Juno News - The CBC publishes a racist screed, then quietly rewrites it

00:00:00.360 The CBC publishes a racist screed against white conservatives and then quietly rewrites the article after some pushback.

00:00:08.700 It's Fake News Friday, I'm Candace Malcolm, and this is The Candace Malcolm Show.

00:00:16.200 Hi everyone, thank you so much for tuning in today.

00:00:18.760 I am going to focus the entire episode today on this truly remarkable piece.

00:00:24.200 It was an opinion piece that was published by the state broadcaster, by the CBC on its website,

00:00:29.340 and it is one of the absolute worst offenders, worst examples of just absolute malfeasance,

00:00:36.600 editorial and journalistic malfeasance on behalf of our government journalists.

00:00:41.600 It is just truly awful in so many ways.

00:00:44.420 I cannot believe it was published and I cannot believe the way that the CBC tried to cover their tracks

00:00:49.280 and cover it up and make it less offensive after the fact.

00:00:52.920 So we're going to go into it, we're going to talk about every aspect of this ridiculous piece that was published earlier in the week.

00:00:59.540 But first, if you like The Candace Malcolm Show, if you like what we do, if you enjoy Fake News Friday,

00:01:03.800 Fake News Friday is certainly my favorite show. 0.69

00:01:05.900 It is a show that we do every Friday where we go through some of the worst examples

00:01:09.380 of the unethical groupthink mentality in the Canadian media.

00:01:13.860 We talk about how it is just such a huge conflict of interest that all of these journalists now receive money from the Trudeau government.

00:01:19.860 So the exact journalists who are there to hold the government accountable,

00:01:23.480 to keep their feet to the fire, to expose corruption, expose bad behavior, expose government waste,

00:01:27.940 those same journalists are reliant upon Trudeau and his government to pay their salaries, to support their jobs.

00:01:35.300 So if it wasn't for Trudeau, if Trudeau wasn't the prime minister, they wouldn't be getting these bailouts,

00:01:39.080 they wouldn't get as much money.

00:01:40.460 Recall that Trudeau has greatly expanded the budget of the CBC,

00:01:44.380 despite the fact that CBC viewership is plunging, nobody watches it,

00:01:48.560 its credibility is at an all-time low, and yet they're still receiving all of this money.

00:01:52.580 It's such an incredible conflict of interest, and that is what we cover every Friday on Fake News Friday,

00:01:58.080 on the Candace Malcolm Show.

00:01:59.040 But like I was saying, if you like our show, if you like what we do,

00:02:01.800 the whole purpose behind True North as a media outlet, as an independent media outlet,

00:02:05.860 is that we don't accept any money from the government.

00:02:08.400 We think that is a conflict of interest.

00:02:09.900 We think that that inhibits a journalist from doing their job.

00:02:13.140 So by principle, we will never take any money from the government.

00:02:16.880 We oppose bailouts, we oppose the state broadcaster in general.

00:02:20.680 But because of that, we need support from our audience.

00:02:23.840 We rely entirely on the donation of our generous viewers and supporters.

00:02:28.300 So if you want to be part of the movement, if you want to join True North Nation,

00:02:31.100 head on over to tnc.news.donate, consider leaving us a modest donation.

00:02:36.420 And if you really like True North, you can donate $10 a month.

00:02:39.280 You get access to our True North Insiders Club, where you get all sorts of perks.

00:02:43.560 And basically, you just get the pride of knowing that you are supporting

00:02:47.620 truly independent journalism in this country.

00:02:50.440 So if you like what we do at the Candace Malcolm Show,

00:02:52.160 and you're currently watching this video on YouTube,

00:02:54.200 don't forget to like this video, subscribe to True North,

00:02:57.160 hit that little notification bell so you never miss an episode.

00:03:00.140 And leave me a comment, let me know what you think of the show,

00:03:02.320 what you think of Fake News Friday,

00:03:03.680 and if you have any suggestions for a future episode.

00:03:06.520 If you're watching on Facebook, please like this video, share with your friends,

00:03:09.900 leave us a comment again, and don't forget to like True North

00:03:13.140 and like my personal page, Candace Malcolm.

00:03:15.720 Finally, if you are listening to the show in podcast form

00:03:18.540 over on Google Podcasts, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts,

00:03:22.720 please consider leaving us a five-star review.

00:03:24.920 It really helps us out in the search and in the algorithm.

