ManoWhisper
Home
Shows
About
Search
The Candice Malcolm Show
- May 02, 2022
Trudeau wants to decide what you see on the news
Episode Stats
Length
24 minutes
Words per Minute
191.08984
Word Count
4,671
Sentence Count
245
Misogynist Sentences
2
Summary
Summaries are generated with
gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ
.
Transcript
Transcript is generated with
Whisper
(
turbo
).
Misogyny classification is done with
MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny
.
00:00:00.000
What are qualified Canadian journalism outlets and why has the Canadian government put itself
00:00:04.880
in charge of deciding what you get to see for your news? I'm Candice Malcolm and this is the
00:00:08.760
Candice Malcolm Show. Hi everyone, thank you so much for tuning into the podcast. So we've been
00:00:24.480
talking in recent days and weeks about the new legislation being put forth by the Trudeau
00:00:29.420
government and how it restricts our ability to speak freely as Canadians. It impacts our free
00:00:34.960
speech as well as freedom of the press and today I wanted to look specifically at Bill C-18 and
00:00:41.620
discuss how it impacts the news that you see. So it's called the Online News Act and part of this
00:00:48.420
legislation is designating certain journalism outlets as qualified Canadian journalism outlets. So in
00:00:55.220
order to be approved by the government, we've learned, you have to be approved by a small board
00:01:00.500
put together by the Trudeau government. So I want to go back to a Twitter thread put out by Jesse Brown.
00:01:06.100
Jesse Brown is the publisher and editor-in-chief over at Candleland. We put out a request to Jesse
00:01:11.100
to see if he'd want to come join the podcast and discuss what he's found. He hasn't gotten back to
00:01:15.980
us. If he does, I'd be happy to have him on the show. But Jesse Brown writes this. He says,
00:01:20.420
In 2020, the Trudeau government started paying ongoing subsidies to newspapers. It was a trip
00:01:26.360
into the unknown. How did government decide which papers to bail out and which to let die? What about
00:01:31.800
independence of the press? Big questions. Now, there are two years of answers threads. So this
00:01:37.300
is a thread that Jesse put together back on April 4th. So he continues. He writes,
00:01:41.860
Meet the five people who decide which news orgs are qualified Canadian journalism outlets,
00:01:46.620
which are known as QCJOs. It's a board of news experts, academics and retired journalists paid
00:01:53.400
by government to read articles from every news organization that applied and decide which are
00:01:59.160
up to the snuff. So here we see the five people who are appointed to this Trudeau government board.
00:02:04.500
And as you can see from this map, we have four people from Eastern Canada. Looks like two from
00:02:09.960
Quebec, one from Ottawa, which is almost basically Quebec, and one from the Maritimes. You have no one
00:02:15.540
from the entire center of the country, no one from the prairies, no one from the West, one person from
00:02:21.980
Vancouver. So really not a very balanced organization here regionally, if you ask me. But these are the
00:02:28.360
people who determine whether or not you are qualified. So Jesse continues. He says, In year one of the media
00:02:34.920
bailout, the board passed judgment on 159 news organizations. In June, they released their first
00:02:40.860
annual report. So how many news orgs from the 159 got in? Which ones? How much money did they get?
00:02:47.240
Also, who got rejected and why? And so he shows a screenshot from the annual report, it shows the
00:02:53.080
statistics. So between March 2020 and March 2021, the board has received and returned to the CRA a total
00:03:00.420
of 159 requests for recommendation. Of those 157 recommendations were QCJO designated applications, and two
00:03:09.800
were rejected. Okay, so so two were rejected, 157 were approved. But as Jesse continues, he says they aren't
00:03:16.840
telling. The names of the news organizations currently funded by taxpayers is a secret. The amounts they receive
00:03:22.500
are a secret. The names of those rejected are a secret. And the reasons why they were rejected are a secret. The board meets in
00:03:29.680
secret. There are no videos online of their meetings, no minutes can be read. Canadian newspapers said
00:03:35.240
that they would die without government aid. This board decides which ones qualify for it. Their
00:03:39.860
rulings could mean life or death for a news org, and it's all kept a secret. And then he says, don't blame
00:03:43.900
the board. It wasn't their choice. Governments chose to put this under the CRA, where tax laws conceal the
00:03:49.420
names of the beneficiaries. This broke an explicit promise of transparency that Minister Pablo Rodriguez made
00:03:56.500
to Evan Solomon. So here is a clip from CTV with Evan Solomon, the journalist, asking the Heritage Minister whether it be
00:04:04.120
secret. And you can see Minister Rodrigo's response right here. Here is that clip.
