Federal Employees monitoring internet forums

[DrGreenthumb]

If Parties want to monitor forums and add responses, which they all probably do, then fine - they pay for it. But when the government starts using my tax money for purposeful propaganda (you know, the truth as they want you to see it) then we should all object. Brainwashing should be on their own dime, not ours.

Trust Harper to come up with another self-aggrandizing stunt paid for by us.

It bothers me even more that they probably do not identify themselves as paid government post-correctors. They would rather have us believe they are just concerned citizens. Kind of Like Guergis' staffers writing glowing letters to the editor about her using their maiden names, and otherwise hiding their connection to her.

[Alta4ever]

It bothers me even more that they probably do not identify themselves as paid government post-correctors. They would rather have us believe they are just concerned citizens. Kind of Like Guergis' staffers writing glowing letters to the editor about her using their maiden names, and otherwise hiding their connection to her.

Then you must be really concerned about those holding NDP party memberships posting here without identifying who they are.

Why not go further why not have a disclaimer on the bottom of each poster of who they voted for in the last election, who they have donated money to in their life times as well as membership info.

Like I said before, it is a waste of our money (taxpayer).

If these government staffers and civil servants want to correct info, they can do it from home, on their own time, or send out media releases.

[DrGreenthumb]

Then you must be really concerned about those holding NDP party memberships posting here without identifying who they are.

Why not go further why not have a disclaimer on the bottom of each poster of who they voted for in the last election, who they have donated money to in their life times as well as membership info.

Like I said before, it is a waste of our money (taxpayer).

If these government staffers and civil servants want to correct info, they can do it from home, on their own time, or send out media releases.

I pretty much agree with you, but at the very least taxpayer funded government employees getting paid to post on forums like this should legally have to identify themselves as such. I don't need anyone to post what party they support, its pretty easy to tell by people's posts who they would support. Again I fully agree with you that this should not be paid for by us.

[Alta4ever]

I pretty much agree with you, but at the very least taxpayer funded government employees getting paid to post on forums like this should legally have to identify themselves as such. I don't need anyone to post what party they support, its pretty easy to tell by people's posts who they would support. Again I fully agree with you that this should not be paid for by us.

I'm glad we agree on this.

[August1991]

I pretty much agree with you, but at the very least taxpayer funded government employees getting paid to post on forums like this should legally have to identify themselves as such.

Dr Green, you miss the broader point. Why are you and I paying people (federal civil servants, earning six figures) to read Internet forums and post on them? Then again, why are we paying them at all if the Internet provides useful information?

----

BTW, you have to admire the "cover" of hiring an outside firm (presumably objective) to monitor (key word) the Internet and identify (another key bureaucratic word) occasions where public discourse is wrong. Civil servants can then intervene and correct the public record.

IOW, bureaucrats are not intervening directly. An outside, independent agency is finding incorrect references.

----

In fact, bureaucrats have been reading (and posting on) the Internet since its inception. Now, bureaucrats in DFAIT (Foreign Affairs) have devised a way to get paid to do it officially.

IOW if you think about this clearly, our six-figure bureaucrats in DFAIT are no better than Topaz or some blogger in Bangkok.

It's a Brave New World indeed.

Edited May 25, 2010 by August1991

[Shwa]

IOW, bureaucrats are not intervening directly. An outside, independent agency is finding incorrect references.

----

In fact, bureaucrats have been reading (and posting on) the Internet since its inception. Now, bureaucrats in DFAIT (Foreign Affairs) have devised a way to get paid to do it officially.

IOW if you think about this clearly, our six-figure bureaucrats in DFAIT are no better than Topaz or some blogger in Bangkok.

It's a Brave New World indeed.

Did you actually read the link in the OP or are you going on musing of your own worst-case scenario fantasy?

First off, where in the story does is say that the federal employee that responds on forums is a "six-figure" bureaucrat? Mostly likely it is a low level five-figure employee which is the typical staff type in most federal department's communications units. By and large, the federal executive class don't do front line services.

Secondly, a federal employee who spends their day in a subject area, has been trained in that subject, has access to practically all the data available on thet subject is going to have a wee bit more expertise that you, Topaz or "some blogger in Bangkok."

Finally, why do you think federal departments have communications units in the first place? The federal (and provincial) government has had access to popular media of all types throughout history including press releases, news magazine, TV and radio interviews, general correspondence. In fact, one of the main reasons that the news media is alive and well is directly due to federal department communications units who provide a heck of a lot of content to the news that people subscribe to.

