It’s in Alberta Premier Danielle Smith’s nature never to admit she’s wrong, so it was no surprise after her announcement Friday she wouldn’t allow reporters at a government news conference to ask more than one question prompted a storm of criticism, that she doubled down yesterday.
During the Your Province, Your Premier radio program given her free of charge by Corus Entertainment, Ms. Smith said she would refuse to take more than one question per reporter at the United Conservative Party’s political news conferences from now until the election scheduled to take place on May 29.
She also seemed to say that each media organization would only get a single question, whether or not they send more than one reporter.
Premier Smith also made up a fanciful and undoubtedly false story about why she is doing this.
To wit: “It’s so that we can get to more media outlets. Because as we get into the election campaign, there’s going to be far more interest. We’ve got dozens of media in Alberta, and if everyone was asking two questions, it means we’d have fewer that were able to get to.”
Please! Nobody believes this, and that includes the UCP employees and party loyalists who were repeating her wing-and-a-prayer talking point yesterday.
Ask yourself, what will happen if they run out of questions before the time allotted for the newser is up? Presumably they won’t go back to reporters who have rejoined the queue, as happened Friday. No, they will end the event and run for the exits.
This is obviously being done to prevent questions about the host of scandals and embarrassments dogging the UCP, most of them of Ms. Smith’s own creation. Among these are Pastorgate, RStar, the ethics investigation, that SLAPP suit, COVID conspiracy theories, and health policy flip-flops.
Anyway, it’s easy to blow off a first question, harder to deal with a thoughtful follow-up. It’s also easy when you’re picking who gets to ask questions, to move on to reporters who have other agendas.
But let’s get back to the premier’s Saturday bloviations on the radio: “You just can’t do hourlong, uh, press conferences. You just can’t do that! I mean, on Friday we had people standing behind me who’d been standing there for an hour, and had a couple of them afterwards saying that they were beginning to feel faint.”
This sounds like another one of Ms. Smith’s imaginary anecdotes. I think it would be reasonable for the media to try to find out who was feeling faint among the crowd of extras at that government announcement – albeit, a politically motivated one. There’s a picture, after all.
After a few supportive interruptions from YP/YP’s simpatico host, Wayne Nelson, Ms. Smith concluded the segment: “We’re going to continue to do media availabilities. We’re going to continue doing scrums. We’re going to continue doing town halls. It’s just, each media outlet will get one question, instead of getting two, while we’re in this period of the campaign, because I just need to make sure that we’re getting to as many people as possible.” (Emphasis added.)
So, a few thoughts about this.
First, this is obviously a ridiculous policy, but it’s the kind of thing Republicans do in the United States, so it was bound to show up in Canada sooner or later, and most bad ideas from south of the Medicine Line seem appear first directly north of Medicine Hat. So … shrug, yawn.
Second, a government has the power to set rules to manage media behaviour at government press conferences called to announce new policy, legislation, or responses to developing situations. Say, the outbreak of an infectious disease and the public health measures required to control it, just to pluck an example out of thin air.
Leastways they do if the reporter wants to get back into the Legislature Building.
If the rules are foolish and citizens (or as in this case, media) protest loudly enough things will usually get changed back, often quickly.
That’s what happened when an NDP staffer blocked a couple of agitators for a right-wing video blog from a government meeting in 2016. The Notley Government heard the protests and reversed course on the policy within two days.
They never did it again. We’ll see if Ms. Smith is that flexible.
Third, it is quite a different matter to say journalists can’t ask as many questions as they like at political events, as Ms. Smith now says she now intends to do.
Yes, if they phone in, the party has the power to hang up on them. But if they attend in person, that is not so.
So whether Alberta’s media meekly knuckles under to Ms. Smith’s one-question decree or ignores it is entirely up to the media.
All reporters need to do to stop this nonsense is show a little spine.
The appropriate response, then, is for reporters attending UCP political events in person is to simply ask the premier their first question and when the answer is unsatisfactory, ask their follow-up.
If the moderator says they can’t, ask it again anyway … louder.
If the moderator cuts of the mike, shout it out.
If party staff try to throw the reporters out, or deny them entry to the next meeting, make sure the cameras are running when it happens.
This is especially true of scrums, which by their nature are unorganized and without a moderator or chairperson. Get there firstest with the loudest voice and you can ask anything you like.
For this reason, Premier Smith’s statement to the contrary yesterday notwithstanding, I doubt very much she has any intention of coming anywhere near a scrum between now and May 29.
I know, this will be difficult for Alberta media, which is renowned for its docile nature. Deference is their middle name. But if reporters choose to let the UCP get away with this nonsense, that’s entirely on them.
If they will not ignore this decree – which the premier has neither the authority nor the power to make – they deserve no sympathy and no respect.
