Tories Spend 5x more on ads than on H1N1

[Bryan]

I saw for myself from one day to the next. There were 40 pictures there. Now there are handful. Where did they go?

CP showed the web capture of the page and the PMO suddenly clammed up. Even Gerry Nicholls today on talk radio said he saw it for himself. Is he lying?

CP is lying, Nicholls is probably just misinformed. The content changes all the time, content on the front page cycles back to one of the thousands of pages on the site. What might have been front page one day may well be on another section now, but nothing is missing. It especially changes based on what's been announced. If the PM made some speeches that week, he'll be all over the front page. If other MPs made speeches/announcements, they'll be featured.

[jdobbin]

CP is lying, Nicholls is probably just misinformed. The content changes all the time, content on the front page cycles back to one of the thousands of pages on the site. What might have been front page one day may well be on another section now, but nothing is missing. It especially changes based on what's been announced. If the PM made some speeches that week, he'll be all over the front page. If other MPs made speeches/announcements, they'll be featured.

Oh brother. I can't find the pictures for love or money now. All I do know is the site was filled to the rafters with Harper pictures and Nicholls himself said he looked at the website in interviews today and said he half expected to see a Tory logo on it. Think he has a National Post story today about it as well since they referenced it in the radio interview.

Accusing CP of lying is a pretty bold statement.

[Bryan]

Accusing CP of lying is a pretty bold statement.

They're either lying or incompetent, take your pick.

[Smallc]

Or, alternatively, you could be wrong.

[Bryan]

Or, alternatively, you could be wrong.

Possible.

[Smallc]

I have trouble believing the CP is lying, that's all. There are still Harper pictures there, no doubt, but something is obviously different enough for them to mention it.

[noahbody]

From OP:

Meanwhile, with public health officials fretting over an onrushing fall flu season, the spread of the H1N1 virus and widespread public apathy about the need for vaccination, no television ads are in the works to combat swine flu.

Ironically, the bolded words have now been edited out from the link. They do, however, clarify what this story is about. Here's what I think likely happened:

Bruce Cheadle gets a good (in his mind) idea for a story. In it, he plans to hammer the government for what he feels are partisan ads. The knife he plans on using is "no television ads are in the works to combat swine flu." This isn't something he's not certain of, so he places a call. He doesn't hear back, and he has to get a story done, so he just goes with it.

Government officials didn't respond to a specific query from The Canadian Press last week on whether television ads were in the works to combat swine flu.

But a government spokesman said Sunday evening that television ads are to be launched Monday across the country to raise public awareness about H1N1.

The official said the government has planned for some time to launch the ad campaign.

The Public Health Agency of Canada says it has a total marketing budget of $6.5 million to inform Canadians about the H1N1 virus and how to avoid infection.

On Sunday evening, he gets a call that debunks his story. At that time it's too late to come up with another story so he tries to make it work by comparing and criticizing the amount spent on both campaigns. I guess if he had longer that Sunday evening he could have noted the staggering amount of free publicity H1N1 has been given or written a story on how Bob Rae might be responsible for the apathy due to Rae's comments on kissing babies. But he didn't have the time, so he had to run the joke of a story. He just forgot to edit out the bold words before he sent if off.

[noahbody]

TORONTO — The Conservative government is showing "contempt" for Canadians by spending far more to promote its own economic action plan than on its plans to fight the H1N1 flu, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff said Monday.

So a media buy should be determined by how much is being spent on something non-related? Is that how any budget should be judged?

"At a time when we're worried about H1N1, Canadian taxpayers' money should be spent on public health information, not paid advertising for the Conservative party," Ignatieff said following a speech to the Toronto Board of Trade.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianp...2AW0kF0Qx8tc7KA

Maybe this should be in the Ignatieff is a flake thread. Isn't this the guy who wants to spend $300 million of taxpayers' money for an election that would increase exposure to H1N1?

[DrGreenthumb]

So a media buy should be determined by how much is being spent on something non-related? Is that how any budget should be judged?

http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianp...2AW0kF0Qx8tc7KA

Maybe this should be in the Ignatieff is a flake thread. Isn't this the guy who wants to spend $300 million of taxpayers' money for an election that would increase exposure to H1N1?

Yes he is the guy that knows we need an election to remove the corrupt Conservatives. He wants to have an election to remove the guy that broke his own fixed date election law to try get a majority 11 months ago. There is far more reason to have an election now, and none of them partisan, than there was when Harper called it himself because he thought it would be to his advantage. Parliament was dysfunctional??my ass! The liberals supported Harper on every major vote and Harper pulled the plug on his own government anyways so that he could try and get a majority and push through all the nasty conservative plans he has had to keep hidden during the minority.

[Murray B.]

The website doesn't pass the sniff test from the Taxpayer's Federation.

What does this federation say about the millions of taxpayers’ dollars that have been used to perpetuate the myth about the Avro Arrow. You know the one about how the evil Americans and their lackeys, Diefenbaker and his demonic Conservatives, all conspired to murder our beautiful ‘unicorn’. The CBC’s crock-u-drama alone must have cost millions. Even the taxpayer funded official Canadian Air Force site promotes the myth.

Take a look at some things posted on the official Canadian Air Force website.