So who do you want the world to hear what Canada is all about? Topaz and some blogger in Bangkok?

Gimme a break.

Edited May 25, 2010 by Shwa

[bjre]

Did you actually read the link in the OP or are you going on musing of your own worst-case scenario fantasy?

First off, where in the story does is say that the federal employee that responds on forums is a "six-figure" bureaucrat? Mostly likely it is a low level five-figure employee which is the typical staff type in most federal department's communications units. By and large, the federal executive class don't do front line services.

Secondly, a federal employee who spends their day in a subject area, has been trained in that subject, has access to practically all the data available on thet subject is going to have a wee bit more expertise that you, Topaz or "some blogger in Bangkok."

Finally, why do you think federal departments have communications units in the first place? The federal (and provincial) government has had access to popular media of all types throughout history including press releases, news magazine, TV and radio interviews, general correspondence. In fact, one of the main reasons that the news media is alive and well is directly due to federal department communications units who provide a heck of a lot of content to the news that people subscribe to.

So who do you want the world to hear what Canada is all about? Topaz and some blogger in Bangkok?

Gimme a break.

Experts with plenty of access to all information are valuable. In case they are controlled by lobbyists, and do what they can to ignore all facts of some issues and emphasis on some other unconfirmed to mislead public opinion for the interests of some particular groups as some traditional media always do are nothing good the most people here.

Edited May 25, 2010 by bjre

[Shwa]

Experts with plenty of access to all information are valuable. In case they are controlled by lobbyists, and do what they can to ignore all facts of some issues and emphasis on some other unconfirmed to mislead public opinion for the interests of some particular groups as some traditional media always do are nothing good the most people here.

What??!!?

[williat]

Did you actually read the link in the OP or are you going on musing of your own worst-case scenario fantasy?

First off, where in the story does is say that the federal employee that responds on forums is a "six-figure" bureaucrat? Mostly likely it is a low level five-figure employee which is the typical staff type in most federal department's communications units. By and large, the federal executive class don't do front line services.

Thank you for finally pointing this out. Do I agree with spending $75,000 of tax payers funds to "monitor" forums, obviously not. The fact that it somehow went from $75,0000 to bureaucrats making six-figure salaries sort of shows a hole in the argument. Screw em', they want to read what people are saying thats fine. Are any of us really going to pay attention when a "correction" is made, most likely not.

Waste of time and money is all it is, some people are going to hate the government regardless, get over it and move on.

[bjre]

What??!!?

Give you an example:

Can the Health minister access plenty information? Is his/her information good to public? Or just good for the medical systems only and simply take more money from public?

Health minister tells doctors H1N1 challenge looms

http://www.vancouversun.com/health/Health+minister+tells+doctors+H1N1+challenge+looms/1901952/story.html

(instead of doctors tell the minister)

By Janet French, Saskatoon StarPhoenix August 17, 2009

SASKATOON — The expected surge in H1N1 cases this fall could challenge Canada's medical community like nothing before, federal Health Minister Leona Aglukkaq told Canadian doctors Monday as she issued a rallying cry to physicians.

Aglukkaq told physicians gathered for the Canadian Medical Association's annual meeting in Saskatoon they got into the medical field for the "immeasurable satisfaction of saving lives and helping change lives for the better."

Given the current challenges posed by the H1N1 outbreak and a shortage of medical isotopes, Aglukkaq said: "The time to realize this ambition is now."

"What may come this fall is something that could test all of us, possibly to a limit we've never experienced," she said of the potentially difficult flu season ahead.

"Whatever may come, I stress that we'll best meet the challenges and serve Canadians by co-operating."

That co-operation includes politicians, aboriginal leaders and medical professionals, she said.

"Every Canadian is counting on our successful collaboration," Aglukkaq told the 142nd annual gathering of doctors.

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/health/Health+minister+tells+doctors+H1N1+challenge+looms/1901952/story.html#ixzz0owgHtNlA

H1N1 Scandal provided by the government

http://hubpages.com/hub/H1N1-Scandal-provided-by-the-government

By irish_hazard

H1N1 Scandal provided by the government

H1N1,what is it?Is it man made or is it natural?Was is a man made flu virus put out by a company funded by government money?If they say it comes from pigs more or less why are more humans catching from other humans then animals and why isn't effecting animals as much as humans?

