Posts Tagged ‘politics’

I am much more the armchair quarterback than the participant when it comes to politics. I volunteered on an NDP campaign in Halifax back in the 80s, and I tried to help a friend become an Ottawa city councillor in 2006. Beyond that, I’m a dutiful voter and an active discusser. I don’t know many politicians. I’ve met a few, from time to time. But I don’t really know them.

So watching the assassination of a friend’s character in 24 hours has been a sobering experience.

Anthony Marco is someone I’ve met through PAB. I consider him a friend in the social-media sense of the word. We might not speak for months at a time. More likely, we might trade an e-mail, a tweet, or I might leave a comment on one of his several podcasts. Anthony is a dynamic speaker, he’s a great writer and a superb podcaster.

And he’s also the NDP’s candidate for the riding of Ontario PC party leader Tim Hudak.

And since yesterday, he’s been the subject of a story in the Toronto Sun, and now the smearing of the Liberal Party’s war room. The source of the outrage in the Sun story? Anthony said, in a podcast, that he was an atheist, that he thought churches were great examples of brand loyalty, and that he sometimes considered religion equivalent to a hobby. The comment thread at the Sun story quickly degenerated to juvenile and insulting personal comments.

Now the Liberal party, led by its prominent war-room blogger Warren Kinsella, has decided to paint Anthony as a “kook”, a “lunatic”, and to insinuate that he is somehow anti-Semitic and/or sympathetic to Nazism. By referring to one (I’m waiting to find out which one)  of his more than 300 podcast episodes at LoveHateThings.

Since I haven’t the time to listen to all 332 episodes, I can’t determine whether the quotes are accurate, or whether the context would have something to say about them. So I’m not going to try (at this point) to defend them, beyond saying I’ll wait until I know what the actual content tells me.

What I will say is this. I know enough about Anthony Marco to know a misrepresentation when I see one. And if this is how the game of politics is played, I pity our country. If political parties are willing to listen to hundreds of hours of audio to search out something to smear a fundamentally good man, to paint him as an anti-Semite, then I now see one reason for our country’s political disengagement.

Someone once said that you don’t want to see two things being made: sausages, and laws. I would now add political victories to that list. This is ugly, and infuriating, and nauseating, and sleazy. And it makes me wonder just how many other good, worthy people have lost elections because of this sort of nonsense. Sad, isn’t it?

UPDATE: I appear to have been banned from Warren Kinsella’s website. Mr. Kinsella posted a reply to me that read “Then beat it.” I replied with “Cogent.” He deleted that reply in the moderation queue. I then replied again, assuming that it was a mistake. The second reply was deleted, and he then added significantly to his comment. You can find the thread here. I suppose I should start emptying my closets. God knows what skeletons Mr. Kinsella will find there.

In any case, just to be sure that SOMEONE gets to read my reply to his comment, I’ll post it here.

Warren, I’m not sure what your issue is here. When it started, you said that this candidate  was deserving of censure because he was in some way denigrating those who “fought Nazis.” However, the direct quote suggests nothing of the sort. It argues that trying to change the mind of those who hold Nazi-like beliefs is futile. I agree. I’m not going to waste time trying to convince a lunatic that his Holocaust-denial beliefs are mistaken. Might as well tell Michelle Bachman that the HPV vaccine is safe. Now, you’re accusing this candidate of a “paean to Mein Kampf.” Again, I see nothing of the sort in the expanded quoted text. In fact, I read it as an argument against book-burning. As the organizer of an event called Censored Out Loud here in Ottawa, I tend to disagree with book burning. Even when the book is the product of a homicidal maniac. I would argue in order to understand such human monsters as Adolf Hitler, we need to read and comprehend their writings. When you wrote “Web of Hate”, an excellent and courageous book, did you read neo-Nazi literature? Perhaps even Mein Kampf? Does your reading it imply an endorsement? Of course not. We owe it to ourselves as a society to understand those we oppose. Even the loathsome. I’m disappointed that you would put your political ambitions above a commitment to honesty and fairness. 

Rob Ford tells the media their questions. Then answers them. (Image from CBC)

Rob Ford is the mayor of Canada’s largest city. The dedicated Flacklife reader may note that I’ve covered Mayor Ford a couple of times here. The most notable post was the one in which I included audio of his interview (to use the term loosely) with CBC Radio’s national show “As It Happens” — an pre-booked interview which was 210 seconds of intense awkwardness.

