Monday, September 24, 2012

Thanks, but…


I’ve now been fielding interview requests about this post from The Agenda, CBC, and other organizations, which I will respectfully decline. There’s not much more to offer on it at this end, as I’m no expert in journalism ethics, crowdsourcing, or how the industry works.

I appreciate that mainstream media want to discuss the issues, and thank the tweeters from all quarters and across the spectrum, but I leave it to others with more expertise.  I’m sure journalism profs or other media experts can provide more insights and knowledgeable comment - and the public can weigh in on that.

It was also not my intent to embarrass anyone.  I would have preferred that the issues be dealt with consistently, and in a straightforward way, directly with the publications involved.  I hope that in future, when members of the public raise concerns, that will happen, and that a positive, respectful conversation can take place. 

p.s. Comments are much appreciated but need to be kept respectful (or they'll be removed).  Repost at will with thoughts that don't invite contempt (or other things). 

15 comments:

  1. I've been following all of your Globe and Mail posts and appreciate the research that has gone into them. I appreciated finally seeing a response from the Globe concerning this. I was underwhelmed by the response and hope that we will see something else from them in the coming weeks.

    Thank you for all of the work that you've put into this.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Please reconsider your decision to decline interviews as the issues you raise require public airing. You are an expert -- your blog posts are evidence of that. Your diligent work is the type of investigative journalism we deserve and which outlets like the Globe & Mail have abandoned.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'd be quite interested in your interviews on the subject, but understand that you'd rather leave it other people in the field.

    Anyways, Chris Selley at the National Post has picked this up, and his writeup on it is quite well-constructed:

    http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/09/24/chris-selley-on-margaret-wente-plagiarism-and-the-globes-public-editor-cum-union-rep/

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think it would be interesting to speak upon the issue in the mainstream media as well. Bringing attention to it was great but that's taking it to a whole new level of exposure. I agree with Will when he said you should reconsider. But I understand it's a personal choice.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm glad that there are people like you doing the work you do. The media has such awesome power, that it's vital that fact checkers and scrutinizers like you challenge them when they get it wrong. It's not personal--as you've made clear. It's that journalists and columnists should be held to a high standard. Their work carries such authority and responsibility, by virtue of their positions, and that power to inform and misinform necessitates scrutiny.

    ReplyDelete
  6. US progressives have numbers enough to write about the corruption and sleaze of their own business, political and media elites from many different angles. Their impact is rather negligible, but at least we have a picture of how the elites operate and how they fail.

    Canada, with 1/10th the population didn't appear to have as large a left to produce the same level of inquiry and investigation and the absence of such inquiry would make some Canadians think that their country was more moral and better governed than the USA.

    I stopped reading Wente years ago, because I thought she was a waste of time. Your well researched analysis has exposed major violations of journalistic ethics. It has also exposed her employer, who I have stopped reading about since they endorsed the re-election of a politician who blatantly displayed contempt for Parliament.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Just want to express my thanks for all of your dedication and effort. Wish we had more like you staffing the mega-media outlets.

    All the best!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thanks for your efforts, they won't be forgotten. I hope your other work to establish Ms. Wente's pattern of unethical behaviour isn't forgotten. It's much more than this one problem.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Good for you in exposing the truth. I believe that the Globe and Mail owes you an apology.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Your attention to this matter is highly commendable. I support you fully in your efforts, and encourage you to keep fighting this great fight.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Thank you for your efforts. Wente has been removed from the media panel on CBC show Q, and good riddance.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I appreciate what you are doing to try and hold the media to account and think it's important that people do so... but at the same time, when so many of your columns focus on Margaret Wente, it's hard not to buy the Globe's allegations that you have a particular bias against her...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. “...you have a particular bias against her...”

      Worse yet, so do the facts! Why does the mean old universe keeping picking on poor Margaret Wente just because of things she’s actually done?

      Delete
    2. With all due respect, the number of posts reflects the number of issues, and the fact that those issues were not addressed in a consistent and appropriate manner. There were a large number of problems I identified that were corrected, but an equally large number were not, and very likely deserved to be. Had the concerns been taken seriously, that would have been preferred, and this debacle avoided.

      Delete