Frogs v. Bears

Comedian Mitch Hedberg has a bit about the differences between frogs and bears. This has nothing to do with what is to come, but the title seemed appropriate for some reason.

Not long ago I was discussing the different spins or perspectives news agencies apply to their stories. I have begun to read the news on both CBC.ca and canada.com, the latter of which is a collection of the top stories from reporters and newspapers across the country, and have noticed some interesting variations.

Today Harper announced a $105-million-over-5-years aid package for African children. First I'll link you to the CBC's account the PM's trip to Tanzania here. This was, incidentally, on the same day that a report was released saying that child poverty rates in Canada have remained basically unchanged over two decades.

Okay, so this first article seems pretty benign, uninteresting really.

Now check the article from the Ottawa Citizen on canada.com here.

It's much more interesting, with critique related to the visit and a little bit of a mocking tone don't you think? "Stephen Harper made a high-profile aid announcement and paid a photogenic visit to schoolchildren", "a yard filled with hundreds of singing, flag waving children awaited, for a 20-minute photo-op" and leaves out any Harper quotes about the aid package (like CBC's "Canada has the lead role.") and treats the whole thing as secondary to his supporting of a large mining company who might be doing nasty things to it's employees.

In my opinion, the canada.com article is far better in that it is more skeptical - which is exactly the kind of attitude I want reporters to adopt when approaching political fanfare.

I also like this from the canada.com version; "Harper told a joint press conference...that he wasn't in the habit of telling visiting countries how to conduct their internal affairs." Which he likes to bust out whenever he tries to deflect the spotlight from his support of things that his constituents don't support. However we are all very aware that part of being the leader of a country, particularly one of the leading nations, means constantly telling countries, visiting or otherwise, how to conduct their internal affairs.

Harper does it all the time.

Did he not join the Commonwealth motion that put a time-out on Pakistan for General Pervez Musharraf's dirty deeds? "Representatives from nine Commonwealth countries, including Canada, voted unanimously to suspend Pakistan "from councils of the Commonwealth pending restoration of democracy and rule of law in the country," said Secretary-General Don McKinnon." Why yes he did.