That was October. This is August. And Rob Ford has worked hard on his media relations skills.

Today, he met with the Premier of Ontario, and afterward, met the Toronto media for a scrum. But this was a scrum with a difference. Listen and learn:

[audio:http://www.translucid.ca/site/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/robford1.mp3|titles=robford]

This is taking the Donald Rumsfeld school of media relations to an entirely new plateau. News conferences are far more pleasant when in two minutes you can tell the gathered reporeters what they would be asking, answer those questions, and leave.

I don’t know whether to rejoice at the innovation or… jump off a bridge.

Audio from the National Post’s Youtube channel.

Tony Cement demos a new Twitter app

While politics isn’t a huge part of my business life (unlike my compatriot Mark Blevis, for example), I am an armchair political quarterback of the first water. So this post by Maclean’s magazine parliamentary correspondent and blogger Aaron Wherry really caught my eye.

Minister of Industry Tony Clement is possibly the most passionate user of Twitter within Canada’s federal cabinet (although there are others.) And he should be given credit for not cutting and running despite being in charge of some controversial files, including changes to Canada’s census, an attempted takeover of Potash Corporation by Australian firm BHP Billiton, and most recently the government’s awarding of $300 million to Pratt & Whitney Canada to assist the company in carrying out research & development on new aircraft engines.

The announcement of this funding led to some stiff media criticism, and last night, as Wherry illustrates, Minister Clement took to his Twitter account to joust with several people, including journalist Andrew Coyne and economist Stephen Gordon (who had been intensely critical of Clement’s decision to discontinue the mandatory long-form census).

Clement puts on the gloves Twitter-style

The exchange lasted about two hours and ended at about midnight. I think it’s remarkable (in a good way) that Clement is doing this. But it makes me wonder about a couple of things. The Stephen Harper government has been painted as exceedingly locked-down in terms of communication, and there has been a long history of clashes between journalists and the government. But here’s a senior cabinet minister slugging it out with a journalist and others in the public twitterverse.

So I tip my hat to Minister Clement. I think it’s great that he’s doing this. And now, some tips that I think his tweeting can teach us all:

1. Use the tool that you are comfortable with. It could be argued that a blog might be a better tool for Clement. But for whatever reason or reasons, Clement likes Twitter. So he’s using Twitter. You can’t force a minister to do stuff. But I don’t think anyone’s twisting Clement’s arm to do this. He’s engaged. So work with that.
2. Don’t cut and run when things get tough. Clement has gone through some bruiser battles on Twitter. But he’s still there, and while he may end a given exchange, he doesn’t go to ground when critics appear. You have to brace yourself for the critics and be ready to respond.
3. Remember that you control your message, no matter the medium. In the exchange from last night, Andrew Coyne presses hard for Clement to disclose departmental research. Note that Clement doesn’t say “no.” He ignores the request. He could provide it at a later time, or he might not. Or Coyne could do an Access to Information request to obtain the research.
4. Choose a medium you can communicate in. Clement appears to be a tech savvy guy; he also appears to like cut and thrust. That makes Twitter useful for him. Furthermore, he uses the shorthand and conventions of the medium to his own advantage. He shortens words, uses hashtags, etc.
5. Choose a medium that matches your urgency and frequency needs. I mentioned in tip 1 that a blog might be better for Clement in terms of putting out fleshed-out arguments. But the conversationality wouldn’t be there, and the need to polish the writing would be higher. A podcast would require some sort of equipment (even Audioboo would require a mobile device), and it doesn’t have the immediacy of a tweet.

I hope these tips are useful. If you have any more to add, please leave them in the comments.

UPDATE: Great to see all of you new visitors to the site. Can I ask commenters to please be civil to each other and to the readers? Thanks.

I just got pointed to an interview that aired on last night’s CBC Radio show “As It Happens.” For readers outside of Canada who don’t know about this show, it’s one of the flagship national current affairs shows on CBC Radio One, hosted by a senior journalist named Carol Off.

The interview was with the newly-elected mayor of Toronto, Rob Ford. Ford is a colorful figure to say the least, and I would suggest that those wanting the details of the many controversies (ranging from insensitive remarks to a DUI arrest to a pending defamation lawsuit) check out the wikipedia entry. He was elected based on a platform of cutting waste and spending and reducing taxes. That platform differed greatly from his chief competition George Smitherman, and his predecessor David Miller.

