The Candice Malcolm Show - The CBC publishes a racist screed, then quietly rewrites it

00:00:00.420 The CBC publishes a racist screed against white conservatives and then quietly rewrites the article after some pushback.

00:00:08.740 It's Fake News Friday, I'm Candace Malcolm, and this is The Candace Malcolm Show.

00:00:16.260 Hi everyone, thank you so much for tuning in today.

00:00:18.800 I am going to focus the entire episode today on this truly remarkable piece.

00:00:24.240 It was an opinion piece that was published by the state broadcaster, by the CBC on its website,

00:00:29.380 and it is one of the absolute worst offenders, worst examples of just absolute malfeasance,

00:00:36.640 editorial and journalistic malfeasance on behalf of our government journalists.

00:00:41.660 It is just truly awful in so many ways.

00:00:44.480 I cannot believe it was published and I cannot believe the way that the CBC tried to cover their tracks

00:00:49.320 and cover it up and make it less offensive after the fact.

00:00:52.960 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.

00:00:59.380 But first, if you like The Candace Malcolm Show, if you like what we do, if you enjoy Fake News Friday,

00:01:03.840 Fake News Friday is certainly my favorite show. 0.69

00:01:05.940 It is a show that we do every Friday where we go through some of the worst examples

00:01:09.420 of the unethical groupthink mentality in the Canadian media.

00:01:13.900 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.

00:01:19.900 So the exact journalists who are there to hold the government accountable,

00:01:23.520 to keep their feet to the fire, to expose corruption, expose bad behavior, expose government waste,

00:01:28.000 those same journalists are reliant upon Trudeau and his government to pay their salaries, to support their jobs.

00:01:35.340 So if it wasn't for Trudeau, if Trudeau wasn't the Prime Minister, they wouldn't be getting these bailouts,

00:01:39.120 they wouldn't get as much money.

00:01:40.500 Recall that Trudeau has greatly expanded the budget of the CBC,

00:01:44.420 despite the fact that CBC viewership is plunging, nobody watches it,

00:01:48.600 its credibility is at an all-time low, and yet they're still receiving all of this money.

00:01:52.620 It's such an incredible conflict of interest, and that is what we cover every Friday on Fake News Friday,

00:01:58.120 on the Candace Malcolm Show.

00:01:59.060 But like I was saying, if you like our show, if you like what we do,

00:02:01.840 the whole purpose behind True North as a media outlet, as an independent media outlet,

00:02:05.880 is that we don't accept any money from the government.

00:02:08.440 We think that is a conflict of interest.

00:02:09.940 We think that that inhibits a journalist from doing their job.

00:02:13.180 So by principle, we will never take any money from the government.

00:02:17.060 We oppose bailouts.

00:02:17.940 We oppose the state broadcaster in general.

00:02:20.740 But because of that, we need support from our audience.

00:02:23.880 We rely entirely on the donation of our generous viewers and supporters.

00:02:28.340 So if you want to be part of the movement, if you want to join True North Nation,

00:02:31.160 head on over to tnc.news.donate.

00:02:33.500 Consider leaving us a modest donation.

00:02:36.480 And if you really like True North, you can donate $10 a month.

00:02:39.320 You get access to our True North Insiders Club, where you get all sorts of perks.

00:02:43.600 And basically, you just get the pride of knowing that you are supporting truly independent

00:02:48.580 journalism in this country.

00:02:50.480 So if you like what we do at the Candace Malcolm Show, and you're currently watching this video

00:02:53.620 on YouTube, don't forget to like this video, subscribe to True North, hit that little notification

00:02:58.340 bell so you never miss an episode.

00:03:00.180 And leave me a comment.

00:03:01.060 Let me know what you think of the show, what you think of Fake News Friday.

00:03:03.860 And if you have any suggestions for a future episode, if you're watching on Facebook, please

00:03:07.980 like this video, share with your friends, leave us a comment again.

00:03:11.080 And don't forget to like True North and like my personal page, Candace Malcolm.

