— Musings —12.27.2013 04:47 PM
Manning and Press Gallery ethics and a question
Media folks are unimpressed, and rightly so, about Presto’s bizzaro column, here.
The whole thing hangs on Manning’s claim that Mike Duffy had been lobbying for a Senate appointment “for years.” Meanwhile, he conspicuously disregards the fact that we media folks have been kicking the living shit out of Duffy for months. With a vengeance.
Anyway – what caught my eye was this bit in Presto’s treatise:
“Section 10 of that constitution provides for the expulsion of a member by a majority vote of the members for only one reason: “… that such member uses his membership or the facilities of the Gallery to obtain a benefit other than by journalism …”
That rule sure is interesting.
I am aware of a Press Gallery member (and Frank magazine contributor) using House of Commons property – stationary and whatnot – to fire off myriad legal threats, recently. Got the evidence, even.
How would one go about pursuing such a complaint, Presto (or anyone)?
Presto writes: “Should gallery members who have a conflict of interest in covering a particular issue or event be obliged to publicly disclose it (e.g., reporters and commentators for the CBC, a highly subsidized corporation, when they report on governmental initiatives to reduce or eliminate corporate subsidies)?”
Now there’s a good observation that should be followed up by you, Warren. Sun News too.
Yeah, when reporters on CBC report on gvt cut backs on subsidies to CBC or other gvt corporations, I have no idea who they are working for.
Preston Manning is spewing nothing more than a piece of PMO spin intended to deflect attention to real problem: A corrupt government run by a corrupt prime minister … who has appointed *gasp* corrupt Senators…
Standard Harper MO: Deny, Spin, Deflect … and never take responsibility