Reports are circulating on the internet that a company had man made the H1N1 virus back in 2005-2006.They did it by breaking down the DNA structure of several different flues and creating the current H1N1 virus.Think about it,the swine flu had been around for years and was never so contagous and it never had the bird flu mixed with it back then.

The H1N1 vaccine was approved by a board of directors after just 3 days of testing.Now what made it on the news for only one day is that during that testing anyone who developed a fever of one hundred degrees or higher during that time was ejected from the testing.Now aren't those the type of people who should have stayed in the study to see what the end result was instead of ejecting them so that the public would have a better understanding of what will be going into their bodies.Instead they ejected them from the study so they could pass through the vaccine quicker.

Edited May 25, 2010 by bjre

[Michael Hardner]

Your idea is laudable but laughably naive. You are dealing with people who have finagled a way to an Iron Rice Bowl, deposited bi-monthly into their bank account, and now depend on it for their family's livelihood. They are brazen to the point where they can read the Internet and justify this as "a job".

I'm not sure what that has to do with my suggestion. Certainly line workers aren't expected to take up my suggestion themselves.

If you think that your list above will reign these people in, you are sorely mistaken.

They get their marching orders from above. If people paid attention to the big things, then the small things would take care of themselves.

Company executives don't tend to spending time following their company's delivery vans around to see if they're on time.

[Shwa]

Give you an example:

Can the Health minister access plenty information? Is his/her information good to public? Or just good for the medical systems only and simply take more money from public?

Health minister tells doctors H1N1 challenge looms

http://www.vancouversun.com/health/Health+minister+tells+doctors+H1N1+challenge+looms/1901952/story.html

(instead of doctors tell the minister)

By Janet French, Saskatoon StarPhoenix August 17, 2009

H1N1 Scandal provided by the government

http://hubpages.com/hub/H1N1-Scandal-provided-by-the-government

No one said that all the information they put out will be agreeable and no one said that all the information they put out will be infallible.

If you want an answer to the whole H1N1 thing, then you may want to consider that the federal government also uses the concept of contigencies. If you want to spin that into conspiracy, you are free to do so. But don't be surprised to have some federal bureacrat log on and correct you.

[Michael Hardner]

If Parties want to monitor forums and add responses, which they all probably do, then fine - they pay for it. But when the government starts using my tax money for purposeful propaganda (you know, the truth as they want you to see it) then we should all object. Brainwashing should be on their own dime, not ours.

Trust Harper to come up with another self-aggrandizing stunt paid for by us.

To take another tack on this - I'm not sure how different all of that is from taking out millions of dollars of TV ads to propagandize some political cause, really. But, it does seem like a piddly waste of resources - I'll give you that.

[Shwa]

To take another tack on this - I'm not sure how different all of that is from taking out millions of dollars of TV ads to propagandize some political cause, really. But, it does seem like a piddly waste of resources - I'll give you that.

But not much more than clipping news paper stories for the daily executive briefing. Even IF there is no response, internet communications and social media is a very good source of information for government departments.

And trust me, the newspaper clipper does not make six figures.

[GostHacked]

Did you actually read the link in the OP or are you going on musing of your own worst-case scenario fantasy?

First off, where in the story does is say that the federal employee that responds on forums is a "six-figure" bureaucrat? Mostly likely it is a low level five-figure employee which is the typical staff type in most federal department's communications units. By and large, the federal executive class don't do front line services.

It does not really matter how much they are getting paid, they are simply getting paid to spread the governments angle on anything. Propaganda or Public Relations, don't matter what you call it, it is still deceit. Deceit because we have no clue if they are a government paid propagandist or not. Some on here could be that, but how do we really know? And what do we do with that person once he/she is outed as a government propagandist?

My tax dollars are going towards what you can call psy-ops. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_Operations_(United_States)

Psychological operations are planned operations to convey selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of foreign governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.[1]

We now see it turned in on the country's own citizens instead of trying to influence foreign entities.

Secondly, a federal employee who spends their day in a subject area, has been trained in that subject, has access to practically all the data available on thet subject is going to have a wee bit more expertise that you, Topaz or "some blogger in Bangkok."

Absolutely false. The person would get paid to distribute what the government wants people to hear. they would not have access to all the information, only enough to combat opposing views on forums just like this. And then it's just enough to keep the 'poster' in check. Would not want one of the government paid shills to go rogue with all that important information. Even if that person does, a huge effort will be put in place to discredit that 'poster'.