00:03:15.760 Finally, if you are listening to the show in podcast form over on Google Podcasts, Apple

00:03:20.820 Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts, please consider leaving us a five-star review.

00:03:24.940 It really helps us out in the search and in the algorithm.

00:03:29.080 And also, don't forget to subscribe to the Candace Malcolm Show so that you never miss an

00:03:33.600 episode.

00:03:34.180 Okay, so I want to go back to this original news story that was published on Monday, published

00:03:38.660 on October 25th, early in the morning.

00:03:41.900 And just first of all, as a little bit of an aside, I don't really understand why the

00:03:46.260 CBC chose to get into the whole idea of editorial news.

00:03:50.220 You know, the whole idea behind the state broadcaster, there's a couple basic justifications.

00:03:54.920 First is that we need more reporters covering Canadian news.

00:03:58.040 The other is to make sure that news is able to travel throughout the country.

00:04:02.120 It's a big country, especially in the North, that Northerners are able to access radio and

00:04:07.380 news in places where there wouldn't be a market to support that kind of thing.

00:04:11.360 But when you get into the idea of opinion journalism, which is a different kind of journalism, you

00:04:16.220 really get into dicey territory.

00:04:17.400 Because again, the CBC is funded by the government.

00:04:20.360 It is a government broadcaster.

00:04:22.260 So when you start hosting opinions, you know, just by virtue of there being opinions in politics,

00:04:27.360 people are going to disagree.

00:04:28.400 You know, I'm an opinion columnist over at the Toronto Sun.

00:04:30.680 And I write opinions.

00:04:31.900 I've been doing it for a long time.

00:04:33.960 Sometimes my opinions are very, very controversial.

00:04:36.620 There is a whole group of Canadians out there who really hate me, who hate my opinion, hate

00:04:40.480 what I stand for, hate what I believe in.

00:04:42.700 And, you know, that's just life.

00:04:44.220 That's part of politics.

00:04:45.100 And no matter which position you take, you're going to experience that.

00:04:48.160 But when it comes to the state broadcaster, the idea that they would start inserting opinions,

00:04:51.980 it sort of looks like it's an officially endorsed opinion.

00:04:55.160 It's an opinion endorsed by the state, which again, gets into really dicey territory.

00:04:59.640 I don't like the idea.

00:05:00.680 Of the CBC doing these opinion pieces.

00:05:03.800 And this article that I'm going to talk about today is exactly why.

00:05:07.320 This is exactly why the CBC has no business publishing editorial opinion pieces.

00:05:14.280 And we're going to see why.

00:05:16.080 Okay.

00:05:16.300 So here is the story.

00:05:17.460 I'm basically going to read it in its entirety because it is just so surprising, so shocking,

00:05:22.680 so appalling, so despicable.

00:05:24.260 So it says this.

00:05:26.640 On election day, I greeted people who voted for parties that hate people like me.

00:05:31.980 And then the sub-headline here says, elections provide numerical evidence of the rise of right-wing

00:05:38.140 politics.

00:05:38.940 And that should worry all of us.

00:05:40.500 It's written by a woman called Ziha Raymond.

00:05:44.220 I think I might be pronouncing that incorrectly.

00:05:46.220 Ziha Raymond.

00:05:47.860 And we are told that she was a Elections Canada officer.

00:05:52.940 So this is a person who worked for Elections Canada, who is one of the officers who welcomed

00:05:59.060 voters on election day.

00:06:00.580 So a government official, a person who has been hired by the government to oversee our

00:06:05.560 elections.

00:06:06.120 For some reason, this person felt the need to write an opinion piece to tell us what she

00:06:11.120 thinks of Canadians, what she thinks of the people who are voting.

00:06:13.880 And again, the CBC gave it a platform.

00:06:15.880 So just so many conflicts of interest here.

00:06:17.640 This woman should never be allowed to work for Elections Canada again. 1.00

00:06:20.720 People who have outward opinions like this, they don't fit the role of a sort of non-partisan,

00:06:26.200 apolitical public servant.

