Rob Ford's Toronto

[AlvinofDiaspar]

PL:

Well, given what was leaked by the office could very well be construed as bridge burning, I have a feeling we will hear more from both yet.

AoD

 

[Thanos]

Um, never heard of Atlantic Canada? Plenty of English language newspapers there, including the Telegraph Journal from Saint John, NB. When I lived in Fredericton we'd have the Globe and Mail delivered to our house, as did many of the neighbours.

I'm talking about within Montreal and est of St-Denis street. Wowzers, some people.

 

[LowPolygon]

Maybe it's the camera, but at least he looks like he has a healthier tone to his skin. The usual cherry red shine often has me worried he's going to drop dead on the spot. Could be a sign that he's trying to sober up... at least until this scandal goes away.

i think there is little question that virtually ANYONE facing these kinds of accusations would go cold turkey. he's probably not drinking either.

 

[nfitz]

The hypocrisy is astounding......If Ford nation says the star is out to get Ford, they're paranoid racist conspiracy theorists, but then you continue to say that they were anti-Miller too.

People here have spent pages defending the Star and their journalistic integrity, except they messed up on Miller - but they did get it right with Ford????? Maybe it's both. The Star was doing their job both times, and Miller wasn't actually as good as most people here think.

Yes, the Star's very good, but they exaggerated Ford's mistakes on minor issues leading to people thinking they were out to get Ford. Obviously some of you think they did this with Miller as well. But Ford nation are idiots for bringing it up, yet you guys can say it's true for Miller and that's perfectly acceptable?

I actually can't follow your point. How is pointing out the Star's anti-Miller bent hypocrisy? I wasn't attacking the Star for being anti-Miller, simply pointing it out.

I haven't seen much exaggeration of Ford's mistakes ... there might have been one or two. Ford's drug problems have not been a secret, and it's taken a long time for the Star to start highlighting it.

 

[guitarchitect]

I'm talking about within Montreal and est of St-Denis street. Wowzers, some people.

Well damn, I guess if you can't buy an english-only newspaper in a pocket of montreal that is almost exclusively french, you can't say that the toronto star is nationally circulated. GOOD WORK!!!

 

[sarnya]

And the Globe has a piece on David Price:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...-of-torontos-city-hall-storm/article12218380/

It's fascinating that a couple weeks ago, Price was discussed here as one of the thugs in the magnet video. Now this guy's recent past is headline news on a major Canadian newspaper. Whoever had the premonition that Price was bad news was bang on.

 

[NotKevinBacon]

I must say that I lol at the issue. More at the irony of the whole thing. First, Ford "allegedly" gets caught on a video and then they are unable to show the video, because their guys went off the grid. I "wonder" who made them do such thing. It's like an amateur Shakespearean comedy in three acts.

Anyway, I still don't get it why the Gawker donated the money to a charity instead of giving it back to backers. Aren't those crowdsourcing supposed to have a policy of refunding the people if the project didn't meet its goal?

I definitely agree with this article:
"It seems morally wrong to arbitrarily donate someone's money to a charity of Gawker's choice, when the original intention was to use that money to help purchase a video, especially when you don't know if the funders are the giving type or would support such a donation. What Gawker really should be doing is giving the money back to the backers if the video cannot be purchased. If Gawker's motivations are truly altruistic, why not match the contributions of it's pledgers in the form of a charitable donation themselves? If the $200,000 target is not hit before the deadline, why not refund the money to the pledgers and still match them dollar for dollar in the form of a charitable donation? This would be a real show of good will and everyone would go home at the same point they were at when this proposed fund began."

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I must say that I lol at the issue. More at the irony of the whole thing. First, Ford "allegedly" gets caught on a video and then they are unable to show the video, because their guys went off the grid. I "wonder" who made them do such thing. It's like an amateur Shakespearean comedy in three acts.

Anyway, I still don't get it why the Gawker donated the money to a charity instead of giving it back to backers. Aren't those crowdsourcing supposed to have a policy of refunding the people if the project didn't meet its goal?

