oh bloody hell

Damn. After the BBC producer interviewed me, she explained the format of the show and who would be on. I told her I didn't want to be involved in a debate format, an American-style shouting match.

She assured me that wouldn't be the case. She said it was gentle discussion, each person given their say, all points of views represented - not a debate.

Then they don't even call me til the show is half over, and there's a conservative talk-show host spouting inanities about Michael Moore and the "Northeast media". The next thing I know I'm debating US abortion rights with someone whose position is "That's a blatant lie!". The man lived in the US for five years, he should know, right? Well, I'm a 25-year veteran of the reproductive rights movement, and my claims are facts. What's more, most American women don't even know how tenuous the right to abortion is right now - why would a conservative Canadian man know?!

Damn. I'm annoyed. I hate debating with those types and never would have wanted to do it on the air.

I sat down to email my dissatisfaction to the producer, but she had already emailed me to apologize. She wrote some very nice things, and I'm sure, as she says, it was out of her control.

I know this is what happens when you deal with the media - you can't control how your message is used, or even if it's heard. But it's hard to resist a chance to try.

Well, if you were listening, I hope I didn't sound like a complete git. If you weren't listening, I'm relieved!

Comments

  1. allan17 January 2006 at 10:52

    I hate debating with those types and never would have wanted to do it on the air.

    What debate? You stated facts in a logical manner and the Limbaugh-wannabe talked louder and offered stupid bluster.

    The host really fell down on the job in not cutting off the back-and-forth much earlier (after all, it wasn't a discussion of abortion rights in Canada and the US).

    And by giving "Rush" so much airtime, it seemed like he was co-hosting the show.

    Plus they didn't plug the blog!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Unknown17 January 2006 at 11:14

    I didn't hear but it sounds like a big bummer to me! :(

    ReplyDelete
  3. Kyahgirl17 January 2006 at 11:49

    i'm sorry-you're right-things often get messed up when dealing with the media.

    crap, I'm sorry I missed it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. laura k17 January 2006 at 11:56

    crap, I'm sorry I missed it.

    You're very sweet, but I'm glad you did.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Granny17 January 2006 at 11:56

    I'm sorry I missed it too.

    There's very little anyone can do, at least not on those shows, when they're sandbagged. I'm sure you acquitted yourself admirably and more people may have heard your viewpoint than you realize.

    It's not a debate, it's two against one.

    You were dealing with "my mind is made up, don't confuse me with the facts". No way to combat it; they're not interested in the truth, they just want to score points.

    ReplyDelete
  6. laura k17 January 2006 at 11:59

    more people may have heard your viewpoint than you realize.

    Hey, thank you for reminding me of this. It's what I've told myself any time I've done anything in the media. You're right.

    No way to combat it; they're not interested in the truth, they just want to score points.

    True. That's why I try to avoid those types of "debates". In this case, as you said, it was a surprise attack. All you can do is all you can do.

    Thanks you guys.

    ReplyDelete
  7. andrea17 January 2006 at 12:17

    Fortunately most of us recognize a bully when we hear one, so cheer up. I'm sure you communicated a few good points. Still, I'm sorry I missed it. I was about 5 minutes too late.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Restless Sole17 January 2006 at 12:57

    Typical right wing bullying tactics. What the hell is wrong with the world anyway? When is the pendulem going to stary swinging the other way again? Sorry you had a rough time Laura.

    ReplyDelete
  9. allan17 January 2006 at 13:35

    We figured the conservative would be a conservative voter -- not a guy with a conservative radio show.

    The producers clearly knew what they were getting. I guess they assumed they could always apologize to Laura afterwards if she complained.

    What's crazy is that the Limbaugh wannabe wasn't a typical Canadian conservative at all. If he was, he wouldn't have shot off his mouth about Michael Moore.

    I mean, really, who in Canada gives a shit about Michael Moore in this election campaign? That comment was a huge red flag.

    With that comment and his "debating" tactics, he revealed himself to be just another US wingnut. Trust us, we know the type.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Wrye17 January 2006 at 15:16

    Oh bloody hell, I'm so sorry. This is why we aren't much more fond of Britain than America, around here. This sounds very unlike the BBC, but wingnuts can form their own gravity well and warp space accordingly.

    The program seems to be available online for a while (the next 24 hours, I presume). Would you rather we all just give it a pass?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Crabbi17 January 2006 at 20:24

    I'm sure you were brilliant, and I was going to ask if they archived the show, but I think I'll follow Wrye's lead and ask if you'd rather we not listen. (Even though I know you kicked ass.)

    ReplyDelete
  12. Echomouse17 January 2006 at 23:26

    Hey Laura, I caught it on the archives just now. Those conservatives did what they always do -- blocked your very well-formed opinion. If you read conservative blogs, most of them seem to attack anyone who disagrees by getting them off the actual topic. They're adept at it. The entire party of conservatives is now and has always been nothing but argumentative troublemakers who don't give a wit about Canada or Canadians.

    You were great. For a new Canadian, you kick butt really well :)

    I'm glad I caught it because the old timer Canadians who called in were dead on. I was laughing at the guy near the end who said Canadians "don't really care what the rest of the world thinks" because that's so true. The USA and the world spends so much time putting us down because it bugs the hell out of them that we don't care what they think.

    You're ok ;) Don't worry about it. I agree with others who said the interviewers screwed up big time. And the person who wrote in anonymously vindicated you really well. They aired a very biased program, pro-con, which is b.s.