00:06:28.120 The whole idea of the public service is that it is not partisan.

00:06:31.680 It's not political.

00:06:32.780 It does the job.

00:06:33.720 It's this sort of stable force within the government.

00:06:36.420 And, you know, the parties come and go.

00:06:38.020 The politicians who run the country come and go.

00:06:39.720 But this civil service remains neutral and trusted.

00:06:42.940 And so when you have a crazy opinion like the one I'm going to present to you, you can

00:06:47.080 recognize we have a deeper problem in this country when it comes to the partisanship

00:06:51.220 and the ideology, clearly, that's seeping through into the public service.

00:06:55.440 OK, so I'm going to basically read this thing in its entirety because it's so shocking.

00:07:00.000 So bear with me.

00:07:00.980 Here we go.

00:07:01.480 It says, I've always loved the idea of democracy in action and have voted in every single election

00:07:06.060 since I turned 18.

00:07:07.300 This September, I worked for Elections Canada as an information officer.

00:07:10.860 On election day, I greeted incoming voters, determined if they were at the correct polling

00:07:14.820 address, and helped count votes after the polls closed.

00:07:18.400 During the first hour of my shift, an elderly white woman came in with a walker. 1.00

00:07:24.180 After skimming over her voter identity card, I informed her that unfortunately, she was at

00:07:28.820 the wrong polling address.

00:07:30.100 The correct address was next door.

00:07:32.000 But their parking lot was full, she told me.

00:07:34.600 I apologized to her for the inconvenience.

00:07:37.100 She thanked me profusely for directing her to the right place.

00:07:40.920 OK, so remember that the headline of this article is, I greeted people who voted for parties

00:07:45.800 that hate people like me.

00:07:47.220 So here we see there's this interaction with an elderly white woman.

00:07:51.100 And so we're thinking, OK, what did she do?

00:07:53.760 How did she show that she hated people like you?

00:07:56.600 You know, what happened?

00:07:57.780 Well, the interaction, it turned out, was actually quite pleasant.

00:08:01.580 There was a bit of a misunderstanding.

00:08:03.660 She directed the woman to the right place.

00:08:05.840 The woman thanked her profusely.

00:08:07.380 And that was the end of the interaction.

00:08:09.660 So we'll just keep reading.

00:08:11.040 It says, I was buoyed both at her dedication to her civic duty, as well as her kind words.

00:08:16.160 However, after she left, I couldn't help but wonder whether, despite our pleasant interaction,

00:08:21.680 she was one of the people who hate people like me, dun-dun-dun.

00:08:25.380 So again, this woman is just basically wildly speculating that because this woman was old 0.97

00:08:31.040 and white, she must be a hateful bigot, essentially. 1.00

00:08:34.300 Even though there's no evidence from the interaction, the assumption that she has is that this woman, 1.00

00:08:39.100 because she's white, because of her appearance, she must be a hateful bigot. 1.00

00:08:42.660 Again, because this woman, this elections worker, clearly thinks that Canadians are hateful 1.00

00:08:47.020 bigots. 0.97

00:08:47.440 She clearly thinks that the average default position of a Canadian is hateful bigot. 0.97

00:08:52.360 OK, let's keep reading.

00:08:53.220 She goes, obviously, I am well aware that it is unhealthy to distrust people who I have

00:08:57.840 no outward reason to do so.

00:08:59.540 But I am a visibly Muslim, South Asian woman, and also well aware of the rising number of

00:09:04.960 police-reported hate crimes throughout Canada, like the mass murder of a Muslim family in

00:09:09.840 London, Ontario this summer, and the rhetoric that enables it.

00:09:13.440 OK, so she's telling us that she is a visible Muslim, that she is from South Asia, and that

00:09:19.040 she thinks that basically because of a handful of hate crimes and because of one heinous murder

00:09:24.140 that happened in the country, that therefore the entire country must hate her.

00:09:28.600 And then she talks about the rhetoric that enables it.

