Reporters walk out on PM

[Cloud Cover]

Something that is not being widely reported in the national media:

From the Winniepg Sun:Reproduced under the Fair Dealing provision of the Copyright Act:
http://winnipegsun.com/News/Canada/2006/05/24/1594772-sun.html

May 24, 2006

Reporters walk out on PM
By CP

OTTAWA -- About two dozen journalists walked out on Stephen Harper yesterday after he refused to take their questions, the latest chapter in an increasingly unseemly spat between the prime minister and members of the national media.

The scene of reporters boycotting a prime ministerial news conference was described by Parliament Hill veterans as a first.

It resulted in Harper being forced to make his announcement on aid to Darfur to a small handful of reporters, photographers and cameramen outside the House of Commons.

The impromptu boycott was the latest move by journalists in their ongoing tug-of-war with the prime minister over who controls news conferences.

The Prime Minister's Office insists on choosing who gets to ask questions based on a list it compiles. Officials say they're merely trying to install some order to the often chaotic ritual of parliamentary news scrums.

"It is unfortunate that a select group within the press gallery displays such hostility and exhibits disrespect toward the prime minister," said a Harper spokesman.

But the parliamentary press gallery is concerned that Harper wants to freeze out any journalists or news organizations that he dislikes.

Harper spokesman Dimitris Soudas walked downstairs from the PMO to see which reporters wanted to ask questions. But the Ottawa-based media have refused for almost two months to submit their names to any list prepared by the PMO.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Journalists? Spoiled children more like. At least we won't have to listen to them spin their drivel.

 

[GAP]

At least we won't have to listen to them spin their drivel

Wanna Bet??? 

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Maybe he will get them so riled that they will quit..........na, we couldn't get that lucky.

I like the idea. As an old Gunner, I HATE when more than one person is trying to yell out questions as they all fade together as "noise' to these ears. Half the time I figure out what the question was by going backwards from the answer.

 

[2 Cdo]

While I do agree with all of the above posts, there is a fine line to walk when dealing with said "spoiled children". As for them "spinning their drivel", I fear the divide is getting so large between the PM and these self righteous arseholes that their particular "spin" will be even worse then it was before!

 

[vonGarvin]

Though I cannot imagine any worse spin from the media, I fear that you are correct, 2 Cdo....

 

[a_majoor]

As Edward has pointed out in other threads, far to many of our "reporters" are simply scribes used to being spoon fed by Liberal press releases. Having to actually work at finding facts and reporting the story must be very unsettling to them.

Prime Minister Harper should stay the course. Flip flopping would be considered a sign of weakness and the press would respond with a feeding frenzy of even worse behaviour. Rather, the Prime Minister and government members of parliament should aggressively cultivate the reporters who are willing to operate within the boundaries. How long do you think the "spoiled children" will last when their editors see rival reporters and media outlets getting exclusive interviews, briefings and "scoops" of government news and information?

Even a media "counter offensive" by the "spoiled brat pack" would fizzle when people realized which reporters and media outlets carried the substantial articles.

 

[mdh]

Flip flopping would be considered a sign of weakness and the press would respond with a feeding frenzy of even worse behaviour. Rather, the Prime Minister and government members of parliament should aggressively cultivate the reporters who are willing to operate within the boundaries.

So far it's not having any impact on the polls - quite the opposite it seems.  I think this is a classic example of "inside baseball" which the public really doesn't care about.  (if anything it might make Harper even more popular).  It's amusing to see the Great Guardians of Journalistic Integrity and Freedom TM working themselves into a frenzy over the alleged PMO "control". (One wonders where they were when the Danish cartoons were published by the Western Standard Magazine, there was a deadening silence in the press gallery bar over the campaign to "control" Ezra Levant.)

Harper is pursuing a regional media strategy instead to get around the gallery; it might succeed, but the real test will come during the election campaign when it's very difficult to escape the parliamentary herd.

cheers, mdh

 

[Kirkhill]

.....during the election campaign when it's very difficult to escape the parliamentary herd.

Is it that difficult?  What happens if he doesn't invite them on his plane and buses and makes them find their own way to his engagements?

 

[Cloud Cover]

He needs the Ottawa based national press to get re-elected, or they will control the entire focus of the campaign and crush him.  They may even campaign against him.

 

[a_majoor]

By flip flopping and showing weakness I meant the PMO and Prime Minister Harper would be considered to have shown weakness to the spoiled children by the spoiled children and they would simply make life even more hellish (Dad, are we there yet, dad, are we there yet, DAD ARE WE THERE YET, dad......).

Doing the regional media and selective co opting of journalists who are willing to play by the rules is probably the best we can hope for, if I didn't "know" the press was objective and non partisan I would think they are all ready campaigning against him. This will also be an interesting time to see if the blogosphere can be harnessed as a counterweight to the MSM in the Canadian context.

 

[GAP]

This will also be an interesting time to see if the blogosphere can be harnessed as a counterweight to the MSM in the Canadian context.

The blogosphere is not that significant yet. To the committed, fine, but for the general public, I don't think so.