    So Good Job Laura! Don't sweat it :) And keep speaking up.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Echomouse17 January 2006 at 23:30

    Just want to clarify my comment about Conservatives being argumentative troublemakers. I meant that in terms of how they handle politics. As individuals, many of them are fine people. I'm not saying I don't like people who are conservative. I just don't find their political values or aims humane on the whole and think they're too ambitious for their own good. Again, that's just my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  14. laura k18 January 2006 at 05:47

    The program seems to be available online for a while (the next 24 hours, I presume). Would you rather we all just give it a pass?

    Wrye, you're very sweet for asking. (And you too Crabbi.) Go ahead and listen if you like, by all means. Keep in mind that I was told I would not be debating, and wasn't expecting to! But if you feel like listening, I would love an honest (not just trying-to-make-me-feel-better) assessment of how I sounded. Something to take away from a sour experience.

    Echo Mouse: thank you much. :)

    ReplyDelete
  15. laura k18 January 2006 at 06:12

    I'm glad I caught it because the old timer Canadians who called in were dead on.

    Just to clarify, none of the people on the show had called in. They were all chosen by the producer and interviewed in advance.

    And the person who wrote in anonymously vindicated you really well. They aired a very biased program, pro-con, which is b.s.

    I agree. Who is this anonymous person, where is the comment? If you come back around, let me know, ok?

    Thanks again for your kind words.

    ReplyDelete
  16. sharonapple8818 January 2006 at 12:25

    Sad that they couldn't find a rational conservative to speak on the show. (There are ones out there, but most of the attention is focused on the nutballs.)

    ReplyDelete
  17. laura k18 January 2006 at 12:35

    Sad that they couldn't find a rational conservative to speak on the show.

    I doubt they looked very hard. They emailed me two hours before the show. In my (albeit limited) experience, that's how those things are usually put together.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Doctor Marco18 January 2006 at 17:21

    I see what you mean. Regardless of the apologies, it looks like a setup. Is there a way I can listen or see you?

    ReplyDelete
  19. laura k18 January 2006 at 18:55

    Hey Dr Marco. You can go to the BBC radio site, look for "World Have Your Say" and see if the 17 January programme is archived. I don't know if it will be there, but you can try.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Echomouse18 January 2006 at 20:21

    At the very end of the program, they let an anonymous email have the last word. The person did not sign their name but said they were Canadian and would only sign it as "Anonymous". They said it was terrible and wrong of BBC to air a program about Canada's election which was pro-conservative, as that certainly isnt't he flavour in Canada. They said the BBC should be ashamed of themselves for misrepresenting Canada that way :) LOL

    Then the BBC journalists heading the program begged "Anonymous" to call back and write again! They took the criticism well and didn't let the conservative talking nuts respond it, so it was good. It immediately made me think of them cutting off your mike. That emailer backed up their intention with the program and gave them hell for it. I loved it :)

    ReplyDelete
  21. laura k19 January 2006 at 07:11

    At the very end of the program, they let an anonymous email have the last word. The person did not sign their name but said they were Canadian and would only sign it as "Anonymous". They said it was terrible and wrong of BBC to air a program about Canada's election which was pro-conservative, as that certainly isnt't he flavour in Canada. They said the BBC should be ashamed of themselves for misrepresenting Canada that way :)

    COOL!!! Wow. Very cool. Thanks again, Echo Mouse. You are doing me a world of good this morning. :)

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

sharia

This morning I see that Dalton McGuinty, Premier of Ontario, is banning the Muslim religious court known as sharia . This ends months of debate about whether sharia would be legal and binding in Ontario. I'm quoting at length from the story in today's Toronto Star because many US readers are likely not up on this. In a surprise announcement that caught both supporters and opponents of sharia law off guard, Premier Dalton McGuinty says he will move quickly to ban all religious arbitration in the province. McGuinty made the announcement in a telephone interview with The Canadian Press yesterday after months of debate and controversy surrounding use of Islamic sharia law in family arbitration. "I've come to the conclusion that the debate has gone on long enough," the premier told the news agency. "There will be no sharia law in Ontario. There will be no religious arbitration in Ontario. There will be one law for all Ontarians." The announcement prompted t...
Read more

can of worms

I'm opening a sticky subject here, my need to understand causing me to throw caution to the wind. It's about Alberta. Alberta vs. the rest of the Canada. The Globe And Mail runs something about Alberta's gripes every day, and I try to follow along. If it weren't for wmtc's resident Albertan , and the ensuing arguments in comments, I would've had no warning. It's not something Americans know about. As is, observing for more than a year, I have only the smallest of clues. Here's what I know. Please pardon my ignorance and oversimplification, but I have to start somewhere. The province of Alberta is rich, because it has oil. The province of Alberta is conservative, relative to the rest of Canada. Hmm. Funny how those two go together. Because of its great oil wealth, Alberta revenue helps fund services in the rest of Canada. (These are transfer payments?) Apparently many Albertans resent this. They want to keep Alberta's money in Alberta. They don't...
Read more

low confidence

I'm excited about today's no-confidence vote . Only three months after moving here, we'll get to see a government fall, a campaign, and an election, in a system very different from what we're accustomed to. Even the expression "the government will fall" strikes us as oddly dramatic and revolutionary. My sense of current Canadian politics, for what it's worth, tells me that very little will change from the upcoming election. I'd be surprised if the Liberals didn't win. So it's kind of cool to see this happening without a lot at stake. On a semi-tangential note, have I mentioned I'm completely down with "Corner Gas"? Excellent show; I love the deadpan humour. (Great website, too; check it out .) So was that really Finance Minister Ralph Goodale ragging on Brent Butt's camera last Saturday night?
Read more