00:04:08.680
Will you promise to make every decision this advisory group makes and the next group makes transparent in terms of how your
00:04:17.180
government decides, who is what your government calls a qualified journalistic organization, and why they got the money? Will all that be
00:04:24.880
transparent and no secrecy? Absolutely. Absolutely. All the recommendations. And so they'll be making
00:04:32.040
recommendations on a lot of things. And some, some will maybe, anyways, 100% of the recommendations, as you were
00:04:39.920
asking, will be, will be public. It is because it's the whole intent of our action, making, making sure that this is done on an
00:04:49.240
arm's length basis, respecting the experts that sit on those panels. You know, the groups that are consulting to name
00:04:56.100
experts, can name people in their organization, can name people outside of their own organization. So we'll listen
00:05:03.600
to them, we'll listen to what they say, and we'll definitely make it public. It's really important that we do so. And we will.
00:05:09.200
And again, he says 100% transparency, the minister promised 100% transparency. And yet, we know nothing. The only thing we
00:05:17.280
know, as Brown later points out in his Twitter thread, is that the only people who we know what funding they receive
00:05:23.860
are publicly traded news companies who have to disclose their funding. So Post Media got $6.9 million in tax
00:05:30.020
credits. In 2020, the Toronto Star got $6.8 million. But we don't know for other newspapers that were privately
00:05:35.720
held such as the Globe and Mail. We do know about one organization that was rejected because they
00:05:41.700
themselves made it public. I'm talking about Rebel News. You may have heard the news last week that
00:05:46.220
Ezra Levant, Rebel Commander and Rebel News is suing the government after their outlet was denied to be
00:05:52.960
covered under this qualified Canadian journalism organization status. And so Levant tweeted this out.
00:05:59.760
He said that the board reviewed his content. They looked at a total of 276 news stories. It took
00:06:07.280
them over a year to do that. And the board, this is a quote from Ezra, they declared to get this,
00:06:13.220
that quote, less than 1% of the content meets the criteria for original news. So what a strange world
00:06:19.560
we live in, where the government is the one that gets to determine whether or not you're a journalist,
00:06:25.260
a qualified journalism organization, whether you qualify for funding, then there's a whole bunch
00:06:30.380
of other consequences that come with that. So joining me today on the podcast, I'm really pleased
00:06:35.180
to welcome my friend and colleague, Andrew Lawton. Andrew is a senior journalist here with True
00:06:40.740
North, and he is the host of The Andrew Lawton Show. Andrew, thank you so much for joining us today.
00:06:46.320
Hey, always a pleasure. Thanks for having me on.
00:06:48.480
So, I mean, I don't think that you will be a very big fan of this regime that's being brought in
00:06:54.200
when it comes to the mix of journalism and government. What do you think of this whole
00:06:59.360
secret panel and a government-appointed panel in the first place getting to determine
00:07:03.500
who is and who isn't a journalist? You know, I remember when the Global Conference for Media
00:07:10.120
Freedom took place back in July of, I think, 2019. And the government of Canada was in the UK talking
00:07:18.260
a big game about media freedom in Congo and media freedom in Venezuela and media freedom in Iran
00:07:24.000
without looking in the mirror and talking about its own very dismal record to media freedom.
00:07:28.880
And this isn't just the Liberal Party banning independent journalists from covering its campaign
00:07:33.300
events, but as we see here, it's the government getting into the business of deciding what a
00:07:39.060
journalist is. And this is something that is quite significant because it also means the government
00:07:44.400
is, as in the case of Rebel, also saying what isn't a journalist. And the idea of a government
00:07:50.540
designation, something that doesn't exist in Canada in the form of a license, is now effectively coming
00:07:56.940
in through the back door through this. Because if you're someone that is, let's just look at the
00:08:01.080
convoy as a great example. When you had police questioning people as to why they were walking
00:08:05.440
down the streets of Ottawa, and you could say, I'm a journalist, and they'd say, well, prove it.
00:08:10.420
And the response that I'd give is, well, there is no national license to be a journalist in Canada.