00:03:29.100 And also, don't forget to subscribe to the Candace Malcolm Show

00:03:31.560 so that you never miss an episode.

00:03:34.140 Okay, so I want to go back to this original news story

00:03:36.660 that was published on Monday, published on October 25th,

00:03:40.280 early in the morning.

00:03:41.880 And just first of all, as a little bit of an aside,

00:03:44.420 I don't really understand why the CBC chose to get into the whole idea of editorial news.

00:03:50.160 You know, the whole idea behind the state broadcaster,

00:03:52.300 there's a couple basic justifications.

00:03:54.900 First is that we need more reporters covering Canadian news.

00:03:58.060 The other is to make sure that news is able to travel throughout the country.

00:04:02.080 It's a big country, especially in the north,

00:04:04.040 that northerners are able to access radio and news

00:04:07.740 in places where there wouldn't be a market to support that kind of thing.

00:04:11.300 But when you get into the idea of opinion journalism,

00:04:14.340 which is a different kind of journalism,

00:04:15.960 you really get into dicey territory.

00:04:17.520 Because again, the CBC is funded by the government.

00:04:20.300 It is a government broadcaster.

00:04:22.200 So when you start hosting opinions,

00:04:24.080 you know, just by virtue of there being opinions in politics,

00:04:27.320 people are going to disagree.

00:04:28.340 You know, I'm an opinion columnist over at the Toronto Sun.

00:04:30.640 I write opinions.

00:04:31.880 I've been doing it for a long time.

00:04:33.940 Sometimes my opinions are very, very controversial.

00:04:36.600 There is a whole group of Canadians out there who really hate me,

00:04:39.500 who hate my opinion, hate what I stand for, hate what I believe in.

00:04:42.740 And, you know, that's just life.

00:04:44.180 That's part of politics.

00:04:45.400 And no matter which position you take, you're going to experience that.

00:04:48.100 But when it comes to the state broadcaster,

00:04:49.840 the idea that they would start inserting opinions,

00:04:51.960 it sort of looks like it's an officially endorsed opinion.

00:04:55.100 It's an opinion endorsed by the state,

00:04:57.560 which again, gets into really dicey territory.

00:04:59.420 I don't like the idea of the CBC doing these opinion pieces.

00:05:03.780 And this article that I'm going to talk about today is exactly why.

00:05:07.280 This is exactly why the CBC has no business publishing editorial opinion pieces.

00:05:14.260 And we're going to see why.

00:05:16.040 Okay, so here is the story.

00:05:17.400 I'm basically going to read it in its entirety

00:05:19.260 because it is just so surprising, so shocking, so appalling, so despicable.

00:05:24.220 So it says this.

00:05:26.600 On election day, I greeted people who voted for parties that hate people like me.

00:05:32.060 And then the sub-headline here says,

00:05:34.080 elections provide numerical evidence of the rise of right-wing politics.

00:05:39.260 And that should worry all of us.

00:05:41.000 It's written by a woman called Ziha Raymond.

00:05:44.180 I think I might be pronouncing that incorrectly.

00:05:46.180 Ziha Raymond.

00:05:47.260 And we are told that she was a Elections Canada officer.

00:05:53.140 So this is a person who worked for Elections Canada,

00:05:56.720 who is one of the officers who welcomed voters on election day.

00:06:00.460 So a government official,

00:06:01.940 a person who has been hired by the government to oversee our elections.

00:06:06.160 For some reason, this person felt the need to write an opinion piece

00:06:09.700 to tell us what she thinks of Canadians,

00:06:11.960 what she thinks of the people who are voting.

00:06:13.700 And again, the CBC gave it a platform.

00:06:15.860 So just so many conflicts of interest here.

00:06:17.600 This woman should never be allowed to work for Elections Canada again. 1.00

00:06:20.680 People who have outward opinions like this,

00:06:22.960 they don't fit the role of a sort of non-partisan, apolitical public servant.

00:06:28.080 That the whole idea of the public service is that it is not partisan.

00:06:31.660 It's not political.

00:06:32.760 It does the job.

00:06:33.680 It's this sort of stable force within the government.

00:06:36.360 And, you know, the parties come and go.

00:06:37.980 The politicians who run the country come and go.

00:06:39.960 But this civil service remains neutral and trusted.

00:06:42.700 And so when you have a crazy opinion like the one I'm going to present to you,

00:06:46.620 you can recognize we have a deeper problem in this country

00:06:49.360 when it comes to the partisanship and the ideology,

00:06:52.540 clearly, that's seeping through into the public service.

