COMMENTARY
X
Story Stream
recent articles
On Tuesday, Twitter was, well, atwitter with clips of Joe Biden’s confrontation with a union worker in a Detroit auto plant. The man in a hard hat told Biden, “You are actively trying to end our Second Amendment rights and take away our guns.” To which the former vice president responded, “You’re full of s—!” and the conversation went downhill from there. Nothing about the exchange was particularly flattering for Biden, who not only mangled the facts but threatened to “slap” the voter for good measure.
To hear the media tell it, this was great moment for Biden. In order to make that confounding claim, the media chose ignore the substance of what Biden said and his angry behavior, and skipped right to talking about the “optics” of the confrontation, which involves a lot of tendentious meta-analysis of how they think the event might be perceived by other voters. This is not reporting — it’s spin.
MSNBC anchor Joy-Ann Reid went so far as to declare, “Biden in this clip was forceful but composed, quite the opposite of what his foes have been depicting him as.” She was just one of a bevy of reporters and commentators who rode to Biden’s defense.
Defending Biden in this instance would be bad enough, but excusing his outbursts is becoming a habit with the media. Biden was asked a perfectly legitimate question by a voter about how his son — who has a checkered personal history that involves drug addiction, taking bribes from Chinese businessmen, and fathering children with adult entertainers — got a no-show job with a Ukrainian gas company to the tune of a million dollars a years while Joe Biden was overseeing Ukraine affairs for the White House. Biden responded by not just calling the voter a “damn liar,” he called him “fat” and challenged him to take an IQ test.
The media, if it wants to retain any bipartisan credibility, can’t seriously be defending physical threats and gratuitous insults — but that’s exactly what they’ve done. CNN political reporter Maeve Reston wrote of the Iowa exchange, “In a human moment defending his son, Biden showed the authenticity, emotion and readiness for a fight that appeals to so many Democrats as they look for someone who can take on Trump.”
There has been no shortage of reporting on the business dealings of Trump’s children and son-in-law. Can anyone imagine Trump dismissing questions about his adult children with personal insults and a CNN reporter turning around and saying it was a “human moment” showing “authenticity”? What about Biden’s threat to “slap” the union worker while pointing a finger at him in close quarters? If Trump did that, would the media describe him as “forceful but composed”?
Similarly, the media are anxious to defend Biden this time around by bowling right over the facts. ABC News’ chief political analyst Matthew Dowd said the exchange over guns with a union worker was a “net plus” because “voters are sick of the typical political speak … Voters want somebody that they can trust, and is genuine, and has believability.”
It’s telling that Dowd is simply asserting his views, not making an argument on the merits that the exchange proves Biden is trustworthy. At one point, Biden referred to “AR-14s” when he clearly meant to say “AR-15s.” Then Biden asked the worker, “Are you able to own a machine gun?” The worker rightfully noted, “Machine guns are illegal.” Biden seemed to think he had the man. “That’s right. So AR-15’s illegal,” he said. The worker incredulously – and quite correctly – responded, “That’s not a machine gun. It’s a semi-automatic.” The AR-15 is the most popular rifle in America – Americans own somewhere between five to ten million of them – so not knowing anything about it makes it hard to take Biden seriously on guns.
As for Biden’s denial that he wants to confiscate anyone’s guns, this, too, is a reasonable concern that demands a far better answer than “you’re full of shit.” Biden’s official campaign policy on guns is a reinstatement of the so-called “assault weapons ban” and “calls for a voluntary buyback program of assault weapons, stopping short of candidates and advocates who are calling for a mandatory gun buyback,” according to the Washington Post.
However, Biden has recently said he would appoint former Texas congressman Beto O’Rourke his “gun control czar,” after O’Rourke dropped out of the presidential race and endorsed Biden. O’Rourke is famous for declaring at a Democratic debate, “Hell, yes, we are going to take your AR-15.”