00:09:31.340 So stay tuned for that, the rhetoric that enables it, because we're going to try to understand

00:09:35.240 a little bit more about what she thinks about why Canadians are so hateful.

00:09:39.400 So we'll keep reading here.

00:09:40.400 It says, well, it might be tempting to dismiss that as extreme behaviour from a select few.

00:09:45.660 Elections, like the recent election of the 2021 Canadian federal election, give us numerical

00:09:50.220 evidence of the rise of right-wing politics and hateful rhetoric throughout Canada.

00:09:55.700 This evidence, in turn, serves as a reminder that many people in my community hate people

00:10:00.500 like me so much that they want to elect officials who have demonstrated similar hatred.

00:10:06.600 So she's saying it's not just select examples, it's not just a handful of crazy people out

00:10:10.720 there, the idea that elections show us how many people out there actually support this

00:10:16.180 hateful rhetoric.

00:10:17.180 And so she's tying that to right-wing politics in Canada. 0.81

00:10:20.780 So she's saying, OK, here we go, here are the numbers that prove that this hatred

00:10:27.060 against people like me is so widespread.

00:10:28.820 Here it goes.

00:10:29.700 She says, when I helped count polls during election night and having interacted with numerous

00:10:33.980 voters throughout the day, it was jarring to realize that many of the people who had seemingly

00:10:39.340 been nice to me throughout the day had chosen to vote for the Conservative Party, whose leader's

00:10:46.880 slogan was the xenophobic phrase, take Canada back, and whose former leader Stephen Harper

00:10:52.400 sought to ban kneecaps and implement a barbaric practices hotline when he was Prime Minister.

00:10:57.960 In fact, almost six million Canadians voted for the Conservative Party this past election,

00:11:01.780 and more than six million in 2019.

00:11:04.580 Though the Liberal Party won more ridings in both elections, the Conservatives received

00:11:08.320 more votes overall.

00:11:09.380 OK, so basically the bill up here is that there are these extreme far-right parties that clearly 0.57

00:11:13.600 must, what, hate Muslims and support attacks against Muslims.

00:11:17.020 So she's sort of setting it up like we basically, what I was expecting anyway, was that she was 0.88

00:11:22.300 going to go into a tirade against the People's Party and Maxine Bernier because that's the one 1.00

00:11:26.080 who the media paint as being sort of xenophobic and far-right.

00:11:29.600 But then in this paragraph, we realize that she's not even talking about the new absurd

00:11:33.900 party.

00:11:34.700 And Maxine Bernier, remember in 2019, much of his campaign circled around limiting immigration

00:11:39.340 and sort of defending Canadian values and sort of no longer supporting the multicultural

00:11:44.460 ideology in Canada.

00:11:46.640 So I expected her to be talking about Maxine Bernier.

00:11:49.480 But again, in this paragraph, she reveals that no, she's talking about all Conservatives.

00:11:53.640 She's talking about the party that received the most votes in Canada.

00:11:57.400 So this woman thinks that anyone who is a conservative, therefore, must be a bigot. 0.98

00:12:02.260 Anybody who is an old white woman, therefore, must be a bigot. 1.00

00:12:05.560 Basically, what this piece is revealing is that the person who wrote this piece is kind 1.00

00:12:11.000 of unhinged, is kind of a lunatic, is kind of a crazy person. 0.95

00:12:13.780 She's one of those paranoid people who believes that everybody hates her, everybody's out to 1.00

00:12:17.340 get her. 0.58

00:12:17.840 She clearly doesn't have a very high opinion of Canada, the country that welcomed her, the

00:12:21.460 country where she lives peacefully.

00:12:23.040 And in fact, she's so free in Canada that she even gets published by the CBC, which I

00:12:28.460 think is the largest, most circulated website, news website in Canada.

00:12:31.680 So even though she feels so oppressed and so hated in Canada, she still has all these wonderful

00:12:35.920 opportunities that she doesn't seem very grateful about.

00:12:38.500 But again, this story really just reveals her insane bias.

