Conservatives have long-realized that like-minded people in the media business can really help their cause. And every once and a while we can see such players expose themselves. A few months ago, Stephen Harper named media heavy hitters Mike Duffy, Pamela Wallin and Linda Frum Sokolowski to the Senate. TV anchorman Peter Kent, (journalist and senior member of the neo-conservative outfit Canadian Coalition for Democracies) also officially jumped to the Conservatives not too long ago. And recently, former journalist, Danielle Smith, won the leadership of Alberta’s right-of-Conservative Wildrose Party. Incidentally, Smith’s husband, David Maretta, and fellow WR party member, is the managing editor for Calgary Global TV. (Hot off the press: yesterday Peter MacKay announced he will be marrying Jana Juginovic, a CTV news executive. We’re sure she’ll remain impartial…as always.)
To only find out years later that these journalists may have been playing partisan politics while feeding us the news is unfortunate, to say the least. On the other hand, it is (a) vindicating to see the likes of Mike Duffy finally come out of the closet and admit he’s in bed with the Conservatives and (b) a good reminder that the media is far from objective; other partisans certainly remain embedded.
The same holds true for campus media; the campus conservative movement would be nowhere without the aid of sympathetic media.
Look at Maclean’s, for example. There, teams of writers and bloggers consistently blur the line between news, opinion and fiction, all the while pushing decidedly right-of-center on campus issues like: labour, Canadian militarism, science vs. the humanities, feminism, tobacco and public health, and the Canadian Federation of Students. But, it’s easy to beat up on institutions like Maclean’s or the Western Standard, which have been at this for years. It is more of a challenge to spot individuals. A campus Conservative writing for his or her paper for a couple of years easily evades due recognition. So we thought we would find and expose a representative sampling of such “journalists” from across country. From East to West we have…
Québec: Andrew Haig
Dwindling solidarity among students in Québec has put in jeopardy their claim to a more progressive post-secondary education system than any jurisdiction in Canada (Actually there does seem to be an upswing in solidarity between the ultra-left and the right). Conservatives there are contributing to, and seizing on, student unionists’ disarray. Andrew Haig, former editor-in-chief of the Concordian and regular contributor to the Link appears to be making full use of this opportunity. Apart from attempting to re-brand conservative hero, George Bush, he is among those who are calling for tuition fee increases in Québec.
With this in mind, it is clearly for strategic purposes only that he argues that one of the two main threats to the Québec student movement is “annual increases in Qu[é]bec tuition through 2012”. The second “threat”, and more likely his real target, is the Canadian Federation of Students [note: he spends one sentence on tuition fees and the rest of the article on the CFS]. Haig has been reported working anti-CFS petition drives at McGill, Concordia and Carleton.
Ontario: Dean Tester
Dean Tester fills a number of roles within Canada’s conservative student movement, including blogging for Maclean’s. His role with Maclean’s seems to be relegated to personal PR service for Nick Bergamini, the most notable Carleton Conservative elected to the Carleton University Students’ Association (CUSA). We presume Tester’s goal there is to sow the seeds for a better showing for the Conservative ticket next time around.
Tester’s Conservative credentials also include: serving as the communications coordinator for Conservative candidate in the Ottawa-Centre riding, a (failed) candidate himself (and strategist) for the right-wing slate in the last CUSA election, an elected member of Carleton’s alternative right-wing “student government”, and a “Blogging Tory” (under the blog “Alwaysright.ca”). Unsurprisingly, he is also the organizer of the campaign to pull Carleton University undergrads out of the Canadian Federation of Students. Tester’s fervour for capitalism is only outdone by his fanaticism for his other favourite flawed –ism, Toronto Maple Leafism.
British Columbia: Sam Reynolds
Reynolds works with the BC Liberals (read: CONSERVATIVE!) and is at the same time a journalist with the Simon Fraser campus newspaper, The Peak. Reynolds proudly touts his far-right views.