00:06:55.400 Okay.

00:06:55.880 So I'm going to basically read this thing in its entirety because it's so shocking.

00:06:59.960 So bear with me.

00:07:00.940 Here we go.

00:07:01.440 It says,

00:07:31.860 Okay, so remember that the headline of this article is,

00:07:43.700 I greeted people who voted for parties that hate people like me.

00:07:47.200 So here we see there's this interaction with an elderly white woman.

00:07:50.600 And so we're thinking, okay, what did she do?

00:07:53.740 How did she show that she hated people like you?

00:07:56.560 You know, what happened?

00:07:58.300 Well, the interaction, it turned out, was actually quite pleasant.

00:08:01.540 There was a bit of a misunderstanding.

00:08:03.620 She directed the woman to the right place.

00:08:05.820 The woman thanked her profusely.

00:08:07.320 And that was the end of the interaction.

00:08:09.400 So we'll just keep reading.

00:08:11.040 It says,

00:08:11.800 I was buoyed both at her dedication to her civic duty,

00:08:14.580 as well as her kind words.

00:08:16.120 However, after she left,

00:08:17.820 I couldn't help but wonder whether,

00:08:19.760 despite our pleasant interaction,

00:08:21.640 she was one of the people who hate people like me, dun-dun-dun.

00:08:25.740 So again, this woman is just basically wildly speculating 0.99

00:08:29.020 that because this woman was old and white, 1.00

00:08:31.780 she must be a hateful bigot, essentially. 1.00

00:08:34.260 Even though there's no evidence from the interaction,

00:08:36.640 the assumption that she has is that this woman,

00:08:38.960 because she's white, because of her appearance, 0.89

00:08:41.020 she must be a hateful bigot. 1.00

00:08:42.620 Again, because this woman, this elections worker, 0.99

00:08:45.140 clearly thinks that Canadians are hateful bigots.

00:08:47.420 She clearly thinks that the average default position

00:08:49.740 of a Canadian is hateful bigot. 0.72

00:08:52.340 Okay, let's keep reading.

00:08:53.720 She goes,

00:08:54.200 Obviously, I am well aware that it is unhealthy to distrust people

00:08:57.280 who I have no outward reason to do so.

00:08:59.500 But I am a visibly Muslim, South Asian woman,

00:09:02.200 and also well aware of the rising number of police-reported hate crimes

00:09:06.400 throughout Canada,

00:09:07.120 like the mass murder of a Muslim family in London, Ontario this summer

00:09:10.740 and the rhetoric that enables it.

00:09:13.400 Okay, so she's telling us that she is a visible Muslim,

00:09:16.700 that she is from South Asia,

00:09:18.420 and that she thinks that basically because of a handful of hate crimes

00:09:21.980 and because of one heinous murder that happened in the country,

00:09:25.460 that therefore the entire country must hate her.

00:09:28.260 And then she talks about the rhetoric that enables it.

00:09:31.300 So stay tuned for that, the rhetoric that enables it,

00:09:34.000 because we're going to try to understand a little bit more

00:09:35.820 about what she thinks about why Canadians are so hateful.

00:09:39.440 So we'll keep reading here.

00:09:40.360 It says,

00:09:40.660 While it might be tempting to dismiss that as extreme behaviour

00:09:44.280 from a select few,

00:09:45.620 elections, like the recent election of the 2021 Canadian federal election,

00:09:49.120 give us numerical evidence of the rise of right-wing politics

00:09:53.260 and hateful rhetoric throughout Canada.

00:09:55.760 This evidence in turn serves as a reminder that many people in my community

00:09:59.260 hate people like me so much that they want to elect officials

00:10:03.360 who have demonstrated similar hatred.

00:10:06.840 So she's saying it's not just select examples.

00:10:09.040 It's not just a handful of crazy people out there.

00:10:11.200 The idea that elections show us how many people out there

00:10:14.960 actually support this hateful rhetoric.

00:10:17.140 And so she's tying that to right-wing politics in Canada. 0.81

00:10:20.740 So she's saying, okay, here we go.

00:10:22.380 Here are the numbers that prove that this hatred against people like me

00:10:27.940 is so widespread.

00:10:28.780 Here it goes.

