Wednesday, July 8, 2015

This Franklin-search "scandal" looks like sour grapes and grandstanding

Several people have nudged me to comment on this latest Franklin-search “scandal.” Journalist Paul Watson resigning in a huff? Complaining that the Toronto Star has been suppressing a story of great public interest. I get the Star delivered to my doorstep every day, and I have to admit that the response of publisher John Cruickshank resonates with me: “Let me publicly deny this extremely odd idea. . . . Suppressing stories of public interest is something the Star has never done and will never do.”
You have to admit that Watson is positioning himself brilliantly. Champion of the little guy. Voice of the voiceless. But I’ve perused and parsed the long interview published in Canadaland and have to admit that I am still scratching my head. Apparently Jim Balsillie is quite upset. A Russian-flagged vessel was highlighted in the documentary when the CCGS Laurier led the search and carried the crew? A robotic sub was “presented as a key technical help” instead of “the Gannet and the Kinglet launched from the CCGS Laurier.”
Somebody is getting a medal when some other deserving soul is not? Wow, that’s the first time that has ever happened. Maybe I’m missing something, but I’m having trouble finding the great public interest in all this . . . much less evidence of witchhunt-worthy wrong-doing. Apparently, that’s what the Star editors told Paul Watson. And he didn’t want to hear it. What I see here is sour grapes and grand-standing . . . and maybe a touch of hubris.


Glenn M. Stein said...

Yes, you're probably right on the mark about hurt feelings. This so often happens when it comes to the awarding of medals and honors generally. For the last many years, the American military has tightened up its awarding of gallantry decorations, but that came only after shamefully doling out medals by the fistful for operations in the 1980s.

Poster One said...

I think you hit the nail on the head here, Ken.