“The Arrow program was unique in that the prototype was built using the same tools and rigs that were to be used on production Aircraft...”

- This is known as the Cook-Craigie Plan and it is a method developed by two USAF officers. It was used on the Convair F-102 before the Arrow so the method cannot be “unique” to Avro Canada.

“During the test flights, the Arrow had flown at mach 1.96 and up to 50,000 feet, results that are still impressive by today's standard of fighter Aircraft design.”

- Many aircraft at the time were this fast and at least the Lockheed Starfighter and English Electric Lightning had both exceeded mach 2 by the time of the Arrow tests. This statement may be true but it is also misleading because it does not give proper context.

“The Arrow was a very clean design and many of its features were copied on other North American-made fighters, including today's F-22 Raptor. “

- The F-22 has many features in common with many aircraft of the late fifties and none of them, including the Arrow, compare favourably with the F-22. Even the F-4 Phantom II, which had the best performance of that generation, cannot compete with an F-22 or even with the F-15 Eagle of earlier days. The Air Force has made another misleading statement that is out of context.

The Arrow that actually existed had performance “comparable” to aircraft that were half its price or less. The ‘unicorn’ myth was created as part of a conspiracy between U.S. liberals and the Canadian opposition parties to destroy the Conservative government.

Fifty years of these politically motivated and often taxpayer-funded lies is enough.

[nicky10013]

So a media buy should be determined by how much is being spent on something non-related? Is that how any budget should be judged?

http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianp...2AW0kF0Qx8tc7KA

Maybe this should be in the Ignatieff is a flake thread. Isn't this the guy who wants to spend $300 million of taxpayers' money for an election that would increase exposure to H1N1?

Your post is just as flakey. You obviously deliberately left out the fact that Ignatieff called for a board of non-partisan folks to screen whether or not ALL government ads contain partisan messages or not.

Sounds good to me. Sounds like Ignatieff is trying to make government more accountable. Harper had his accountability act. Too bad it was too useless even to be used for toilette paper.

Link from the Globe and Mail.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politi...article1301552/

[Murray B.]

How many millions of our tax dollars have been spent promoting lies about the Avro Arrow aircraft?

It was an average performer that cost five times as much as competing aircraft. Bona fide historians like Morton and Bliss have said so and the records are clear enough on the matter.

See international.gc.ca site

The cost of the Arrow is given as nearly $10 million each:

The R.C.A.F. now had nine all-weather squadrons and the present programme called for their re-equipment with the CF-105, requiring a production order of 169 in number. These, together with aircraft recovered from the development and pre-production order for 37, would provide sufficient aircraft for nine squadrons. The total cost would be $2 billion spread from 1959-60 to 1963-64.

[Note that the Voodoos that were purchased instead cost about $2 million each.]

The recommendation to cancel came from the military:

Finally, the cost of the CF-105 programme as a whole was now of such a magnitude that the Chiefs of Staff felt that, to meet the modest requirement of manned aircraft presently considered advisable, it would be more economical to procure a fully developed interceptor of comparable performance in the U.S.

The Chiefs of staff advised the government that the Arrow's performance was "comparable" to U.S. interceptors. They do not mention anything about the Arrow flying faster, or higher, or further, than anything else.

Despite the facts Canadian governments at all levels and all parties have used our tax dollars to spread lies about how great the aircraft was.

How much of our money has been wasted on this over the last fifty years?

Edited October 20, 2009 by Murray B.

[Shady]

Tories Spend 5x more on ads than on H1N1

What a sleezy title for a thread. When I first read it, I thought that the federal government was spending more money on recession ads than on actual H1N1 prevention. Instead, I read that it's H1N1 advertising, not H1N1 itself.

What do you want commercials to say? Wash your hands? How much does the government ever spend on flu ads? And the regular flu actually kills many more people per year than this one.

Pathetic.

[wyly]

What a sleezy title for a thread. When I first read it, I thought that the federal government was spending more money on recession ads than on actual H1N1 prevention. Instead, I read that it's H1N1 advertising, not H1N1 itself.

What do you want commercials to say? Wash your hands? How much does the government ever spend on flu ads? And the regular flu actually kills many more people per year than this one.

Pathetic.

and how would you know that since it's the first year we've had h1n1?...the USA's CDC reports H1N1 has a higher death toll than the seasonal flu, 1 in 28 pregnant women who get h1n1 will die...so at very least combined with the normal seasonal flu deaths H1N1 will double the amount of deaths we see every year...

[Shady]

and how would you know that since it's the first year we've had h1n1?

Not true.

Since Jan 1, 2009, 80 Canadians have died of H1N1. However, 2000+ Canadians die every year from the regular flu. You do the math.

[wyly]

Not true.

Since Jan 1, 2009, 80 Canadians have died of H1N1. However, 2000+ Canadians die every year from the regular flu. You do the math.

the first cases in Canada didn't appear until April 26th '09 the spread of the illness has only just begun, flu season begins late fall, it's just warming up...if you doubt the stats take it up with the American CDC they'll be delighted to know that they're wrong because you know better..

Edited October 20, 2009 by wyly

[bush_cheney2004]

...if you doubt the stats take it up with the American CDC they'll be delighted to know that they're wrong because you know better..

The "American CDC" doesn't apply in Canada.