00:10:29.640 She says,

00:10:30.400 When I helped count polls during election night

00:10:32.460 and having interacted with numerous voters throughout the day,

00:10:35.180 it was jarring to realize that many of the people

00:10:38.420 who had seemingly been nice to me throughout the day

00:10:41.120 had chosen to vote for the Conservative Party,

00:10:45.660 whose leader's slogan was the xenophobic phrase,

00:10:49.200 Take Canada Back,

00:10:50.720 and whose former leader Stephen Harper

00:10:52.380 sought to ban kneecaps

00:10:54.040 and implement a barbaric practices hotline

00:10:56.580 when he was Prime Minister.

00:10:57.920 In fact, almost 6 million Canadians

00:10:59.500 voted for the Conservative Party this past election

00:11:01.720 and more than 6 million in 2019.

00:11:04.540 Though the Liberal Party won more ridings in both elections,

00:11:07.460 the Conservatives received more votes overall.

00:11:09.340 Okay, so basically the bill up here

00:11:10.620 is that there are these extreme far-right parties

00:11:12.800 that clearly must, what, hate Muslims

00:11:14.800 and support attacks against Muslims.

00:11:16.940 So she's sort of setting it up like we basically,

00:11:20.040 what I was expecting anyway,

00:11:21.720 was that she was going to go into a tirade 0.91

00:11:23.620 against the People's Party and Maxine Bernier

00:11:25.240 because that's the one who the media paint

00:11:27.280 as being sort of xenophobic and far-right.

00:11:29.560 But then in this paragraph we realise

00:11:31.480 that she's not even talking about the new absurd party

00:11:34.320 and Maxine Bernier, remember in 2019

00:11:36.300 much of his campaign circled around limiting immigration

00:11:39.300 and sort of defending Canadian values

00:11:41.520 and sort of no longer supporting

00:11:43.640 the multicultural ideology in Canada.

00:11:46.620 So I expected her to be talking about Maxine Bernier,

00:11:49.440 but again in this paragraph she reveals

00:11:51.280 that no, she's talking about all Conservatives.

00:11:53.620 She's talking about the party

00:11:55.580 that received the most votes in Canada.

00:11:57.360 So this woman thinks that anyone who is a Conservative 0.98

00:12:00.320 therefore must be a bigot.

00:12:02.200 Anybody who is an old white woman 0.99

00:12:03.560 therefore must be a bigot.

00:12:05.500 Basically what this piece is revealing

00:12:07.360 is that the person who wrote this piece

00:12:10.080 is kind of unhinged, is kind of a lunatic,

00:12:12.520 is kind of a crazy person.

00:12:13.740 She's one of those paranoid people

00:12:14.820 who believes that everybody hates her,

00:12:16.680 everybody's out to get her.

00:12:17.800 She clearly doesn't have a very high opinion of Canada,

00:12:20.180 the country that welcomed her,

00:12:21.320 the country where she lives peacefully in.

00:12:23.460 In fact, she's so free in Canada

00:12:24.980 that she even gets published by the CBC,

00:12:28.200 which I think is the largest,

00:12:29.480 most circulated website, news website in Canada.

00:12:31.640 So even though she feels so oppressed

00:12:33.220 and so hated in Canada,

00:12:34.740 she still has all these wonderful opportunities

00:12:36.360 that she doesn't seem very grateful about.

00:12:38.460 But again, this story really just reveals

00:12:40.620 her insane bias

00:12:42.300 and the fact that this piece was published

00:12:44.560 is an absolute disgrace.

00:12:46.280 So I will just quickly keep reading.

00:12:48.560 She does go on to talk about the People's Party.

00:12:50.900 She says,

00:12:51.200 some of the people I interacted with

00:12:52.420 had voted for the far-right's People's Party of Canada,

00:12:54.860 whose leader, Maxime Bernier,

00:12:55.940 had proposed to end multiculturalism,

00:12:58.460 reduce the number of immigrants and refugees 1.00

00:12:59.980 Canada receives,

00:13:01.340 and foster hate speech

00:13:03.140 under the guise of free speech

00:13:04.740 as part of his party's platform.

00:13:06.480 The PPC received more than 840,000 votes

00:13:08.640 in the 2021 federal election.

00:13:10.280 That's more than double the number of votes

00:13:11.540 they received in the 2019 federal election.

00:13:13.780 And it's because these policies

00:13:15.300 resonate with some Canadians.

00:13:16.600 Well, the reason that Maxime Bernier

00:13:19.280 more than doubled his electoral fortune

00:13:21.060 is because he moved away

00:13:22.460 from talking about immigration all the time

00:13:24.100 and he started critiquing the government

00:13:25.900 for lockdowns and overzealous COVID response.

