Rob Ford, mayor of Toronto UPDATES

BubberMiley · February 10, 2014

I assume by "heresay", you mean "Hearsay." That's a legal term that has nothing to do with journalism. It's also a legal term that has nothing to do with how you define it. But what Star story are you referring to that used anonymous sources?

In terms of the video, I can't believe someone is still harping on the possibility it could have been faked. There was no such possibility. If they had ignored it, you would still be part of Ford Nation, being all indignant at anyone who mentions his weight. You should be thanking them for showing you the light. :lol:

guyser · February 10, 2014

Rue, you're stepping in it big time.

Every

single

thing

the

Star

wrote

is

true.

Your defence is comical as is your abrupt turnaround regarding him.

bleeding heart · February 10, 2014

Let's not forget that the same people wanting to "give Rob ford the benefit of the doubt" (which I have no problem with, were it even faintly warranted), were the very first to NOT give the reporters the "benefit of the doubt."

In other words, all things being equal, let's assume that the politically-powerful millionaires are telling the truth; and let's simultaneously assume that those who report unfavourably or criticize them...are dishonest.

Such outright elitism always gets exposed like underwear at a frat party..

Black Dog · February 10, 2014

Rue is still mad at those unethical hacks Woodward and Bernstein for their reliance on anonymous sources.

Black Dog · February 10, 2014

1. Anonymous sources provided heresay evidence that was reported in the Toronto Star-that is a fact. That is heresay and its bs to run from an anonymous source that they heard from someone else that Ford was farting. That is called yellow journalism and that is what was run in Star stories and you bet I object to it.

Using anonymous sources is pretty widespread in investigative journalism. That's not yellow journalism, for that you should look to the Sun.

2. Running a story on a video you watched but did not verify as being authentic from someone charging you money for that video is bs journalism. Until that tape was first verified as having not been doctored it was not direct evidence. It was never direct evidence because

it was never tested. In fact it would have been inadmissible in a court of law precisely because it was not tested first, and therefore remained indirect and heresay.

...

If you can't understand why a paper should not run a story until it properly verifies it so be it. I am not so worried in this case with Ford. I am however if this kind of bs journalism is used to take down an innocent person.

This is total B.S. The standards for reporting are a lot less stringent than the standards for a court of law. There's no requirement to verify the authenticity of the video as long as that much is indicated.

WestCoastRunner · February 10, 2014

Well, here we go. Rob Ford in his latest venture, a youtube series discussing his drug abuse: http://www.vancouversun.com/health/Toronto+Mayor+Ford+comes+clean+about+drug+YouTube+video/9489956/story.html

PIK · February 10, 2014

That already happened in Ontario years ago. Many cities municipalities grew in size to take in more tax revenue from the outlying areas. Timmins, Sudbury, North Bay, Toronto, Ottawa, ect ect have done just that. And yet they still are struggling.

Take care of the corruption and there is no need for these actions.

And ottawa wished they never did.

PIK · February 10, 2014

Tag team of idiots. Now it's Doug's turn.

http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/#!/content/1.2525629/

He's not homophobic. He has friends that are gay," said Ford of his brother.The councillor said he himself would not attend the Pride Parade because he objects to the nudity of participants."Do I condone men running down the street buck naked? No I do not," said Ford. He repeated six times he does not want to see men "buck naked."

Gay parades are gross, if they want people to accepted them more ,have a proper parade instead of some sex show. And ford is right about the olympics is for athetes not sexual orientation. And what is going to happen in russia after everyone leaves with all the stories and insults about russia's gay hating? It is going to be open season on gays..

bleeding heart · February 10, 2014

So people shouldn't criticize homophobia...because the criticism will result in more homophobia?

WestCoastRunner · February 10, 2014

I have watched the Vancouver Pride Parade a few times with well over 600,000 spectators. I have noticed thousands of families with young children also viewing the parade. Yes, there is a lot of nudity from both the men and women participants. I'm not sure that I would have brought young children to watch the parade but that is a parent's choice. I don't think these parades are gross, nor are they sex shows but there certainly is a lot of nudity.

