes have irked many listeners, who accuse the CBC of dumbing itself down and chasing trends to try and snag listeners who won't tune in anyway. Take, for instance, this Globe and Mail comments thread, or the 16,000+ members of the "Save Classical Music at the CBC" Facebook group. And while I agree with those who complain the new format is schizoid and unfocused, I would actually argue that the changes don't go far enough.

Most of the criticism around this change has focused on the reduction in classical music. Classical music, the thinking goes, is inherently refined, educational, and aesthetically superior to contemporary music. Even if that were true &mdash which I don't concede &mdash it's beside the point when talking about the CBC.

Why do we have a national broadcaster in the first place? To provide Canadian perspective on world events, showcase Canadian artists, and tell Canadian stories. If the CBC really wanted to live up to this mandate with Radio 2, it would play nothing but Canadian music, instead of material written by dead white European men centuries before the invention of radio. Classical music is obviously part of every well-rounded musical diet, but there is no logical reason that the CBC must be its ordained provider in this country.

The truly daring move, and one that would shore up — instead of erode — the CBC's mission to provide Canadian programming, would be to transfer Radio 2, classical music and all, to satellite radio and online streaming, and move CBC Radio 3 onto Radio 2's slot on the FM dial. Radio 3 has been building a substantial and devoted audience for years now, airing new Canadian music 24 hours a day, on satellite radio and over the web. It's doing everything that a CBC radio station should be doing: it plays music by living, working Canadian musicians; it makes room for unique programming that can't be found anywhere else on the broadcast dial; and it eschews vapid, Americanized top-40 pablum.

This move would undoubtedly provoke even more teeth-gnashing and garment-rending than the current programming change has done. But it would give the number-two station a real and meaningful mission, and save it from the anonymous irrelevance toward which it is aimlessly drifting.

Image: CC-licensed "CBC Radio 2 Posters" via Flickr

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

December 10, 2007

Maher Arar helps Amnesty's letter-writing marathon

Posted by mason at 01:37 AM ET | Comments (1)

If you're reading this on Monday, you're likely able to check out live coverage of Amnesty International's Global Write-a-thon in association with the brand new rabble endeavour, rabbletv. Wrongly accused Canadian Maher Arar will be among those speaking during the day's events.

To mark International Human Rights Day, AI is hosting letter-writing events in Ottawa and Toronto to raise awareness of a variety of human rights causes, and has joined forces with online news outlet rabble to provide live online video coverage of the events using the Mogulus player, a first for both organizations. Late Sunday night, there were 937 individual letter-writers and groups across Canada registered for the event, including 49 in Ottawa and 87 in Toronto.

Coverage runs from 11:30 am to 8 pm (presumably this is Eastern time, since the events are in Ontario). Rabble will be basing its coverage out of AI's downtown Toronto office, while AI will file footage from its Ottawa office.

Click here or go to rabble.ca to view the coverage.

(PICTURED: GUANTANAMO BAY DETAINEE OMAR KHADR)

More entries on: Human rights | Media navel-gazing

December 07, 2007

Factchecking? The National Post? HA!

Posted by audra at 07:37 PM ET | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Oh dudes, I finally got a new username/password! Lookout, internet! I am so happy to be on here again, because I have a lot of fury to share with you!

To commemorate December 6th this year, Barbara Kay wrote this annoying article where she talks about how women need to get over themselves about being targets of violence, and something about why can't everything be more like Remembrance Day. There are roughly a million things wrong with what she's written, but the most glaring blatant error is this paragraph:

Logic would demand that the buried name of Laurie Dann be as recognizable and as reviled as that of 12/6 killer Marc Lepine's. Dann's hatred for boys exceeded Lepine's for women. A year before the Montreal massacre, this equally psychotic Chicago woman shot five elementary-school boys, poisoned two fraternity kitchens, torched the Young Men's Jewish council, burned two boys in their homes, shot her own son, and murdered an eight-year old boy, claiming he had raped her.