00:13:29.740 And so the reason that he got so many more votes

00:13:32.260 and the message that resonated to Canada

00:13:33.780 wasn't even about immigration this time around,

00:13:36.200 it was about the pandemic

00:13:38.500 and the insane response

00:13:39.800 that the government has been having.

00:13:41.320 So this take isn't even correct.

00:13:43.500 And even just to go back even further,

00:13:45.100 just because you want to limit

00:13:46.580 the number of immigrants that Canada takes

00:13:48.280 doesn't mean by virtue

00:13:49.780 that you're a racist or a bigot. 0.78

00:13:51.740 That's just, it's a very juvenile argument.

00:13:53.520 It's like, it's like so basic and so limited

00:13:55.620 and just so poorly argued

00:13:57.160 that it's hardly even worth refuting.

00:13:59.540 But regardless, you know,

00:14:01.500 this piece is just so pathetic.

00:14:03.500 I'll just read a little bit more

00:14:04.920 as I'll skip a few paragraphs.

00:14:06.260 She says,

00:14:06.660 the results of these recent elections

00:14:08.060 is tangible proof

00:14:09.200 that this hatred

00:14:10.160 is not some faceless online entity.

00:14:12.780 They are real people,

00:14:13.820 some of whom are my neighbors.

00:14:15.300 Some of these people

00:14:15.960 might even belong to my community.

00:14:17.860 After all, immigrants and racialized people

00:14:20.580 make up a sizable chunk of right-wing voters

00:14:23.100 as well as candidates.

00:14:24.400 This is often due to a combination

00:14:25.620 of their economic interests,

00:14:27.180 e.g. less taxes,

00:14:28.680 conservative cultural values,

00:14:30.140 e.g. anti-abortion or anti-LGBT policies,

00:14:33.520 support for a specific politician,

00:14:35.640 or their internalized self-hatred

00:14:38.180 or views on colorism,

00:14:40.040 which outweighs any oppression

00:14:42.100 they may face at the hands

00:14:43.660 of other voters or candidates

00:14:45.420 in their party.

00:14:46.200 So, first, it's just so obvious

00:14:47.980 from reading this thing

00:14:48.800 that this woman has such a reductive, 0.98

00:14:51.340 infantile, very simplistic,

00:14:53.920 very silly view of conservatives.

00:14:56.140 Broadly, she's writing

00:14:57.180 an entire opinion piece

00:14:58.320 saying that people who vote

00:14:59.720 for right-wing parties,

00:15:01.140 including the conservatives,

00:15:02.340 who are hardly right-wing,

00:15:03.360 give me a break,

00:15:03.880 hardly right-wing,

00:15:04.560 but if you vote for conservatives,

00:15:06.260 it's because of these

00:15:06.860 very simplistic ideas.

00:15:08.500 She clearly has a very low opinion

00:15:09.940 of Canadian voters,

00:15:11.260 including immigrants

00:15:12.660 or what she calls racialized people.

00:15:14.360 There are so many made-up words

00:15:15.360 in this piece,

00:15:16.740 racialized colorism.

00:15:19.180 This woman is definitely 1.00

00:15:20.700 a gender studies major.

00:15:22.880 It definitely has some kind

00:15:24.200 of a really steeped,

00:15:25.940 woke leftist ideology,

00:15:27.500 and again,

00:15:28.020 it is coming through so badly.

00:15:30.180 So, finally,

00:15:30.940 I'll just read the final sentence here.

00:15:32.080 She says,

00:15:32.420 I hope I'm wrong to be fearful,

00:15:34.440 and I hope that my neighbors

00:15:35.540 will get to know me

00:15:36.740 and my community

00:15:37.760 before casting their ballots.

00:15:39.580 So, again,

00:15:40.080 the final insinuation here

00:15:41.260 is that if you get to know

00:15:42.820 a Muslim person,

00:15:43.760 if you get to know her community,

00:15:45.640 you would never vote

00:15:46.540 for a right-wing party.

00:15:47.560 So, again,

00:15:48.240 very reductive,

00:15:49.280 this idea that

00:15:50.120 if you are on the right,

00:15:51.480 if you're conservative

00:15:52.140 because you must be a bigot, 0.82

00:15:53.580 because you don't know Muslims,

00:15:54.720 because you don't understand

00:15:55.560 people from other cultures,

00:15:56.680 it's just plain wrong.

