Angelunatic
Active Member
Now he is relaxed and rehabilitated, summertime in the city , with his flip flops on Ford I guess.
|
|
|
Rob Ford's Toronto
- Thread starter MetroMan
- Start date
- Status
Now he is relaxed and rehabilitated, summertime in the city , with his flip flops on Ford I guess.
Angelunatic
Active Member
JWBF
Senior Member
Nepotism.
ROFOMOFO
Active Member
Karl Rove was known as Bush's Brain, I'd suggest Tug be referred as Fuckheads Brain.
aghost
Active Member
I was thinking more "puppetmaster" without the master credentials.
dforthandbview
Senior Member
Erin Davis from CHFI had a great zinger the other day:
Marc Coward @YYZMarc Jul 7
Congratulations @CHFIErin, you can read Doug's mind. That's exactly what he said next.
Erin Davis CHFI @CHFIErin
@YYZMarc Reading his mind is admittedly light reading.
https://twitter.com/CHFIErin/status/486197400168431616
Marc Coward @YYZMarc Jul 7
Congratulations @CHFIErin, you can read Doug's mind. That's exactly what he said next.
Erin Davis CHFI @CHFIErin
@YYZMarc Reading his mind is admittedly light reading.
https://twitter.com/CHFIErin/status/486197400168431616
expat
Active Member
Does anyone else think it's time for the media/protesters to change the channel on the 'homophobia' stuff? It seems to me that every thinking person in town knows where Rob stands on this, and his hard base aren't changing their minds. We're never going to get him to say, "yes, I'm a homophobe." Nor are we ever going to get a meaningful apology from him.
Why not pick some of the other - criminal, or unethical - stuff to work on? Business conflicts of interest, the return of Sandro, etc?
Why not pick some of the other - criminal, or unethical - stuff to work on? Business conflicts of interest, the return of Sandro, etc?
TOBorn
Active Member
The Star has explained their views on publishing Ford's 'rehab' antics.
[QUOTERehab no free pass to zero accountability: Public EditorDid the Star cross an ethical line in reporting information from confidential sources with inside information about Mayor Rob Ford's rehab stint?
Share on Facebook
CARLOS OSORIO / TORONTO STAR Order this photo
Toronto Mayor Rob Ford returned to public life on June 30, 2014, after a two-month stint in rehab at Greenestone Muskoka. Here he signs autographs at Nathan Phillips Square on July 11, 2014.
By: Kathy English Public Editor, Published on Fri Jul 11 2014
Open policard for MayorRob Ford
The privacy of personal health information is an important principle in our civil society.
The Toronto Star well understands that principle and has a strong record of reporting vigorously on violations of personal privacy rights.
Why then, did the Star report on the alleged bad behaviour of Mayor Rob Ford during his two-month stay in a Muskoka drug and alcohol rehabilitation facility?
Did the Star cross an ethical line in reporting information from confidential sources with inside information who said that the mayor was kicked out of group therapy and that management was concerned Ford continued to use drugs or alcohol during his time in rehab?
“It would seem to me that there is a strong expectation of privacy at such a facility, especially in group therapy activities, because of the personal and confidential nature of the medical treatment,” said one of several readers who came forward this week seeking to understand why the Star published these disturbing details about Ford’s rehab stint.
“The decision of the Toronto Star to violate that expectation (even for an individual with the reprehensible public conduct of Rob Ford) felt like a bold one that warrants some explanation,” he added.
The decision was indeed bold and involved considerable thought about the competing principles at stake here. And certainly, this call warrants explanation to Star readers as publishing private health information is generally not in line with this news organization’s policies and practices.
It should be noted that the Star did not in fact reveal any private details of the mayor’s personal health. Still, the newsroom understood fully that publishing information from three people with inside confidential knowledge of Ford’s behaviour at GreenStone Muskoka would be seen by some — especially those who work in the health-care field — as crossing a prohibited line between the public and private realms.
There are few greater conflicts in journalism than that between the responsibility to seek truth and report it in the public interest and the rights of individuals to privacy of personal information.