It was only during the last election where blogs were even highlighted. A lot of people picked up on that, but there is such a plethora of them, for most people, unless there is something that catches your attention initially, they don't know which one(s) to follow; myself included.

 

[Cloud Cover]

  Reproduced under the fair dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

C B C . C A  N e w s  -  F u l l  S t o r y :
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Harper says he's finished with Ottawa press corps
Last Updated Wed, 24 May 2006 18:12:22 EDT
CBC News
Prime Minister Stephen Harper says he'll no longer give news conferences for the national media, after a dispute led a number of journalists to walk away from an event when he refused to take their questions.

 
Prime Minister Stephen Harper announces Canada is increasing aid to Sudan's violence-plagued Darfur region as Foreign Affairs Minister Peter Mackay looks on in Ottawa, Tuesday May 23, 2006. It was during this news conference that some reporters left after being told they would not be allowed to ask questions. (CP PHOTO/Fred Chartrand) Canadian Press 

INDEPTH: Stephen Harper

Speaking to A-Channel in London, Ont., Harper said "unfortunately the press gallery has taken the view they are going to be the opposition to the government."

"They don't ask questions at my press conferences now. We'll just take the message out on the road. There's lots of media who do want to ask questions and hear what the government is doing."

Since becoming prime minister in January, Harper has had a testy relationship with the national media in Ottawa.  His staff has tried to manage news conferences by saying they will decide which reporters get to ask questions.

The press gallery has refused to play by those rules.  "We can't accept that the Prime Minister's Office would decide who gets to ask questions," Yves Malo, a TVA reporter and president of the press gallery, told CP on Tuesday.  "Does that mean that when there's a crisis they'll only call upon journalists they expect softball questions from?"

On Tuesday about two dozen Ottawa reporters walked out on a Harper event when he refused to take their questions.

That led Harper to say that from now on he will speak only to local media.

The CBC says it will continue to cover the prime minister.  "If the prime minister chooses to take questions we will be there to ask them," said Ottawa managing editor George Hoff.  "We will have a journalist there to ask questions," he said.

Harper's supporters said Wednesday they believed the conflict is being blown out of proportion.

"I think this will get sorted out over time," Conservative Geoff Norquay said during an interview on Politics on CBC Newsworld.

"I think both sides have an interest in sorting it out and I think they will over time.  The reality is that every new government wants to keep a tight lid on its messages and this one in particular because it had the previous example of Mr. Martin who had so many priorities that they all turned to mush in the minds of the Canadian people.  And that's why this government is tightly focused on its messages," he said.




Copyright ©2006 Canadian Broadcasting Corporation - All Rights Reserved 

 

[2 Cdo]

Just a quick little note on why I can't/don't trust the "press" in Canada. Last week in Kingston RMC was having their graduation ceremonies and the Skyhawks were on hand to do their show as part of the grad. The local radio station, K-Rock, in their usual well-informed manner reported that the Canadian Forces parachute demonstration team "The Seahawks" were performing that day! :

 

[North Star]

What I think the media has forgotten is that the relationship between the PMO and goes both ways. Sure, they can make Harper look bad at every turn, but they'll also miss "scoops" that generate the headlines that sell their wares. Walking out on the PM over a matter of press-conference process is shortsighted of them at best, financially dangerous to their employers at worst.

I think we are beginning to perceive a fundamental split within Canadian society with this new government that was "glossed over" by the Big Red Machine for the past 13 years. Namely, one of values. One the one side, you have working-class, sub-urban, and rural Canadians who espouse the values of traditionalism, compassion (within bounds), and "hard-work". On the other, you have the cosmopolitans of the Big Cities who have embraced the "Trudeautopian" values pushed in the late 70s. The veined Maple-Leaf versus the Stylized one, so to speak. The media by and large identify mainly with the cosmopolitan crowd, and their treatment of the PM is driven by this identification.

I agree with many people posting on here that the average Canadian, who I believe fall into the former category, don't give two hoots about this spat whatsoever. But in the world of the stylized maple-leaf, this is a "major crisis" that they won't let go.

What has been bothering me, though, is the attitude displayed by some of my friends (many of whom consider themselves "cosmopolitan") since the last election. I think some personal background is in order. I grew up in TO, did a BA and MA at UofT (a predominantly left-wing institution), and joined the Army as a NCM in Highschool. I'm now in the Regular force in Ottawa. I've been overseas to Bosnia once, and in my current job am pretty aware of what is going on in Afghanistan (as best you can from Ottawa). I think I therefore represent a "blend" of both worlds, having an academic background tempered with real-life expereince.

During a conversation with some "cosmopolitan" friends, the topic of the last election came up. After fending off various accusations of murdering innocents, etc, one of them exclaimed "the whole problem is that those ignorant people outside of Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver have just as much say as we do, when really we are the only people with the intellect and education to run the country and respect the rights and priviledges of Canadians, who are really a left-wing people."

The part that surprised me is I was the only once out of a group of 5 (incl mbrs of the Liberal Party) who then countered this anti-democratic sentiment, based as it was on "classism, rural-phobia, and the like".