Biden himself seemed to tell CNN’s Anderson Cooper that gun confiscation is not out of the question. “To gun owners out there who say, well, a Biden administration means they’re going to come for my guns,” asked Cooper. Biden responded, “Bingo. You’re right, if you have an assault weapon … They should be illegal, period.”
Perhaps Biden is against gun confiscation, but that’s open to interpretation, and his policy position borders on the incoherent. Voters are hardly out of line to question him on this on this issue.
Instead, what we get out of this episode is facile analysis such as CNN’s Chris Cillizza saying, “Why Joe Biden’s confrontation with an auto worker in Detroit is probably a good thing for him.” According to Cillizza, Biden’s outburst is excusable because there’s “a huge double standard. When Trump tells people where they can stick it, his fans say he’s being tough and standing up for America. When Biden does the same, he’s unhinged.”
There’s a double standard here all right – but it’s not what Cillizza thinks it is. No one cares about the fact that political partisans are hypocritical — that’s obvious, and almost expected. The media, on the other hand, are supposed to assess events with at least a minimum level of professional detachment and objectivity. Yet, when Trump acts addled and insults people, the media has no trouble clearly saying what happened. When a 77-year-old Joe Biden, who was gaffe-prone back in his prime, mangles the facts, gratuitously insults, and physically threatens an ordinary voter whose only crime is asking a pointed question – the media have an obligation to tell it straight – not try and spin an embarrassing episode into a political victory.
The Official Loch Ness Monster Sightings Register sent the photo to one of their experts ‘who said that it was “compelling evidence” ‘ of the creature
Author of the article:
Published Apr 24, 2024 • Last updated 3 hours ago • 3 minute read
LONDON — Parry Malm and Shannon Wiseman weren’t expecting a “pivotal moment” in their sons’ lives when they visited Scotland’s Loch Ness earlier this month, but that’s exactly what happened.
“Our youngest is turning three next week,” said Wiseman from the family’s home in London, England. “And he tells everyone there have been two pivotal moments in his life: Seeing the world’s largest dinosaur, which he did at the Natural History Museum in January, and seeing Nessie.
Advertisement 2
Article content
Article content
“He tells everyone he encounters. He tells the postman, he tells the guys in the shops and the cafes.”
Malm and Wiseman have been thrust into the limelight after a photo they took during their family vacation showed a shadowy figure poking above the waterline, something that the couple’s children _ and others — firmly believe is the latest sighting of the famed Loch Ness monster.
Malm and Wiseman, who are from Coquitlam B.C., and Calgary respectively, moved to England in 2006.
The couple said the original plan for the spring vacation was to take a boat ride in Loch Ness because their children were “completely captivated by the concept of Nessie.”
“We’d even packed shortbread cookies, which we were told from these books was Nessie’s favourite treat,” Wiseman quipped. “Turned out shortbread cookies were not necessary.”
That’s because the family spotted something sticking out of the water while visiting a lookout at nearby Urquhart Castle.
“We just started watching it more and more, and we could see its head craning above water,” Malm said. “And then it was swimming against the current towards the castle, slowly but surely, like very fastidiously going over the waves (and) coming closer and closer. And then it submerged and disappeared.”
NP Posted
Article content
Advertisement 3
Article content
Recommended from Editorial
Malm said the family took a photo of what they saw and decided “for a bit of a laugh” to send the picture to the Official Loch Ness Monster Sightings Register, which he stumbled upon while surfing the internet.
“They got in touch within 24 hours,” Malm recalled. “They were super excited. They sent it to one of their Loch Ness experts who said that it was ‘compelling evidence,’ I believe was the exact phrase.
“And just one thing led to another. I mean, it’s been incredible.”
Since the photo submission, Malm and Wiseman have been featured in British tabloids such as The Sun and the Daily Mirror and digital publication LADbible.
On the Official Loch Ness Monster Sightings Register, the encounter has been recorded as the first Nessie sighting of 2024.