In response to the Canadian Federation of Students’ “Guide to Sustainable Living”, Reynolds could not contain himself and not only announces on his blog that he denies climate change, but calls David Suzuki, of all people, a “dickhead” (also be sure to catch his list of things that are “awesome” at the end of his article…hint some of them are firearms, what’s the message there?).
On the Canadian Federation of Students:
Reynolds penned the entirely one-sided news story for the Peak, which reads very similar and was published at almost the same time as the much criticized piece from Erin Hale, in the McGill Daily. Both articles carry the usual mis-mash of unsubstantiated allegations levelled at the organization. Since being published, similar or identical stories to Reynolds’ or Hale’s have appeared in other campus papers. As George Bush would say, “mission accomplished.”
In response to an opinion piece by James Clark from the Ryerson Free Press (a lone progressive voice in a sea of reactionary campus newspapers), Reynolds levels legal accusations against Clark of “slandering” Dean Tester. Though it is preposterous to allege that Clark slandered Tester in any way, Reynolds’ accusation quickly spread.
Despite his open hostility toward left-leaning political principles, Reynolds happily promotes the open letter from the “The Left” to the Canadian Federation of Students, a letter which has generated a lot of concern among real progressives.
On his ‘hatred’ for Barak Obama:
“I hate Barack Obama. I despise the man and his policies entirely…It’s because I strongly believe that his reckless financial management and weak foreign policy will lead to the demise of what was once the world’s hegemon, the United States of America.”
“The prevailing logic being that because these people are “rich” they can afford to pay extra taxes to fund the state’s social programs. But does this exercise in pseudo Demand side economics really work? No. And to prove it, I’ll show you a parable from the magnum opus of simulation gaming, Sim City.”
–Yes, he’s using a video game to attempt to prove the supremacy of right-wing economics.
“In fact Guantanamo Bay isn’t that bad of a place at all.” And, “The effects of modern enhanced interrogation techniques don’t leave any permanent damage…don’t advertise it as Torture”
–Maybe Reynolds thinks water boarding is some kind of recreational activity?
While it is obvious that these unbalanced rants are that of a far-right ideologue, too often such comments are dismissed as those of a harmless crank. In fact, people like people like Reynolds, Haig and Tester have the power of their collective voices (there are some 220 registered blogging Tories alone) and their positions in various media organizations to influence “legitimate” media, as well as the general public. We think students reading their campus papers deserve better than recycled Tory rhetoric passing as news.
————————————————
Email us if you have evidence of a Conservative posing as a journalist: campusconservativewatch@gmail.com
Follow us on Twitter.
15 responses so far ↓
Sam Reynolds // November 3, 2009 at 6:07 pm |
Thanks guys! This really tickles me pink and has made my day. I’ve printed this page off and put it on my wall! Much love from Burnaby!
Dan // November 3, 2009 at 6:38 pm |
The more I read this blog the more I suspect it’s a hoax set up by Conservatives to get undue attention…
Kevin // November 3, 2009 at 7:30 pm |
Does nobody see the McCarthyist irony in a left-wing group trying to uproot and expose ‘deviant’ political opinions in the media? The argument here is not merely that political parties shouldn’t be controlling the media (an obviously meritous argument) but rather that anyone with small-c conservative opinions should not be able to work in the campus media.
That’s both absurd and completely undemocratic. Everyone in the media (and in general) has opinions on various matters. The onus is on media liberals and conservatives to put their biases asied when writing articles, though they are more than able to write opinion pieces.
Please explain to me how it is ok for people with progressive views to work in the campus media, but there is an assumption that conservative journalists must be ‘exposed’ because they are somehow incapable of engaging in proper journalism.
Campusconservativewatch // November 3, 2009 at 9:20 pm |
Kevin,
Thanks for your comment. It is a fair question.
But, to be fair you are mischaracterizing our piece. We were actually careful to not state anywhere that conservatives (small- or large-c) should not be able to work in the media. But voluntary compliance to some loosely defined media ethics are about as useful as asking the financial sector to self-regulate.
