The Candice Malcolm Show - October 29, 2021


The CBC publishes a racist screed, then quietly rewrites it


Episode Stats

Length

22 minutes

Words per Minute

194.79887

Word Count

4,402

Sentence Count

246

Misogynist Sentences

15

Hate Speech Sentences

10


Summary

The CBC publishes a racist screed against white conservatives, and then quietly rewrites the article after some pushback. It's Fake News Friday, and today we're covering a truly remarkable piece that was published by the state broadcaster, the CBC.


Transcript

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.
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.
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.
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
00:08:31.040 and white, she must be a hateful bigot, essentially.
00:08:34.300 Even though there's no evidence from the interaction, the assumption that she has is that this woman,
00:08:39.100 because she's white, because of her appearance, she must be a hateful bigot.
00:08:42.660 Again, because this woman, this elections worker, clearly thinks that Canadians are hateful
00:08:47.020 bigots.
00:08:47.440 She clearly thinks that the average default position of a Canadian is hateful bigot.
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.
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
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
00:11:22.300 going to go into a tirade against the People's Party and Maxine Bernier because that's the one
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.
00:12:02.260 Anybody who is an old white woman, therefore, must be a bigot.
00:12:05.560 Basically, what this piece is revealing is that the person who wrote this piece is kind
00:12:11.000 of unhinged, is kind of a lunatic, is kind of a crazy person.
00:12:13.780 She's one of those paranoid people who believes that everybody hates her, everybody's out to
00:12:17.340 get her.
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
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
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.
00:13:59.840 But regardless, you know, this piece is just so pathetic.
00:14:03.540 I'll just read a little bit more as I'll skip a few paragraphs.
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,
00:14:51.380 infantile, very simplistic, very silly view of conservatives broadly.
00:14:56.720 She's writing an entire opinion piece saying that people who vote for right-wing parties,
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.
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
00:15:55.600 people from other cultures, it's just plain wrong.
00:15:57.680 It's very simplistic, very, very silly view of the right.
00:16:01.260 Shame on this woman for being so ignorant and for thinking that her ignorant view is
00:16:05.800 so important that she wants to put it out there.
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
00:16:21.760 used to her, and they're saying, okay, she might be controversial.
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.
00:18:04.240 I'm just floored by the fact that they would put out a garbage, garbage piece like this by
00:18:08.200 a person who sounds like a paranoid lunatic when it comes to accusing everyone around her
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.
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.