The NDP is finally coming down on MyBlahg -- and just as I've advised them to
For quite some time, I've been providing free advice to the NDP about how to use the blogosphere more effectively. Their problem is unique. Their main blogger, Robert McCelland of MyBlahg.com, is routinely offensive, sometimes shockingly so. That in turn would keep the NDP from establishing any formal relationship.
So I've been clear to the NDP -- you own your brand, so take control of it. And take control of the blogroll. Set some standards and enforce them.
Looks like the message has gotten through.
When the NDP asked for advice on how to use the internet more effectively, I offered some free advice:
So the NDP wants to know how to communicate better? Here's my suggestion:
- Evaluate where the NDP brand is being displayed. If the party communications people have concerns about that site carrying the NDP banner, insist that the logo be removed.
- Establish a code of conduct for NDP bloggers. In order to carry the NDP logo and to be added to the NDP bloggers blogroll, a certain minimum standard of writing quality must be maintained.
- Take control of the NDP blogroll. Then hand it over to a blogger trusted by the NDP based on his or her adherence to the (newly written) code of conduct.
My advice was motivated by this post that advocated physical violence against conservative writers.
Now it looks like someone was listening. From a letter from the NDP to the Canadian Jewish Congress:
I am writing in regard to some highly offensive comments that appear on a blog operated by Robert McClelland. The statements allegedly made by Mr McClelland are repugnant and in no way reflect the views of our Party.
I want to assure you that the New Democratic Party of Canada, its [unclear] and local riding associations are not affiliated with Mr McClelland or his independently operated blog roll, the "Blogging Dippers".
The NDP is undertaking the development of a new blog roll that better reflects the views and needs of New Democrats in the blogosphere.
Anne McGrath
President
Isn't that exactly what I said needed to be done? I don't know that the NDP was actually taking my advice, but if not, it is good to see that someone has independently decided that brand control and an official blogroll are critical elements in reining in the excesses that seem to happen in the Dipper community.
The comment that seemed to be the last straw?
When the State starts rounding up my Jewish neighbours, I’ll speak up.
Not me. People like Klownsella, Chernyuk and Smeagol the Jew have taught me it’s not worth getting involved. When next they come for the Jews I doubt I’ll even be able to muster up a “what a shame”.
Well, that makes things absolutely clear, doesn't it? Jason Cherniak started the ball rolling on this one, making it clear that these comments demanded that the NDP move to sever all ties with McClelland.
McClelland is spinning as fast as he can, insisting that there were no ties to sever:
From what I’m not exactly sure, but that seems to be the growing consensus amongst a number of Libfloggers. And not only am I supposed to resign, these Libfloggers also believe Jack Layton should make me do it.
So once again for the stupid people who inhabit the two internets.
I am not a member of the NDP nor do I speak for them.
My one and only contact with an NDP MP throughout my entire life–all 42 years of it–was when I emailed some information on an issue to NDP MP Pat Martin and he or one of his staff replied only to say thank you.
Perhaps, but it is also true that McClelland desperately wants to be the voice of the NDP:
If any party desperately needs bloggers, it’s the NDP. They have no one going to bat for them in the mainstream media. The Conservatives have their stable of Ezra Levants and the Liberals have their Warren Kinsellas. Who does the NDP have? Right, nobody. This puts them at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to getting their message out to the people or defending against scurrilous attacks. Thus the job has fallen soley on the shoulders of a small group of bloggers who aren’t given the time of day from the party.
That "small group of bloggers" are the Blogging Dippers, the blogroll created and maintained by McClelland.
Clearly the NDP is taking action to eliminate that association, real or imagined, and then to proactively decide which blogs would be formally associated with the NDP. Presumably the NDP would establish criteria for blogs to follow that would cement that association.
And that lines up exactly with what I have been saying for quite some time (and not only about McLelland).
Now lets see how it works out.
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
NDP New Democratic Party Canada anti-semitism Robert McClelland blogging
Sphere presents related news articles and blog posts
Sphere It!
Comments
This may sound a little cynical, but I don't think the NDP setting up its own blogroll is going to help all that much.
The one thing that *would* be a step in the right direction would be to persuade Blahgger Bob to remove the NDP link from his website, as a demonstration of his independence. As long as that graphic's there, and as long as he doesn't have a permanent disclaimer, he'll be looked on as an NDP blogger.