The Star’s policy offers little concrete directive here. On “privacy” it states: “Conflicts between the public’s right to know and the expectation of privacy of individuals are inevitable in the gathering and publishing of news, but common sense, our duty to inform and compassion should govern our judgment.”
In practice, unless it is judged to be of important public interest, the Star generally does not regard an individual’s private and confidential health information as falling within our duty to inform.
But, as with much of the Star’s outstanding, awarding-winning reporting on the scandals involving Toronto’s mayor, this confidential information presented the newsroom with a unique ethical dilemma. Given the extraordinary circumstances of all that led up to and followed Ford’s rehab stint, the newsroom determined that it must publish this information.
I don’t think it had any other choice. The information revealing the truth about Ford’s rehab stint is indeed of compelling public interest to Toronto voters in the midst of a mayoral election campaign.
Ford himself made his rehab and sobriety a public issue and a key aspect of his campaign to be re-elected to lead Canada’s largest city. Keep in mind, he lied about his alcohol and drug usage for many months before suddenly checking in to rehab in May after another crack cocaine video surfaced. Then after two months away in the cottage country rehab facility — during which time he contacted a Toronto Sun reporter to share his insight that rehab was “kind of like football camp” — he returned to Toronto, gave interviews to select media and in effect told citizens, “trust me, I changed in rehab, now re-elect me.”
“Ford wants the public to believe this process of going to rehab rendered him fit for office and he is asking the public to give him a second chance. Given this, we think the truth about his time in rehab demands to be told,” said Jane Davenport, the Star’s managing editor.
“Insofar as Ford acknowledged that his private behaviour affected his public work, and he is making public promises to win back trust and win re-election based on his stint in rehab, then what he says publicly will be fact checked and investigated by the Star.”
And well it should be. It is the role of media to hold politicians and public officials to account — and no more so than during an election campaign. The greatest responsibility of journalism is the pursuit and telling of truth. That often conflicts with the carefully crafted messages of those seeking and holding public office.
In the face of a shameful record of lies and denials, and worldwide notoriety for his drug and alcohol issues, can Ford or anyone else really expect that what happens in rehab will stay in rehab, that the Star would not report credible information that contradicts the mayor’s message?
Indeed, this is information that Toronto citizens deserve to know. And certainly, no one should think that rehab is a free pass to zero accountability.
publiced@thestar.ca][/QUOTE]
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/publ...ass_to_zero_accountability_public_editor.html
[QUOTERehab no free pass to zero accountability: Public EditorDid the Star cross an ethical line in reporting information from confidential sources with inside information about Mayor Rob Ford's rehab stint?
Share on Facebook
CARLOS OSORIO / TORONTO STAR Order this photo
Toronto Mayor Rob Ford returned to public life on June 30, 2014, after a two-month stint in rehab at Greenestone Muskoka. Here he signs autographs at Nathan Phillips Square on July 11, 2014.
By: Kathy English Public Editor, Published on Fri Jul 11 2014
Open policard for MayorRob Ford
The privacy of personal health information is an important principle in our civil society.
The Toronto Star well understands that principle and has a strong record of reporting vigorously on violations of personal privacy rights.
Why then, did the Star report on the alleged bad behaviour of Mayor Rob Ford during his two-month stay in a Muskoka drug and alcohol rehabilitation facility?
Did the Star cross an ethical line in reporting information from confidential sources with inside information who said that the mayor was kicked out of group therapy and that management was concerned Ford continued to use drugs or alcohol during his time in rehab?
“It would seem to me that there is a strong expectation of privacy at such a facility, especially in group therapy activities, because of the personal and confidential nature of the medical treatment,” said one of several readers who came forward this week seeking to understand why the Star published these disturbing details about Ford’s rehab stint.
“The decision of the Toronto Star to violate that expectation (even for an individual with the reprehensible public conduct of Rob Ford) felt like a bold one that warrants some explanation,” he added.
The decision was indeed bold and involved considerable thought about the competing principles at stake here. And certainly, this call warrants explanation to Star readers as publishing private health information is generally not in line with this news organization’s policies and practices.