“We’ve both got texts from people who we haven’t heard from in quite some time going, ‘Guess who I just saw on TV?”‘ Malm said.
“I’m just glad that we hit the national media in Canada for spotting the Loch Ness monster and not being on Crime Stoppers.”
Advertisement 4
Article content
Both Malm and Wiseman said they are happy their experience is bringing some positivity to the daily news cycle, and at least one person they have spoken with thanked them for the picture.
“Our son’s school’s headmaster is Scottish,” Malm said. “And he pulls me aside at pick up one day and he goes, ‘You know what, Perry? You’ve done more for Scottish tourism than anybody else in my lifetime.’
“So, hopefully some people will be inspired to come visit Scotland.”
What isn’t certain, however, is what they actually encountered on that cold April morning on the shore of Loch Ness.
“We don’t know what we saw,” Wiseman said. “Our children believe we saw Nessie, and I believe it for them.
“I believe that we saw something that could be Nessie, and that is a very broad possibility.”
Malm said the wonder that the sighting has inspired in his children, and others resonating with the photo, is more important than the question of what they encountered.
“It’s really charming,” he said of the outpouring of reactions. “Because in a world where the news is about a war here and an atrocity there, it’s just nice that people are interested in something that’s just lighthearted, a little bit silly and a little bit unbelievable.”
Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.
Article content
|
|
The British Columbia government is putting its proposed online harms legislation on hold after reaching an agreement with some of the largest social media platforms to increase safety online.
Premier David Eby says in a joint statement with representatives of the firms Meta, TikTok, X and Snapchat that they will form an online safety action table, where they’ll discuss “tangible steps” toward protecting people from online harms.
Eby added the proposed legislation remains, and the province will reactivate it into law if necessary.
“The agreement that we’ve struck with these companies is that we’re going to move quickly and effectively, and that we need meaningful results before the end of the term of this government, so that if it’s necessary for us to bring the bill back then we will,” Eby said Tuesday.
The province says the social media companies have agreed to work collaboratively with the province on preventing harm, while Meta will also commit to working with B.C.’s emergency management officials to help amplify official information during natural disasters and other events.
The announcement to put the Bill 12, also known as the Public Health Accountability and Cost Recovery Act, on hold is a sharp turn for the government, after Eby announced in March that social media companies were among the “wrongdoers” that would pay for health-related costs linked to their platforms.
At the time, Eby compared social media harms to those caused by tobacco and opioids, saying the legislation was similar to previous laws that allowed the province to sue companies selling those products.
Eby said one of the key drivers for legislation targeting online harm was the death of Carson Cleland, the 12-year-old Prince George, B.C., boy who died by suicide last October after falling victim to online sextortion.
“In the real world we would never allow a company to set up a space for kids where grown adults could be invited in to contact them, encourage them to share photographs and then threaten to distribute those photographs to their family and friends,” Eby said when announcing the legislation.
The premier said previously that companies would be shut down and their owners would face jail terms if their products were connected to harms to young people.
In announcing the pause, the province says that bringing social media companies to the table for discussion achieves the same purpose of protecting youth from online harm.
“Our commitment to every parent is that we will do everything we can to keep their families safe online and in our communities,” said Eby.
Ryan Cleland, Carson’s father, said in a statement on Tuesday that he “has faith” in Eby and the decision to suspend the legislation.
“I don’t think he is looking at it from a political standpoint as much as he is looking at it as a dad,” he said of Eby. “I think getting the social media giants together to come up with a solution is a step in the right direction.”
On Monday, the opposition B.C. United called for a pause to Bill 12, citing potential “serious legal and economic consequences for local businesses.”
Opposition Leader Kevin Falcon said in a statement that his party pushed Eby’s government to change course, noting the legislation’s vague language on who the province can sue “would have had severe unintended consequences” for local businesses and the economy.
“The government’s latest retreat is not only a win for the business community but for every British Columbian who values fairness and clarity in the law,” Falcon said.
