22 May The Herald’s double standard – updated

Greg Beaulieu writes:

I particularly enjoyed this piece, probably in part because I agree with your view on the topic at hand around MLAs’ expenses and the like, and have been appalled (sorry Alexa) by some of the public reaction that was seen in places like the Herald’s online comments section, where it is apparently OK to impugn the integrity of politicians and their staff, but not Herald reporters.

The message you received from Mr. Whateverhisnameis sounds a lot like the comments one sees at the Herald and elsewhere….

The pervasiveness of government means that if one is a consultant, or in the communication, education, or medical business, or like Mr. Terris, a gadfly in in the arts community, you are likely to be on the receiving end of some government funds one day. That does not mean you cannot do what you are doing with Contrarian. What it does mean is that if you do something like Contrarian, you need to do it very well and not make it sound like comments in the Herald online, just with better grammar and spelling.

And you do it very well indeed, Mr. Donham. Congratulations on your first anniversary.

Colin May writes:

The Herald certainly made a mess of the $42,000 story because the headline was misleading as were the opening paragraphs.

George Bain would call this ‘GOTCHA’ writing, sensational headline to attract the reader and make a first, and false, impression. I see the same trait in media covearge of the expenses of MPs with no attempt to explain what an MP is allowed to spend  and no details of the rules, which if published may get in the way of great revelations of what wine Ignatieff drinks and clothes Harper wears courtesy of our taxes.

Turns out an MP has an allowance of $280,000 per year to run an office in Ottawa and an office in the constituency. No reporter on CBC or the Globe or National Post or the CH bothered to tell readers  the facts until late this week, all the while leaving the impression that MPs had access to $500,000,000 of our money. This deliberate obfuscation by the media is shameful and they need to be called out.

Finally, if the comments in the CH were never posted how did the reporter know of them?