At some point, I fully expect the media to be banned from all of Danielle Smith’s and the UCP’s campaign events. Well, Keean Bexte will likely be invited to be “embedded” with the campaign, so that he can tweet and post to The Rumble to his heart’s content.
So I could be wrong, but I have a feeling that the 1 question thing isn’t going to last long, going by Dani’s Twitter comment…..
“The NDP wants you to forget they were charging Albertan’s $40 per day to get access for basic healthcare.
We removed those fees because no one should ever have to pay out- of-pocket to see a doctor…”
Say what????
Randi-lee: The NDP never charged Albertans $40 a day to get access to basic health care. Ask any Albertan who has received health care services from AHS while the NDP was in power if they were charged for anything. I am one of those Albertans. I was not asked to pay a dime. I expect there was an AHS charge for some purpose, perhaps for a drug rehabilitation program when the UCP eliminated harm reduction and allowed religion-based 12-step programs that are run by relatives and churches of UCP members. In that case, eliminating the fee would amount to a public subsidy of programs that are known not to work. What she is actually referring to would be an excellent follow-up question for some reporter. The UCP has no problem lying flat-out, bare faced and repeatedly, and this is only one example. DJC
Apparently you are correct about the treatment beds DJC, judging by the Twitter comments from the frothing-at-the-mouth Smith supporters. This is grossly misleading at best, outright lies/gaslighting at worst. Typical move from the UCP playbook, unfortunately.
I guess your sources were right, DJC. Smith will say anything, just gassing on while her mind catches up with her mouth. No wonder her campaign manager told her to shut up–or more accurately, told her to tell the reporters to shut up.
Yep, there it is. (link below)
There are lies, and then there are stupid lies. This is the latter, as the NDP government was recent enough that most people will remember not paying anything when they went to the doctor. What do they then think of Danielle Smith’s other claims of ‘misspeaking’?
https://mobile.twitter.com/ABDanielleSmith/status/1647328803474264064
Dear Randi-Lee I am an 80 year old senior who supported the Alberta Conservative Party for many years. My friends are all older than me , some are in their 90s and we are all sick and tired of the stupid remarks our fellow seniors keep coming up with, and our Lawyer friends are warning us seniors to not spread these Reform Party lies, without any proof to back it. Like we are seeing seniors doing, or we could find ourselves in court trying to defend our stupidity, so where is your proof that Notley was charging this $40. a day, you claim? I was in hospital 8 times during the Notley years and had 4 operations and like David it never cost me a dime. As someone who had ties to the oil industry ,do you also believe she increased taxes 97 times and cost Albertans 183,000 jobs when she had nothing to do with the International Oil Industry crash that happen the year before she was elected? We are tired of you guys ignoring the facts and believing these Reform Party lies, do you blame us? We aren’t that stupid, why are you?
I wonder if Smith is conflating the NDP (aka “the enemy”) with the ancient Medicare premiums that were cancelled in the dawn of time?
If memory serves, Ralph Klein cancelled the $35/person /month insurance premium.
Connecting that to Rachel Notley’s party would be an extreme leap, even for Danielle Smith. But you know, it wouldn’t surprise me.
“Deference is not a foregone conclusion,
but a forelock-tugging one.”
Stewart Stafford
But let’s get back to the premier’s Saturday bloviations on the radio: “You just can’t do hourlong, uh, press conferences. You just can’t do that! I mean, on Friday we had people standing behind me who’d been standing there for an hour, and had a couple of them afterwards saying that they were beginning to feel faint.”
Standing still for an hour would be extremely unpleasant; your back gets sore and the urge to fidget becomes overwhelming. Our bodies are made to move, not stand motionlessly. In the photo above, Rajan Sawhney seems to have migrated away from the electrical tape that told her where to stand. I would be surprised if any of the people who stood there on Friday would be willing to do it again.
Maybe Danielle should reconsider the need to have people standing there at all. In addition to being really unpleasant for them, if the people back there are paid employees there is a significant cost to having them just stand there doing nothing, especially if it taxpayers paying the cost (think medical workers). As an added bonus, there is no risk of one of their fingers sticking out!
Bob: I suppose in future we should be carefully checking all such pictures for such gestures. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the diogt d’honeur shows up again. DJC
Doight d’honeur! Bravo!
“…we had people standing behind me…and had a couple of them afterwards saying that they were beginning to feel faint.”
As the blogger directs, I scanned the adoring contingent trying to figure out who was feeling faint. After careful study it looks like one of them might be the tall thin guy with the short fat appearance.
Spinless media people? You want deferential and spineless look at Alberta’s lawyers and Judges. The lawyers know that if they take on a legally reasonable case which goes against Con/UCP policy, they will never have access to any lucrative jobs from either government or the energy sector. For actual farmers and ranchers our main contact with the Government of Alberta is when the energy companies come calling and we find out the rule of law in Alberta is whatever the energy companies say it is. When they say “jump” the Energy Regulator and the Courts ask “how high.”