So when there’s a major change at the top of Canada’s largest city, it’s not surprising that As It Happens would want to talk with him. And if you’re the leader of Canada’s largest city, you’d think you’d want to speak on As It Happens.

Well… apparently Ford was struggling with the dilemma of coaching his minor league football team and doing a national radio interview. Listen for 3 and a half minutes:

I am flabbergasted. I can’t figure out whether Ford did this out of incompetence, or whether it was a direct insult to the show and/or CBC. Now here’s my question for you: If you were Adrienne Batra, Ford’s director of communications, how would you respond to this? Options that occur to me:

• Resignation
• Apology to AIH for the insult
• A heart to heart with your boss
• Something else

Tell me what you think.

UPDATE: Torontoist has kindly provided a transcript of the interview. If you just can’t bring yourself to listen to the audio, here it is:

Carol Off: Mr. Ford, congratulations…

Rob Ford: Thank you. Appreciate it.

Carol Off: People are saying it’s a, calling it a stunning win. What do you think that—

Rob Ford: Things are, things are going really well.

Carol Off: What drew so much—

Rob Ford, yelling: Coach, half your juniors aren’t even here, eh? Alright. Alright.

Carol Off: Hello, Mr. Ford, are you there?

Rob Ford: Yeah, yeah, I’m here, yeah.

Carol Off: Oh, you’re at some event or…?

Rob Ford: I’m a coach. I’m a football coach.

Carol Off: Okay, so you’re at football practice, then.

Rob Ford: Yes.

Carol Off: Alright well, okay, we’ll continue then. What is it that you think drew so much support to your campaign?

Rob Ford: Yeah, it’s just people are sick and tired of the wasteful spending. People are sick and tired of wasteful spending, that’s the bottom line, that’s what it comes down.

Carol Off: Well there—

Rob Ford: You know, I’m the only one that can go down there [Inaudible, then, yelling:] Just go get changed! Go! Out! And get changed! Don’t worry about the water right now. [Pause.] Sorry.

Carol Off: Uh-huh—

Rob Ford: So, um, yeah, no, people are just fed up with, uh, with, you know, uh, politicians squandering, uh, hard-earned tax dollars, and they know that I’m gonna get rid of the sixty-dollar car registration tax and the land transfer tax.

Carol Off: Well you know that your campaign has been compared to Mike Harris’s Common Sense Revolution, to the Tea Party movement, do you see those comparisons?

Rob Ford: I don’t see [inaudible] comparisons [inaudible] what, I don’t care [laughs]. I just, I just know, know the taxpayers, uh, want, uh, you know, the gravy train to come to an end, and that, uh, Rob Ford’s the guy to do it, and uh [inaudible]—

Carol Off: Do you think there are similarities?

Rob Ford: And, and, I don’t, I don’t see there’s any similarities, I just know that, uh, like I said, uh, I’m, you know, gonna put an end to the wasteful spending, and, uh…you know, stop the gravy train—sorry, I’m being distracted [inaudible] so…

Carol Off: So—

Rob Ford: So, that’s pretty well it.

Carol Off: Mr. Ford, do you think that though there’s not people that who might think that their taxes are too high, or that too much is being spent on things? There seems to be a division in this city. People, in the, ah, you’ve seen it in even your voting: people who live in the more of the core of the city have different priorities than people in the suburbs. So when you stop the gravy train, some people want to see more public transportation, more bike lanes…

Rob Ford: Right…

Carol Off: …others want to see better routes out into the suburbs. how are you going to reconcile that?

Rob Ford: Well the first, well the first and foremost concern with people—is money. That’s the first and foremost concern. So, I’m gonna make sure our finances, um, you know, are well taken care of, and then we can deal with all the other issues, but uh, money’s the first and foremost concern, and, uh, that’s what my uh, what I’m gonna concentrate on.

Carol Off: Well sure, that’s everyone’s concern, but we’re not sure what it is that you’re going to save money on. Are you going to reduce public transportation?

Rob Ford, interrupting: Well I just told you that I’m gonna get rid of the sixty-dollar car registration tax and land transfer tax, so, um, maybe I’m not making myself clear, but I’m gonna get rid of the sixty-dollar car registration tax and land transfer tax. And we’re gonna stop the wasteful spending, and not have $12,000 retirement parties, and you know, all the other nonsense that’s been going on for seven years.

