@kady and @NickKouvalis: the new Downey vs. Boulerice

Dominant story of the day, naturally, was the Auditor-General and the Harper Government's^TM  G8 spending and lying to Parliament. This is going to turn the volume up – waaaay up – on the sleaze and lack-of-transparency memes.

This is getting juicier and smellier by the minute, and best of all, it's sticking to them. And it's got legs. They're not spinning their way out of this one, no matter how many Facebook profiles they red-flag.

Amidst all the yargle-bargle, though, I'd hate to see the Kady O'Malley / Nick Kouvalis scrap totally overshadowed. Not the least because it gives me another (transparent) excuse to recycle this.



Just in case you missed it, here's @kady's smackdown:

Punching above her weight, she is. As you were, Nick.

Tweets about Auditor-General's report spike ...

... and overtake coalition talk on Monday.

Gosh. Could that be because people recognize a genuine scandal when they see one? And can tell the difference between that and a bullshit manufactured controversy?

Sent from my mobile device

Never mind Internet billing, let's worry about Internet spying

Given the name of this blog, it's probably just as well that I've avoided references to Big Brother as long as I have.

But via impolitical, some very worrying stuff in what the Harper regime is planning in terms of internet legislation. More likelihood that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) will be forced to hand over personal and private information. More power for real-time surveillance and warrantless interception. More intrusive police powers. These things have been flagged by Michael Geist and Cory Doctorow, among others. When you consider the authoritarian mindset this government has already demonstrated, it's not hard to connect the dots.

What Dana said

Welcome to the inaugural edition.

H/t both Dana and Steve V. at Far and Wide.

An excerpt:

" ... the news media live in a bubble too, just like their pet creation.  Remember that they do not live by bread alone but by the closed room circle jerk as well.  They look to one another for verification or reinforcement more often than they look to actual citizens, if they haven't relegated citizens to the realm of the legendary or mythical."

There's more to it, of course. I'm not so sure I'd buy into the characterization of younger journalists – it's a little too close to the "kids these days!" mindset for me. In particular, the suggestion that they're conditioned by their education and training to be obeisant to the mighty corporation doesn't really ring true. Some of them, in fact, are smart enough to put in their time, get what they can out of it in a few years, and then leave to set up their own startups.

But it does sum up why the national discourse is so poorly served by the corporate media.

On thwap and honesty as the best policy

Full disclosure here: I like thwap. Honest, spirited and refreshingly nasty. Although he is given to the occasional vulgarity. Makes me feel all naive and earnest by comparison.

Was just reading his stuff (I'd recommend it to anyone of a progressive mindset, by the way), and had to comment. And then I thought to throw the discussion open to a wider audience. (That means both my readers.) So, read thwap's post here.

What I said in response:

@SueAnnLevy in her own words

What's that website again? Blogging Tories in Their Own Words?

(I have a slight problem with the appropriation of voice implicit in the use of the term "Tories" in this context, but I'll let that go for now.)

#Elxn41: emerging theme from the week? Don't know yet

It would be easy to make it all about the expulsions, and the screenings, and the secret files, and the vetting of people on the basis of who they've got pictures of on their Facebook profiles. It's an easy story to write; the bad guys are obvious, the narrative simple, and the shades of meaning very few.

Unfortunately, as Simon points out, that's part of the white noise that helps Harper mask his ugly intentions. Not sure which polls to believe, and whether or not the arrogance and isolation and condescension are really hurting. And as Paul Wells argues, the more we focus on why Harper's so mean to reporters and so afraid of unscripted moments with people who haven't been filtered out by the multi-layered security screen, the less we can focus on other things – health care, aboriginal communities, fiscal policy, corporate-tax cuts, so-called free trade, climate change, our carbon footprint, the tar sands, energy, environment, just to name a few.

All important, yes, but based on what we've seen this week, I'd suggest that our overarching strategy still has to be making this about Harper's character, his aggressively totalitarian impulses, his hyperpartisan bitterness, what his wackjob base wants, and what would be in store for us if he ever got his majority. Ultimately, it's on those terms that we're best able to distinguish him from the opposition (after all, it's not like the Liberals are suddenly going to depart from their pattern of serving the ownership-class agenda).

And we can do that without reducing it to a simplistic two-dimensional story that's easy for the corporate media to digest and twist. That's the message at which we have to keep hammering away.

(Update: one possible suggestion ... )