00:08:15.160
If you want to be a journalist, you just work as a journalist. But now when government is doing this,
00:08:20.120
that they're actually making themselves the gatekeepers. And it's very, very dangerous.
00:08:25.320
Well, I remember you telling the stories about how they were asking for like an official piece
00:08:28.520
of government ID. And to me, that's so Ottawa, that's such an Ottawa mentality that if you're
00:08:32.760
something official, you have some kind of an ID card. And basically what they were asking for was a
00:08:37.980
parliamentary press pass, which True North doesn't have. I mean, we can apply for temporary ones.
00:08:43.720
But this is really formalizing it. So what else? So if you become a qualified outlet,
00:08:50.680
I know you can apply for government funding. True North has chosen not to, because we don't want
00:08:55.800
government funding. We're not interested. So we haven't even bothered putting an application in.
00:09:00.680
What else is this qualification? What does it do? Aside from just government funding, does it have any
00:09:08.260
other powers? Does it have any other ability to prevent or enable journalists from practicing in
00:09:15.360
Canada? Well, not directly, but you have to look at the broader package of what the government is
00:09:21.580
trying to do here. And in the last parliament, there were three bills that significantly regulated
00:09:27.100
the internet. And a couple of those have come back already. Bill C-10 has come back as C-11.
00:09:32.240
One of the other ones came back as C-18, which is what we're talking about now. And then there was
00:09:37.040
also an online hate speech bill. And all of these combined basically expand the purview of the
00:09:43.860
government to regulate the internet and regulate internet content providers. And one of the things
00:09:49.140
that Minister Stephen Gilboa has said is that, well, we're not going to regulate news providers.
00:09:53.800
But the definition of what a news provider is, is now something that the government gets to decide.
00:09:59.980
So if they say, well, we don't recognize you as a news agency, all of a sudden the government is able
00:10:05.280
to regulate someone. So the government could regulate someone like Rebel News, for example,
00:10:09.880
as a group the government does not recognize as a legitimate journalism organization. And the reason
00:10:16.180
this also is significant is one of the things they're trying to do is force social media companies
00:10:21.780
like Facebook and Google to pay for news. So they want big tech to subsidize news.
00:10:27.540
Now, I've got a lot of issues with big tech, but I have to defend the tech companies here
00:10:31.800
because news is a very small subset of what they do. And Facebook has been very transparent or meta
00:10:37.640
rather to its credit about this, as far as the small percentage of their market share
00:10:42.460
that is related to news content. They get a lot more money out of influencers and silly videos and
00:10:49.200
cats and memes and all of that than they do out of news. And what the government is saying that,
00:10:53.920
no, no, no, you need to pay these companies. So it isn't just about the tax credits. It's not
00:10:58.040
just about evading government licensing. It's also about forcing a pipeline of money from big tech
00:11:03.780
companies to subsidize journalism. It's so funny where we're now in the situation where we're
00:11:09.300
defending these tech companies because usually, you know, we're some of the biggest critics of them.
00:11:14.140
But I'm just reading here that Bill C-18, the Online News Act, would ensure that news media and
00:11:20.560
journalists receive fair compensation for their work. So it would require tech giants to make fair
00:11:26.420
deals with outlets for the news and information that is shared on their platform. It just seems,
00:11:30.860
I mean, to me, the idea that somehow the government, the Trudeau government thinks that it is the one that
00:11:36.200
is responsible for ensuring that journalists get fair compensation for their work. Like, I thought that
00:11:42.200
was the job of the market, right? It's like, if you're a competent journalist who is able to get
00:11:47.880
people to pay for your work and encourage people that there's value in your work, that's up to the
00:11:54.220
journalists, that's up to the consumer, that's up to the market. This whole idea that somehow Trudeau is
00:11:59.820
going to like valiantly step in and, you know, be the knight in shining armor to save these media outlets
00:12:06.740
is just sort of, to me, it seems so antiquated and out of touch, Andrew, to your point that most of the
00:12:12.760
people who have huge audiences on social media platforms, it's because they're doing something
00:12:17.560
fun and compelling, not because the government is forcing their hand. I'm just wondering, like,
00:12:26.600
do you think this is going to work? Do you think that somehow this is going to save outlets like
00:12:31.740
Post Media and Toronto Star and Globe and Mail from the fate that they've seen over the last
00:12:36.700
several years of just declining readership and declining profits? I know. I mean, you can,
00:12:42.900
the problem is they need a business model that is going to be modern. And unfortunately, the only
00:12:48.760
alternative that's being offered up by government and also by a lot of these outlets is the subsidy
00:12:54.880
model. That's basically it. I mean, when we say find a new model, we don't mean replace
00:12:59.700
advertising and subscriptions with government subsidy. We mean, be innovative, do what True
00:13:04.880
North is doing, do what Rebel is doing, do what Epoch Times is doing. I mean, there's a whole host
00:13:09.220
of independent media companies that have developed new models, yet newspapers have tremendous overhead.
