Showing posts with label Ezra Levant And The CBSC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ezra Levant And The CBSC. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 17, 2015
My CBSC Complaint Against Sun TV Fades Quietly Away
Curses! I inquired today, thinking maybe there was still a chance to give Ezra one last kick in the ass as he was going out the door. But apparently the CBSC has no authority over broadcasters after they go TU; they have to let my complaint slide. Ah well. I've found a whole new way of punishing people for having the wrong opinions...you bet I'm gonna file another complaint against somebody real soon! Its just one of a range of "actions" I have planned for 2015. Another is to convince Trojan to stop using petroleum oil from the tar sands in their petroleum jellies. I call it my "Ethical Rubbers" initiative. I've written them a couple of times already about this. First time they forwarded my email to their "research" dept. but the after the third email they stopped answering. I'll keep at it, though.
Tuesday, December 16, 2014
My First CBSC Complaint, Part III: Request For A Ruling
The third stage in filing a CBSC complaint is, if you are not satisfied with the response you've got from the station rep, is to outline your reasons in a ruling request form, and, well, request a ruling. Below is the final version of what I submitted on Sunday. If you've followed this you've read some of it before, though I've added a bit at the end. In any case:
The CBSC Secretariat will be reviewing your file in the near future to determine whether adjudication by a panel of industry and public members is appropriate in the circumstances of this complaint. The CBSC’s examination of any complaint includes a review of all of the correspondence in the file as well as our own viewing or listening of the broadcast in question. Each CBSC decision creates an important precedent and is used to clarify the interpretation of the broadcast codes. Due to the importance of every complaint, we review each one in the order it was received, and accordingly, it could take up to four months for this process to be completed for your file.
And here's the complaint:
---
CBSC File Number: CBSC File C14/15-0421
Thanks to Mr. Manson of Sun News for his response. However, I find it an inadequate defence of Mr. Ezra Levant's November 10 broadcast. Therefore I would like to request a a ruling on this particular case. Mr. Manson and I have exchanged a pair of emails. The bulk of this complaint is my response to his first email; the remainder is a response to issues raised in his second.
When I first contacted the CBSC, I suggested that the segment in question violated clause
2 of the CAB code, and also clause 5. Clause 5 demands accurate reporting, which standard I felt Mr. Levant had failed to meet when he asserted that the Greater Essex school-board was exempting Muslim school-children from Remembrance Day ceremonies due to conflicts with their/their family's religious beliefs.
Now, Mr. Manson has suggested that a failure of communication between The Board and SNN occurred, and points to several exchanges between their spokesperson and Sun News representatives dating from the morning of November 10 as evidence of this. But none of the facts contained in these exchanges would render Mr. Levant's original assertion an accurate report of what was said to him by Board representatives, or even a plausible inference from what was said to him. In fact, Mr. Manson quotes from one email as
follows:
"The procedure for religious accommodation has been in place for some time and no it was not in response to any concerns from any particular people or groups – it’s a necessary document to allow the board to manage any requests for accommodations based on religion or beliefs."
The claim that no particular people or groups requested accommodation logically implies that no Muslim people or groups requested it. Therefore the assertion Mr. Levant made to the effect that Muslim individuals did request such accommodation (and were granted
it) would necessarily be an inaccurate report.
And in his later discussion of the controversy, Mr. Levant neither admits to nor apologizes for this basic inaccuracy.
Furthermore, this inaccurate statement serves as a trigger for what I would call an extended violation of the CAB code's second clause. That is, Mr. Levant engages in a stream of Muslim bashing invective. I would probably argue that even if facts stood as per Mr. Levant's original assertion--if in fact some Muslim parent had requested accommodation for religious reasons—Levant's tirade would still have been abusive and unduly discriminatory. But as it stands we have a falsehood serving as an excuse for a concentrated blast of bigotry. And of course Mr. Levant has neither admitted to or apologized for his bigoted statements anymore than he has for his inaccurate ones.
In his second email, Mr. Manson writes as follows:
"In his follow-up monologue on November 12, 2014, Mr. Levant said: “In the end, the school board claims that no students asked for an exemption. I take public statements from the board with a grain of salt now, but I hope that’s true.”
"Mr. Levant therefore acknowledged the Board’s position that no students had asked for an exemption. Sun News therefore reiterates its position that no further action by the CBSC is necessary with respect to this complaint."
Put generally, Sun News and myself are offering different narratives as to the sequence of events that occurred the week of November 10.
I am arguing that Mr. Levant's first exchange with the school-board on the morning of November 10 was absolutely clear: no students, including Muslim students, had requested an exemption, and none had been granted. Nevertheless on the evening of that same day Mr. Levant claimed that the school-board had exempted a number of Muslim students from its Remembrance Day ceremonies for religious reasons. It is this statement, as well as the anti-Muslim tirade that followed, that I believe Mr. Levant should be sanctioned over, and for which he has thus far assumed no responsibility.
On the other hand Mr. Manson and Mr. Levant have argued that this first exchange with the school-board somehow supported or at least did not at least logically disallow Mr. Levant's claim. And when afterwards Mr. Levant received new information which cast his earlier assertion into doubt, he was willing to take responsibility for any of the resultant confusion. And it is clear why he would prefer to promote this narrative. To be told clearly that not-A, and to then go on television and say A, suggests either deliberate misrepresentation or a reckless disregard for the truth.
However, I think even a cursory reading of the school-board/SNN correspondence makes clear that Mr. Levant and Mr. Manson's time-line of events is largely fictive. Nor is this just my opinion. For example, The Globe's Sylvia Stead has written of this incident:
"Nothing in the partial memo received by Mr. Levant or in the follow-up questions justified his conclusion because it is not based on the truth."
Other writers who have looked at the matter have come to similar conclusions. I can supply more links as needed.
Finally, I would suggest past incidents make a “reckless disregard for the the truth” the more likely explanation for Mr. Levant's assertion. It is, after all, the manner in which his writings have been described in a number of defamation cases which Mr. Levant has found himself on the losing side of, including this one decided very recently between Mr. Levant and Khurrum Awan:
Sincerely,
MJ Murphy
The CBSC Secretariat will be reviewing your file in the near future to determine whether adjudication by a panel of industry and public members is appropriate in the circumstances of this complaint. The CBSC’s examination of any complaint includes a review of all of the correspondence in the file as well as our own viewing or listening of the broadcast in question. Each CBSC decision creates an important precedent and is used to clarify the interpretation of the broadcast codes. Due to the importance of every complaint, we review each one in the order it was received, and accordingly, it could take up to four months for this process to be completed for your file.
And here's the complaint:
---
CBSC File Number: CBSC File C14/15-0421
Thanks to Mr. Manson of Sun News for his response. However, I find it an inadequate defence of Mr. Ezra Levant's November 10 broadcast. Therefore I would like to request a a ruling on this particular case. Mr. Manson and I have exchanged a pair of emails. The bulk of this complaint is my response to his first email; the remainder is a response to issues raised in his second.
When I first contacted the CBSC, I suggested that the segment in question violated clause
2 of the CAB code, and also clause 5. Clause 5 demands accurate reporting, which standard I felt Mr. Levant had failed to meet when he asserted that the Greater Essex school-board was exempting Muslim school-children from Remembrance Day ceremonies due to conflicts with their/their family's religious beliefs.
Now, Mr. Manson has suggested that a failure of communication between The Board and SNN occurred, and points to several exchanges between their spokesperson and Sun News representatives dating from the morning of November 10 as evidence of this. But none of the facts contained in these exchanges would render Mr. Levant's original assertion an accurate report of what was said to him by Board representatives, or even a plausible inference from what was said to him. In fact, Mr. Manson quotes from one email as
follows:
"The procedure for religious accommodation has been in place for some time and no it was not in response to any concerns from any particular people or groups – it’s a necessary document to allow the board to manage any requests for accommodations based on religion or beliefs."
The claim that no particular people or groups requested accommodation logically implies that no Muslim people or groups requested it. Therefore the assertion Mr. Levant made to the effect that Muslim individuals did request such accommodation (and were granted
it) would necessarily be an inaccurate report.
And in his later discussion of the controversy, Mr. Levant neither admits to nor apologizes for this basic inaccuracy.
Furthermore, this inaccurate statement serves as a trigger for what I would call an extended violation of the CAB code's second clause. That is, Mr. Levant engages in a stream of Muslim bashing invective. I would probably argue that even if facts stood as per Mr. Levant's original assertion--if in fact some Muslim parent had requested accommodation for religious reasons—Levant's tirade would still have been abusive and unduly discriminatory. But as it stands we have a falsehood serving as an excuse for a concentrated blast of bigotry. And of course Mr. Levant has neither admitted to or apologized for his bigoted statements anymore than he has for his inaccurate ones.
In his second email, Mr. Manson writes as follows:
"In his follow-up monologue on November 12, 2014, Mr. Levant said: “In the end, the school board claims that no students asked for an exemption. I take public statements from the board with a grain of salt now, but I hope that’s true.”
"Mr. Levant therefore acknowledged the Board’s position that no students had asked for an exemption. Sun News therefore reiterates its position that no further action by the CBSC is necessary with respect to this complaint."
Put generally, Sun News and myself are offering different narratives as to the sequence of events that occurred the week of November 10.
I am arguing that Mr. Levant's first exchange with the school-board on the morning of November 10 was absolutely clear: no students, including Muslim students, had requested an exemption, and none had been granted. Nevertheless on the evening of that same day Mr. Levant claimed that the school-board had exempted a number of Muslim students from its Remembrance Day ceremonies for religious reasons. It is this statement, as well as the anti-Muslim tirade that followed, that I believe Mr. Levant should be sanctioned over, and for which he has thus far assumed no responsibility.
On the other hand Mr. Manson and Mr. Levant have argued that this first exchange with the school-board somehow supported or at least did not at least logically disallow Mr. Levant's claim. And when afterwards Mr. Levant received new information which cast his earlier assertion into doubt, he was willing to take responsibility for any of the resultant confusion. And it is clear why he would prefer to promote this narrative. To be told clearly that not-A, and to then go on television and say A, suggests either deliberate misrepresentation or a reckless disregard for the truth.
However, I think even a cursory reading of the school-board/SNN correspondence makes clear that Mr. Levant and Mr. Manson's time-line of events is largely fictive. Nor is this just my opinion. For example, The Globe's Sylvia Stead has written of this incident:
"Nothing in the partial memo received by Mr. Levant or in the follow-up questions justified his conclusion because it is not based on the truth."
Other writers who have looked at the matter have come to similar conclusions. I can supply more links as needed.
Finally, I would suggest past incidents make a “reckless disregard for the the truth” the more likely explanation for Mr. Levant's assertion. It is, after all, the manner in which his writings have been described in a number of defamation cases which Mr. Levant has found himself on the losing side of, including this one decided very recently between Mr. Levant and Khurrum Awan:
Sincerely,
MJ Murphy
Tuesday, December 09, 2014
My First CBSC Complaint, Part II
So, when you first approach the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council with concerns over one of the tv/radio stations they regulate, they forward those concerns to the station in question and ask the company legal reps to address them. Below is an email from Tycho Manson, counsel to the Sun News Network, addressing my issues with Ezra Levant's broadcast of November 10th. During this show Ezra accused the Greater Essex County District School Board of pandering to Muslim extremists, and then went on with a good ten minute rant about how ungrateful Muslims immigrants are. Above Mr. Manson's letter is my reply to it.
As noted, unless Mr. Manson has some better arguments up his sleeve, I will be going forward with the complaint.
---
My reply:
Thanks to Mr. Manson for his response. However, as it stands now I find it an inadequate defense in several respects.
In my original complaint, I suggested that the segment in question violated clause 2 of the CAB code, and also clause 5.
Clause 5 demands accurate reporting, which standard I felt Mr. Levant had failed to meet when he asserted that the Greater Essex school-board was exempting Muslim school-children from Remembrance Day ceremonies due to conflicts with their/their family's religious beliefs.
Now Mr. Manson has suggested that a failure of communication between The Board and SNN occurred, and points to several exchanges between their spokesperson and Sun News representatives as evidence of this. But none of the new facts contained in these exchanges would render Mr. Levant's original assertion an accurate report of what was said to him by Board representatives, or even a plausible inference from what was said to him. In fact, Mr. Manson quotes from one email as follows:
The procedure for religious accommodation has been in place for some time and no it was not in response to any concerns from any particular people or groups – it’s a necessary document to allow the board to manage any requests for accommodations based on religion or beliefs.
The claim that no particular people or groups requested accommodation logically implies that no Muslim people or groups requested it. Therefore the assertion Mr. Levant made to the effect that Muslim individuals did request such accommodation would necessarily be an inaccurate report.
And in his later discussion of the controversy, Mr. Levant neither admits nor apologizes for this inaccuracy.
Furthermore, this inaccurate statement serves as a trigger for what I would call an extended violation of the CAB code's second clause. That is, Mr. Levant engages in a stream of Muslim bashing invective. I would probably argue that even if facts stood as per Mr. Levant's original assertion--if in fact some Muslim parent had requested accommodation for religious reasons--his tirade would still have been abusive and unduly discriminatory. But as it stands we have falsehoods serving as an excuse for a concentrated blast of bigotry. And of course Mr. Levant has neither admitted to or apologized for this either.
I'm not sure if Mr. Manson wishes to address this matter further. If not I think I will probably request a ruling on the matter.
Sincerely,
MJ Murphy
---
Mr. Manson's letter:
Dear Mme. Courteau and Mr. Murphy:
I am counsel to Sun News Network. I am writing in response to Mr. Murphy’s complaint below concerning a monologue by Ezra Levant at the beginning of his show The Source, which was broadcast on Sun News on November 10, 2014 at 8:00 pm ET.
In the monologue, Mr. Levant discussed an apparent policy of the Greater Essex County District School Board (the “Board”) that schools within the jurisdiction of the Board should provide alternate activities for students who do not wish to participate in Remembrance Day activities (or whose parents do not wish them to participate).
The facts
I am advised by Sun News that the facts of the matter are as follows.
The monologue was based on a memorandum that had been sent by the Board to schools within its jurisdiction. That memorandum read in part:
Some schools may have their own school assemblies while others may choose to participate in the ceremonies of their local municipalities such as the Windsor Cenotaph. Please be mindful that some families may be reluctant to have their children attend your local municipality’s ceremonies. Please note that meaningful alternate activities should be provided at the schools for those families who do not wish their children to participate in any Remembrance Day activities.
Please find attached some images that reflect Canada’s diverse military and to honour those families who are, and have been our allies in conflicts that we as a nation, have participated [sic].
Included in the memorandum were two web links, one to the Canadian War Museum and one to a blog post about a Canadian Muslim soldier in Afghanistan.
On the morning of November 10, 2014, a Sun News producer contacted an official of the Board by email, referred to the Board’s apparent policy “that will exempt certain students from participating in Remembrance Day activities” and asked the following questions:
1. Is this a new policy? If not, when did it start?
2. Is this policy in response to complaints from parents?
3. Is this policy aimed at any specific group?
4. What was the intent of including the article on the Muslim in the Canadian Forces?
The Board official responded to this email the same day. He stated in part: “Any such exemption would be granted in consideration of our Religious Accommodations procedure – a parent/guardian may request an exemption – which would have to be approved, after consideration, by the Principal.” He added that that he was not sure which article the producer was referring to, “however it is our goal to celebrate diversity whenever we can.”
In a follow-up email, the Sun News producer sent the Board official a copy of the memorandum, and asked: “Was this policy in response to complaints from parents? Is the policy aimed at a specific group? I’m also wondering why the last two links at the bottom were included.”
The Board official responded as follows:
The procedure for religious accommodation has been in place for some time and no it was not in response to any concerns from any particular people or groups – it’s a necessary document to allow the board to manage any requests for accommodations based on religion or beliefs.
The particular link merely is an example and a reminder of the diversity that exists in our country’s armed forces.
The Board official therefore stated twice, in response to specific questions from Sun News, that the policy was in place as part of a religious accommodation policy. At no time did the Board official mention security concerns as a reason for the policy.
Sun News is willing to make this entire correspondence available to the CBSC in full if the CBSC considers it necessary for resolution of this complaint.
In his monologue, Mr. Levant went on to express his opinion of the Board’s policy, as he is entitled to do pursuant to Clause 5 of the CAB Code of Ethics.
The facts are, therefore, that Sun News contacted the Board in advance of airtime, provided the Board with the memorandum Sun News had received, asked specific questions about it, and was expressly told by the Board’s official spokesperson that the policy was about religious accommodation. Again, parents' concerns about security were not mentioned.
The subsequent controversy
Subsequent to the airing of Mr. Levant’s monologue, a controversy broke out over the monologue and over the Board’s intention in promulgating the policy discussed by Mr. Levant. Officials of the Board apparently told some media representatives that the policy was put in place in response to parents’ security concerns. However, as noted above, at no time were security concerns mentioned as a reason for the policy in the Board’s email correspondence with Sun News.
In addition, it appears that a different version of the memorandum was in circulation. In this version of the memorandum, the web links in the memorandum included web pages about aboriginal Canadian soldiers, African Canadian soldiers and Asian Canadian soldiers. Sun News cannot explain the discrepancy in the versions of the memorandum, but notes that the Board representative who responded to Sun News did not at any time state or suggest that the version of the memorandum shown to him by Sun News was inaccurate or incomplete or had been superseded.
On a subsequent appearance on Sun News, Board Superintendent Sharon Pyke made the following statement in response to a comment by host Jerry Agar:
AGAR: Alright, while what we might have here is failure to communicate. There was a memo that went out. We had a look at the memo. Some of the producers here and Ezra did at Sun News. Then we asked a question about it and we were told that exemptions would be granted in consideration of [your] religious accommodations procedures. And that was, well that seemed wrong and seemed confusing, but of course, we had to take the word of [the Board spokesperson] in your organization that sent that to us.
PYKE: And I'm sorry for the miscommunication. It was certainly was not our intent at all. It was to provide information to our principals so they could make the ceremony - their ceremony - the best it can be. [Emphasis added.]
Ms. Pyke therefore referred expressly to a “miscommunication” and said she was sorry for it.
On The Source on November 12, 2014, Ezra Levant referred to the controversy that had erupted and stated the further facts set out above.
In the circumstances, Sun News submits that its original item was based on information provided to it by the Board, and that Sun News followed up appropriately when further facts became available by airing and discussing those further facts. Sun News therefore submits that no further action should be taken with respect to this complaint.
Yours truly,
Tycho Manson
As noted, unless Mr. Manson has some better arguments up his sleeve, I will be going forward with the complaint.
---
My reply:
Thanks to Mr. Manson for his response. However, as it stands now I find it an inadequate defense in several respects.
In my original complaint, I suggested that the segment in question violated clause 2 of the CAB code, and also clause 5.
Clause 5 demands accurate reporting, which standard I felt Mr. Levant had failed to meet when he asserted that the Greater Essex school-board was exempting Muslim school-children from Remembrance Day ceremonies due to conflicts with their/their family's religious beliefs.
Now Mr. Manson has suggested that a failure of communication between The Board and SNN occurred, and points to several exchanges between their spokesperson and Sun News representatives as evidence of this. But none of the new facts contained in these exchanges would render Mr. Levant's original assertion an accurate report of what was said to him by Board representatives, or even a plausible inference from what was said to him. In fact, Mr. Manson quotes from one email as follows:
The procedure for religious accommodation has been in place for some time and no it was not in response to any concerns from any particular people or groups – it’s a necessary document to allow the board to manage any requests for accommodations based on religion or beliefs.
The claim that no particular people or groups requested accommodation logically implies that no Muslim people or groups requested it. Therefore the assertion Mr. Levant made to the effect that Muslim individuals did request such accommodation would necessarily be an inaccurate report.
And in his later discussion of the controversy, Mr. Levant neither admits nor apologizes for this inaccuracy.
Furthermore, this inaccurate statement serves as a trigger for what I would call an extended violation of the CAB code's second clause. That is, Mr. Levant engages in a stream of Muslim bashing invective. I would probably argue that even if facts stood as per Mr. Levant's original assertion--if in fact some Muslim parent had requested accommodation for religious reasons--his tirade would still have been abusive and unduly discriminatory. But as it stands we have falsehoods serving as an excuse for a concentrated blast of bigotry. And of course Mr. Levant has neither admitted to or apologized for this either.
I'm not sure if Mr. Manson wishes to address this matter further. If not I think I will probably request a ruling on the matter.
Sincerely,
MJ Murphy
---
Mr. Manson's letter:
Dear Mme. Courteau and Mr. Murphy:
I am counsel to Sun News Network. I am writing in response to Mr. Murphy’s complaint below concerning a monologue by Ezra Levant at the beginning of his show The Source, which was broadcast on Sun News on November 10, 2014 at 8:00 pm ET.
In the monologue, Mr. Levant discussed an apparent policy of the Greater Essex County District School Board (the “Board”) that schools within the jurisdiction of the Board should provide alternate activities for students who do not wish to participate in Remembrance Day activities (or whose parents do not wish them to participate).
The facts
I am advised by Sun News that the facts of the matter are as follows.
The monologue was based on a memorandum that had been sent by the Board to schools within its jurisdiction. That memorandum read in part:
Some schools may have their own school assemblies while others may choose to participate in the ceremonies of their local municipalities such as the Windsor Cenotaph. Please be mindful that some families may be reluctant to have their children attend your local municipality’s ceremonies. Please note that meaningful alternate activities should be provided at the schools for those families who do not wish their children to participate in any Remembrance Day activities.
Please find attached some images that reflect Canada’s diverse military and to honour those families who are, and have been our allies in conflicts that we as a nation, have participated [sic].
Included in the memorandum were two web links, one to the Canadian War Museum and one to a blog post about a Canadian Muslim soldier in Afghanistan.
On the morning of November 10, 2014, a Sun News producer contacted an official of the Board by email, referred to the Board’s apparent policy “that will exempt certain students from participating in Remembrance Day activities” and asked the following questions:
1. Is this a new policy? If not, when did it start?
2. Is this policy in response to complaints from parents?
3. Is this policy aimed at any specific group?
4. What was the intent of including the article on the Muslim in the Canadian Forces?
The Board official responded to this email the same day. He stated in part: “Any such exemption would be granted in consideration of our Religious Accommodations procedure – a parent/guardian may request an exemption – which would have to be approved, after consideration, by the Principal.” He added that that he was not sure which article the producer was referring to, “however it is our goal to celebrate diversity whenever we can.”
In a follow-up email, the Sun News producer sent the Board official a copy of the memorandum, and asked: “Was this policy in response to complaints from parents? Is the policy aimed at a specific group? I’m also wondering why the last two links at the bottom were included.”
The Board official responded as follows:
The procedure for religious accommodation has been in place for some time and no it was not in response to any concerns from any particular people or groups – it’s a necessary document to allow the board to manage any requests for accommodations based on religion or beliefs.
The particular link merely is an example and a reminder of the diversity that exists in our country’s armed forces.
The Board official therefore stated twice, in response to specific questions from Sun News, that the policy was in place as part of a religious accommodation policy. At no time did the Board official mention security concerns as a reason for the policy.
Sun News is willing to make this entire correspondence available to the CBSC in full if the CBSC considers it necessary for resolution of this complaint.
In his monologue, Mr. Levant went on to express his opinion of the Board’s policy, as he is entitled to do pursuant to Clause 5 of the CAB Code of Ethics.
The facts are, therefore, that Sun News contacted the Board in advance of airtime, provided the Board with the memorandum Sun News had received, asked specific questions about it, and was expressly told by the Board’s official spokesperson that the policy was about religious accommodation. Again, parents' concerns about security were not mentioned.
The subsequent controversy
Subsequent to the airing of Mr. Levant’s monologue, a controversy broke out over the monologue and over the Board’s intention in promulgating the policy discussed by Mr. Levant. Officials of the Board apparently told some media representatives that the policy was put in place in response to parents’ security concerns. However, as noted above, at no time were security concerns mentioned as a reason for the policy in the Board’s email correspondence with Sun News.
In addition, it appears that a different version of the memorandum was in circulation. In this version of the memorandum, the web links in the memorandum included web pages about aboriginal Canadian soldiers, African Canadian soldiers and Asian Canadian soldiers. Sun News cannot explain the discrepancy in the versions of the memorandum, but notes that the Board representative who responded to Sun News did not at any time state or suggest that the version of the memorandum shown to him by Sun News was inaccurate or incomplete or had been superseded.
On a subsequent appearance on Sun News, Board Superintendent Sharon Pyke made the following statement in response to a comment by host Jerry Agar:
AGAR: Alright, while what we might have here is failure to communicate. There was a memo that went out. We had a look at the memo. Some of the producers here and Ezra did at Sun News. Then we asked a question about it and we were told that exemptions would be granted in consideration of [your] religious accommodations procedures. And that was, well that seemed wrong and seemed confusing, but of course, we had to take the word of [the Board spokesperson] in your organization that sent that to us.
PYKE: And I'm sorry for the miscommunication. It was certainly was not our intent at all. It was to provide information to our principals so they could make the ceremony - their ceremony - the best it can be. [Emphasis added.]
Ms. Pyke therefore referred expressly to a “miscommunication” and said she was sorry for it.
On The Source on November 12, 2014, Ezra Levant referred to the controversy that had erupted and stated the further facts set out above.
In the circumstances, Sun News submits that its original item was based on information provided to it by the Board, and that Sun News followed up appropriately when further facts became available by airing and discussing those further facts. Sun News therefore submits that no further action should be taken with respect to this complaint.
Yours truly,
Tycho Manson
Wednesday, December 03, 2014
Just Resting
Regular readers will note it's been quiet around here. That's because of life-maintenance stuff, work, and a few other things. And being a little bored by the world as it stands at this moment. One possibly exciting thing coming up is the next step in my CBSC complaint against Ezra Levant and the Sun News Network. When you first complain to the CBSC about some media outlet, they forward your complaint to said media outlet and give them 21 days to respond directly to you. We're in day 17 and I have got no response out of SNN so far. The clock is ticking.
Thursday, November 13, 2014
Ezra's Grovelling Apology
...can be found here. The "I was wrong" bit comes at the end (about the 14 minute mark). Ezra has also pulled the explicit Muslim-bashing from his "Canada: Love It Or Leave It" site (from the cache too, if you are trying to find it there). Finally, SNN has also pulled down the original segment and replaced it with Ezra's Mea Culpa. The original T.O. Sun column, however, remains.
Some background on this story can be found here, and here.
Update: This person was good enough to screen cap the original/updated Love It Or Leave It page:
Some background on this story can be found here, and here.
Update: This person was good enough to screen cap the original/updated Love It Or Leave It page:
Hey @ezralevant @SunNewsNetwork, why the sudden change? #cdnpoli cc @Bigcitylib2 pic.twitter.com/rbDmnMpzc9
— Alheli Picazo (@a_picazo) November 13, 2014
Wednesday, November 12, 2014
Ezra Versus The School-Board: Prepare For The Grovelling Apology?
Tonight at 8 & 10 ET on The Source: a post-mortem on the Windsor school board story. What did we get right & what did we get wrong? Tune in.
— Ezra Levant (@ezralevant) November 12, 2014
If anyone actually watches, let me know what happened.
Ezra, The School Board, And The Muslims: Day Three
Well, as my CBSC (and also CRTC) complaints await processing in Ottawa, it's time for a few updates. Most importantly, Ezra has offered his side of the story, and also an email exchange between himself and Greater Essex County District School Board representative Scott Scantlebury.
Probably the most important bit from his "Factual background" is this:
-Someone who received an e-mailed memo from the school board forwarded it to me as a potential news item.
[...]
-That memo we received did not include the links to aboriginal, Asian, and African soldiers in the Canadian military. Scantlebury did not advise us of this fact. The quotes we cited from the memo are accurate.
-I have attached my producer’s email exchanges yesterday with Scantlebury. I have only redacted the producer’s name and contact info.
This leaves open the distinct possibility that Ezra's source deliberately removed the extra links so as to, well, sucker Ezra and his production team into the misconstruction that they did indeed put upon the memo. In fact, this would not be the first time Ezra has been lied to by one of his tipsters. In an earlier case as well, the result was a CBSC complaint.
Not that such a scenario would make Ezra's subsequent behavior any less reprehensible. After all, he surely knows that anyone watching his show and slipping him tips must be to some degree sick in the head, and should be fact-checked quite a bit more thoroughly than the effort Ezra gave it.
On the other hand, after his recent anti-Justin tirade, several family members emailed Ezra to say that the whole episode had been entirely innocent. These emails conveniently disappeared into Ezra's spam folder (can't find the link for that, so I am going by recollection), so discount the man's words appropriately.
Also, Greater Essex County District School Board Superintendent Sharon Pyke appeared on the Jerry Agar show to discuss the incident. Sun News has spun this into an apology by the board, but read the entire transcript of the interview and see if you can detect the contrition in it. I can't.
And, meanwhile and finally, Ezra is still using the false story as a means of hawking merch at one of his websites. Hopefully, the CBSC/CRTC will take this into account when trying to form an idea of Ezra's intent in spreading this story.
Probably the most important bit from his "Factual background" is this:
-Someone who received an e-mailed memo from the school board forwarded it to me as a potential news item.
[...]
-That memo we received did not include the links to aboriginal, Asian, and African soldiers in the Canadian military. Scantlebury did not advise us of this fact. The quotes we cited from the memo are accurate.
-I have attached my producer’s email exchanges yesterday with Scantlebury. I have only redacted the producer’s name and contact info.
This leaves open the distinct possibility that Ezra's source deliberately removed the extra links so as to, well, sucker Ezra and his production team into the misconstruction that they did indeed put upon the memo. In fact, this would not be the first time Ezra has been lied to by one of his tipsters. In an earlier case as well, the result was a CBSC complaint.
Not that such a scenario would make Ezra's subsequent behavior any less reprehensible. After all, he surely knows that anyone watching his show and slipping him tips must be to some degree sick in the head, and should be fact-checked quite a bit more thoroughly than the effort Ezra gave it.
On the other hand, after his recent anti-Justin tirade, several family members emailed Ezra to say that the whole episode had been entirely innocent. These emails conveniently disappeared into Ezra's spam folder (can't find the link for that, so I am going by recollection), so discount the man's words appropriately.
Also, Greater Essex County District School Board Superintendent Sharon Pyke appeared on the Jerry Agar show to discuss the incident. Sun News has spun this into an apology by the board, but read the entire transcript of the interview and see if you can detect the contrition in it. I can't.
And, meanwhile and finally, Ezra is still using the false story as a means of hawking merch at one of his websites. Hopefully, the CBSC/CRTC will take this into account when trying to form an idea of Ezra's intent in spreading this story.
Tuesday, November 11, 2014
My First CBSC Complaint!
From the submission I filed with them this morning:
In this segment, Sun News Network personality Ezra Levant implies that the Greater Essex County District School Board has sent around an email to its principals exempting Muslim students from Remembrance Day celebrations due to possible conflicts with their/their families' religious beliefs.
As evidence that the exemption caters to Muslims, Mr. Levant points to a number of links in the email, which send the reader to stories about Muslim soldiers serving in the Canadian army.
Mr. Levant then goes off on a ten minute rant suggesting that any Muslim immigrants who refuse to participate in Remembrance Day ceremonies are being dis-loyal to Canada, and denigrating Muslims in general.
However, when you look at the email in question (which can be found here), you will see that the link to stories re Muslim soldiers are followed by links to other, similar stories about Aboriginal CDN soldiers, African CDN soldiers, and etc.
So the rant is based on a falsehood. There is nothing in the memo that suggests that this exemption was meant to spare the religious sensibilities of any Muslim child/parent In fact, a CBC story on the email indicates that the exemption was a matter of parents having safety concerns re sending their kids to a public ceremony, given the Ottawa attacks of a few weeks ago.
Surely this piece fails the CAB code provision requiring accuracy, and contains material that discriminates against Cdn Muslims.
In this segment, Sun News Network personality Ezra Levant implies that the Greater Essex County District School Board has sent around an email to its principals exempting Muslim students from Remembrance Day celebrations due to possible conflicts with their/their families' religious beliefs.
As evidence that the exemption caters to Muslims, Mr. Levant points to a number of links in the email, which send the reader to stories about Muslim soldiers serving in the Canadian army.
Mr. Levant then goes off on a ten minute rant suggesting that any Muslim immigrants who refuse to participate in Remembrance Day ceremonies are being dis-loyal to Canada, and denigrating Muslims in general.
However, when you look at the email in question (which can be found here), you will see that the link to stories re Muslim soldiers are followed by links to other, similar stories about Aboriginal CDN soldiers, African CDN soldiers, and etc.
So the rant is based on a falsehood. There is nothing in the memo that suggests that this exemption was meant to spare the religious sensibilities of any Muslim child/parent In fact, a CBC story on the email indicates that the exemption was a matter of parents having safety concerns re sending their kids to a public ceremony, given the Ottawa attacks of a few weeks ago.
Surely this piece fails the CAB code provision requiring accuracy, and contains material that discriminates against Cdn Muslims.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)