Carol Off: Um—

Rob Ford, interrupting: Anyways, I gotta let you go here. And, uh…

Carol Off: Well, can I ask you about public transportation before you go?

Rob Ford: Pardon me? I can’t talk to you right now—I’m really, I’m on a really tight schedule, so I hate to be rude, but I gotta let you go, and we can chat another time. Really nice talking to you, all the best, buh-bye.

I spent the better part of a decade working at post-secondary institutions in communications. Which means that I did a lot of work around politicians visiting campuses. New buildings, new labs, funding announcements, safety blitzes, policy unveilings… I’ve done ‘em all.

And one evergreen part of the event is the walkabout. This is the part of the event where the politician, accompanied by his or her entourage as well as officials from the institution, leaves the podium and then wanders around an area looking at stuff that’s related in some way to the announcement.

Talking about water purification? Check out this demo: EcoVu water purification.  Announcing new money for education? Hit a classroom or computer lab. Health care announcement? Check out a nursing lab.

This gets done for a couple of reasons. The most important one from my perspective has always been that it’s hard for TV to cover an announcement with just pictures of the politician speaking. You need stuff on tape that the reporter can write over. And in some cases, the politicians are actually interested.

But this morning’s Daily Intel slide show is the epitome of the photo-op: A History of Obama Feigning Interest in Mundane Things. If you’re a communicator or a political aide, view and chuckle knowingly. Or weep. Or both.

Obama feigning interest in a screw

I don’t often pile on. But I can’t help myself. I have to take a couple of kicks at  Angelo Persichilli’s latest column in the Hill Times.

Angelo Persichilli is the Politics Editor of Corriere Canadese, a national Italian-language newspaper, and a dedicated opinionist, with a column in the Hill Times and in the Toronto Star besides his work for Corriere. And he got himself some significant attention recently when he wrote in the Star that a group of Liberal MPs had met in the bar of the Chateau Laurier to discuss getting Bob Rae into the leadership of the Liberal Party, and Michael Ignatieff out.

The column was roundly criticized for its lack of attribution for quotes, among other things. So reading (thanks to Chris Selley’s National Post column) that according to Persichilli, the Internet and politics means that

a lot of information might reach millions of people unfiltered. While this provides a great opportunity for the truth to reach millions, we may also be flooded by faulty, incomplete and outright wrong information, as well as malicious attack and some plain lies.

This will clog the system making it hard to see the difference between truth and lies and justified and unjustified accusations. Essentially, without the filter of editors, producers, and responsible journalists, what exists now is a jungle of bloggers. There is no doubt that the internet has and will continue to let the truth reach people, the problem is that we no longer know what’s true and what’s not.

Later in the column, Persichilli suggests that

I don’t know how many hits websites of the major political organizations have every day. Given the ease with which people can access them, I hope there are millions. Otherwise I think they should take them down and completely refocus their aim. The only time we hear about them is when they show controversial items that systematically create problems for the image of their own political organization.

I don’t know where to begin with what Persichilli writes and appears to think.

First, his focus is almost entirely on mainstream media vs. bloggers and particuarly those affiliated with the mainstream political parties.

Second, it’s impossible to ignore the irony of Persichilli criticizing bloggers after being roundly castigated for his Star column, which it should be assumed benefited from the “filter of editors, producers, and responsible journalists” he writes about.

I think the great frustration of the last decade in Canadian politics where it meets the internet has been the lack of trailblazers who are using the tools of social media to really make a difference in the process of government. Look, for example, at David Miliband in the UK, who as Foreign Secretary is at the head of a line of dozens of bloggers, both politicians and public servants.

What is needed in Canada’s political scene are places where people put forth thoughtful and reasoned opinions that become the basis of informed discussion. Slagging bloggers won’t do it, nor will uninformed journalism.

What will do it is a commitment by political parties and by individual politicians to begin engaging in conversation, not just continue using social media channels to re-blast the same old messages down a one-way street. What is also needed is a commitment by government to support responsible bloggers within its departments, and a decision to stop blocking the use of social media tools by its employees.What’s happening right now is that social media engagement in much of Canada’s federal government is spasmodic and project-limited, not defined by conversation and engagement.

There are a lot of smart, competent politicians (my MP Paul Dewar, for example, who I think is a diligent and serious-minded parliamentarian) AND public servants here in Ottawa working for the feds (Nick Charney and Colin McKay come to mind), as well as in the provincial and municipal governments. Let’s turn them loose a little bit.