Politics

[CanuckShooter]

I had an interesting discussion with one of our reporters on the way home this evening. I indicated that I was planning to attend a protest of the Prorogation of the Canadian Parliament because I felt that it was irresponsible for our elected officials to take a 2 month paid vacation from their jobs. She asked me if I thought it was ok to be going to a political protest because I work in the media.

I feel 100% confident in going to this demonstration for several reasons:
1) It's on my day off, 2) It's a non partisan event, 3) I don't work in front of the camera

I understand that I work for the media and we're supposed to be unbiased and present both sides of the story, but I'm not putting a campaign sign on my lawn or volunteering to knock on doors for anyone, and I'm not putting together a story about the event, I'm attending a protest and flexing my democratic muscle.

If I were taking time off work to attend, or if it were a protest of a specific party instead of a protest of the Government, or if I were on camera every night, I would probably reconsider my decision to attend, but as I see it currently, my "journalistic integrity" remains intact.

My question to the b-rollers who are politically inclined: Where do You draw the line between work and your political affiliations/beliefs?

 

[Chicago Dog]

It's a sticky situation: the station can't tell you what you can and can't do on your time off. They're only paying you for a job when you're on the clock. You're also not in front of the camera, so you're a lot more private than one of the on-air folks.

However, you do work for the media. We're supposed to be objective. If Katie Couric showed up to some kind of Republican fundraiser and donated money to John McCain's campaign, I think that would create a lot of distrust.

This is not to say that you can't have beliefs at all: I helped vote Obama into office. You just have to be careful about wearing your opinions on your sleeve in this business.

 

[cameradog]

I indicated that I was planning to attend a protest of the Prorogation of the Canadian Parliament because I felt that it was irresponsible for our elected officials to take a 2 month paid vacation from their jobs.

Hell, why? I wish our Congress would take 11 months off each year. I don't care if they still get paid full salaries. I just want them off somewhere else with their hands in their pockets, not doing any damage.

A legislative body can accomplish everything necessary to run a country in a month-long session, about the time it takes to pass a budget and address maybe one other major issue. Anything more than that, and they start looking for things to fix that ain't broken.

 

[justFRED.ca]

Some context

Proroguing means that the business of Parliament - including the structure and deliberations of committees and legislation moving through the system - is reset to zero. Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200.

Full stop.

There are many Canadians who feel this move by the Prime Minister was intended to let him trade uncomfortable questions for Winter Olympic photo ops. It's the 2nd time he's used this technique in just over a year. The last time was to avoid a vote that would have almost certainly have led to his government's defeat.

There are rallies planned for later this month to protest the closure of Parliament and demand that our elected politicians get back to work.

Will they be partisan affairs? To some extent, yes. But a couple of recent polls indicate that a sizable percentage of the government's supporters aren't happy with what's widely viewed as a highly partisan tactic.

Cheers,
George

 

[zac love]

I think a lot of it has to do with how well you can check things at the door when you go to work & who you claim to be representing when you're off the clock.

Politics & religion are two very important parts of people's lives which can be handled in both appropriate and inappropriate ways.

If you go to a rally don't wear a station / network logo. And when you go back into work, don't let propaganda hijack your newcast. I think good journalists need to do their job with impartiality, but don't have to live their personal lives in a vacuum.

I would argue that the best journalists are the ones who are in touch with the communities they serve in.

 

[Cornelio78]

I think a lot of it has to do with how well you can check things at the door when you go to work & who you claim to be representing when you're off the clock.

Politics & religion are two very important parts of people's lives which can be handled in both appropriate and inappropriate ways.

If you go to a rally don't wear a station / network logo. And when you go back into work, don't let propaganda hijack your newcast. I think good journalists need to do their job with impartiality, but don't have to live their personal lives in a vacuum.

I would argue that the best journalists are the ones who are in touch with the communities they serve in.

i agree. I mean i do story's all the time with involving churchs and their beliefs, and their work, ect., and i am an atheist Hell i do political stories and i think all politicians for the most part should be shot and i say it when i am not around them. BUT I STILL DO THE STORY and tell boths sides when i do tell the story.

I think even an on air type of person can go to these things as long as they check it at the door and are fair when reporting or conveying their stories. Will the public think otherwise, maybe, but can they prove your biased when you tell both sides? No they cant, they can try to discredit you, but anyone can. Its what they can prove.

You are still a person with your own beliefs and morals and you dont have to comprimise them to do your job and you dont have to deny them either.

 

[Freddie Mercury]

Many stations, mine included, have policies that make this issue very clear. I would not be allowed to demonstrate for a political cause. I cannot have a yard sign, either.