Black Dog · February 10, 2014

Gay parades are gross, if they want people to accepted them more ,have a proper parade instead of some sex show.

You obviously don't understand the purpose or history of Pride parades.

And ford is right about the olympics is for athetes not sexual orientation.

"The Olympics are for athletes not stuff about Jews" - some guy in 1936, probably.

And what is going to happen in russia after everyone leaves with all the stories and insults about russia's gay hating? It is going to be open season on gays..

It already is open season on gays in Russia. That's the point.

PIK · February 10, 2014

You obviously don't understand the purpose or history of Pride parades.

"The Olympics are for athletes not stuff about Jews" - some guy in 1936, probably.

It already is open season on gays in Russia. That's the point.

I guess I don't and do not want to anyways. I support wht they want, but I don't have to agree with it. And the point is it is going to be worse on jews now that the world is involved.

Black Dog · February 10, 2014

I guess I don't and do not want to anyways.

There you go. Wear your ignorance with pride!

I support wht they want, but I don't have to agree with it.

This also makes no sense. "I support equal rights, but don't agree with equal rights".

And the point is it is going to be worse on jews now that the world is involved.

This also makes no sense.

How is the world's attention and condemnation of Russia's treatment of gays going to make things worse?

WestCoastRunner · February 11, 2014

PIK, you have a very bizarre way of expressing yourself. I still don't understand what it is you are trying to explain. Is it Jews, or Gays, or what?? And what do you support and what do you not support?

jacee · February 11, 2014

Keeping in mind that this is the Rob Ford thread ...

Gay parades are gross, if they want people to accepted them more ,have a proper parade instead of some sex show. And ford is right about the olympics is for athetes not sexual orientation. And what is going to happen in russia after everyone leaves with all the stories and insults about russia's gay hating? It is going to be open season on gays..

Doug Ford repeated "buck naked" six times, suggesting to me an obsessive homophobia and it's couched in a racial slur.

("Buck" is a reference to the slave trade.)

He's an ignoramus.

jacee · February 11, 2014

1. Anonymous sources provided heresay evidence that was reported in the Toronto Star-that is a fact. That is heresay and its bs to run from an anonymous source that they heard from someone else that Ford was farting. That is called yellow journalism and that is what was run in Star stories and you bet I object to it.

You're wrong Rue. The reporters saw the video themselves. That's not hearsay. They didn't report the name of the person who had it, but he wasn't anonymous to them.

2. Running a story on a video you watched but did not verify as being authentic from someone charging you money for that video is bs journalism.

The Star didn't pay money to watch the video.

Until that tape was first verified as having not been doctored it was not direct evidence. It was never direct evidence because

it was never tested. In fact it would have been inadmissible in a court of law precisely because it was not tested first, and therefore remained indirect and heresay.

You are confusing legal evidence with journalism. Not the same.

If you can't understand why a paper should not run a story until it properly verifies it so be it.

They did verify that a video existed that showed Rob Ford smoking what appeared to be a crack pipe. That's not law, that's journalism.

Rue · February 11, 2014

Lol yah Blub I have seen the light. Let me be serious for a second. The fat stuff I was mocking from the get go. The people I mock for calling him fat I am only teasing are no better than me or anyone else. I was being sarcastic on the fat stuff because I have no problem saying he's an unkempt embarassement and that goes to a lot of why people do not like him-his being a fat slob and why beat around the bush on that.

Not for a second was I saying I was better than anyone calling him fat. I am saying They are just as bad as me only too politically appropriate to admit it.

The fat is besides the point.

I do have serious concerns about the state of journalism and what it reports and it did run a whole bunch of anonymous sources repeating second hand gossip which is to me bad journalism. The fact it was directed at Ford doesn't make it better is my point.

Sure in this case he has proven himself to be everything they said with his own admissions and behaviour but it does not dismiss yellow journalism.