Posted by: PhantomObserver at March 5, 2007 07:26 PM
Hi Phantom,
The presence of the NDP logo is addressed in point (1):
Evaluate where the NDP brand is being displayed. If the party communications people have concerns about that site carrying the NDP banner, insist that the logo be removed.
Though the letter makes no reference to this, it seems to me that it is likely to be pursued as a natural extension of the existence of an official blogroll. Not every site that has the logo, of course, but just those that are embarrassiing the the party in some way.
Posted by: Steve Janke at March 5, 2007 07:30 PM
Hi Steve, Phantom Observer. The problem the NDP has is that McClelland DOES represent them. He talks their talk, he walks their walk. His latest faux pas is quite mild compared to stuff one sees on Rabble/Babble all the time.
Too bad for them he blew their cover, eh?
Posted by: The Phantom at March 5, 2007 08:30 PM
That's only if you accept the rabble/babble as official NDP communications -- which obviously it isn't.
The distinction needs to be drawn between NDP *members* and NDP *supporters*; it's only the *former* that the party brass can actually police. Blahgger Bob says he's not a member; however, based on his display he *is* a supporter. For all intents and purposes, however, the public in general does not distinguish between the two.
Posted by: PhantomObserver at March 5, 2007 08:34 PM
Congratulations to the NDP!
It's a small tentative step, but it's in the right direction. Too bad it took so long.
Robert McLelland is a blight upon the blogosphere. He is toxic to political discourse. Any party that associates with him, his methods, or his words should be ashamed.
Posted by: PlaidShirt at March 5, 2007 11:16 PM
The Robert McClellands of this world are the audience to which the NDP is pandering, Phantom Observer.
Lately we have skinny left leaning punks and Indian thug groups flying the Palestinian flag (Caledonia, I have pictures) and wearing that scarf thing to show "solidarity" with the school bus bombers, which again fits right in with McClelland's ravings.
So yeah, I'd say the NDP have a problem. Steve thinks they should have an official dipper blog, I think it wouldn't look much different than McClelland/Rabble. Maybe less swearing, probably not.
For my part I say, RAVE ON! The more people read Robert, the more people who'll be voting Conservative.
Posted by: The Phantom at March 5, 2007 11:31 PM
Uh, Steven, of all the political parties this is the one which is the most open about wanting to steal from them what earns and give to them what won't. And you want to help them polish their image? They're incorrigible, and you should be glad that their representatives on the web are honest and open about what they want and how they think.
It'll take a lot more effort and guts to root out the socialists in your own party. Those are the ones you want to watch out for - the dishonest and the just plain stupid who try to tell you that they can run the socialist wealth distributing machine "smarter" and "fairer" than the other guys, the ones with the nasty blogs.
Posted by: at March 5, 2007 11:44 PM
Fair Question: if we substituted Arabs for Jews in all of McClelland's comments would you have a problem with them?
Posted by: Real Conservative at March 6, 2007 01:35 AM
It's absolutely unreasonable to paint all Arabs with one brush.
It's undeniable the terrorism we are fighting in our World today
springs from radical Islam, that's the connection.
Jews are not terrorists. They don't train and send young martyrs
around the world to suicide bomb innocent people.
They are constantly fighting to keep their civilized, modern ,
Democratic State, surrounded by people who want to push them
to sea.
Antisemitism , like all other "Antis" will always be around to one
degree or another. At this point, Antisemitism seems to spring
from inherent ignorance or just plain hatred on the basis of
ethnicity. Jews and Arabs are Semites who just can't seem to
get along in the Tinderbox of the World, the ME
We in the West have evolved, well hopefully most of us. We
wont count McClelland in.
Posted by: Liz J at March 6, 2007 08:27 AM
I Thought that I'd never find myself defending McClellan and his vulgar intellectually vacant spew.....but as detestable as he is, he serves a purpose.
I have always believed deeply that as long as those who offend or use vulgarities are free to express themselves ( as devolved as this function is with them) that my right to disagree with them is intact.
As well motivated as censors like Jason C may be....they needn't think thay have to politically sanitize cyber space on my account....free speech is best served raw... by tolerating the extremists who remind us that their freedom to speak shit secures my freedom to speak against shit...as vulgarly or offesively as I deem fitting in disagreeing with them.
