An opportunity of a lifetime for Canadian bloggers
A massive opportunity for bloggers in Canada:
The parliamentary press gallery launched its latest salvo Tuesday in an ongoing cold war with the Harper government over media access and procedures for reporting on federal politics.
Prior to the start of a news conference in which Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced that Canada would contribute $40 million in humanitarian and military assistance to the war-torn Sudanese region of Darfur, members of the press gallery simultaneously got up and left, moments before the prime minister arrived in the room, in an act of defiance against new news conference rules imposed against the media.
So the old media doesn't want to cover Stephen Harper under these new rules? Fine. Start shooting some press releases and doing online Q&A sessions with us bloggers. Might not be as engaging as video for the evening news, but if it keeps Canadians informed, why not? It gives the government a means of getting its message out, and subjects the government to questions from people with a fresh perspective. A no one thinks bloggers are uniformly left-wing the way the old media is perceived (not entirely fairly, by the way).
Skew my story on Skewz.com
Rate political news for their bias, read related stories, and leave your own skewed commentary
Search for more opinions from Canadian bloggers on these related keywords
Sphere presents related news articles and blog posts
Sphere It!
Comments
You're dreaming.
The Goverment doesn't want to be subjected to "questions from people with a fresh perspective", they want to be subjected to hand-picked people with predetermined questions.
Q & A sessions with bloggers is probably their worst nightmare.
Far from being a massive opportunity for bloggers, this is likely a minor setback given that most (but certainly not all) bloggers simply add their own spin to stories already reported through traditional media.
Posted by: bob at May 23, 2006 05:27 PM
Exxxxxxxxxcellent...
There are some extremely capable people in the blogosphere. Mr. and Mrs. Harper read it.
I say go for it...
it should be fun.
Maybe even a step into the future...
ie. MP Turner
Posted by: Paul Hansen at May 23, 2006 05:31 PM
BWAAAAH!
Do the employers of these idiots pay them to make public asses of themselves?
They are making themselves redundant.....now that is progress.
Posted by: PGP at May 23, 2006 05:39 PM
It'll be front page news tomorrow. Which will be funny.
The press reporting on the press.
Posted by: Toronto Tory at May 23, 2006 05:45 PM
The Ministers and MPs are constantly on radio talk shows taking calls andanswering the tough questions. Getting the message out closer to the people than the Hill in Ottawa is a great idea.
I think the press gallery has lost their perpective - they try to control the government's agenda and in many cases hijack it. That's not news. That's a game by for profit unelected journalists who think their opinions are more important than yours and mine.
Posted by: maria at May 23, 2006 05:46 PM
The Ministers and MPs are constantly on radio talk shows taking calls andanswering the tough questions.
I assume this is some sort of ironic humour. I'd actually love to see a list of Ministers' radio appearances and transcripts of these though questions.
Posted by: bob at May 23, 2006 06:08 PM
The vast majority of the Canadian electorate isn't paying any attention to a sorry group of self important reporters in Ottawa - as evidenced by the latest poll. The nets and papers will try to make this an issue but most people will tune out what is perceived as an inside baseball issue.
Posted by: mohaqu at May 23, 2006 07:47 PM
I thought you BT'ers always dismissed polls - the only poll that matters is the one on Election Day... Remember? Seeing as we arent going to be in an election for another year, if you guys wanna go all gah-gah over this particular poll.. go for it. A lot of things can change in a year, as Mr. Martin found out.
As for bloggers asking questions of the PMO, I'm presuming you're saying ALL bloggers should get to ask the PM questions.. not just you BT'ers who'd do nothing more then lob softball questions at the guy. We have 283 Prog Bloggers who I am sure would all love to ask the PM questions - and he'd get a lot tougher ones then he's currently getting with the Press Gallery. So yea.. I think its a great idea - provided you include us on the ideological opposite side of the aisle.
Posted by: Scott Tribe at May 23, 2006 09:11 PM
The press gallery needs to get off their high horse and start doing their job. If they want to play silly games with the Prime Minister and walk out of press briefings then I agree with Angry - let bloggers fill the void. I also agree with Scott Tribe - let bloggers of all political stripes fill the void.
Tribe don't forget there are plenty of conservatives out there who think Harper is going too soft, so you could expect our questions to be hard.
Posted by: Andrew Smith at May 23, 2006 09:21 PM
Tribe don't forget there are plenty of conservatives out there who think Harper is going too soft, so you could expect our questions to be hard.
Which is exactly why this entire thing is a pipe-dream.
Posted by: bob at May 24, 2006 12:06 AM
No mention of the press gangs little hissy fit in the Vancouver Sun today, just that Stephen Harper turned on his heals when questioned. About par for the Sun.