In his case no one sees him as being hurt by it. He certainly wasn't. He's on his own self destruct button. But what if he had been innocent? What you think this is where journalism should be today?

Call me od fashioned and I am but I will give you a model journal I still read and that is the Christan Science Monitor and for God's sakes I am Jewish but I read it because it has a strong level of ethics when it reports and I appreciate that.

I used to think the Globe was above that kind of stuff and it was limited to the Star and Sun but even the Globe is a trash tabloid now.

Its a sign of the times. People want trash and negative gossip on people.

I can't be more honest with you. I sure as heck gave him benefit of the doubt and admit that yes until he admitted lying and breaking the law an bad mouthing the police chief and turning on anyone who challenged his behaviour accusing them all of being on a gravy train. Then I explained why I now believe he is owned no benefit of the doubt.

Did I give a hoot when he was insulting Colin Vaughan? Truthfully no.. I don't like the guy's sanctimonious pretentious I am smarter then anyone attitude and found it hilarious the rude fat boy was giving it to him. But enough is enough. Its a circus now.

Now I think we are past leftist perceived snit fits and right wing brutish rudeness cancelling each other's phoniness out. Now I think he's playing out a suicide in public slowly and now I am not cheering it on.

Do I think I was wrong defending him until his own evidence or sufficient first hand corroborated evidence existed, no. .

On the other hand yes I think whatever he gets now is deserved. Yes. I waited until I felt there was sufficient evidence before saying no more. Bottom line, my subjective opinions changed. Sure it did. I openly admit it. Can't be more blunt about that.

I will say it right here. I do not think morally I am better then Rob Ford.Maybe that is why I am angry with him. I think he is a disappointment.Yes maybe he reminds me of qualities I had or might have and do not like. Of course. To me he is a failure and that disappoints me. It reminds me of the mistakes I made in life and others have and its not those mistakes that are the thing I can't stand, its the continued denial and manipulation that eats at my craw. We all screw up. Then we become better people if we can learn from what went wrong. The message from Ford I see right now is he is a bully and abuser and he has zero remorse for that he has done to his wife, family, and his community.

Now you want to challenge what I said, fair game. Its a forum. I also can understand you would not agree with my take on journalism and yes I am using terms of evidence admissibility standards used in court because in my personal opinion they should be the same ones journalists used-thus the presumption of innocence.

Am I harsh on the media? Why yes. They are the last line. They are in a democracy the final line that protects us from corrupt politicians so I think its crucial they get it right and not engage in practices that could ruin their credibility and enable politicians to use their ambiguities or bad practices to wiggle out of bad behaviour.

Can't be any more blunt with you on this topic.

Edited February 11, 2014 by Rue

Black Dog · February 11, 2014

I do have serious concerns about the state of journalism and what it reports and it did run a whole bunch of anonymous sources repeating second hand gossip which is to me bad journalism. The fact it was directed at Ford doesn't make it better is my point.

Sure in this case he has proven himself to be everything they said with his own admissions and behaviour but it does not dismiss yellow journalism.

In his case no one sees him as being hurt by it. He certainly wasn't. He's on his own self destruct button. But what if he had been innocent? What you think this is where journalism should be today?

Why do you continue to ignore the reality, which is that anonymous sources are commonly used in investigative journalism. Indeed, I'd argue using anonymous sources is essential to investigative journalism.

Call me od fashioned and I am but I will give you a model journal I still read and that is the Christan Science Monitor and for God's sakes I am Jewish but I read it because it has a strong level of ethics when it reports and I appreciate that.

I used to think the Globe was above that kind of stuff and it was limited to the Star and Sun but even the Globe is a trash tabloid now.

Its a sign of the times. People want trash and negative gossip on people.

You don't think the mayor of Canada's largest city possibly having a substance abuse problem and associations with criminal elements is newsworthy?