My wonderful friend Sarah Curry has eagle-eyes and is a shrewd researcher, and this claim set off her warning bells, big time. So she did some research, and discovered that almost none of that is true. Two girls were shot, Dann sent poisoned drinks to 6 families and set fire to a house where she babysat in which a mother and her two kids were in the house.

Sarah wrote a great letter to the editor, which I hope they print. I wrote to Barbara Kay herself, hoping that even if she was a rampant anti-feminist, she might at least wanted to be accurate about it.

I can't deny that I also was enjoying the chance to gloat a little, because let's be serious her stuff is tripe and it's nice to be able to poke holes in her "logic".

It went like this:

Me!:
Does the National Post employ any fact checkers? What you have written about Laurie Dann is completely inaccurate. Actual news reportage of the event can be found -- from dozens of legit media sources -- here:

http://www.theawarenesscenter.org/lauriedann.html

Laurie Dann did not solely target males. One male child was killed, no male-specific buildings were burned down, and male and female children both were injured in her spree shooting.

It's frankly astonishing that such a string of invented facts got past the editors.

Audra Williams
Edmonton, AB

Her!
My facts came from a highly accredited scholar's book: Moral Panic by John Fekete. That *is* considered fact checking. And no the Post does not employ fact checkers as we take our facts from what are normally reliable sources. Fekete is a reputable scholar and I had no reason to distrust his claims. Barbara

Me! (after looking up quoted parts of the book>
Oh wow, you sure did take it from that book! Practically verbatim!

I trust there will be some kind of correction or addendum, detailing how one of the cruxes of your article's argument was based on fiction?

audra

Her!
I actually don't think it is important whether Dann killed boys AND girls or just boys, becasue you see the anlogy still holds, since I said she should logically stand in as a symbol for women who abuse children. I think your quarrel is with John Fekete in any case, since I took the information in good faith.

Me!
It does not still stand. This is what you wrote:

"Logic would demand that the buried name of Laurie Dann be as recognizable and as reviled as that of 12/6 killer Marc Lepine's. Dann's hatred for boys exceeded Lepine's for women. "

Which isn't the case at all.

It's so strange to me how unconcerned you are about inaccurate information being in a piece you've written.

I have emailed Fekete as well, don't worry. Maybe as a scholar -- rather than a journalist -- he'll be more concerned about facts.

audra

Her!
Okay, take out the sentence about the hatred. My arument still stands.

Me!
What I'm asking is that YOU take out the sentence about the hatred, actually, rather than leave the inaccuracies online.

Me again!
While you're at it, this bit has to go, too:

"A year before the Montreal massacre, this equally psychotic Chicago woman shot five elementary-school boys, poisoned two fraternity kitchens, torched the Young Men's Jewish council, burned two boys in their homes, shot her own son, and murdered an eight-year old boy, claiming he had raped her. "

Her!
Please inform me of what Fekete tells you. I will adjust my website version accordingly if necessary.

Me!
Is Fekete the only source you will accept on this issue? Because if not, I can cite 48 different newspaper articles.

Her!
Since I took Fekete as my source, I need to know what his source was.

THE END.

Seriously, what the hell. Why do I have to be the one who contacts her source and updates her about the factualness of her own article? And why does the National Post have no factcheckers? It's all so galling.

Today I had an email exchange with the National Post, and it seems like they are willing to print an extensive letter on the subject, which I am going to write this weekend. Hilarious, they seem very insistent that my letter have sources to back up its claims.

I guess the letters page has more exacting standards than the rest of the paper. Sheesh.

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

November 08, 2007

Stephen Lewis, The Hour and This Magazine

Posted by jesse at 07:19 PM ET | Comments (1)

The September/October issue of This was given some airtime on CBC's The Hour. Stephen Lewis offers his insights, and cradles that magazine like a newborn baby. He can't seem to put it down. Check it out here, at about 4:48 into the segment.

More entries on: From the intern desk | Media navel-gazing | THIS matters

September 17, 2007

Media meltdown?