Posted by: morison at May 24, 2006 06:54 AM
Harper is very pro-blog, and his wife reads dozens of them a day. I don't think your speculation is too far off the mark. I think he's be happy to have the bloggers in the gallery.
RG
Posted by: RightGirl at May 24, 2006 08:35 AM
It's funny, a lot of people here are slamming the Press for "not doing their job" by walking out on what was SUPPOSEDLY a "news conference". What few mention is that for the reporters who remained, as the Vancouver Sun article states, Harper "[took] no questions from reporters after making the announcement". So the PPG walked out on a staged announcement at which the Prime Minister refused to take questions. For shame! (not).
I don't see why the Press bothers to show up to any of these things anymore. Couldn't the government just save the news industry some money and tape these announcements themselves? They're not interested in being questioned by the press, so I don't see why the press needs to be there to cover the announcement. Just fax the announcement to the newspapers, and send tapes to the T.V. stations.
I really don't see why the PM ever needs to be seen in person in public again.
Posted by: Lord Kitchener's Own at May 24, 2006 08:37 AM
Harper refused to take questions after the gallery refused to submit the names of the attendees to a list so that they could be called out in order, as opposed to the old scheme where the question posed in the loudest voice was the one answered.
In press conferences in Toronto and other places, where reporters followed the new rules, the PM has answered dozens of questions, and has stayed over to chat with reporters.
Posted by: Steve Janke at May 24, 2006 08:45 AM
That's certainly one way to spin it.
Posted by: Aaron at May 24, 2006 08:58 AM
so that they could be called out in order
The real question is: in order of what?
Posted by: bob at May 24, 2006 09:28 AM
In order of intelligence I suppose, Bob.
Posted by: Irwin Daisy at May 24, 2006 12:55 PM
To Bob
The Rutherford show had Rona Ambrose on yesterday answering questions about the Ethanol announcement it is an ambitious program and I felt fairly informed
Posted by: ian at May 24, 2006 01:03 PM
I laughed yesterday when the news reader on CKNW yesterday called her "Ronna". Just a talking head, yes, but you would think these jokers might know who they are talking about even if they were reading a typo.
Posted by: morison at May 24, 2006 02:14 PM
Rutherford has also had Vic Toews on today, Stockwell Day last week, and Chuck Strahl as well. Every segment allowed public input and not all was complimentary.
Maybe people need to start paying attention to all that is being said instead of sitting at work playing solitaire and listening to music. Nobody ever listens to the message until it becomes a crisis, then all hell breaks loose.
Posted by: Jan Schaafsma at May 24, 2006 02:35 PM
I laughed yesterday when the news reader on CKNW yesterday called her "Ronna". Just a talking head, yes, but you would think these jokers might know who they are talking about even if they were reading a typo.
Ummm, I think she does pronounce it that way, and not with the long 'o'; but I could be mistaken.
Posted by: timincan at May 24, 2006 03:19 PM
Steve Janke.. Excellecnt idea, and if the public slowly learns who *POLITICAL BLOGGERS* are, People who take a special interest ...cutting edge like, then the public are bound to pick up enthusiasm and interest.
Your light shines bright today my son! Remember..Bob is our resident foil. I see no logical argument in his distracts so far.
*ALSO IMPORTANY**!!
MsM is asleep at the wheel on this.
No, the band is GREAT!
It*s the MSM that seems sickly lately.
*Tomorrow is a very important day for the future of the Internet,*
said Paul Misener, an Amazon vice president. He warned that phone and cable companies will run roughshod over their customers, *unless Congress acts to stop them* by approving alternative legislation prepared by Sens. Olympia Snowe of Maine and Byron Dorgan of North Dakota.
By Declan McCullagh
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: May 24, 2006, 10:41 AM PDT : http://tinyurl.com/fa8h4
My personal opinion? Rogers Sugar were criminals when workers owed them mony after a months work.
Multiply that ten fold for today*s Pirates AT&T and Rogers. TG
Posted by: TonyGuitar at May 24, 2006 03:45 PM
Ian,
You may have felt "fairly informed" anout the ethanol announcement, but if you truly feel it's an "ambitious program" then you aren't well-informed enough.
In the U.S., most states require 10-20% ethanol, not this measily 5%. And most experts agree that at a 5% rate, the environmental advantages of ethanol won't come close to outweighing all the pollution created to plant, harvest and process the ethanol. The reduction of GHG from 5% ethanol content in gasoline is only (remotely) significant if you ignore the increase in GHG needed to produce the ethanol in the first place.
I'm surpirsed no one asked the Minister of the Environment about that.
Maybe the people who knew enough to ask the question were too far down on some list.
Posted by: Lord Kitchener's Own at May 24, 2006 04:20 PM
My apology, then, however then the CTV has it wrong. Now I am confused.
Posted by: morison at May 25, 2006 06:09 AM
 
|
|