00:13:15.880
They've got these giant, you know, multi-million dollar buildings and downtown spaces. They've got
00:13:20.600
real estate holding. I mean, all of this stuff. And it isn't viable. It isn't working at all. But the
00:13:25.380
answer to that is not to get government to bankroll it, when even that hasn't exactly stopped layoffs
00:13:31.560
for media companies. And interesting thing here about social media is that we are talking about
00:13:39.360
companies here that are not messing around in some ways. And they're bigger than the countries
00:13:44.940
that are passing these. I remember when Australia moved very aggressively to do a very similar thing
00:13:50.840
to what Minister Gilboa was doing. And there was a time when Facebook, in protest of this,
00:13:55.460
banned you from sharing a link to an Australian news website. And I know for whatever reason,
00:14:01.400
my website had an Australian server. And there was a time until I got it sorted out where you
00:14:07.280
couldn't share a link to my website because Facebook thought I was an Australian, which may
00:14:12.040
have been a compliment. I don't know. But that was a very chilling thing when all of a sudden you're
00:14:16.640
trying to share a link and you're getting the old New York Post, Hunter Biden laptop treatment of
00:14:20.800
just the link will not post because Facebook has decided it's not worth the hassle. And I fear
00:14:27.060
that could happen in Canada. Any companies that are saying, we want Facebook to subsidize us,
00:14:33.320
I would say, well, are you not posting your content on Facebook? Are you not using Facebook and Twitter
00:14:38.700
to amass an audience? I mean, you need them more than they need you.
00:14:44.060
Well, it's so funny because we were talking about this. I remember when this,
00:14:46.880
because the media companies, the newspapers have been advocating for this for a long time. And it's
00:14:52.060
kind of funny, Andrew, I know in the early days when we were trying to get accredited for the
00:14:56.100
liberal campaign to have you embedded as a journalist there back at the 2019 election,
00:15:01.160
they were saying, no, you guys can't come because you're not journalists, you're activists,
00:15:04.540
right? And you do advocacy or something like that, which we don't, but that's just sort of code
00:15:09.640
their way of saying conservatives aren't welcome, basically, or conservative news outlets.
00:15:14.140
But anyway, at the same time, the newspapers were doing a real advocacy campaign to the Trudeau
00:15:19.340
government lobbying for them to get this kind of treatment. And, and, and one of the things was
00:15:24.100
that, you know, Facebook, everyone knows that Facebook and Google have sort of eaten the lunch
00:15:27.840
of the advertising company, you can you can, if you want to buy an ad for a small business,
00:15:31.320
you can target your audience so much better on Facebook and Google, you can reach the exact type
00:15:36.360
of person where that you want. Whereas if you put an ad in a newspaper, you know, it goes to
00:15:40.660
everybody and most of those people won't even pay any attention to your to your ad and you're not
00:15:46.400
going to get good bang for your buck. So Google and Facebook do a much better job with advertising
00:15:51.440
than these newspaper companies. But the idea was, oh, you know, people can share our content for free
00:15:56.780
on Facebook. You go to like almost any link shared by the Toronto Star. And it's like the only ones
00:16:03.020
sharing it are the Toronto Star. So somehow the Toronto Star wants to be compensated for the fact
00:16:08.660
that they're sharing their own news story on Facebook. And then it's wild, because that's
00:16:13.680
basically what this what this bill does is making sure that Facebook and Google pay these companies
00:16:20.160
for every time their link is shared online, even though they, frankly, they don't get shared that
00:16:25.100
much. A lot of the stuff they put out isn't that interesting. People aren't that, you know,
00:16:29.420
interested in sharing this kind of stuff. I wonder you, you mentioned the whole Australia thing,
00:16:33.840
and how Facebook, Facebook kind of just flex their muscles and said, like, we don't have to do this,
00:16:38.340
because all we have to do is shut you down, you have no recourse. Do you think that the tech
00:16:44.120
companies are going to go along with this? Because all of this legislation says we've modeled after
00:16:48.500
Australia. When I hear that, I kind of laugh, because I think the Australia legislation was a
00:16:53.380
failure. Like, they introduced this legislation, Facebook flexed by just completely shutting off all
00:16:58.980
the news stories, like you mentioned. And then Australia had to go and rejig and rewrite their
00:17:03.760
legislation so that it wasn't as aggressive because Facebook slapped it down so hard. So
00:17:08.200
I have a hard time imagining that big tech companies in Silicon Valley will go along with
00:17:14.140
government kind of trying to meddle in their business, meddle with their algorithm, tell them
00:17:18.160
they have to pay. Once they do this, it sets a precedent that they're going to have to do this
00:17:21.820
for all kinds of other governments. What do you think? Yeah, that's certainly the concern is that
00:17:26.500
all of a sudden, and again, these companies have invested considerably in government relations and
00:17:31.080
lobbying. So they are engaging with government on this. And I know they're probably trying to exact
00:17:35.980
concessions behind the scenes here. And again, how powerfully they're going to be able to do that,
00:17:40.960
we don't know. Governments are committed more to ideology right now. They want to be able to say
00:17:46.060
they're saving local news and saving journalism and all of this. But the result of it is that you have
00:17:51.280
a journalism industry that is entirely dependent on government. And even if, I mean, this is why it's
00:17:56.900
so brilliant, because government can pass a bill that makes Facebook and Google and Twitter and
00:18:02.160
whatever subsidize news outlets, but it's government that's claiming the credit. It's government that's
00:18:08.040
doing it without actually having to shell out the money. And they're saying, no, no, no, we're not
00:18:12.380
subsidizing. We're not paying, but we're saving, we're saving media. And in doing so, that is going
00:18:18.960
to be very difficult for the next government to take away. And we even saw in the last election in
00:18:24.440
September, Aaron O'Toole, and we can have a different discussion about the why, but Aaron O'Toole was very
00:18:30.080
reticent to say, we're going to rip up the $600 million media bailout and CBC defunding, because it
00:18:36.220
becomes very difficult once government has decided to establish some pot of money for something for
00:18:41.400
another government to go in and take that away.
00:18:43.960
Which is why you never see the rollback of government policies. And you're right. I mean, I hate to give
00:18:48.840
Trudeau any credit, but it's the brilliance of his campaign. And you can go back because in 2015, Andrew,
00:18:54.340
the Trudeau government pledged to quadruple a cut that had been made by the Harper government. So
00:19:00.940
I think Harper cut $150 million and Trudeau came back with like $500 million or something like that
00:19:08.320
in additional funds. So he basically won that election in part by bribing the CBC saying,
00:19:13.860
if you elect me, you'll get all this money. If you elect the other guy, you won't and you could lose
00:19:17.980
your job, which puts a journalist in a direct conflict of interest where their livelihood could
00:19:22.940
potentially be at stake. They were so successful in 2015 doing that. They brought out the same
00:19:28.140
playbook in the 2019 election, but made it much, much broader with the newspaper bailout because
00:19:33.820
Andrew Scheer, the conservative leader, was opposed to it. So all of a sudden, you know, you have
00:19:38.480
journalists covering an election where their jobs could potentially be at stake. How could anyone be
00:19:43.820
fair in that scenario? How could you provide fair coverage? And then now we're in a situation where
00:19:48.800
they're all on essentially the government dole. I mean, to me, it's wild. It's such a conflict of
00:19:54.200
interest. There is no free press in Canada when you have the government this entangled in it. I mean,
00:20:00.260
Andrew, you've worked in newsrooms, you've worked in legacy media in the past. Why is it that so many
00:20:06.760
journalists are just sort of complacent and they barely cover this and they don't seem to think it's
00:20:11.220
a big deal? They're allowing a government takeover of the free press in this country.
