Recently the Toronto Star had to write an “explanation” of why an article they’d written a couple of days prior came across as overtly inciting hatred against the unvaccinated.

Because, obviously, that’s not what they do.

Obviously.

The follow-up does use the word “sorry”, not because they actually did it but because the formatting of the headlines “sowed confusion”. Not only is this a flaccid half-apology but it’s also bullshit. In fact, they pull this sort of crap regularly, without reservation, and with no apologies.

For example, they give voice to hateful, racist, divisive rhetoric like that of Shree Paradkar who openly lambasts “(mostly) white covidiots” (then swiftly changes her tune when new evidence emerges), and reminds readers that it’s white people that are basically the original source of all evil everywhere.

Then there’s Royson James who not-so-subtly threatens white people with violence, looting, and destruction unless they take a knee to his own unbelievably twisted, racist, ignorant viewpoint.

And lest we forget Vinay Menon who supports screaming obsenity-laced rants against “covidiots” by people like Tom Cruise. “Good for YOU!”, concludes a giddy Mennon in his article.

No, the Toronto Star’s latest attempt to incite hatred, violence, and sow division wasn’t an accident, mistake, or a one-off. This is par for the course at the ignominious rag and has been for some time. They were simply seeing how far they could take it and this time around there were just too many complaints to ignore. You can be certain that they wouldn’t have issued an “explanation” if so many people weren’t “confused”.

Of course they’re not the only ones to do this but they’re among the most consistent and vocal. This toilet paper masquerading as news openly engages in hate speech and incitement to violence (which I thought was a crime here in Canada), and gets away with it every time.

Apparently it’s perfectly fine for some publications to promote hate and violence while those not toeing the line of state propaganda get shut down and criminally charged for “consistently dehumanizing” identifiable groups of people. Clearly white people and the unvaccinated don’t count.

You don’t have to agree with their statements to see that there’s a massive double standard here.

Being perennially broke I often shred newspapers for my cat to relieve herself on. Unfortunately, almost all of the mainstream media has become so toxic that I’m afraid that it’s no longer suitable for even this purpose.

Though there’s still no indication of this on their website, The Grid TO’s last issue will be tomorrow:

What makes this sad news is what appears between the lines:

“The media landscape continues to be impossible for a start up,” he said, calling The Grid a victim of timing.

Launched on May 12, 2011, three years after the Great Recession, Turnbull said, “nobody anticipated how dramatically print and online revenue would continue to decline after 2009. We all thought it would be a gentle landing. Instead, it’s been violent.

If, for some bizarre reason, you happen to read this blog and you’re a Ford supporter, first off, kudos for making it this far without losing your shit (or at least keeping it out of my face). Second, I’m going to propose that we have something in common.

I’m totally serious.

Assuming that the Ontario Press Council had ruled against the Toronto Star, and the Globe and Mail, etc., would you agree that the Council should have some real teeth to go after infractions? Maybe monetary penalties? Maybe something tougher? Well me too.

Oh, I think the ruling was right on, and I would’ve been surprised at anything else. But I would want these oversight agencies, while being diligently transparent, to have the power to affect and mandate some actual change. Change like holding Ford to account, for starters.

We don’t have to get all medieval on anyone’s ass, just get a little closer to what they do in the private sector, as Ford and friends so wisely suggest.

Although I tend to lace my political analyses with a lot more profanity and not so subtle calls to action, I’m heartened to see that the mainstream media seem to be waking up to what’s happening — at least here in Canada.

Christopher Hume’s piece in the Toronto Star today, for example, demonstrates a willingness to no longer tip-toe around the issues. Although I wish I could quote the entire article, the last few-ish paragraphs sum it all up perfectly:

It was painful to watch our prime minister and chief environmental scofflaw, Boss Harper, squirm in New York last week as he tried to talk his way out of his antediluvian attitudes to climate change.

It was just as excruciating to witness Sheriff Ford’s efforts to deal with reports of a video of him apparently smoking crack. The man has yet to mount any defence beyond, “ridiculous.”

Through it all we remain so polite, deferential and glad to be of use, that a good many Torontonians lined up to denounce the media that did them the favour of revealing the mayor for what he is, an overgrown man-child who does what he wants, the city be damned.

Harper, by contrast, knows what he’s doing. He knows his actions are reckless, but to him ethics are a nicety leaders can’t afford.

Neither Harper nor Ford respect government, its institutions or the positions they hold. Both believe themselves exempt. To them, Canadians are gullible or too preoccupied with getting by to hold them responsible.

As bad as things may be, Canadians are terrified they could be worse.

I applaud you, Mr. Hume, for taking a stand against the blithe illegality and corruption of our various levels of government. Now we just need more people to do the same.

I found it interesting to read what Peter Worthington’s final thoughts were about the paper he helped to found in his auto-obituary:

Of course, there is the Toronto Sun, which was never as good a newspaper as it could have been, but which was always a fun place to work, with good people who seemed to be forever being replaced by other good people.

The Sun was always pretty tolerant of me and, I must say, I was pretty tolerant of it from time to time. We both served each other’s purpose.

Not great, high turnover, and a necessary evil — or am I reading that wrong?

You must know me by now, I’m not exactly what you’d call fond of the Toronto Sun. But I guess it must fill some void out there because it’s managed to stay alive since 1971, and credit for that certainly must lie with Peter Worthington, the paper’s founding editor.

Worthington died from staph complications today, and although I’d probably have nothing polite to say to him (despite him occasionally being right on the money), you gotta give it to the man — he gnarled on that conservative bone until there was nothing left.

It’s been almost a year since I reached out to the Star to see what was happening with their complaint against the mayor. You may not remember it — it had to do with how Ford was excluding media from City Hall (and especially the Star).

Well, the much-maligned Integrity Commissioner recently released her report on the incident and decided that there was nothing to follow up on. In other words, case closed.

Unsurprisingly, no one from the Ford camp is so much as mentioning the decision. I suppose it must be a foregone conclusion now that Rob Ford gets away with breaking every rule and law out there, why should this be any different? And, of course, further discussions about the balance in the office of the Integrity Commissioner are completely absent. In other words, if she’s questioning the mayor and doing her job, then of course she’s irrelevant, biased, and just the scum of the earth. If she’s siding with him, it can be ignored so that she can continue to be demonized.

But let’s put this to the side for moment and see what the report actually said. First, some history.

In February 2011, members of the City Hall press gallery put together a brief note stating what they expected of the mayor as a public servant:

The Gallery expects that all of its members will be treated equally and fairly. As such, all media releases, circulars, agendas, notice of scrums and other events, and other official communications from the City of Toronto, including the mayor’s office, must be communicated equally to all members of the Gallery, without favour or prejudice.

Ford ignored this and didn’t respond (surprise!)

In December of that year, a formal complaint was filed and, indeed, Rob Ford was once again found to have been doing exactly what he’d been accused of doing:

The complainant provided examples of bulk distribution of news releases and statements made by the Mayor to the media that were not given to journalists writing for the Toronto Star. The Mayor acknowledges that these were not delivered to writers for the Toronto Star. A search conducted of press releases from the Office of the Mayor during the relevant time period identified the recipients.

Additionally:

The former Press Secretary for the Mayor confirmed that after taking office the Mayor’s flatly stated position was, “I do not talk to the Star.”

Furthermore:

One journalist for the Toronto Star described the situation as an “underground economy” in information. Material was often provided on an “off the record” basis. Another journalist from the Toronto Star described the relationship-building with the Mayor’s Press Secretary as a “long hard slog” which improved over time.

And just to clarify:

The subject of the Mayor’s relationship to the media was discussed with many of those interviewed in this investigation. Staff members from the Toronto Star spoke about the difficulty of doing their work without up to date information about the Mayor and his activities. This complaint was not limited to the Toronto Star. Other journalists described the flow of information out of the Mayor’s office in these terms:

• “few and far between”
• “we aren’t kept up to date regarding what he is doing”
• “occasional” statements
• “less than once per week and sometimes once per month”
• “It is not as if we have a direct line to the Mayor”
• The Press Secretary is “inconsistent” in responding to journalists

…

On the continuum of “sparse or sparser” access, members of the Press Gallery said that the Toronto Star has less access than others. The media members interviewed, and those who commented publicly on the issue have said a number of times that a Mayor should be even-handed with the press and treat all outlets “fairly.” Others felt strongly that there is a democratic obligation on the part of elected officials to be open with the press and to be fair in access to information about their activities.

In the end and despite this overwhelming evidence, the Integrity Commissioner ruled in favour of Ford:

I conclude that on the particular facts in this case, there was no breach of the Code of Conduct by Mayor Ford. The reasons for this finding can be summarized as follows:

• There is an accepted practice of elected officials, including the Mayor, determining how and when they will grant access to the media, by way of interviews, answering questions during scrums or providing information about their views, outside of the formal and publicly accessible mechanisms that exist for ensuring transparent municipal democracy;
• The Mayor did not interfere with the access of Toronto Star reporters to significant avenues of information about the workings and agendas of City Council, the public service, or other councillors;
• The City of Toronto has an open access policy for disseminating information to the media and to the public;
• The Mayor’s personal policy of “not talking to the Star” was incomplete, with his knowledge and approval, as shown by the following:
  • distribution of some bulk e mails to thestar.ca;
  • distribution of most bulk e mails to other members of the Star Media Group, all falling under the direct supervision of the Publisher of the Toronto Star;
  • distribution of all bulk e mails to the affiliated sister company of Metroland;
  • the unofficial and multiple “work arounds” by staff and Toronto Star journalists, known, tolerated and cited by the Mayor in his defence.
  • The originating story which led to the Mayor’s reason for not speaking to the Toronto Star was written during a political campaign and was newsworthy because of his status as a public and political figure;
  • The ability of the press to publish, comment and otherwise hold politicians to account for their media communications practices.

So once again, Rob Ford smugly walks away from the fray because there’s really nothing in place to hold him to account.

This is, of course, in response to Ford’s latest bluster about how people need to sue him when he calls them liars (I’m sure it makes sense to him).

The Star’s Robyn Doolittle seems to be gunning close to the core Rob Ford issue of the moment: his alcohol / drug abuse. Not terribly surprising given both the rumours and some earlier contacts (this date last year, in fact):

The story, apparently, is that Rob made another slovenly mess of himself at a war veteran’s charity ball, and had to be shown out.

Three members of the Garrison Ball organizing committee said Ford was asked to leave because he appeared impaired. One said, “he seemed either drunk, high or had a medical condition.”

Doolittle goes on to name a variety of sadly but understandably anonymous (all fearing the mayor’s wrath),  sources who detail the alcoholism that Rob Ford is “battling with” (seems like a warm embrace to me, but that’s just my take). Some of the guest descriptions of Ford from the military ball, however, should remind us that there’s probably more than alcohol involved:

“incoherent,” “stumbling,” “rambling,” “intoxicated,” “slurring,” “seemed to be drunk,” “was nervous, excited, sweaty, out of it.”

I’ve had my fair share of alcohol, and I can’t say that I’ve ever been nervous or excited. Quite the opposite, in fact.

I know that Fordites are going to cling to their main mass no matter what, but to the rest of us, doesn’t it seem like maybe it’s time for a random drug test? And before anyone raises a fuss about inequality, I’d definitely be in favour of all the Councillors taking one.