I have also observed the other side, I will admit. I've been with more right-minded friends(and mbrs of the Cons) who proclaim most Canadians to be snivelling children at the teat of the welfare state. They never, however, questioned concept of liberal-democracy, only components of it.  But never have I heard this kind of anti-democratic stuff from the "progressive"/cosmopolitan people I know. I have heard similar, albeit less dramatic comments, from some of my left-wing friends who work around Ottawa.

I think it's time the left, and the media who identify with it, take pause and realize the country began a new direction with the last election, and maybe should re-evaluate their attitudes and opinions in light of this.

 

[TMM]

I find the PM's action far more childish than that of the media. By only talking to certain media he cuts off a large group of Canadians.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

I find the PM's action far more childish than that of the media. By only talking to certain media he cuts off a large group of Canadians.

I don't....The Ottawa Press Corps has long ago moved from an objective source of detailed information that citizens can then use to make up their mind into a partisan group of op-ed hacks who use every opportunity to "spin" everything they do talk about and worse appear to feel entitled to use editorial license to omit other things that don't fit neatly into the image they want to present.  As an example, with the coverage of the Tory Budget, how much coverage did you see on the Immigrant-friendly measures such as lowering fees and pushing for credentials recognition, or about the "working credit" which basically allows a taxpayer to keep more money if they go work as opposed to sit at home and collect benefits (which frankly costs less to do)?  How about the credit for tools for skilled tradesmen and apprentices?  How about the credit for schoolbooks for university students?

Bottom Line:  I think our media in its current form is a tremendous threat to the overall well-being and security of our society and if Harper can somehow change the information delivery model to bypass these pricks, then I'm the happier for it.



Matthew. 

 

[TMM]

As an example, with the coverage of the Tory Budget, how much coverage did you see on the Immigrant-friendly measures such as lowering fees and pushing for credentials recognition, or about the "working credit" which basically allows a taxpayer to keep more money if they go work as opposed to sit at home and collect benefits (which frankly costs less to do)?  How about the credit for tools for skilled tradesmen and apprentices?  How about the credit for schoolbooks for university students?

I saw a lot but then again I live in an area with a large immigrant population(Toronto) I also work with co-ops and my company uses the IT Worker Program so it would be hard for me not to notice those. They did get coverage though. Even as an adamant non-Conservative I gave kudos to the PM for that budget; he's not in an easy spot these days.

Bottom Line:  I think our media in its current form is a tremendous threat to the overall well-being and security of our society and if Harper can somehow change the information delivery model to bypass these pricks, then I'm the happier for it.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one. I was a journalism student until life happened and I had to change my plans, but I'll be going back in the next 5-10 years. I still think the media does more good than harm, Any time the state starts to change the "information delivery model" I worry.

 

[Kirkhill]

I just e-mailed this to a columnist, Paul Wells, who is trying to sit outside of this discussion and apparently failing miserably.  He posted a column from 2003 where he castigatied the press gallery for pursuing gossip and trivia over substance and policy.  http://weblogs.macleans.ca/paulwells/

He has also slagged Harper in the past - so I at least find him an equal opportunity castigator.

Having said that I said this:

I think that part of the problem is that while many of the press revel in the trivia of the personality,  the gossip column, and they may or may not like the individual in power,  at a deeper level large numbers of them know/believe that conservative policies are just plain wrong.  After all, by definition they are not progressive and progress is a good thing.  Right? 
For a large portion of the media, it appears anyway, those same people that can’t be bothered to read the policies they are reporting on, it is enough to know that it is a conservative policy and ipso facto the policy is wrong. 

It’s kind of a double-whammy.  Where liberals are given the benefit of the doubt on policy and only the personality is up for debate, conservatives not only have to find a likeable personality but also have to find a way to convince the scribes that their policies are beneficial (or at least do no harm).

What proportion of your colleagues would identify themselves as conservatives?  How many see themselves as progressive, liberals?

 

[mdh]

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one. I was a journalism student until life happened and I had to change my plans, but I'll be going back in the next 5-10 years. I still think the media does more good than harm, Any time the state starts to change the "information delivery model" I worry.

I think it's easy to overstate the press gallery's "agenda"; most reporters are far too cynical, jaded, and terrified of losing his or her jobs in some ruthless management purge in the newsroom to actively pursue a coherent political agenda. 

While I think it's a truism that most reporters are left of center culturally (as TMM seems to demonstrate  ) that doesn't necessarily translate into party bias.  Having had some journalism experience myself, I think the main obession for reporters is two-fold: not being scooped, and getting noticed by the managing editor.  In other words newsroom politics dominates their thinking not party politics.

In these circumstances the herd rules the day, which is why if you ever see the gallery in action they will flit around from scrum to scrum making sure they haven't missed anything and often parrot what they think is the main story line from other reporters. (If they miss the main story of the day, aforesaid managing editor will very, very unhappy.)

Overall I think Harper's strategy is a high risk one and probably a diversion of time and energy; perhaps not now, as the poll results indicate, but during the next election campaign.

cheers, mdh