00:12:42.720 And the fact that this piece was published is an absolute disgrace.

00:12:46.300 So I will just quickly keep reading.

00:12:48.600 She does go on to talk about the People's Party.

00:12:50.860 She says, some of the people I interacted with had voted for the far-right's People's

00:12:54.220 Party of Canada, whose leader, Maxine Bernier, had proposed to end multiculturalism, reduce

00:12:58.820 the number of immigrants and refugees Canada receives, and foster hate speech under the 1.00

00:13:03.700 guise of free speech as part of his party's platform.

00:13:06.520 The PPC received more than 840,000 votes in the 2021 federal election.

00:13:10.340 That's more than double the number of votes they received in the 2019 federal election.

00:13:13.820 And it's because these policies resonate with some Canadians.

00:13:16.640 Well, the reason that Maxine Bernier more than doubled his electoral fortune is because

00:13:21.820 he moved away from talking about immigration all the time, and he started critiquing the

00:13:25.640 government for lockdowns and overzealous COVID response.

00:13:29.780 And so the reason that he got so many more votes and the message that resonated to Canada

00:13:33.820 wasn't even about immigration this time around.

00:13:36.240 It was about the pandemic and the insane response that the government has been having.

00:13:40.980 So this take isn't even correct.

00:13:43.540 And even just to go back even further, just because you want to limit the number of immigrants 1.00

00:13:47.540 that Canada takes doesn't mean by virtue that you're a racist or a bigot.

00:13:51.780 That's just, it's a very juvenile argument.

00:13:53.560 It's like, it's like so basic and so limited and just so poorly argued that it's hardly even

00:13:58.420 worth refuting. 0.99

00:13:59.840 But regardless, you know, this piece is just so pathetic. 0.94

00:14:03.540 I'll just read a little bit more as I'll skip a few paragraphs. 0.98

00:14:06.000 She says, the results of these recent elections is tangible proof that this hatred is not

00:14:10.700 some faceless online entity.

00:14:12.840 They are real people, some of whom are my neighbors.

00:14:15.360 Some of these people might even belong to my community.

00:14:17.920 After all, immigrants and racialized people make up a sizable chunk of right-wing voters

00:14:23.120 as well as candidates.

00:14:24.440 This is often due to a combination of their economic interests, e.g. less taxes, conservative

00:14:29.040 cultural values, e.g. anti-abortion or anti-LGBT policies, support for a specific politician,

00:14:35.300 or their internalized self-hatred or views on colorism, which outweighs any oppression

00:14:42.140 they may face at the hands of other voters or candidates in their party.

00:14:46.240 So first, it's just so obvious from reading this thing that this woman has such a reductive, 0.97

00:14:51.380 infantile, very simplistic, very silly view of conservatives broadly. 0.91

00:14:56.720 She's writing an entire opinion piece saying that people who vote for right-wing parties, 0.93

00:15:01.180 including the conservatives who are hardly right-wing, give me a break, hardly right-wing.

00:15:04.600 But if you vote for conservatives, it's because of these very simplistic ideas.

00:15:08.540 She clearly has a very low opinion of Canadian voters, including immigrants or what she calls

00:15:13.360 racialized people.

00:15:14.400 There are so many made-up words in this piece, racialized, colorism.

00:15:19.200 This woman is definitely a gender studies major. 1.00

00:15:22.920 It definitely has some kind of a really steeped, woke, leftist ideology.

00:15:27.560 And again, it is coming through so badly.

00:15:30.220 So finally, I'll just read the final sentence here.

00:15:32.060 She says, I hope I'm wrong to be fearful, and I hope that my neighbors will get to know

00:15:36.500 me and my community before casting their ballots.

00:15:39.640 So again, the final insinuation here is that if you get to know a Muslim person, if you get

00:15:44.240 to know her community, you would never vote for a right-wing party.