Am I harsh on the media? Why yes. They are the last line. They are in a democracy the final line that protects us from corrupt politicians so I think its crucial they get it right and not engage in practices that could ruin their credibility and enable politicians to use their ambiguities or bad practices to wiggle out of bad behaviour.

If you think the media is so important as a check on corruption, why do you oppose practices that help them do that job?

Mighty AC · February 11, 2014

PIK, you have a very bizarre way of expressing yourself. I still don't understand what it is you are trying to explain. Is it Jews, or Gays, or what?? And what do you support and what do you not support?

Give him time to consult CPC talking points for an answer. PIK, You've managed to stray beyond the Harper Party comfort zone on this one (in public at least), though the Republicans would be happy to provide you with an opinion.

guyser · February 11, 2014

I do have serious concerns about the state of journalism and what it reports and it did run a whole bunch of anonymous sources repeating second hand gossip which is to me bad journalism. The fact it was directed at Ford doesn't make it better is my point.

Sure in this case he has proven himself to be everything they said with his own admissions and behaviour but it does not dismiss yellow journalism.

Yellow?

Here is what yellow journalism is.....assuredly not what you think it is of course...

1.scare headlines in huge print, often of minor news

2.lavish use of pictures, or imaginary drawings-

3.use of faked interviews, misleading headlines, pseudoscience, and a parade of false learning from so-called experts

4.emphasis on full-color Sunday supplements, usually with comic strips

5.dramatic sympathy with the "underdog" against the system.

So lets move on.

In his case no one sees him as being hurt by it. He certainly wasn't. He's on his own self destruct button. But what if he had been innocent? What you think this is where journalism should be today?

You really think the Star et al who saw the video, didnt for a second wonder if it was fake or doctored and didnt seek out pro's who could tell them it would be almost impossible to do so?

Call me od fashioned and I am but I will give you a model journal I still read and that is the Christan Science Monitor and for God's sakes I am Jewish but I read it because it has a strong level of ethics when it reports and I appreciate that.

I used to think the Globe was above that kind of stuff and it was limited to the Star and Sun but even the Globe is a trash tabloid now.

Sigh...now would that be the same Christian Science Monitor who gleefully reported all about Rob Ford pre Chief Blair conference confirming the video?

The same CSM who reported all about this going back to may of last year?

So now you best find a real paper who isnt into yellow journalism.....if there are any

GostHacked · February 11, 2014

1. Anonymous sources provided heresay evidence that was reported in the Toronto Star-that is a fact. That is heresay and its bs to run from an anonymous source that they heard from someone else that Ford was farting. That is called yellow journalism and that is what was run in Star stories and you bet I object to it.

I question any article that uses 'anon' sources or 'some government official'. Much of the MSM is yellow journalism. A good deal of that is heresay. Why are we not calling this kind of tactic out in other situations?

On Guard for Thee · February 12, 2014

Gay parades are gross, if they want people to accepted them more ,have a proper parade instead of some sex show. And ford is right about the olympics is for athetes not sexual orientation. And what is going to happen in russia after everyone leaves with all the stories and insults about russia's gay hating? It is going to be open season on gays..

You are quite correct in one regard, the olympics is about atheletes, some of whom are gay. Putin made the olympics about oppression with laws that would be illegal in most of the rest of the world. One other thing, I'd give it some serious thought before I started quoting Rob Ford these days.

BubberMiley · February 12, 2014

I question any article that uses 'anon' sources or 'some government official'. Much of the MSM is yellow journalism. A good deal of that is heresay.

Even Nixon conceded that Woodward and Bernstein's deep-throated friend was speaking the truth. Nobody thought that was heresy.

PIK · February 12, 2014

You are quite correct in one regard, the olympics is about atheletes, some of whom are gay. Putin made the olympics about oppression with laws that would be illegal in most of the rest of the world. One other thing, I'd give it some serious thought before I started quoting Rob Ford these days.

It is about athletes not gay athletes. And this one time ford is right. And all this gayness being pushed into thier faces is not going to be good for gays when everyone leaves.