00:15:57.860 It's very simplistic,

00:15:59.000 very, very silly

00:15:59.860 view of the right.

00:16:01.220 Shame on this woman 1.00

00:16:02.060 for being so ignorant

00:16:02.880 and for thinking

00:16:04.440 that her ignorant view

00:16:05.400 is so important

00:16:06.200 that she wants to put it out there.

00:16:07.740 And then double shame

00:16:08.760 on the CBC.

00:16:09.660 The CBC should have

00:16:11.180 a better process

00:16:12.520 for screening pieces,

00:16:13.880 for editing pieces,

00:16:14.720 for determining

00:16:15.220 what gets posted

00:16:16.320 on their website.

00:16:17.380 It's not like this woman 1.00

00:16:18.060 is a paid columnist

00:16:19.380 who gets to submit

00:16:20.340 a piece every week

00:16:21.220 and they're used to her

00:16:22.160 and they're saying,

00:16:22.680 okay, she might be controversial,

00:16:24.180 but we own that,

00:16:26.240 we'll protect that,

00:16:27.040 we'll make sure

00:16:27.600 that everything is bulletproof

00:16:28.680 before we put it up

00:16:29.780 onto our website.

00:16:30.700 To the contrary,

00:16:32.120 as soon as this piece

00:16:33.040 started to get some scrutiny

00:16:34.040 and believe me,

00:16:34.800 it got a lot of scrutiny.

00:16:35.920 When this piece was put up,

00:16:37.000 there were a lot of,

00:16:37.960 there's a lot of pushback,

00:16:38.900 a lot of people online

00:16:39.720 scratching their head,

00:16:40.880 wondering what the heck

00:16:41.940 is going on

00:16:42.600 over at the CBC

00:16:43.580 that they would receive

00:16:44.760 this piece,

00:16:45.520 think, you know what,

00:16:46.600 this is a great piece,

00:16:47.700 wow, how thoughtful,

00:16:49.040 wow, this is totally fair,

00:16:50.320 wow, these arguments

00:16:50.940 are so well argued

00:16:52.400 that we're just going to

00:16:53.220 post this thing

00:16:53.960 on our website

00:16:54.980 and run with it.

00:16:56.580 Usually, just sort of

00:16:57.980 to pause for a second

00:16:58.840 and talk about the

00:16:59.620 behind-the-scenes aspect

00:17:01.340 of a news organization,

00:17:02.960 I run one here

00:17:03.600 at True North,

00:17:04.120 I'm the editor-in-chief,

00:17:05.100 I know what goes on

00:17:06.340 before we publish something.

00:17:07.760 Typically, if someone

00:17:08.760 submits an article

00:17:09.660 or a video in our case

00:17:11.200 or an op-ed,

00:17:12.320 you know, you read it through,

00:17:13.340 you make sure,

00:17:13.880 like I said,

00:17:14.300 it's bulletproof

00:17:14.920 that every single piece

00:17:16.440 can be completely justified,

00:17:18.920 that every stat,

00:17:20.040 every fact has a source

00:17:22.100 or you know where it came from,

00:17:23.220 that the piece is true,

00:17:24.720 that you are confident with it,

00:17:26.160 that it has met

00:17:26.640 your journalistic standards

00:17:28.240 and your integrity,

00:17:29.540 your ethics,

00:17:30.240 and everything like that

00:17:31.140 before you publish it,

00:17:32.220 before it goes up.

00:17:33.080 Usually, it's read over

00:17:34.060 by at least two or three people

00:17:35.360 and that's just at True North.

00:17:36.900 I imagine CBC has

00:17:38.120 many, many, many, many,

00:17:39.360 many more staff members

00:17:40.800 and people on their editorial team

00:17:42.660 that can help

00:17:43.500 with the editing process.

00:17:45.180 So the fact that this piece,

00:17:46.640 as I just read it,

00:17:47.700 the original piece,

00:17:48.840 made it through

00:17:49.580 all of those stages

00:17:50.540 and the CBC put it out

00:17:51.720 is a crazy, crazy indictment

00:17:54.540 of just how terrible

00:17:55.640 the CBC is,

00:17:56.500 of just how absolutely

00:17:57.940 poorly organized this place is,

00:17:59.800 of their complete lack of ethics

00:18:01.780 and integrity

00:18:03.060 when it comes to journalism.