00:15:47.620 So again, very reductive, this idea that if you are on the right, if you're conservative,

00:15:52.340 because you must be a bigot, because you don't know Muslims, because you don't understand 0.73

00:15:55.600 people from other cultures, it's just plain wrong. 1.00

00:15:57.680 It's very simplistic, very, very silly view of the right. 1.00

00:16:01.260 Shame on this woman for being so ignorant and for thinking that her ignorant view is 1.00

00:16:05.800 so important that she wants to put it out there. 1.00

00:16:07.780 And then double shame on the CBC.

00:16:09.720 The CBC should have a better process for screening pieces, for editing pieces, for determining

00:16:15.260 what gets posted on their website.

00:16:17.440 It's not like this woman is a paid columnist who gets to submit a piece every week, and they're 0.63

00:16:21.760 used to her, and they're saying, okay, she might be controversial. 1.00

00:16:23.760 But we own that, we'll protect that, we'll make sure that everything is bulletproof before

00:16:29.020 we put it up onto our website.

00:16:31.080 To the contrary, as soon as this piece started to get some scrutiny, and believe me, it got

00:16:35.080 a lot of scrutiny.

00:16:35.960 When this piece was put up, there was a lot of pushback, a lot of people online scratching

00:16:40.400 their head, wondering what the heck is going on over at the CBC, that they would receive

00:16:44.800 this piece, think, you know what, this is a great piece, wow, how thoughtful, wow, this

00:16:49.400 is totally fair, wow, these arguments are so well-argued that we're just going to post

00:16:53.540 this thing on our website and run with it.

00:16:56.780 Usually, just sort of to pause for a second and talk about the behind-the-scenes aspect

00:17:01.380 of a news organization, I run one here at True North, I'm the editor-in-chief, I know

00:17:05.560 what goes on before we publish something.

00:17:07.800 Typically, if someone submits an article, or a video in our case, or an op-ed, you know,

00:17:12.720 you read it through, you make sure, like I said, it's bulletproof, that every single

00:17:15.800 piece can be completely justified, that every stat, every fact has a source, or you know

00:17:22.480 where it came from, that the piece is true, that you are confident with it, that it has

00:17:26.480 met your journalistic standards, and your integrity, your ethics, and everything like

00:17:31.020 that before you publish it, before it goes up.

00:17:33.120 Usually, it's read over by at least two or three people, and that's just at True North.

00:17:36.940 I imagine CBC has many, many, many, many, many more staff members and people on their

00:17:41.800 editorial team that can help with the editing process.

00:17:45.000 So the fact that this piece, as I just read it, the original piece, made it through all

00:17:49.940 of those stages, and the CBC put it out, is a crazy, crazy indictment of just how terrible

00:17:55.680 the CBC is, of just how absolutely poorly organized this place is, of their complete

00:18:00.820 lack of ethics and integrity when it comes to journalism. 0.99

00:18:04.240 I'm just floored by the fact that they would put out a garbage, garbage piece like this by 1.00

00:18:08.200 a person who sounds like a paranoid lunatic when it comes to accusing everyone around her 1.00

00:18:13.180 of hating her with absolutely no evidence.

00:18:15.720 And so, of course, the backlash was pretty strong, pretty fierce.

00:18:20.460 Here you have John Kay, who is the editor over at Collette, and he says,

00:18:25.720 got it, if someone votes for a party you don't like, they must be a bigot.

00:18:30.020 Well, there was a lot of comments just like this on Twitter.

00:18:32.840 So what does the CBC do?

00:18:34.160 Well, they basically completely rewrite the piece.

00:18:36.360 They take down that original version that I just read, and they put up something that

00:18:39.820 is just completely different, completely watered down.

00:18:42.020 They edited so much of it.

00:18:43.620 They took so much down.

00:18:44.900 They clearly recognized that the piece that they put out was indefensible, that there was

00:18:49.160 no walking back from it.

00:18:50.620 And so rather than just completely killing the piece and saying, we apologize for publishing

00:18:55.160 this complete nonsense, we'll try to do better going forward.

00:19:00.760 Instead of that, what did they do?