00:20:15.880
Yeah. And I think a lot of them are, I mean, there are good people I've worked with in mainstream
00:20:21.760
media newsrooms that I think know, well, I'm not affected by this. I'm not going to subsidize. I'm
00:20:28.060
not going to, you know, write favorably about the government because they've done this. So they don't
00:20:31.600
see the broader implication. I mean, in every other space, the illusion of a conflict of interest is
00:20:35.860
just as dangerous as a genuine conflict of interest. And I think there's a challenge in how the
00:20:41.540
newsrooms themselves are. I mean, when the National News Media Council or whatever it's called has
00:20:46.200
advocated for this, they have had coordinated campaigns for the front pages, literally the front
00:20:51.320
pages of all mainstream media newspapers are instead a letter to the government saying, do this,
00:20:57.700
implement this policy. And again, if you were to have to go back to our previous exchange about
00:21:03.460
a party wanting to roll that back, if you were to have a party in, let's say, 2025 or 2029 or
00:21:10.040
whatever, saying we're campaigning on rolling this back. Well, how are those newspapers going to
00:21:14.640
respond during the election? Is there going to be a big letter on the front page of newspapers telling
00:21:20.600
people why this policy is wrong? So the newspapers themselves have become the advocates, even if the
00:21:27.560
individual journalists aren't. And that can't not filter down to the coverage that people are reading.
00:21:33.880
Well, that's why I find it so funny and amusing that they would call us, you know, activists and they
00:21:38.500
would say that we engage in advocacy when they literally, you know, they're pushing for specific
00:21:43.780
legislation. True North would never do that kind of stuff. And for sure, I mean, who knows what kinds
00:21:49.260
of stories are buried or killed or, or what, you know, I mean, just as an example, it was a US
00:21:56.400
publication, Time Magazine, that first reported that Justin Trudeau was wearing blackface. And almost
00:22:00.560
immediately, a bunch of Canadian outlets put out follow up stories that they had other pictures. So they
00:22:05.460
were just holding, it was like the middle of an election. I think it was CTV and maybe the Global
00:22:09.360
Mail or something. Global had another one that they had not done anything with. Global. Yeah,
00:22:14.140
they were, and they were just holding it. And so it's like, okay, well, we might as well release this
00:22:17.320
now. It's almost like, what else do you have that you're not reporting? Because for whatever reason,
00:22:23.320
you've justified to yourself that it's not in the public interest. Again, I think we're, we're heading
00:22:27.700
down a pretty, I mean, we're already there. We're already in this weird dystopian world where
00:22:32.080
independent journalists are deemed to be activists, like the rebel, like True North.
00:22:38.120
Whereas the actual legacy media outlets are doing advocacy, successfully lobbying the government,
00:22:43.940
getting money from it. And then they create this club where they lock themselves out. So I guess,
00:22:48.980
final question here, Andrew, what does this mean for outlets like True North? What does this mean for
00:22:53.540
organizations like the Independent Press Gallery?
00:22:56.440
I think it means, well, I mean, for the Independent Press Gallery, I think it means there needs to be a
00:23:00.880
counterbalance to this. And I've always been very, very impressed, not just as a counterbalance to the
00:23:05.940
Parliamentary Press Gallery, but even to the National News Media Council and to these institutions that are
00:23:10.940
advocating for more of a relationship between government and the press and more of a financial
00:23:16.440
relationship. And I think for outlets like True North, it means that we have to be able to just continue
00:23:22.440
doing what we're doing. I mean, what government is trying to do is, as you mentioned earlier,
00:23:26.700
Candice, manipulate the market. They're trying to create a business model to keep these things going,
00:23:32.120
but they're only doing that because these outlets are in a very bad place otherwise. And I think the
00:23:37.900
fact that we are growing and hiring an independent journalist, I mean, the Western Standard has been
00:23:42.000
on a hiring spree in the last couple of months. And while they are a competitor in some way, I'm
00:23:46.880
actually quite pleased to see growth in independent media in general. So I think eventually it may take
00:23:52.420
some time, but the audience is going to have the final say on this. Well, you're right. And the
00:23:56.720
idea that during an election, you know, if the Conservative leader comes out and says, we're not
00:24:01.460
going to renew this, and all of a sudden you have front page ads in newspapers, I just think that that
00:24:06.340
further drives people away from legacy media. It'll drive people to independent media because it's like,
00:24:11.040
how can you trust these guys? They're not even pretending to be objective anymore. Well,
00:24:16.100
Andrew, I always appreciate your perspective and your opinion. Thank you so much for joining the show.
00:24:19.860
Thank you. All right. That's Andrew Lawton, host of the Andrew Lawton Show here on True North.
00:24:24.920
I'm Candice Malcolm, and this is the Candice Malcolm Show.
Link copied!