00:18:04.220 I'm just floored by the fact

00:18:05.300 that they would put out

00:18:06.220 a garbage, garbage piece like this

00:18:08.020 by a person who sounds

00:18:09.520 like a paranoid lunatic

00:18:10.860 when it comes to accusing

00:18:12.160 everyone around her

00:18:13.140 of hating her

00:18:14.020 with absolutely no evidence.

00:18:15.680 And so, of course,

00:18:16.780 the backlash was pretty strong,

00:18:18.980 pretty fierce.

00:18:20.440 Here you have John Kaye

00:18:21.980 who is the editor

00:18:23.600 over at Collette

00:18:24.540 and he says,

00:18:25.660 got it,

00:18:26.420 if someone votes

00:18:27.040 for a party you don't like,

00:18:28.440 they must be a bigot.

00:18:30.000 Well, there was a lot of comments

00:18:31.360 just like this on Twitter.

00:18:32.800 So what does the CBC do?

00:18:34.120 Well, they basically

00:18:34.900 completely rewrite the piece.

00:18:36.340 They take down

00:18:36.860 that original version

00:18:37.680 that I just read

00:18:38.420 and they put up something

00:18:39.560 that is just completely different,

00:18:41.040 completely watered down.

00:18:42.200 They edited so much of it.

00:18:43.580 They took so much down.

00:18:44.840 They clearly recognized

00:18:45.960 that the piece

00:18:46.680 that they put up

00:18:47.280 was indefensible,

00:18:48.220 that there was no

00:18:49.360 walking back from it.

00:18:50.620 And so rather than just,

00:18:51.600 you know,

00:18:51.860 completely killing the piece

00:18:52.900 and saying,

00:18:53.600 we apologize for publishing

00:18:55.120 this complete nonsense,

00:18:57.500 we'll try to do better

00:18:59.300 going forward.

00:19:00.700 Instead of that,

00:19:01.620 what did they do?

00:19:02.360 They just kind of

00:19:03.340 rewrote the piece

00:19:04.060 and tried to basically

00:19:05.580 make it seem like

00:19:07.220 they had done nothing wrong,

00:19:08.300 hope that people don't notice

00:19:09.440 that this was a completely

00:19:10.440 rewritten piece.

00:19:11.800 So I'll give you

00:19:12.140 a couple of examples here.

00:19:14.060 Okay, so here is

00:19:15.100 the updated piece.

00:19:16.000 You can see that there's

00:19:16.820 like stealth edits

00:19:17.720 that really water

00:19:18.620 the piece down.

00:19:19.500 But again,

00:19:19.760 they don't make it clear

00:19:20.520 that they've changed it.

00:19:21.340 When you go onto the website

00:19:22.240 and you read the piece,

00:19:23.500 there's no big note

00:19:24.940 anywhere at the top

00:19:25.780 that says this piece

00:19:26.420 has been edited.

00:19:27.360 There's no correction label

00:19:29.400 or anything like that.

00:19:30.200 They just sort of

00:19:30.780 stealth went in

00:19:31.600 and changed the headline.

00:19:33.000 It now says on election day,

00:19:34.440 I greeted people

00:19:35.480 who voted for candidates

00:19:36.800 who might hate people like me.

00:19:38.800 So they added that

00:19:39.440 who might

00:19:40.240 before it just said

00:19:41.360 who hate people like me.

00:19:42.680 So again,

00:19:43.300 that might word 0.55

00:19:43.900 really, really couches it

00:19:45.120 and makes it a lot less

00:19:46.320 assertive than it was.

00:19:47.960 And then she goes on.

00:19:49.680 Basically,

00:19:50.100 I'm not entirely sure

00:19:51.040 to be honest

00:19:51.560 who made these changes,

00:19:52.540 whether the editor

00:19:53.260 just went in

00:19:54.340 and did it themselves

00:19:55.040 or whether they went back

00:19:56.040 to this Elections Canada woman 0.81

00:19:57.320 and said,

00:19:57.740 look, you got to

00:19:58.320 really make this piece

00:19:59.320 a lot stronger

00:19:59.860 because it's not

00:20:00.620 standing up to scrutiny.

00:20:01.780 But regardless,

00:20:02.660 a lot of the really,

00:20:04.160 really loaded pieces

00:20:05.700 are now gone.

00:20:06.440 For instance,

00:20:08.000 for some reason,

00:20:08.720 she still talks about

00:20:09.840 her interaction

00:20:10.740 with the woman 0.73

00:20:11.480 in the walker

00:20:12.260 who was at

00:20:12.840 the wrong polling station.

