Posts
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.
2 comments:
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.
I think you hit the nail on the head here, Ken.
Post a Comment