It should be noted that the Star did not in fact reveal any private details of the mayor’s personal health. Still, the newsroom understood fully that publishing information from three people with inside confidential knowledge of Ford’s behaviour at GreenStone Muskoka would be seen by some — especially those who work in the health-care field — as crossing a prohibited line between the public and private realms.
There are few greater conflicts in journalism than that between the responsibility to seek truth and report it in the public interest and the rights of individuals to privacy of personal information.
The Star’s policy offers little concrete directive here. On “privacy” it states: “Conflicts between the public’s right to know and the expectation of privacy of individuals are inevitable in the gathering and publishing of news, but common sense, our duty to inform and compassion should govern our judgment.”
In practice, unless it is judged to be of important public interest, the Star generally does not regard an individual’s private and confidential health information as falling within our duty to inform.
But, as with much of the Star’s outstanding, awarding-winning reporting on the scandals involving Toronto’s mayor, this confidential information presented the newsroom with a unique ethical dilemma. Given the extraordinary circumstances of all that led up to and followed Ford’s rehab stint, the newsroom determined that it must publish this information.
I don’t think it had any other choice. The information revealing the truth about Ford’s rehab stint is indeed of compelling public interest to Toronto voters in the midst of a mayoral election campaign.
Ford himself made his rehab and sobriety a public issue and a key aspect of his campaign to be re-elected to lead Canada’s largest city. Keep in mind, he lied about his alcohol and drug usage for many months before suddenly checking in to rehab in May after another crack cocaine video surfaced. Then after two months away in the cottage country rehab facility — during which time he contacted a Toronto Sun reporter to share his insight that rehab was “kind of like football camp” — he returned to Toronto, gave interviews to select media and in effect told citizens, “trust me, I changed in rehab, now re-elect me.”
“Ford wants the public to believe this process of going to rehab rendered him fit for office and he is asking the public to give him a second chance. Given this, we think the truth about his time in rehab demands to be told,” said Jane Davenport, the Star’s managing editor.
“Insofar as Ford acknowledged that his private behaviour affected his public work, and he is making public promises to win back trust and win re-election based on his stint in rehab, then what he says publicly will be fact checked and investigated by the Star.”
And well it should be. It is the role of media to hold politicians and public officials to account — and no more so than during an election campaign. The greatest responsibility of journalism is the pursuit and telling of truth. That often conflicts with the carefully crafted messages of those seeking and holding public office.
In the face of a shameful record of lies and denials, and worldwide notoriety for his drug and alcohol issues, can Ford or anyone else really expect that what happens in rehab will stay in rehab, that the Star would not report credible information that contradicts the mayor’s message?
Indeed, this is information that Toronto citizens deserve to know. And certainly, no one should think that rehab is a free pass to zero accountability.
publiced@thestar.ca][/QUOTE]
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/publ...ass_to_zero_accountability_public_editor.html
TOBorn
Active Member
Need proof for that. Slander and all...
content
New Member
Attachments
DSC
Superstar
Member Bio
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2008
- Messages
- 18,999
- Reaction score
- 26,419
- Location
- St Lawrence Market Area
I have a friend who is a Manager at the City. She had to sit at Council all day yesterday, until 7pm because RoFo held an item in her area. After holding it all day he then asked no questions and released it. There is nothing wrong with Councillors, or mayors, holding items they have questions about them but there are consequences. Result: My friend was not in her office all day and little work was done. Respect for taxpayers, oh yea!
casita
Senior Member
View attachment 29638
Likely not any members of UT, but I suspect there may be a few closet homophobe voters in "Crazy Town". Some may see Rob as their voice at City Hall.
"When will you speak to Gary Giroux", is the question I like seeing on signs, and hearing reporters ask.
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Expatriot
New Member
Rove's nickname was "Turd Blossom". I'd suggest we just roll it forward.
Kat_YYZ
Senior Member
I agree with not simply repeating "are you homophobic" again and again, but I'd like the question phrased "why wouldn't you stand up to recognize organizers and volunteers who worked hard to ensure that a huge event that brings money to the city went off smoothly?"
- Status