Finally, why do you think federal departments have communications units in the first place? The federal (and provincial) government has had access to popular media of all types throughout history including press releases, news magazine, TV and radio interviews, general correspondence. In fact, one of the main reasons that the news media is alive and well is directly due to federal department communications units who provide a heck of a lot of content to the news that people subscribe to.

Before it was the media asking the questions. Now it is government telling the media what questions can be asked, and that does not even guarantee the questions will be answered at all. The internet is making it easy for the government to influence us on a grand scale everywhere. And now they can bypass the media all together and spread the message they want you to hear. It's not objective in any way. And with that, questions can't even be answered let alone asked.

So who do you want the world to hear what Canada is all about? Topaz and some blogger in Bangkok?

I'd rather hear it from citizens before I listen to the government.

[Shwa]

It does not really matter how much they are getting paid, they are simply getting paid to spread the governments angle on anything. Propaganda or Public Relations, don't matter what you call it, it is still deceit. Deceit because we have no clue if they are a government paid propagandist or not. Some on here could be that, but how do we really know? And what do we do with that person once he/she is outed as a government propagandist?

The government has been spreading their angle on everything through private firms since 1867 and before. Seriously Ghosthacked, come on now.

My tax dollars are going towards what you can call psy-ops. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_Operations_(United_States)

From baby seals to psy-ops. You watch Fringe don't you?

We now see it turned in on the country's own citizens instead of trying to influence foreign entities.

143 years of Canadian history and you are only discovering this now??

Absolutely false. The person would get paid to distribute what the government wants people to hear. they would not have access to all the information, only enough to combat opposing views on forums just like this. And then it's just enough to keep the 'poster' in check. Would not want one of the government paid shills to go rogue with all that important information. Even if that person does, a huge effort will be put in place to discredit that 'poster'.

Perhaps they are the poster that asks others to cite their sources and when they can't they produce alternative sources showing the 'other' to be off the mark. Is that so bad?

Before it was the media asking the questions. Now it is government telling the media what questions can be asked, and that does not even guarantee the questions will be answered at all. The internet is making it easy for the government to influence us on a grand scale everywhere. And now they can bypass the media all together and spread the message they want you to hear. It's not objective in any way. And with that, questions can't even be answered let alone asked.

TV is still the best way to influence people and the government has been doing just fine since the 50's. They even have their own TV & raio network and influence us about things like the the nutritional pyramid, the health of an average 60 year old Swede and baby seals.

I'd rather hear it from citizens before I listen to the government.

Then stay away from Stats Can!

[DrGreenthumb]

The government has been spreading their angle on everything through private firms since 1867 and before. Seriously Ghosthacked, come on now.

From baby seals to psy-ops. You watch Fringe don't you?

143 years of Canadian history and you are only discovering this now??

Perhaps they are the poster that asks others to cite their sources and when they can't they produce alternative sources showing the 'other' to be off the mark. Is that so bad?

TV is still the best way to influence people and the government has been doing just fine since the 50's. They even have their own TV & raio network and influence us about things like the the nutritional pyramid, the health of an average 60 year old Swede and baby seals.

Then stay away from Stats Can!

Seems you are the only one defending this practice, so how much are they paying you?

[Topaz]

Did you actually read the link in the OP or are you going on musing of your own worst-case scenario fantasy?

First off, where in the story does is say that the federal employee that responds on forums is a "six-figure" bureaucrat? Mostly likely it is a low level five-figure employee which is the typical staff type in most federal department's communications units. By and large, the federal executive class don't do front line services.

Secondly, a federal employee who spends their day in a subject area, has been trained in that subject, has access to practically all the data available on thet subject is going to have a wee bit more expertise that you, Topaz or "some blogger in Bangkok."

Finally, why do you think federal departments have communications units in the first place? The federal (and provincial) government has had access to popular media of all types throughout history including press releases, news magazine, TV and radio interviews, general correspondence. In fact, one of the main reasons that the news media is alive and well is directly due to federal department communications units who provide a heck of a lot of content to the news that people subscribe to.

So who do you want the world to hear what Canada is all about? Topaz and some blogger in Bangkok?

Gimme a break.

[/quote

Give YOU a break? Why doesn't the Tories give Canadians a BREAK and quit spending our tax dollars on things that, if really mattered they find a better way and cheaper way of correcting statements on THEIR website and not hire and spend 75,000 too, Oh yeah, this must be

under the stimlus package creating jobs?