I definitely agree with this article:
"It seems morally wrong to arbitrarily donate someone's money to a charity of Gawker's choice, when the original intention was to use that money to help purchase a video, especially when you don't know if the funders are the giving type or would support such a donation. What Gawker really should be doing is giving the money back to the backers if the video cannot be purchased. If Gawker's motivations are truly altruistic, why not match the contributions of it's pledgers in the form of a charitable donation themselves? If the $200,000 target is not hit before the deadline, why not refund the money to the pledgers and still match them dollar for dollar in the form of a charitable donation? This would be a real show of good will and everyone would go home at the same point they were at when this proposed fund began."

You don't understand how Indigogo works

 

[NotKevinBacon]

You don't understand how Indigogo works

Then tell me, where's the catch?

 

[bobbob911]

What catch? No money has been donated yet, they are trying to buy the video and will continue to try for at least 30 days

 

[voxpopulicosmicum]

re: NP article

It's sounds more like a planned response to the original leaks than an actual "insider perspective". I found the implied incompetence quite interesting as well, given what the mayor himself said about the two individuals.

Agreed re: the sour grapes. I could almost hear Doug Ford dictating the script.

There are a couple of cryptic allusions in recent stories that I'm trying to figure out:

In the NP article, the "source" says: "Isaac had his shredder going in overdrive, so it was pretty obvious what was going on." Not sure what to make of that. It could simply be that Ransom was making sure that any confidential info in his possession was safely disposed of, but considering the source and the way it's referenced in the story, something doesn't feel right.

In yesterday's Star story about the police investigation is the following passage:

When Toronto woke up to news of the video, the media descended on Ford’s Etobicoke home. Towhey, a former military man, sent Price to Ford’s house to be of assistance. Soon after, Towhey was angered to discover that Price was at the home of Rob and Doug Ford’s mother.

Price told Towhey not to worry.

Why would Towhey be angry to discover that Price was at the Ford family compound? It could simply be that he expected Price to obey Towhey's instructions, but, again, there seems to be more to it.

 

[guitarchitect]

Then tell me, where's the catch?

Ugh. Why don't you spend a few minutes on the internet and educate yourself?

Google Indiegogo. I'll even give you two hints: look up "flex funding" campaigns and "fixed funding" campaigns, both of which are detailed on Indiegogo's site. Go to Gawker's site or the crackstarter page and look up which one it is, and read about the plan for the crowdsourced funds. Then understand that they met the $200K goal and they are following through on the plan that they set out on the Crackstarter page.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

So I just found this sticker...

 

[junior43]

I actually can't follow your point. How is pointing out the Star's anti-Miller bent hypocrisy? I wasn't attacking the Star for being anti-Miller, simply pointing it out.

I haven't seen much exaggeration of Ford's mistakes ... there might have been one or two. Ford's drug problems have not been a secret, and it's taken a long time for the Star to start highlighting it.

If someone says the Star is Anti-Ford, they're a dumb racist and the Star's just doing their job.
If someone says the Star was anti-Miller, it's just accepted as the truth and the Star was being overly critical.

The Star is overly critical of anyone in power (journalistic integrity aside, they still need to sell papers and exaggerating minor gaffes does this), but when it's a side you don't agree with that states it, their just idiots and racists. Leading up to this debacle, the Star did this too many times and people just discounted everything the Star had to say (the newspaper that cried wolf) Now that they have him dead to rights, the Fordistas don't want to believe because of the Star's past performance.

I'm not excusing Ford's supporters for not believing at this point, but the Star shares a lot of the blame for this.

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

I actually can't follow your point. How is pointing out the Star's anti-Miller bent hypocrisy? I wasn't attacking the Star for being anti-Miller, simply pointing it out.

I haven't seen much exaggeration of Ford's mistakes ... there might have been one or two. Ford's drug problems have not been a secret, and it's taken a long time for the Star to start highlighting it.

The Toronto Star reports on stories of importance to keep the local populous informed on the issues, they aren't "attacking" or "out to get" anyone, they are simply reporting on stories of merit as they arise. As I briefly noted 10 or whatever pages back I think the Star is fairly balanced, they investigate and do stories on a Rob Ford, a Barbara Hall or a David Miller. Compare to NOW (very, very left of centre!) that didn't have too many negative stories on David Miller (who they actually got to leather-up as their front page man) yet relentlessly go after Rob Ford. I enjoy reading NOW and the issues that they cover but one has to admit NOW is a fair example of local media obsessed with trashing Ford, not the Toronto Star.