00:20:14.080 But they took out

00:20:14.820 the fact that

00:20:15.340 she was elderly and white

00:20:16.540 and now it just says

00:20:17.260 I greeted a woman. 0.93

00:20:18.320 So for some reason,

00:20:19.520 CBC thought

00:20:20.160 that it would be better

00:20:20.940 if they took out

00:20:21.620 the part that identified

00:20:23.020 her racial identity.

00:20:26.560 Why?

00:20:27.160 I have no idea,

00:20:28.120 but it sort of

00:20:28.880 underscores the idea

00:20:30.420 that the piece

00:20:31.160 as it was written

00:20:31.920 was just really appalling

00:20:34.100 and a bunch of other changes.

00:20:36.020 Jonathan Kaye

00:20:37.040 does a great job

00:20:37.900 on his Twitter

00:20:38.880 of literally going through,

00:20:40.460 comparing the screenshot

00:20:41.480 to screenshot

00:20:42.080 of all the changes

00:20:43.260 and really dissecting it.

00:20:44.740 I won't go through

00:20:45.640 all that detail,

00:20:46.500 but I will just say

00:20:47.120 that this is one

00:20:47.660 of the worst offenders

00:20:48.620 for Fake News Friday.

00:20:49.840 We joked about it internally

00:20:51.040 here at the Candace Malcolm

00:20:51.940 show and at True North

00:20:52.800 that we might have to do

00:20:54.140 like an award show

00:20:55.040 for the biggest

00:20:56.140 fake news stories

00:20:57.000 of the year.

00:20:57.980 And if we did,

00:20:58.800 this would certainly

00:20:59.540 be a contender

00:21:00.640 because this was

00:21:01.640 absolutely appalling

00:21:03.040 and the CBC

00:21:04.060 has noticed this

00:21:05.980 at least implicitly

00:21:07.620 by going through

00:21:08.760 and making such

00:21:09.520 drastic changes.

00:21:10.280 And the only way

00:21:11.640 that we know

00:21:12.100 that the changes

00:21:12.660 were made

00:21:13.080 if you happen

00:21:13.880 to come on

00:21:14.460 and see this piece

00:21:15.400 after all these edits

00:21:16.380 were made

00:21:16.820 is just at the very,

00:21:18.320 very bottom,

00:21:18.900 the very, very bottom

00:21:19.980 of the CBC piece.

00:21:20.920 It says two things.

00:21:21.800 First, it says

00:21:22.300 Editor's Note.

00:21:23.400 This column and headline

00:21:24.360 has been revised

00:21:25.240 to clarify

00:21:26.300 the writer's reaction

00:21:27.440 was to some

00:21:28.780 conservative candidates

00:21:30.020 and their policies

00:21:30.920 and not broadly

00:21:32.060 to conservative parties.

00:21:33.740 And then under that

00:21:34.340 it says Corrections

00:21:35.220 and it says

00:21:35.680 a previous version

00:21:36.720 of this column

00:21:37.500 said,

00:21:38.200 Our Pan Canna 0.99

00:21:39.660 was a former MP

00:21:40.800 with the Conservative Party.

00:21:42.040 In fact,

00:21:42.540 Canna was a candidate

00:21:43.560 for the party

00:21:44.140 but was not elected.

00:21:45.780 So again,

00:21:46.380 just a total,

00:21:47.180 total joke.

00:21:48.140 Horrible,

00:21:48.600 horrible disservice

00:21:49.460 and abuse

00:21:50.060 by the public broadcaster

00:21:51.340 to the trust

00:21:52.100 of Canadians.

00:21:53.020 It is no wonder

00:21:54.060 why Canadians 1.00

00:21:55.060 don't watch the CBC

00:21:56.060 and they don't trust

00:21:57.140 the CBC.

00:21:57.940 It is because the CBC

00:21:58.960 is absolutely dysfunctional.

00:22:01.720 Thank you so much

00:22:02.300 for watching.

00:22:02.940 This has been

00:22:03.220 Fake News Friday.

00:22:03.940 I'm Candice Malcolm

00:22:04.500 and this is

00:22:05.120 The Candice Malcolm Show.

00:22:08.200 Thank you.

00:22:34.120 Yeah.

Juno News - October 29, 2021

The CBC publishes a racist screed, then quietly rewrites it

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript