In following the story of how an unnamed CBC reporter wrote questions for Liberal MP Pablo Rodriguez to deliver at the Commons ethics committee hearing question Brian Mulroney in the Karlheinz Schreiber affair, the question of whether any such collusion took place has been pretty much settled.
The CBC has said it is planning disciplinary action, so the story is credible.
Does that mean the Liberal Party is planning to backtrack on the public statement that the entire issue was a "fabrication"? Or is the Liberal Party satisfied to let the CBC report to take the fall for this?
Forcing the reporter to bear all the consequences is a plan that could work, as long the CBC keeps the identity of the reporter a secret. But whatever happens, hopefully the media in general will come to appreciate that getting too close to politicians is a dangerous thing.
Did a CBC reporter compose questions to be asked of Brian Mulroney during his appearance in front of the Commons ethics committee investigating the Karlheinz Schreiber affair?
Were the questions utterly off-topic, discussing neither Schreiber nor Airbus nor any events that took place twenty years ago related to the Mulroney lawsuit against the RCMP?
Did Liberal MP Pablo Rodriguez agree to be the CBC sock puppet, essentially giving the CBC a seat at the committee table that is supposed to be reserved for MP committee members?
According to an email from a CBC VP, the answer to all these questions is "yes":
I wanted to let you know that CBC news chiefs have looked at the allegations made yesterday.
They feel that the reporter's actions in pursuing the story were inappropriate and against CBC/Radio-Canada's Journalistic Standards.
They are continuing to investigate the particulars and will follow the disciplinary processes outlined in the CBC's collective agreement.
What is interesting is that even though the CBC has come to admit that something bad happened, the Liberal Party has added nothing since issuing a blanket denial:
But Liberal spokesman Mark Dunn said Friday the allegations were "a total fabrication" and that the MPs devised and wrote their own questions the night before the hearing.
This denial was issued even after a Liberal researcher admitted that the CBC reporter was on the phone working on the questions that night in question.
[Don't be distracted by the identity of the spokesman. Yes, Mark Dunn is married to Gloria Galloway of the Globe and Mail. But that's not relevant. He's a spokesman. He delivers the message the Liberal Party leadership tells him to deliver.]
The CBC has admitted that someone crossed the line. Admittedly, the CBC is trying to limit the damage by making that the limit of their disclosure, and the Conservatives are taking the position, with good reason I think, that the CBC ought to be more forthcoming about the identities of the people involved.
But as far the Liberals are concerned, none of this happened. It was all in our imagination. Jean Lapierre had no idea what he was talking about when he announced on CTV that the collusion had happened.
Pablo Rodriguez devised his own question when he was invited to sit with the ethics committee looking into the Karlheinz Schreiber allegations, the Liberals insist.
So the CBC is talking about discipline, and the Liberals are saying...nothing.
No wonder the CBC wants to avoid revealing any actual details. They can see just how much they can depend on the Liberal Party to take its share of the responsibility.
There is no upside for the CBC in this.
If the CBC keeps everything under wraps, the question of credibility will continue to dog the corporation.
But with the Liberals saying nothing, the CBC will only exacerbate the situation by revealing the identity of the reporter. If we learn the identity of the reporter, that reporter will be on the hotseat. A quiet and gentle slap on the wrist won't pass muster as discipline. With his or her future on the line, he or she will spill the beans, spinning the story to cast him or her in the most favourable light. The CBC will be further embarrassed, and the Liberals will be in a more difficult position. You can expect the Liberal Party will be pretty upset with the CBC under those circumstances.
In both cases, the CBC suffers.
The fact is that the CBC got into this mess when a reporter decided to trust the Liberal Party. Stephane Dion's Liberals seem to have no problem with burning their reporter friend now that his cover has been partially blown.
You know, journalistic impartiality as a principle is there for a reason. It doesn't just protect the integrity of the news. It protects reporters, too, from making the foolish mistake of expecting politicians to stand by them when the going gets tough. The Liberals might be able to talk about how the Conservatives are cold to reporters and how the Liberals want to work with reporters to better Canada and whatever else works to lure a reporter in close, but you have to wonder if any reporters might realize that the distance the Conservatives have put between themselves and the media is actually a good thing for everyone.
Of course, don't expect any reporter to actually admit that.
Check out other entries from the Karlheinz Schreiber category
Results will open in a new window.
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
CBC Brian Mulroney Karlheinz Schreiber Airbus RCMP Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Party Conservative Party Jean Lapierre Stephane Dion
Sphere presents related news articles and blog posts
Sphere It!