Leave the net free of political correctness....I don't care what partisan orgs do in who they choose to associate with....but leave censorship and "Hate crime" star-chamber witch hunts out of it.....McClellan may be a vulgar idiot but there is/nor should be any law gainst that.
Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at March 6, 2007 10:27 AM
I'm of two minds on this issue.
First: This is Wrong - Whlle I've never agreed on pretty much EVERYTHING McLellan has ever said on his blog and found the way he's written pretty much everything rather offensive, I've never felt he should not be allowed to express his views. Freedom of Speech is a core democratic value. This issue has me wondering when is a comment simply critical of an identifiable group become racism? When is criticizing a Jewish organization simple criticism and when does it become anti-semitism? Even writing this I'm concerned that someone is going to call me an apologist for some (alleged) anti-semite and that's not the case. I'm not defending the views, I'm defending the right to express vthe iews regardless of who may or may not approve of those views.
Second: Good For Him - There should be no such thing as freedom of speech without consequences and that's exactly what's happening here. McLellan expressed a view and now he's facing the consequences. Nothing so far has been a reaction from the state (charges), just reactions from other citizens enjoying their freedom of speech rights. Therefore what is happening here is exactly as it should be.
Posted by: Darren at March 6, 2007 12:08 PM
I have to agree with W L Macenzie Redux.
The evil you can see is far more reassurring than the evil that is hidden behind so called political correctness.
McClellan is a bilous fool,no more,no less but like a poisonous snake loose in your home,its nice to know which room its taken up in.
Posted by: Simon at March 6, 2007 12:12 PM
My focus has always been on what the NDP ought to do. This was never about making McClelland tone it down or change his opinions. They are his to voice as he sees fit. But the question was raised about how the NDP could use the blogosphere more effectively. The answer to that question is to take control of their brand and set rules for participation and membership, since the grassroots approach has resulted in too many weeds.
Posted by: Steve Janke at March 6, 2007 01:07 PM
Just because the NDP are being urged to take steps to dissociate themselves from Mr McClelland doesn't mean he would be censored. He would still be able to spew as much vile poison as he does now. The NDP have the right to demand that blogs formally associated with them adhere to a code of conduct, and that blogs not so associated with them remove all NDP logos from their sites.
Posted by: Brian in Calgary at March 6, 2007 01:08 PM
Bobby McLa-La-Land has more than a screw loose. The guy is positively creepy, narcissistic, foul-mouthed, and nasty. I need a loofa handy, with lots of aromatic soaps and bath salts at the ready anytime I read his comments.
He's perfectly free to spew his bilious nastiness around the blogoshphere, but I applaud the NDP for finally disassociating themselves from him. I'm just wondering why it took them so long?
BTW, is Robert McClelland gay? He seems to have that high-camp, overarching, arrogant, and smug attitude of some of the more outrageous activists.
There seems to be more than a death wish in his edgy postings.
Posted by: won'ttell at March 6, 2007 07:39 PM
Blogging Dipper: I have nothing but hatred and contempt for most people, which is why I support a party whose policies treat them like the stupid, greedy children that they are.
Blue Blogger: I condemn your hate-filled opinions, but I support 90% of the government programs which use them as a basic assumption.
Posted by: at March 6, 2007 10:19 PM
Freedom of speech has to do with freedom of consequences, for one's words, from prosecution by the state, not from a punch in the mouth. I bet 99% of these foul-mouthed left wing wankers would never dream of confronting the targets of their vitriol face to face and risking a throttling.
Posted by: Right of free speech at March 7, 2007 03:23 PM
"BTW, is Robert McClelland gay? He seems to have that high-camp, overarching, arrogant, and smug attitude of some of the more outrageous activists."
Wow.
Robert is the left-wing equivalent of Kathy Shaidle. (Both should be pleased by this comment.) They are ideological, highly motivated, over the top on occasion, and they exist to piss the other side off. Which they do.
All that being said, that famous "Comment 37" was unconscionable, and his subsequent defence of it was more so. But he probably would have been kicked out of ProgBlog if he had called Arabs "violent retards," too, so there it is.
Posted by: Dr.Dawg at March 8, 2007 11:14 AM
generic cialis, buy cialis online
Posted by: dennis@gmail.com at May 5, 2007 03:44 PM
generic cialis, buy cialis online
Posted by: rick@gmail.com at May 6, 2007 04:37 AM
 
|
|
