 |
 |
words
latest musings
top ten
nasty past
contact sfh
facebook |
 In the aftermath of September 11, there has been a torrent - a veritable avalanche - of reporting about all manner of subjects. From airport security, to bio-terrorism, to the deployment of troops overseas, to the battle with an unseen and uncertain adversary. Citizens have been bombarded by an astonishing number of words and images, and are still - long after the event - attempting to sort out what they think and feel. Amongst all of the honourable journalism, there have been disappointments, too. And chief among these has been the way, post-September 11, in which ostensibly respectable media organizations and commentators have treated the notion of race. As someone who has paid attention to race, and racism, for 15 years, you will forgive me now for making an observation or two. At times like these, it is incumbent upon everyone - not just politicians - to exercise greater caution, and to probe deeper. Police agencies have noted that expressions of intolerance and hatred are higher than they have been in many, many years. So it is vital that our media recall that words and images have power - that words have to move people to do good things, or to do bad things, as well. Most Canadians, I suspect, would agree that now is not the time to be whitewashing the words and deeds of white supremacists and Holocaust deniers, inadvertently or not. But that is what reporters and commentators at Canadian Press, the Sun Media chain, and elsewhere have done in recent days. And they should be ashamed of themselves. A few days ago, the Canadian Press produced a story describing the reaction of one organization, called the Canadian Association for Free Expression, to the government’s anti-terror bill, and (long overdue) provisions therein to combat expressions of hate on the Internet. It quotes, approvingly, the words of the group’s leader, Paul Fromm. In the story, Mr. Fromm’s group is called a “free speech advocacy group” - while the man himself was permitted access to Parliament Hill to falsely describe the dramatic rise in hate crime, post-9/11, as a “complete red herring.” What the CP story did not note, but should, is that the Canadian Association for Free Expression’s principal activity is supporting Holocaust deniers like Jim Keegstra, or neo-Nazis like Ernst Zundel. The CP story does not detail, moreover, that Fromm is a founder of the racist Western Guard, and that he has given speeches at Heritage Front rallies bedecked with swastikas. Nor does it recall Mr. Fromm’s words at one neo-Nazi event in the United States, a few years back, wherein he stated: “If we are going to be true to our Aryan spirit, to the very best of our people, which is reason [for] doing what Aryan man has always done facing reality…[it is necessary] to recapture the greatness of our race’s spirit and then we can retake this continent.” Why was such a man given access to Centre Block’s 130-S? Why is CP calling him a “free speech advocate?” Troubling questions, indeed. There is more of this drivel, albeit in a different context. Allan Fotheringham (who writes opinion columns for the Globe and Mail and Maclean’s) and Doug Fisher (who does similarly for the Sun chain), have lately provided yet more evidence of their fitness for retirement, having enthusiastically taken up the mantle of one of their deceased colleagues, Doug Collins. According to Mr. Fotheringham, Mr. Collins - who claimed, repeatedly, that he was a war hero - was “the toughest man I ever met,” “who defended anyone who wanted to say anything,” was “defiant,” possessed “gusto,” and was “admirable.” (In his most recent column singing Mr. Collins’ praises - he has written more than one - it is significant that Mr. Fotheringham approvingly quotes Paul Fromm as one of his sources; in another recent effort, about Yours Truly, he details how Ku Klux Klan cross burnings are, well, funny.) Mr. Fisher, meanwhile, stoops to almost the same level, writing movingly about the “respect” he had for the departed Mr. Collins - as well as his “courage” and “bravery.” What Messrs. Fotheringham and Fisher did not note in their paeans to Mr. Collins were his actual words, which would have easily revealed him to be a vengeful old Jew-hater, homophobe and racist. A sampling of these: Jews are “the biggest threat to freedom of speech,” and that they “steal.” That the Holocaust gas chambers were “impossible.” That it makes no “difference” whether six million Jews were murdered or not. That gays are “homos,” “filth,” and “dirt,” who deserve to die of AIDS. That immigrants are “atrocities,” “illiterates,” and “scum.” That it is “good” to intolerant. There is more - much more - but I lack the stomach for it. Conrad Black, whether you approve of him or not, made a number lasting contribution to Canadian journalism, and one for which he deserves much credit: he fired Doug Collins. Not for the “opinions” Mr. Collins expressed in Mr. Black’s former property, the North Shore News, which were always brimming with hate. But because Doug Collins was a lousy journalist. Someone should subject Allan Fotheringham and Doug Fisher - and an anonymous scribe at Canadian Press - to a similar review, perhaps. In the world that is unfolding post-September 11, we can ill afford more such “journalism.”
All contents copyright 2006 warrenkinsella.com. No reproduction whatsoever, in any form, without permission. |
|