00:19:02.400 They just kind of rewrote the piece and tried to basically make it seem like they had done

00:19:07.640 nothing wrong, hope that people don't notice that this was a completely rewritten piece.

00:19:11.800 So I'll give you a couple of examples here.

00:19:14.100 Okay, so here is the updated piece.

00:19:16.020 You can see that there's like stealth edits that really water the piece down.

00:19:19.480 But again, they don't make it clear that they've changed it.

00:19:21.360 When you go onto the website and you read the piece, there's no big note anywhere at

00:19:25.480 the top that says this piece has been edited.

00:19:27.360 There's no correction label or anything like that.

00:19:30.240 They just sort of stealth went in and changed the headline.

00:19:32.880 It now says on election day, I greeted people who voted for candidates who might hate people

00:19:38.480 like me.

00:19:38.840 So they added that who might before it just said who hate people like me.

00:19:42.680 So again, that might word really, really couches it and makes it a lot less assertive than

00:19:47.140 it was.

00:19:48.000 And then she goes on.

00:19:49.700 Basically, I'm not entirely sure, to be honest, who made these changes, whether the editor

00:19:53.320 just went in and did it themselves or whether they went back to this elections candidate woman

00:19:57.360 and said, look, you got to really make this piece a lot stronger because it's not standing

00:20:01.040 up to scrutiny.

00:20:01.920 But regardless, a lot of the really, really loaded pieces are now gone.

00:20:06.520 For instance, for some reason, she still talks about her interaction with the woman in the

00:20:11.920 walker who was at the wrong polling station.

00:20:13.980 But they took out the fact that she was elderly and white. 0.78

00:20:16.640 And now it just says, I greeted a woman.

00:20:18.160 So for some reason, CBC thought that it would be better if they took out the part that identified

00:20:22.960 her racial identity, why, I have no idea.

00:20:28.160 But it sort of underscores the idea that the piece, as it was written, was just really appalling

00:20:34.140 and a bunch of other changes.

00:20:36.060 Jonathan Kaye does a great job on his Twitter of literally going through, comparing the screenshot

00:20:41.520 to screenshot of all the changes and really dissecting it.

00:20:44.600 I won't go through all that detail.

00:20:46.560 But I will just say that this is one of the worst offenders for Fake News Friday.

00:20:49.880 We joked about it internally here at the Candace Malcolm Show and at True North.

00:20:52.960 That we might have to do like an award show for the biggest fake news stories of the year.

00:20:57.980 And if we did, this would certainly be a contender because this was absolutely appalling.

00:21:03.500 And the CBC has noticed this, at least implicitly, by going through and making such drastic changes.

00:21:10.320 And the only way that we know that the changes were made, if you happen to come on and see

00:21:15.040 this piece after all these edits were made, is just at the very, very bottom, the very,

00:21:19.620 very bottom of the CBC piece.

00:21:20.900 It says two things.

00:21:21.820 First, it says, editor's note, this column and headline has been revised to clarify the

00:21:26.720 writer's reaction was to some conservative candidates and their policies, and not broadly

00:21:32.100 to conservative parties.

00:21:33.700 And then under that, it says corrections.

00:21:35.120 And it says a previous version of this column said,

00:21:38.920 Arpan Canna was a former MP with the Conservative Party.

00:21:42.080 In fact, Canna was a candidate for the party, but was not elected.

00:21:45.460 So again, just a total, total joke, horrible, horrible disservice and abuse by the public

00:21:50.820 broadcaster to the trust of Canadians.

00:21:53.060 It is no wonder why Canadians don't watch the CBC and they don't trust the CBC.

00:21:57.880 It is because the CBC is absolutely dysfunctional.

00:22:01.780 Thank you so much for watching.

00:22:02.960 This has been Fake News Friday.

00:22:03.980 I'm Candace Malcolm, and this is The Candace Malcolm Show.

00:22:05.880 I'm Candace Malcolm, and this is The Candace Malcolm Show.

The Candice Malcolm Show - October 29, 2021

The CBC publishes a racist screed, then quietly rewrites it

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript