Thursday, February 12, 2009

Where Do You Stand?

Have you been following the discussion about this charming woman being on TVO tonight?

It's an interesting discussion. The argument is that we the tax payer should have a voice in who is to be featured on Paikin's show. There is merit to that obviously and given the publicity and links provided by Kinsella and others, we do have a voice.

I confess to being of two minds on this issue however. Part of me wants to see her on the show so that her venom is exposed. Exposure of these extremists should lead to ostracization, not to mention confrontation and consequences.

The problem is of course that she and others are all too free with their hate and it has crept into too many forums. What I really object to are these people being treated as respected voices and part of the mainstream. They are out there of course, but they are a minority and should be characterised as such.

If TVO is going to have her on, shouldn't she at least be there to talk about what she writes about? Shouldn't she be introduced in full and her record exposed? Shouldn't she be the guest that epitomizes intolerance? Wouldn't that be honest?

With all of the exposure and ensuing e-mails to TVO, it'll be interesting to see what happens tonight.

23 comments:

The Mound of Sound said...

The best thing for everybody is to give these types as much exposure as possible. Let everyone see the wretch for what she is and, I hope, have someone who will make her acknowledge and defend her outrages. Her type always wind up heaping ridicule on themselves.

Anonymous said...

She has every right to be on the show, and, if asked she should be.
The better question is...why would anyone want her on the show? OH...I just had an idea...get
Ti-guy on with her....I'd pay big bucks for that. billg

Anonymous said...

And another thing....why does Warren Kinsella want everything he dislikes banned or censored? He's starting to remind me of Tiger Wood's first caddy...Fluff, who started thinking HE was a celebrity...and we all know how that ended for Fluff!!
billg

Big Winnie said...

I've been watching "The Agenda" and according to Shaidle, Obama is a "Marxist Professor".

The Right is Where it's At said...

In Quebec we have Télé-Québec, which is the equivalent of TVO in Ontario. I don't know who this person is and I don't care. My problem is for the tax payers owning medium organizations such as TVO,CBC and here in Quebec Télé-Québec. I don't understand the fascination that some people in this country have of the idea for tax payers owning these medium networks. I have yet to hear a credible reason for this. If the motivation is that we are worried about Canadian content on tv,well it just doesn't wash because this is just precisely the reason we have the CRTC in this country. Just take a look at CPAC. I think no one covers politics the way they do. The difference among CPAC,CBC and TVO is that the tax payers don't own it. The last I looked CPAC works just fine!What do you think KNB and others,about what I just said? Thank You!

Chrystal Ocean said...

What Mound of Sound said. Couldn't say it better meself.

knb said...

MoS, that's where I was coming from.

I'd say she did show herself to be ridiculous, yet I'm disturbed that she is able to hide much of who she is on these kinds of panels.

She's given credibility to a certain extent where none should exist.

knb said...

billg. She has a right to her views as disgusting as they are, but the question is does she have a right to be on a show funded by taxpayers.

knb said...

BW...that Marxist professor line was something. At least she received some of the scorn she deserved when she came out with that.

knb said...

Right, that's a whole other discussion.

Public broadcasting isn't going anywhere any time soon and I'm fine with that.

I know your preference is to exclude the 'state' from most aspects of society, but you are in the wrong country for that I'm afraid.

The Right is Where it's At said...

"Right, that's a whole other discussion.

Public broadcasting isn't going anywhere any time soon and I'm fine with that.

I know your preference is to exclude the 'state' from most aspects of society, but you are in the wrong country for that I'm afraid."

KNB Your right when you say that "Public broadcasting isn't going anywhere any time soon" for the moment. Because here in Quebec just a few years ago it came very close for Télé-Québec going private.

My point is KNB if TVO was in private hands you wouldn't be asking yourself if she should be on a show founded by taxpayers,now would you? In other words if she was on global,CTV or CPAC it wouldn't be the same,now would it?
This is the danger you get when government is involed.

What I want the State is to be out of the media business. Regulation is one thing,but being the owner is a complete diffrent story.

It has nothing to do of being in the right or wrong country. I'M sick and tired of people like yourself always trying to make a comparison with the U.S.when it comes to stuff like this for example. Please don't try to deny it,that you were not referring to the U.S.

RuralSandi said...

I think if they are having someone on - they should be clear about that person.

My husband came in from work, looked at her and said what an unhappy, miserable looking person. He had no idea who she was or her history, but said she is so hateful looking. I updated him on her.

The topic was the bus/sign and atheism, and yet when discussing Obama's inclusive speech, she couldn't hold back her venom about Obama and she looked like an absolute fool.

Think about it - would you want to be so miserable?

She talks about religion/christianity and yet if you think about Christ's teachings, she's totally opposite. This gal isn't going to heaven (if there is one).

By the way Right Where it Rants - the US equivalent to TVO is PBS.

knb said...

I'M sick and tired of people like yourself always trying to make a comparison with the U.S.when it comes to stuff like this for example. Please don't try to deny it,that you were not referring to the U.S.

Whaat?

I'll tell you what I'm sick of. I'm sick of people making things up as they go, (such as your statement above), in an effort to blame all of their discontent on people they disagree with.

Too bad you missed the show because Shaidle would have been appealing to you. She blames everything that is wrong in the world on 'liberal' thinking. It's a sick, sad place to be and has nothing to do with reality.