The Greater Vancouver Board of Trade said they are pleased to see the legislation put on hold, given the “potential ramifications” of the proposal’s “expansive interpretation.”
“We hope that the government chooses not to pursue Bill 12 in the future,” said board president and CEO Bridgitte Anderson in a statement. “Instead, we would welcome the opportunity to work with the government to develop measures that are well-targeted and effective, ensuring they protect British Columbians without causing unintended consequences.”
|
|
Donald Trump is set to secure on Tuesday a stock bonus worth US$1.3-billion from the company that operates his social media app Truth Social (DJT-Q), equivalent to about half the majority stake he already owns in it, thanks to the wild rally in its shares.
The award will take the former U.S. president’s overall stake in the company, Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG), to US$4.1-billion.
While Mr. Trump has agreed not to sell any of his TMTG shares before September, the windfall represents a significant boost to his wealth, which Forbes pegs at US$4.7-billion.
Unlike much of his real estate empire, shares are easy to divest in the stock market and could come in handy as Mr. Trump’s legal fees and fines pile up, including a US$454.2-million judgment in his New York civil fraud case he is appealing.
The bonus also reflects the exuberant trading in TMTG’s shares, which have been on a roller coaster ride since the company listed on Nasdaq last month through a merger with a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) and was snapped up by Trump supporters and speculators.
Mr. Trump will be entitled to the stock bonus under the terms of the SPAC deal once TMTG’s shares stay above US$17.50 for 20 trading days after the company’s March 26 listing. They ended trading on Monday at US$35.50, and they would have to lose more than half their value on Tuesday for Mr. Trump to miss out.
TMTG’s current valuation of approximately US$5-billion is equivalent to about 1,220 times the loss-making company’s revenue in 2023 of US$4.1-million.
No other U.S. company of similar market capitalization has such a high valuation multiple, LSEG data shows. This is despite TMTG warning investors in regulatory filings that its operational losses raise “substantial doubt” about its ability to remain in business.
A TMTG spokesperson declined to comment on the stock award to Mr. Trump. “With more than $200 million in the bank and zero debt, Trump Media is fulfilling all its obligations related to the merger and rapidly moving forward with its business plan,” the spokesperson said.
While Mr. Trump’s windfall is rich for a small, loss-making company like TMTG, the earnout structure that allows it is common. According to a report from law firm Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, stock earnouts for management were seen in more than half the SPAC mergers completed in 2022.
However, few executives clinch these earnout bonuses because many SPAC deals end up performing poorly in the stock market, said Freshfields securities lawyer Michael Levitt. TMTG’s case is rare because its shares are trading decoupled from its business prospects.
“Many earnouts in SPACs are never satisfied because many SPAC prices fall significantly after the merger is completed,” Mr. Levitt said.
To be sure, TMTG made it easier for Mr. Trump to meet the earnout threshold. When TMTG agreed to merge with the SPAC in October, 2021, the deal envisioned that TMTG shares had to trade above US$30 for Mr. Trump to get the full earnout bonus. The two sides amended the deal in August, 2023 to lower that threshold to US$17.50, regulatory filings show.
Had that not happened, Mr. Trump would not have yet earned the full bonus because TMTG’s shares traded below US$30 last week. The terms of the deal, however, give Mr. Trump three years from the listing to win the full earnout, so he could have still earned it if the shares traded above the threshold for 20 days in any 30-day period during this time.
Amid concerns over ‘collateral damage’ Trudeau, Freeland defend capital gains tax change
The unmissable events taking place during London’s Digital Art Week
Politics Briefing: Saskatchewan residents to get carbon rebates despite province’s opposition to pricing program
What is a halal mortgage? How interest-free home financing works in Canada
Opinion: Fear the politicization of pensions, no matter the politician
German Business Outlook Hits One-Year High as Economy Heals
B.C. puts online harms bill on hold after agreement with social media companies
Pecker’s Trump Trial Testimony Is a Lesson in Power Politics
Comments