PMO pushes, CTV pushes back

Yesterday, at the end of  CTV's Question Period broadcast,   there was some strong and remarkable evidence of journalists pushing back against the Prime Minister's Office.  Rather than explain the story, why don't I just put the transcript here? I would imagine we'll be hearing more about this in the days to come:

JANE TABER: Craig, we've got to address a complaint. We received a complaint from the Prime Minister's director of communications Sandra Buckler about something you said on the show about the fact the Environment Minister or the Finance Minister would not come on to talk about Dion's green plan.

CRAIG OLIVER: And it was accurate for me to say they had both turned us down. However, they did offer us Jason Kenney, the Minister of Multiculturalism, to attack the government's green plan, and we said, sorry, we're not talking about multiculturalism, we're talking about taxation or we're talking about environment. And so they're insisting that we should take their person. And the question really is who's producing the show? Are we producing the show or is the Prime Minister's office producing the show? Would somebody tell me?

TABER: I think Sandra Buckler has an idea about who's producing the show, and I think that she, when she offers someone, she expects...

OLIVER: She thinks we should take her candidate.

TABER: Exactly.

OLIVER: Any time somebody's offered by her, that's the person we should have on the show. Not somebody we choose.

TABER: And we have to say that Jason Kenney of course did appear on the show, but we spoke to him in a panel situation with other MPs about, you know, what the accomplishments of the government were.

OLIVER: And we were glad to have him.

TABER: We were very glad to have him, we're always glad to have Jason Kenney on the show. So that's the complaint, we've addressed it, and as we leave you we're going to leave with you pictures from the studio of Parliament Hill and the preparations for the July 1st celebrations. Thanks for watching. We'll see you next week.

Comments

[Geoff]

Cameron, I read your post and I don't think I quite get where you are coming from but what I am really interested in is what have the conservatives said about women in the past. I would really like to know. Could you please point me in a direction that would back up that statement.

Thanks

[Manny]

"The show", as Oliver calls it, is run by the democratically elected government, not some windbag with a camera. It is time for journalists to remember who they are.

This being said, I am disappointed by Harper's disregard for this Liberal proposal; it seems popular and could hurt the Conservatives.

[Richard]

I posted the following on another blog in the past. Mr. Oliver and Question Period were part of the reason I wrote it. Perhaps Mr. Harper and his Ministers also feel Mr. Oliver and Question Period are irrelevant.

At 71 I am not a younger reader but I also get most of my news from Blogs. I find there are some very well informed and knowledgeable people on the blogs and I can get usually get far more accurate information and from different sources. I am tired of getting personal opinion, uninformed & outright distortion of facts, personal political views, lazy, inaccurate and many times non existence research from so called and well known "Media Personalities" consisting of columnists, newscasters, pundits, Ottawa correspondents, correspondents on assignment etc. presented to me as NEWS and INFORMED COMMENT as well as "political forums, town halls, pundits" and so on where the people, questions and answers are preordained for their political bias and slant. I feel a number of people in the media attempt to play the public as uniformed fools and suckers that can be influenced by their spin, which unfortunately in many cases is true.

[Andy]

Wow, Richard ... you came HERE for an undistorted, unbiased representation of the facts? Here, to a blog where the news reported is selectively controlled by the writer alone?

I am no Conservative -- nor do I ever intend to be -- but lost in many earlier posters' hysteria is a good point: there is a pervasive Liberal bias in Canadian media. Admittedly, there are exceptions; however, the main example of Conservative bias is the Toronto Sun, which is best suited to manuring one's garden (even on a good day).

The greater whole of the mainstream Canadian media, as exemplified by Oliver and Taber's astoundingly partisan exchange (and the writer's approval of it), got used to sucking up to those in power for twelve years. Now that their favoured party is dealing with a little adversity (and deservedly so) for falling into the trap of complacency and arrogance, the media are having an extended temper tantrum that the current government aren't their BFFs. Gee, I wonder what happens when you advertise en masse for the current governing party's eternal rivals? Think, people.

Let's get real. If the Star was really keeping to its oft-touted Atkinson Principles, they wouldn't be so supportive of the Liberals, a party who promise from the left and govern from the right. They'd be supporting a party that really gives a damn about social justice -- and guess what happened when the Star called for a $10 minimum wage? The Liberals had a hissyfit that their presumptive mouthpiece had the gall to act on its own. Good for the Star.

Where am I going with this, you ask? Simply put, never get all your news from one source. Not just one paper, one blog -- magazines, radio, TV, the internet; look at a variety of sources if you want to see the big picture.

[Barcs]

The parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister isn't good enough for CTV to have on, they want the lowly environment minister.

For a group of "journalists" who complain so much that Harper runs everything and the ministers don't get to do anything..... They sure seem to get annoyed when they are offered the Prime Ministers right hand man to speak on the issues instead of someone they claim doesn't get to make any choices anyway.

Which is it MS. Delacourt? Are the Ministers outside the PMO useless gaged persons that have no responsibility except to the talking points they are given from Mr. Harper? Or are they skilled ministers qualified to speak on their subjects and Mr. Harper isn't the control freak you say he is?

(why would QP ask to speak to a minister if they didn't think he did anything or could answer any questions? Why would they refuse the PM's Right hand man under that circumstance??)

Because as you say they are "pushing back" They would rather score some cheap political points in their own battle with the PMO than report on the issues......

Welcome to todays "Journalism".