I neither referred to nor thought of the US in any context when writing this post. That is your delusion.

knb said...

Sandi she indeed does look unhappy. I'm sure she would beg to differ because attacking people seems to make her happy.

She is an example of the extreme and certainly should be called out for what she is. I found her being on that panel completely disingenuous. I laughed out loud when the other female guest spoke of people who say hateful things on their blogs.

The guy sitting beside Kathy was a piece of work too wasn't he? Man, he teaches at U of T? He struck me as one of those guys who wanders around at cocktail parties babbling nonsense to prove just how clever they are.

Buckman was good at demonstrating just how foolish those guests were.

I think PBS and NPR are privately owned but dependent on donations, btw. I may be wrong.

RuralSandi said...

PBS - Public Broadcastin System would seem to be pubically owned to me. They raise funds like TVO does and probably get funded as well.

TVO is actually an educational station. Their programmes are used in schools, so I don't understand why the right wing object to educational programmes for kids.

knb said...

It's that irrational fear of the 'state'.

The Right is Where it's At said...

"Too bad you missed the show because Shaidle would have been appealing to you. She blames everything that is wrong in the world on 'liberal' thinking. It's a sick, sad place to be and has nothing to do with reality."

KNB I don't doubt what Shaidle has or not said.But that is exactly my point.I'll give you an example.I'M a baseball fan,used to be an expos fan before they moved.People here were so upset with the CBC,because they had stopped broadcasting expos games.They were saying our tax dollars were going to support the blue jays but nothing for the Montreal team.Now you hardly call that fair.I know I'M a little off topic,but it is the same principle with the TVO show.You have people who agree that she should be on that show and people who are against her to be on.Let me give you another example.Let's say TVO would give a weekly show to a hard core separatists spewing his/her nonsense why Quebec should go on it's own.Would anyone be o.k.that our tax dollars would go to support this person? Now I don't get TVO,because I don't want to. But I have access to it if I called my cable company.

My point KNB if she was on a private network it wouldn't have the same impact. Taxs dollars wouldn't be involved!


"I neither referred to nor thought of the US in any context when writing this post. That is your delusion."

If this is the case,than I truly apologize to you. I hope you could accept my apology! I'M old enough to admit my mistake "sorry!"

Most times when people say what you said they usually refer to the U.S. Once again sorry!

The Right is Where it's At said...

"TVO is actually an educational station. Their programmes are used in schools, so I don't understand why the right wing object to educational programmes for kids."

Sandi the private sector can do the same thing,maybe even a better job at it. This is why we have the CRTC. We have the movie networks,sports-networks etc..etc.

I'M not saying just sell them at any price. Put them on the market if some corporation wants to buy them,you then have the CRTC give them a license and they would tell them what kind of shows they could show. I have no problems for people to donate to these networks. The difference that it would not be forced on to you with your tax dollars.

Do you realize that we give about 1 billion dollars to the CBC a year. If the CBC were making money we wouldn't need to subsidize them hey? Just think of what we can do with that cash humm...

knb said...

The comparison isn't the same Right. Shaidle is a bigot, a racist, a disgusting person...period.

I have no problem with publicly funded shows having guests that are contrarian, or even looney for that matter, but we have laws in this country that deal with hate. She ignores them, though she restricts herself to her blog to do so most of the time.

TVO can have whomever they wish on their broadcast, but the argument was should tax dollars support giving this racist a platform.

Indeed if the station was privately held, the argument wouldn't have been about tax dollars, but the argument of giving her a voice may still have been there.

Seriously, to understand this debate you really must read her blog.

I'm not going to debate private/public ownership. We disagree. Your argument that suggests all that money could go to other things holds no water. I could argue that I shouldn't have to pay municipal taxes devoted to school systems...I have no children. I could also point out how much good we could do with the money we spend on the military.

You're obviously entitled to your opinion, but thankfully you're in the minority and that is not about to change any time soon.

The Right is Where it's At said...

"Seriously, to understand this debate you really must read her blog."

KNB like I said I don't deny what you say about her. I have no intention reading her blog. I don't care about it.

"You're obviously entitled to your opinion, but thankfully you're in the minority and that is not about to change any time soon."

We have in the past sold off entities much more profitable i.e. Petro Canada than the CBC has an example. I'M not so sure that if the government would call a referendum to sell the CBC has an example and explain to them how much we put in on a yearly basis that it wouldn't pass.

If you think that one of these years that the CBC and others won't one day be up for sell your just kidding yourself. Just remember Petro Canada.

Anonymous said...

Hmmm....wait long enough and Harper will sell ALL our assets and privatize and we'll have nothing

FredfromBC said...

knb said...

The comparison isn't the same Right. Shaidle is a bigot, a racist, a disgusting person...period.

-------------


Yeah...that comment about Chinese restaurants serving cat meat was way out of line.

Oh, wait...that was a Liberal. In fact it was one of Iggy's top aides, wasn't it? I'm sure you said the same things about him as well, didn't you? Of course you did...

knb said...

The last time I checked Fred, tax payers weren't paying for Kinsella's video blogs.

For what it's worth, I thought his comment was stupid. Apparently though, so did he. He apologized.

Shaidle, not so much. In fact, she prefers to push it further if pressed on an issue.

She's a bigot and a racist. While I am not a Kinsella fan, he is neither.