Juno News - October 29, 2021


The CBC publishes a racist screed, then quietly rewrites it


Episode Stats

Length

22 minutes

Words per Minute

189.50351

Word Count

4,280

Sentence Count

225

Misogynist Sentences

16

Hate Speech Sentences

14


Summary


Transcript

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.
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.
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
00:08:29.020 that because this woman was old and white,
00:08:31.780 she must be a hateful bigot, essentially.
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,
00:08:41.020 she must be a hateful bigot.
00:08:42.620 Again, because this woman, this elections worker,
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.
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.
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
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
00:12:00.320 therefore must be a bigot.
00:12:02.200 Anybody who is an old white woman
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
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.
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,
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
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,
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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.