Posted by annette at 04:15 PM ET | Comments (0)

The CRTC's "Diversity of Voices" hearings kick off this week to review Canada's current media cross-ownership regulations. They arrive in the wake of CTVglobemedia and Rogers divvying up CHUM, while CanWest Global (along with Goldman Sachs) took over Alliance Atlantis.

The Tyee has a thoughtful analysis by mass communications prof Marc Edge, titled Big Media's Big Showdown. He's not optimistic, pointing out that the CRTC's "broadcast only" jurisdiction limits its potential impact:

"There is only one way the CRTC can assist press freedom in Canada, and that is by disentangling it from television ownership. That may require a federal political will that is lacking these days, however. After all, Stephen Harper was personally endorsed in his 2006 bid for the prime minister's job by CanWest Publications head David Asper."

Any bets? Will the CRTC restore media diversity in Canada? Even if it rules against media cross-ownership, will it make a difference?

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

August 03, 2007

Mother Jones on Canada's Afghan mission: What needs to be told?

Posted by mason at 10:01 AM ET | Comments (1)

An article in the current issue of Mother Jones magazine, a stalwart of independent media in the United States, has created something of a stir in a rural part of Nova Scotia. The story is a Canadian military doctor's diary of one month at Kandahar Airfield in Afghanistan, and in it is a detailed and sad account of the fight to save the life of Corporal Kevin Megeney.

Cpl. Megeney, a Canadian, died tragically on March 6 when a roommate's rifle went off in his tent, and as the writer, Dr. Kevin Patterson, describes it: "An accident. Ten thousand soldiers who have to carry weapons in order to be served breakfast and it is bound to happen sooner or later."

The dust-up comes in the comments following the article, in which several readers voice their anger over what they see as disrespect for the life of Cpl. Megeney. Several indicate that they are from Cpl. Megeney's native Pictou County and that they knew the victim. They say they can't get on with the grieving process knowing that the details of the man's death are being made public, and admonish both the writer and Mother Jones for exacerbating the pain of Cpl. Megeney's family.

"I cannot believe people feel the need to print this tragic yet graphic story again and again," writes a commenter calling him/herself Pictou County Upset. "The family must be heartbroken, and thus feeling very betrayed, and to think all the while this sits in print someone is making money off it. Being ex- military nothing surprises me anymore. God Bless."

"PATTERSON: You're nothing more than a crude, insensative bastard," writes Greg, Family Friend, while another commenter who signs off as Ed MacIntosh says the details in the article are a breach of patient-doctor confidentiality and indicates that he hopes the writer gets sued.

The vitriol is enough to warrant a response from Mother Jones co-editor Clara Jeffery, who tries in another comment to set the record straight.

I then spoke with Mrs. Megeney by phone at length. She assured me that the family would like to see the article, and that she was a nurse and would read it before any other members of her family; she said it would help to have closure to know more about what happened. We heard from other members of the family who also wanted to read it, and some whom after they did expressed the desire to write to Dr. Patterson "to express my appreciation to him for exhausting every effort to save [him]."

Is the anger shown by these readers justified? Should journalists be expected to omit details of a grisly death in a theatre of war out of respect for the dead, or is there a duty to report on the horrors of battle? The account in question is about one-sixth of the complete article, which provides a personal perspective on a mission the public has only limited access to. I encourage all to read it.

(CROSS-POSTED TO PROPELLER)

More entries on: Media navel-gazing | War and peace

May 31, 2007

The Tyee: Part of the solution

Posted by mason at 04:05 PM ET | Comments (3)

This Magazine is fortunate to be associated with a number of other fiercely independent news gatherers in Canada; we tend to believe that a diversity of voices is an essential part of a democratic media system.

That’s why the success of The Tyee website (which I wrote about in the magazine awhile back) is so inspiring. In the face of highly concentrated news media ownership in British Columbia, The Tyee has carved out a reputation as a trustworthy source of local news coverage and thoughtful cultural writing.

Currently, The Tyee is looking to boost its readership with a nifty little viral internet campaign. Watch the video above and check out the site—you won’t be disappointed!

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

May 04, 2007

shame on whom?

Posted by john_d at 12:38 PM ET | Comments (0)

Some intriguing details coming out of Britain surrounding the resignation of Lord Browne as head of British Petroleum after revelations of, among other things, a gay affair.

The intrigue? No-one's all that intrigued.

"Gay stories are just not appealing to the masses it seems." -- so says PR consultant Max Clifford in The Guardian, attempting to explain why none of the major British broadcasters is devoting much money or time to the story.

I lived in London in 1987, during the second Thatcher election. It was a circus. My neighbourhood, Earl's Court was the centre of London's gay scene at the time (don't know if it still is), as well as being the expat Aussie neighbourhood and a hangout for local Chelsea football supporters on match day -- how's that for a potent diversity? One of the local candidates for office -- and I confess I forget which one -- was caught in a classic British tabloid sex scandal. Dude was red-handed with a "rentboy," and I believe there was some spanking involved. The papers and radio news went nuts. That week, at the local open-air market, obvious plants from the opposing campaign dogged this candidate through the crowds with cricket paddle spanking devices and shouts of "For shame! For shame!"

Clearly, in 1987, gayness and shame was still a sellable media connection.

These days, not so much. Lord Browne resigned mainly over allegations of bad business practices, though lying about his relationship didn't help his credibility. Is Britain over gay?

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

March 11, 2007

Back in the USSR

Posted by aaron at 07:13 PM ET | Comments (0)

The latest dead Russian journalist, Ivan Safronov, fell from the fifth floor of his apartment building on March second. Authorities claimed it was a suicide but nobody believes this. He was, at the time, working on an article about Russian arms sales to the Middle East, making him the twenty second working journalist to die since Putin gained power in 2000 according to Reporters Without Borders, an organization that monitors press freedom worldwide.

Maybe you caught Michael Specter's article in the New Yorker on January 29th about the new Russian totalitarianism. Most articles don't shock me anymore, I've become very desensitized, but this one did. Surprisingly, I'd fallen for the liberal line that, "post-Soviet Russians now enjoy the benefits of western capitalism and pluralism, finally being free to pursue a sort of Russian version of the American dream."

The reality, as Specter points out, is far darker:

"Sick of the lines, the empty shops, and the false promises of Soviet life, Russians looked first to the West--and particularly to the United States--to provide an economic model. What followed was an epic disaster: the sell-off of the state's most valuable assets made a few dozen people obscenely rich, but the lives of millions of others became far worse. The health-care system fell apart, and so did many of the social-service networks.

Russia became the first industrial country ever to experience a sustained fall in life expectancy. Russian males born today can, on average, expect to live to the age of fifty-nine, dying younger than if they were born in Pakistan or Bangladesh. It is not surprising, then, that by the time Putin became President most Russians were only too happy to exchange the metaphysical ideas of free speech and intellectual freedom for the concrete desires of owning a home and a car and possessing a bank account. They also wanted to feel that somebody was in control of their country."

Consequently, press freedom in Russia has completely disappeared. Statistically it's safer to be a journalist in Afghanistan, which, however you read it, is pretty terrifying.

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

March 09, 2007

Franked

Posted by john_d at 10:32 AM ET | Comments (10)

(image courtesy Frank Magazine, apparently)

The pro-Conrad Black website www.supportlordblack.com is a truly brilliant Frank Magazine hoax, proving once again that if it seems too funny to be true...

D.B. Scott's magazine blog reveals the saddest detail, which is that it appears Lord Black himself sent the site a note of thanks and a t-shirt offer. Now I actually do feel sorry for him. He's becoming that Jon Lovitz character who took Marge Simpson to the prom.

You know, looking at it now, that ribbon up there really should have tipped me off. Brilliant.

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

March 05, 2007

irony passes away at Chicago newsdesk -- no-one notices

Posted by john_d at 11:09 AM ET | Comments (1)

As we all await Lord Black's day in court (March 14th, or as I like to think of it , 3 days before Guinness Day), we sadly mourn the death of ironic comment and hope that Rick Mercer can do something to bring it back to life.

A while back, I posted here about a website set up to gather and express support for Conrad Black in his ongoing legal difficulties in the United States. I encouraged readers to go to the site and register their true feelings for Lord Black. I ended the call to arms by suggesting that all of us supporters of Lord Black would enjoy a bit of fox hunting at the trial's end.

This past weekend, the Chicago Tribune quoted from my posting to make the point that "the fact that Black is out and about, holding his head up, is winning him some grudging respect." Tribune staffer Susan Chandler writes:

Black also has garnered supporters in cyberspace. A recent post by "john_d" on a Canadian magazine blog asks if readers are "sick of how the United States is persecuting one of our best and brightest with a frivolous legal action inspired by little more than the inferiority complex of the common masses?" Then it urges them to "Stand up for Conrad Black."

A public relations blogger in the U.S. declares "Conrad Black is my new anti-hero and favorite writer."

I can't believe the fox-hunting didn't make it into the quote.

Edward Greenspan is a brilliant lawyer, and Lord Black's campaign of innocence has been a marvel to watch. This should be almost as good as the March Madness college basketball tournament.

Thanks to D.B. Scott for pointing out the Tribune article. D.B.reads an awful lot.

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

February 24, 2007

R.I.P. Arthur

Posted by aaron at 03:38 PM ET | Comments (1)

Arthur Magazine, the free journal of freak folk, radical politics and alternative living from Los Angeles is now deceased. Over the four years and 25 issues of its existence I learned about artist like Devendra Banhart, Brightblack Morning Light and Joanna Newsom. Perhaps even more important than the music was the bold editorial stance against militarism, racism and the effects of American capitalism.

Editor in Chief Jay Babcock was quoted last June in The New York Times: "Hallucinogens, rock 'n' roll, love of nature, interest in social justice. These are all people basically fleeing in horror from the homogenizing, materialist, bottom-line corporate monoculture that's overtaking America."

And the culture has claimed another victim, but Arthur leaves behind a legacy larger than it's pages. The magazine was instrumental in sponsoring and nurturing an incredible amount of music festivals, art shows, musicians and writers who will keep the essence of the magazine alive.

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

December 05, 2006

grinch time

Posted by john_d at 05:42 PM ET | Comments (0)

The Toronto CBC morning radio show, Metro Morning, featured an interview with two women this morning on the topic of "Why are wives and girlfirends so difficult to buy gifts for?" The real subject was "Why are men so bad at buying gifts for women?"

One woman told a story about how a former boyfriend drove her from Toronto to New Brunswick so she could spend Christmas with her family when she thought she wouldn't be able to do so. He did all the driving, through snow, and paid for the whole trip. She said "If you ask him, he'd say that trip was my gift," and then she proceeded to complain that all he had wrapped up for her was a pair of gloves. What did she get him? An MP3 player she had asked his entire family to go in on.

Gawd, men are pigs, aren't they? I mean, gloves? That's what, like, chauffeurs wear, isn't it?

I so love holiday "journalism."

Bah, humbug.

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

October 18, 2006

I confirm and do not deny

Posted by john_d at 01:37 PM ET | Comments (2)

For those out there who think all I do on this blog is refer to Paul Wells' blog (properly apostropheed this time) and then say something smarmy, read on.

Wells wrote of Ignatieff yesterday:

Michael Ignatieff's campaign is now reduced to a kind of dare. If you don't support him, it's because you're not sophisticated enough. You can't handle his clever insights. You can't parse his subtle arguments. You've known him for 40 years. What are you, some kind of rube? Chicken. Chicken chicken chicken. Give him the job. Better yourself.

To which I would respond, "it is now reduced to that?"

For some sort of record, I like Paul Wells, and he can drink with me in Etobicoke-Lakeshore anytime. There's one really great bar.

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

September 19, 2006

The future of journalism?

Posted by mason at 01:22 PM ET | Comments (0)

“An experiment in open-source reporting” is how Jay Rosen refers to his web project NewAssignment.Net. Rosen, a journalism professor at NYU and a prominent media critic, is proposing a new kind of citizen journalism in which the audience works with journalists by providing story assignments and feedback, while the professional journalists “carry the project home.”

Central to the idea is that readers can donate to the assignment directly, although other funding arrangements will probably exist. Apparently, this is an idea with traction. Already Rosen has secured $10,000 each from the Sunlight Foundation (a web-based watchdog of Congress) and Craig Newmark (of Craigslist fame) to develop the project. With newspapers struggling to remain relevant, thus leaving increasing numbers of journalists out of work, both citizens and media professionals have interests in a project that can advance democracy through the Fourth Estate.

Rosen seems to envision contributions from “large groups of users” rather than single investors, but I wonder if such an idea could be vulnerable to appropriation by wealthy users who can afford to offer larger amounts of money to put journalists to work on stories that may not be as beneficial to democracy as those ideas coming from the bottom up.

PHOTO: JAY ROSEN (FROM NYU WEBSITE)

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

August 17, 2006

Helping save lives through right-wing media?

Posted by mason at 11:36 AM ET | Comments (3)

The Toronto edition of today’s National Post carries a commentary by yours truly on the importance of harm reduction strategies in fighting drug addiction and the spread of diseases involved in unhealthy drug use. In it, I mention why Insite should stay open beyond the end of its trial run next month.

Say what you will about the Post (please, I encourage it), but I’m betting my article will reach more readers than a similar story in the alternative press would. Hopefully, some of them will even be motivated to support Insite….

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

August 08, 2006

Point, um, taken

Posted by joyceb at 12:44 PM ET | Comments (2)

BabyTalk, a free publication in the U.S. aimed at new mothers hoping to illustrate the controversy surrounding public breastfeeding in the U.S. by publishing what is said to be the first American magazine cover to break the taboo about showing a woman's breast, has done exactly that. According to this AFP report, 25% of some 5,000 letters regarding the cover have expressed outrage (!) and disgust (?!).

Some of the feedback:

"I was offended and it made my husband very uncomfortable when I left the magazine on the coffee table."

"Gross, I am sick of seeing a baby attached to a boob," the mother of a four-month-old said.

These comments are from new mothers. Clearly it is an understatement on the part of the editors that "There is a real puritanical streak in America." It is apparent that embarassment about breastfeeding begins in the home. Sad.

I am sure This Magazine readers will not be offended, here in fact is our beautiful Jan/Feb 2004 cover (our first with the redesign). It was itself not without controversy, as we debated ourselves just how much to show. (In the end, no nipple.)

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

July 19, 2006

Remember this story for when he runs for office...

Posted by mason at 12:48 AM ET | Comments (16)

Funny, why haven't we seen this article about John Bolton saying there is no moral equivalent between Lebanese civilian deaths and terrorism victims published anywhere but the independent media?

More entries on: Bushfraud | Human rights | Media navel-gazing | Signs of the Apocalypse | War and peace

June 28, 2006

excellence noted

Posted by john_d at 09:54 AM ET | Comments (0)

CBC's Middle East bureau chief Adrienne Arsenault is leaving Jerusalem for a new post in London (according to this report on the Zerb blog).

I've probably mentioned this before, but I consider Arsenault to be one of the best working Canadian journalists. I admire the subtle, difficult, balanced work she's done during her time in Israel. She's also a flat-out great writer. If the report is true, this is a loss to Middle East reporting. On the other hand, I look forward to seeing what she can do in London.

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

Helen Thomas: American Hero

Posted by mason at 12:36 AM ET | Comments (0)

Helen Thomas, the long-time White House correspondent, was on the Daily Show tonight, and she said things like*:

"Democracy isn't spread with the barrell of a gun"
and
"I believe people have a right to know everything their government is doing."

Is this woman a defender of democracy or what?

* paraphrased, of course

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

June 27, 2006

Tease This

Posted by john_d at 02:25 PM ET | Comments (5)

THIS Magazine's super-efficient and ever-delightful new editor, Jessica Johnston dropped off an advance copy of the July/August THIS (her first) at my office this morning -- as she was also dropping off a small pile of poetry submissions to the literary contest (I am a panner for poetic ore). The mag will hit store shelves by the end of this week. In the meantime, sink into your fetid well of envy because I can read it now while you cannot. This is how the left engages in advance marketing.

I took the mag with me to my favorite little hole in the wall lunch joint on Dundas and laughed in my soup over Scott Piatkowski's account of not being invited back onto the Michael Coren television show for the unforgivable transgression of catching the host being wrong. Apparently Coren insisted that the right to marry is not one of those pesky rights covered by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (adopted by the UN way back in 1948).

This came up in the context of a discussion about same sex marriage. I'll let you folks figure out who was advocating which position -- rabble-columnist Scott Piatkowski v. Crossroads Television talk show host Michael Coren.

Annnyway, of course the right to marry is there in the declaration (article 16), which, as I've just proven, any boob with Google can call up on their computer in under ten seconds.

So, having publicly exposed Coren not knowing something he really should have known, our man Piatkowski finds himself frozen out of guest duty on the show. Not surprising really; this is standard fare with the neocon and religious right as they struggle to combat the evil and pervasive leftwing media bias -- see Fox's Bill O'Reilly, whose hypocritical froth is so well documented in Al Franken's Lies, And the Lying Liars Who Tell Them, Chapter 13, Bill O'Reilly: Lying, Splotchy Bully.

What I wonder is how any "journalist" can still take himself seriously after such a display of intellectual bullying.

Hey, there's article 19 of the UDHR. What's it say?:

Article 19:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers unless they publicly embarrass Michael Coren or Bill O'Reilly.

Oh, nevermind.

Go, buy THIS. Excellent Canada Day reading.

More entries on: Human rights | Media navel-gazing | THIS matters

June 21, 2006

Concentrate, now, concentrate!

Posted by mason at 02:57 PM ET | Comments (0)

The Nation magazine will print in its July 3 issue an updated chart detailing media concentration in the U.S., which of course spills over to affect Canadian news audiences on a daily basis. Follow the link and download the PDF to see who owns what news outlets. Heck, why not print it out and post it on your fridge or in your office as a friendly reminder and conversation piece?

In related news, the Canadian Senate's report on the state of Canada's media is set to be released today, and while CanWest's David Asper has called for greater consolidation of media, the report will recommend a revamping of the Competition Act to require an automatic review of news media ownership when one proprietor's holdings exceed a certain percentage of a single market's audience.

However, given the history of Parliament ignoring recommendations from Senate reports, expect media ownership in Canada to continue reaching concentration levels close to that in the U.S.

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

June 19, 2006

Fragging conservatives

Posted by joyceb at 03:22 PM ET | Comments (11)

Editor and publisher weighs in today on the (latest) Ann Coulter controversy with an interesting editorial on how conservatives like Coulter can demonstrably go much further over the line than progressives without jeapordizing their jobs or their audience.

As long as Coulter jokes about killing people in her books and on TV, her column is in no jeapardy. Universal Press Syndicate, which distributes her column, says "the syndicate is only concerned about "what is in the columns that we distribute.""

Another Universal creator, liberal editorial cartoonist Ted Rall, was hurt financially by fallout from a 2002 cartoon that lost him the WashingtonPost.com as well as work at Men's Health magazine due to right-wing bloggers "flooding that site". "In the end, Rall figures the backlash cost him $40,000 to $50,000 in business."

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

---

 Subscribe to the feed

---

Blog This Must-Reads

---

---

---

Blog This Archives

May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
March 2000

---