Better, is to simply ensure that there is context to the articles that are being written by such people. This is, in part, what we strive for here. If these authors really stand by their track records then they should have no problem with our re-broadcasting their biases. Based on his comment above, in this respect, Sam Reynolds seems to agree with us.
Dean // November 3, 2009 at 9:49 pm |
I actually enjoy your blog (and the free advertising!) Campus Conservative Watch! Don’t hate on my Leafs though, or I may quickly change my tune…
If you’re going to talk about journalistic ethics, I think my pieces on Maclean’s speak for themselves. I covered every story fairly and actually gave some CFS-friendlies, like CUSA prez Erik Halliwell, some pretty good media coverage. He’s actually a good guy, even though we disagree on a lot of things.
And you might notice I haven’t actually written anything on Maclean’s since I started working on the campaign. Might have something to do with this “journalistic ethics” thing you’re talking about.
You might want to look at your friends on the left if you’re worried about “ethics.” The Ryerson Free Press seems to happily print blatant lies about our campaign (I believe they’ve corrected one paragraph four times), and The Leveller (a new Carleton newspaper that might be more aptly named “The Libeler”) accuses us of all sorts of ridiculous things, without any sort of factual basis or proof (or even basic knowledge of our campaign, evidently.)
Keep up the good work! I like reading about myself.
Regards,
Dean
Eric Onderwater // November 4, 2009 at 12:02 am |
As a Conservative, I thank you for the free publicity you’ve given to all Conservative journalists! Its great that you informed me and my fellow conservatives of all the great conservative journalists out there. I will be sure to look them up and read what they have to say. Keep it up, and keep talking about conservatives, it helps our noble cause.
Crista // November 4, 2009 at 12:51 am |
I think drawing these links is important for students to know. There tends to be a right-leaning bias in student press, but it’s fed to students as being neutral. The more that progressive minded students can remind people that everything is political in the press, those who are ideologically motivated by right-wing ideals wont be able to hide as easily behind the label of ‘unbiased’ media.
Jonathon Van Maren // November 4, 2009 at 1:16 am |
Ha! This is awesome. I love it when people claim there is any such this as “unbiased media”. What a joke. I see my fellow conservatives Sam and Eric have already commented on this so thanks for drawing attention to the fantastic work in exposing far left bullshit!
Marc // November 4, 2009 at 1:59 am |
Thanks for this article. I won’t go on and on here, but as a new journalism student and someone who will be writing for my campus paper soon, I appreciate this perspective.
lex // November 4, 2009 at 5:19 am |
Let us then, in the interest of speaking to the issue of “journalistic ethics” please reiterate Nora Loreto (CFS-O Treasurer)’s role as Editor-in-Chief of the Ryerson “free” Press.
Just pointing it out, yeah?
Also, journalists are allowed to have opinions, the last time I checked, even if we think they are crazy neocons. The only thing they are responsible for doing is backing up claims they have made with facts (note: conspicuously lacking in the RFP article). Though I’m not really a journalist, I will set a good example by imploring you to check out the second article in this neat little document called the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms: http://www.efc.ca/pages/law/charter/charter.text.html
campusconservativewatch // November 4, 2009 at 1:57 pm |
Dear Eric/Jonathon (IP 70.79.xxx.39 from Burnaby BC),
Agreed, your original message under the name Jonathon was pretty much repeated by Eric from the same IP address (in case anyone was wondering if Eric/Jonathon/Sam Reynolds are all the same person, we believe this not to be the case. Sam’s message to us came from Toronto…obviously. There’s a student Day of Action tomorrow in that city, why would he waste his time elsewhere…there a progressive student movement to take down).
