10.31.2010 06:58 AM

Don’t read this!

Don’t!

Whatever you do, don’t read what lies behind this link!

It doesn’t matter! I swear!

16 Comments

  1. Andrew says:

    The one thing to consider when you start a campaign of name calling, i.e. knuckle-draggers, baseline thinkers, etc., is that you don’t build any suasion with voters/supporters of a candidate. Instead, you simply strengthen their resolve to do the opposite of what you are saying.

    If anyone in the media had simply remembered what it is like trying to get your teenager to do something, the more you “nag” the more unlikely the result you wish to achieve.

    Telling someone they?re doing it wrong makes them obstinate and even more determined to stay their course.

  2. Warren, you must be a monster. See this link: http://ebooks.sesamestreet.org/reader/monster-at-end-this-book8053 . It may take a minute to load. Be patient.

  3. JH says:

    I don’t think folks are really swayed by either political columnists, editorialists or the talking heads on TV. They may read or listen to them but that’s it. Most of these types have made it quite clear in the past where they sit in the political spectrum and therefore we know where they stand ideologically before they even start, they are a known quantity. A new voice, or one respected for being even handed, might be the exception to the rule.
    Basically things have gone from don’t trust anyone over 30 in the 60s, to don’t trust the media (or anyone else connected to them) in the 2000s

  4. Cow says:

    I do think one place where the media has a huge impact is in the very early part of a campaign, especially when there aren’t default party lines to jump on. There were, what, two dozen mayoral candidates? My ward had seven or eight candidates for councillor. Not all of them were serious, of course, but many were.

    I think media coverage is a major component in the first round of winnowing down, in deciding who gets taken seriously. (Money and previous résumé matter too, of course.)

    The other time they matter are when they’re surprising. The right-wing newspaper in Seattle recently endorsed the Democrat candidate for Congress, while saying rather nasty things about the Republican one. That got people’s attention, as, I’m sure, a Sun paper endorsing Nenshi did. The Toronto Sun endorsing Ford, and the Star endorsing Smitherman? No one’s surprised and nothing new was said in either case.

  5. nic coivert says:

    Newspapers and their editorials preach to the converted. Political parties need to focus on the all powerful swing vote but that is a relatively small portion of the electorate. Maybe a study should be done focusing on the relevance of journalism and op eds on malleable voters and not on the calcified majority, that may tell a different story.

  6. Brian says:

    “This revolt of thine, methinks,
    Is like another Fall of Man”

    Henry V, Act I

  7. DL says:

    Why do people keep parroting this myth (imported from the US) about there being a “liberal media” in Canada – when in fact, huge swaths of the Canadian media are extremely rightwing – such as Macleans magazine, the National Post, all the Sun papers, all the Canwest papers, Global and CTV news and all that Ruh Limbaugh-style AM talk radio we have in Canada?

  8. Em says:

    Agreed, DL.

  9. Ronald O'Dowd says:

    All,

    Those of us who write for the blogosphere know we have very little impact on what people think — much less on how they decide to vote. Readers who happen to be of the same political persuasion as yours truly just love reading what we have to say. Those who support other parties can be divided into two camps: a smaller group that finds what I have to say interesting and a much larger one that likely can’t stand one word of what I put to keyboard.

    Where we do have a small effect is at the margins. Some people are persuaded by our arguments but that has never turned an election and probably never will. The only instance I can think of where commentary moved mountains was when Cronkite came out against the Viet Nam War and that finished President Johnson politically.

  10. Paul R Martin says:

    At least he did not post a link to Bourque. I am sure that some of you would be amused at Bourque’s report that Belinda Stronach wants to become the next president of the Liberal Party. When it comes to politics, she likes to be on top. This position appears to contain a file that is not too complicated for her.

  11. Ronald O'Dowd says:

    Paul R. Martin,

    She’ll have my support…just like last time!

  12. Paul R Martin says:

    Your consistency is admirable Ronald.

  13. Steve Gallagher says:

    Warren,

    When I lived in Toronto, a long time ago, I worked with a guy from Newfoundland. We operated the glue press at Flintkote. I don’t know if that company is around now. Anyway, every morning he would bring in the Sun, sit on the feeder of the press and go through it. Then he would hand it to me. One day I asked the fellow how he could read the paper that quickly.
    “I can’t read. I look at the pictures.”
    So I figured if you can sell a paper to a man who does not read, then you have something.

    I don’t mean anything negative chum. I always like your writing. And the Sun is a worthy inheritor of the Telly’s legacy.

    My folks always read the Star in Montreal. I delivered it for a long time. Never thought it would go away. But it did.

    So yes, newspapers come and go. The Gazette is still a great read and I guess I should shut up now, eh?

    Shut up Steve.

  14. Ronald O'Dowd says:

    Paul,

    To not put too fine a twist on Brian:

    “You go the party with HER that brung you.”

    • Paul R Martin says:

      Cheers and a toast to the lady. It is possibly the last time I will salute her, but I admire your consistency.

Leave a Reply to Ronald O'Dowd Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*