[Shwa]

Give YOU a break? Why doesn't the Tories give Canadians a BREAK and quit spending our tax dollars on things that, if really mattered they find a better way and cheaper way of correcting statements on THEIR website and not hire and spend 75,000 too, Oh yeah, this must be under the stimlus package creating jobs?

It's a small - very small - government contract. If you want to really blow a vein or valve, check out Contracts Canada. Wait, don't do that because they are spending all those tax dollars telling you how they spend your tax dollars. There has to be redundancy in there somewhere.

Edited May 25, 2010 by Shwa

[GostHacked]

The government has been spreading their angle on everything through private firms since 1867 and before. Seriously Ghosthacked, come on now.

I do understand and realize it has been happening for a long time. It still does not make it right. The government should not be telling us what to think, we should be telling them what we think and they should act upon it.

From baby seals to psy-ops. You watch Fringe don't you?

Yes, I very much like Fringe. What has that got to do with the topic at hand? Does what I watch tell you something about how I think? You want to know what I think? Just ask!!

143 years of Canadian history and you are only discovering this now?? Perhaps they are the poster that asks others to cite their sources and when they can't they produce alternative sources showing the 'other' to be off the mark. Is that so bad?

No, I've suspected/known it for a long time, but this is new in how they are infiltrating online forums and disseminating the governments view on the Canadian tax payers dollar. The government is using your money to tell you how and what to think. I personally have a huge f*cking problem with that. Remember the government should work for us, not the other way around.

TV is still the best way to influence people and the government has been doing just fine since the 50's. They even have their own TV & raio network and influence us about things like the the nutritional pyramid, the health of an average 60 year old Swede and baby seals.

No the best way to fool the public is to make you think they are part of it. And if you agree with their view, then their job is justified and you will continue to get only one angle of the view. Prepare for more government propaganda. You are just making it easier for them to lie to you. You can hold a government official accountable for their words and actions and take them out of office for their views and actions, you will have a very difficult time holding a forum poster accountable for what is said when you are not even sure they are part of the public or part of the problem.

Then stay away from Stats Can!

Stats Can is essentially irrelevant to this post.

Edited May 25, 2010 by GostHacked

[Shwa]

I do understand and realize it has been happening for a long time. It still does not make it right. The government should not be telling us what to think, we should be telling them what we think and they should act upon it.

So we have gone from correcting misinformation about certain subject areas to governmental psi-ops thought police? Is that what you got out of the article?

Yes, I very much like Fringe. What has that got to do with the topic at hand? Does what I watch tell you something about how I think? You want to know what I think? Just ask!!

Because going from baby seals to psi-ops is Fringe material. Alterverse. Walternate even.

No, I've suspected/known it for a long time, but this is new in how they are infiltrating online forums and disseminating the governments view on the Canadian tax payers dollar. The government is using your money to tell you how and what to think. I personally have a huge f*cking problem with that. Remember the government should work for us, not the other way around.

Really? Then putting the ingredients on food labels is bad then eh? Because when you read the labels, their words are going into your brain and you will think about them. You might even make decisions about those thoughts. I won't even discuss reading Hansard with you...

No the best way to fool the public is to make you think they are part of it. And if you agree with their view, then their job is justified and you will continue to get only one angle of the view. Prepare for more government propaganda. You are just making it easier for them to lie to you. You can hold a government official accountable for their words and actions and take them out of office for their views and actions, you will have a very difficult time holding a forum poster accountable for what is said when you are not even sure they are part of the public or part of the problem.

That is, of course, if you can't think for yourself and make rational decisions. I stopped smoking pot because it made me paranoid. But just because you are no longer paranoid doesn't mean the government isn't out to get you. I wanted to join paranoid's anonymous, but they would never tell me where the meetings were.

Stats Can is essentially irrelevant to this post.

Of course not. Unless you use the statistics. And reports. And studies. And other compilations of data that go into making decisions. If you want to question their findings, please feel free to do so.

Edited May 25, 2010 by Shwa

[GostHacked]

So we have gone from correcting misinformation about certain subject areas to governmental psi-ops thought police? Is that what you got out of the article?

It is not really about correcting information. It is about giving you the governments view without any fear of accountability.

Because going from baby seals to psi-ops is Fringe material. Alterverse. Walternate even.

Do you want to know what other TV shows I watch so you can make more idiotic conjectures about it?

Really? Then putting the ingredients on food labels is bad then eh?

Are you trying to give me an opinion or are you asking for my opinion?

Because when you read the labels, their words are going into your brain and you will think about them. You might even make decisions about those thoughts. I won't even discuss reading Hansard with you...

Hansard, I had to look that up. First time I heard of it. So yeah don't bother.

Labels are on the packages so I can make a better decision about what I eat. Explain to me how that is a bad thing. This is different from giving an opinion about something.

That is, of course, if you can't think for yourself and make rational decisions. I stopped smoking pot because it made me paranoid. But just because you are no longer paranoid doesn't mean the government isn't out to get you. I wanted to join paranoid's anonymous, but they would never tell me where the meetings were.

/facepalm

Of course not. Unless you use the statistics. And reports. And studies. And other compilations of data that go into making decisions. If you want to question their findings, please feel free to do so.

The census is designed and supposed to work for us. This is the government coming to the Canadian people and asking us about us and not telling us about us and how we should think. Again the Census for your argument is not going to help you much.

Edited May 25, 2010 by GostHacked

[Shwa]

It is not really about correcting information. It is about giving you the governments view without any fear of accountability.

Are you kidding me? How did you arrive at no accountability from the article that was posted? Truly, are you going on what the article was about or are you extrapolating your fears into a Fringe like psi-cops fantasy scenario?

Do you want to know what other TV shows I watch so you can make more idiotic conjectures about it?

No, I can pretty well guess at this point and be fairly accurate.

Are you trying to give me an opinion or are you asking for my opinion?

Hansard, I had to look that up. First time I heard of it. So yeah don't bother.

Labels are on the packages so I can make a better decision about what I eat. Explain to me how that is a bad thing. This is different from giving an opinion about something.

No. What I would like you to do is do some research into why we have detailed ingredients on food labels, why cigarette packaging is different from 25 years ago, why cereal boxes come in both official languages. Three prime examples should be enough.

The census is designed and supposed to work for us. This is the government coming to the Canadian people and asking us about us and not telling us about us and how we should think. Again the Census for your argument is not going to help you much.

So you don't think the government makes decisions for the Canadian people - some without any consultation no less - based upon the "facts" contained in Census data?

The seal hunt pilot project was set up in part "to establish foundations and recommendations for future programs and campaigns to use social media as another way to listen to, inform and engage with Canadians," MacAndrew added.

Substitute "social media" with cuniform clay tablets, papyrus, books, pamphlets, newspapers, radio, television, websites... and you'll get the idea.

[GostHacked]

Are you kidding me? How did you arrive at no accountability from the article that was posted?

Because the person is paid and trained to give you 'accurate' information aka what the government deems as accurate. In many cases what they say is accurate turns out to be partially or wholly false. It does happen. Not even the government has all the facts.

Truly, are you going on what the article was about or are you extrapolating your fears into a Fringe like psi-cops fantasy scenario?

Are you denying that governments do not engage in psy-ops against foreign and domestic entities? If not, why not?

No, I can pretty well guess at this point and be fairly accurate.

Sure go ahead and guess. This should be entertaining at the least.

No. What I would like you to do is do some research into why we have detailed ingredients on food labels, why cigarette packaging is different from 25 years ago, why cereal boxes come in both official languages. Three prime examples should be enough.

I am not arguing against food labels to tell us what is in them. Why are you trying to make a case of this when there is none to be had? I support food labels. And because of the food labels, there are a lot of products I avoid.

So you don't think the government makes decisions for the Canadian people - some without any consultation no less - based upon the "facts" contained in Census data?

The census can help us as Canadians because we are giving the information to the government which helps them make proper and better decisions for it. We help the government help us. Having a government paid shill on the forum 'correcting facts' to me is quite different.

In the article about the seal hunt, it is really just trying to stifle opposing views. My personal opinion is if the seal hunt is engaged purely for the baby seal's fur, then yes I have a problem with it and then it should be banned.

Substitute "social media" with cuniform clay tablets, papyrus, books, pamphlets, newspapers, radio, television, websites... and you'll get the idea.

Correct, this is just another layer that the government now wants to influence. I am just surprised that people are finding out about it now. It's been happening for years.

[Argus]

The question really is: how do you know who is a party operative?

I always suspected jodobbin was, simply because he was so bloodless about things, and his every post seemed to follow party talking points almost word for word. I have not suspected anyone else here of being a party worker, much less a government staffer. I think people are reading too much into this. It's a tiny contract, and at best they're simply operating like the on-line version of newspaper clippers. The amount of this contract wouldn't pay more than one or two people.