Anyway, we thank you for demonstrating how the world of blogging works for those innocents who are viewing such debates. A message goes over the blogging Tories communication network and a bunch of random crusty old men troll through our site leaving duplicate flaming messages with the hopes that they will somehow drown out what they don’t like reading.
campusconservativewatch // November 4, 2009 at 2:13 pm |
Lex,
It’s surprising, or maybe telling, that you chose to make your debut here by defending Conservatives rather than your ‘open letter from the left’ (PS we’re not convinced you really think neocons are that “crazy”). As you must be aware, we make no claims, whatsoever, that there should be a limit to who is eligible to write for on- or off-campus papers. On the contrary, we expect Conservatives will continue to do so, so our goal is to let students know when Conservatives and their campaigners are pushing the agenda. This is also important for the unbiased journalists (which we hope are still the vast majority) who may otherwise be unwittingly duped into doing Conservative-PR work. [The CFS is neither a registered political party nor are they linked to the Conservatives (other than being the recipient of a Conservative attack campaign), which is the group we’re watching (hint: it’s in our name).]
We disagree with your suggestion that backing up claims with facts is common practice when it comes to reporting on your favourite topic, the CFS, especially when partisans are writing the articles. Too often facts are replaced by uncited comments and allegations are reported made with no attempt to corroborate them, that’s worse than shoddy news reporting, it’s embarrassing. The Peak article by Reynolds (which we refer to in the article) cranks it up a notch. There, he picks two anti-CFS campaigners Dean Tester and José Barrios as the only people he interviews in his article (and calls them “campus representatives”). Holy ignored red flags by the editors.
As for your dressing this up as this freedom of speech angle, we think that is highly insulting and hypocritical. We sorry that there is a growing Conservative emphasis on the news we read but we won’t apologize for telling people about it. We certainly won’t censor ourselves at your request.
Sam Reynolds // November 4, 2009 at 4:48 pm |
campusconservativewatch:
Eric/Jonathon happen to be room mates, so in a way they are the same person in the eyes of server logs.
I’m not sure why my IP address came from Toronto (that city sucks), perhaps its the ISP that SFU uses?
Beisan Zubi // November 9, 2009 at 3:28 pm |
I’ve got a pretty hard case of the giggles that you guys are calling The Link conservative…
Seriously? Seriously. Seriously CCW, c’mon? C’mmmoooonnnnn, seriously?
Beth // December 1, 2009 at 12:07 pm |
I tried to have this posted at Maclean’s in response to Jeff Ryebak’s piece that argues that journalists shouldn’t spend their time looking into how our universities/colleges are being run, and instead spend all their time attacking student unions (http://tinyurl.com/y9qtmqb). Maybe I was too harsh, but he wouldn’t allow my comment to go up. So I’ll post it here, since it is related to this Conwatch article.
———————————
I agree with the people who are taking student journalists to task for defending the indefensible position that priority should be given to sniping student union reps rather than focusing on the the real power structures at play in the education system (university/college decision making bodies, government, corporations, etc). I believe there are two reasons that journalists seem so willing to do this.
First I’ll take Jeff Rybak statement ‘Students, much as everyone hates to admit this, have short-term views’ and turn it around on him to say: “Student [journalists], much as everyone hates to admit this, have short-term views.” Basically, the biggest bang for your buck is to go after an easy target like a student union or the CFS. It’s more difficult and a longer term project to critically analyze the people/structures with real influence over the system. Example: it is a cop-out to repeat the (usually partisan) claim that somehow students are to blame for tuition fee increases, because their lobby/campaign efforts aren’t strong enough. Another way to say this is that journalists are lazy and they prefer to get a semi-juicy story about people calling “corruption”, “ineffective”, etc. This year (esp) a lot of destructive people are catching on that they can get the student media’s attention by doing this.
Second, many student journalists are not just interested in a quick semi-juicy story for the sake of an quick semi-juicy story, but they are actually biased themselves and using their opportunity to advance their own agenda. This also speaks to laziness. If these people really want to make change they should get involved in politics. Otherwise, if they want engage in the noble job of reporting the news, they should do that. But I’m getting tired of “journalists” using their positions to do advocacy on behalf of themselves, or Maclean’s.