If Pierre wants to label the CBC as some type of government organ, then he should have the decency to label Postmedia as foreign owned and demand the cessation of all tax breaks and government subsidies.
I’d say “hare-pelt” in reference to Poilievre.
Sorry Peter, it won’t happen. Postmedia is a privately owned, for-profit, foreign propaganda machine. Everybody knows “Private = Good” and “Government = Bad.”
I think the media have forgotten what it means to be a “reporter”, not a “journalist”. Reporters back in the day did not have diplomas or journalism degrees, let alone PhDs. But by golly, the stories that came out of those scrappy hacks with their manual typewriters! Dipping back into news stories written in the early 1900s is a delight, but I digress.
Some of us might be old enough to remember when press conferences did not entail a cast of dozens of extras grinning inanely in the background. That was pre-Trump. This is the post-Trump era. Perhaps the solution to fainting from a too-tight whale bone corset or venous insufficiency is not to have the throngs there at all. Think about it. The premier and her staff could choose modern inventions like Spanx and graduated support hose to help them get through the agonizing minutes with reporters. Problem solved! It sure beats the alternative of having lower ribs surgically removed to facilitate the wearing of whale bone corsets. Nope. Scarlett Unbearable is in charge now, y’all. Bring on the fainting couch.
There you have it–Queen Danielle of Oilberduhstan has spoken the words of her Grand Vizier, whoever he is. It’s probably her campaign manager, but I wouldn’t rule out some behind-the-scenes prodding by the Take Back Alberta cabal.
We could still have some fun with this, though. It’d take some thought, but phasing a question that’s likely to rattle Smith shouldn’t be hard. Just get her motor-mouth started, sit back and wait for the fiery crash.
It might turn out even better than DJC’s totally legitimate advice to ignore the silly pronouncement, and just keep shouting questions.
It’s just going to be like the covid press conferences where they ignored reporters. All the reporters will complain on Twitter and it will never be included in their actual stories or reporting.
I’m blocked by a good chunk of the #ableg reporters because every time they complained on Twitter I’d ask “do you care enough to include this in your story, and if not why should we care?”, which I don’t blame them for because it was obnoxious of me. But it also never made it into their actual reporting.
Ryan: Agreed. The odds are they will do nothing. As I said, in that event they deserve no sympathy, they’re simply not doing their jobs. That said, their hand is a little stronger now because Ms. Smith (foolishly as always) has made an issue of this. Will they play that hand? Doubtful. But one can hope. DJC
Off-topic, but you mentioned Smith’s radio show – once the writ is dropped, what do election financing rules say about this sort of free advertising?
Lars: That would be subject to interpretation. The whole claim the show is not free advertising for the premier and her party is more than a little dubious. It should be treated as a political donation. That said, it is telling that even CORUS has pulled the plug on the show until after the election. Host Wayne Nelson makes reference to this in the first minutes of the program. I doubt CORUS would make the same offer to Premier Notley, should that happen, but you never know. DJC
Ah, didn’t realize that The Danielle Smith Hour of Power was going off the air for the duration of the election. That makes things a little less ethically dubious, surely a first for the Smith government.
Thanks, David.
Lars: Of course, this was a decision by CORUS, not the UCP. DJC
Apparently the radio show last Saturdy was the last one until the election.
Valerie: That is correct, or so Mr. Nelson said during the first few minutes of the show. DJC
Hopefully the media of Alberta will push this to the extreme.
Smith is acting like a dictator.
Whatever happened to “freedom” of the press?
Or does freedom only apply to convoy types?
Though her bloviations were meant for her choir
Danielle continued to sink in the mire
So she was advised to ignore
Second questions from the floor
Lest she drown in her own Lake of Fire.
Well done, Gromster. DJC
Better to be thought a fool in silence than to speak and prove it. Sorry too late Dani.
Danis’ proposed governance by press releases of back room deals , unchallenged edicts and non discussed legislation is an embarrassment and hard to square with her fight for freedom.
there is no defence against an authoritarian political party, except not electing them in the first place.
Dear D & G: yes, in our Westminster type of system, once a party is elected, it is effectively a dictatorship. The media, lawyers, the Civil Service, and the Courts are all supposed to provide a counter balance. After over 40 years of Albertans voting for a single-party authoritarian state, those checks and balances are either gone or so weak they might as well be. The fascists know this and that is why they have the arrogance to put up a collection of con-artists, and kooks all led by a transparently glib front-person.
PS: I should have included the “Loyal Opposition” in that list, but when so few over the years have been elected, that pretty much makes them irrelevant. And let’s not forget even when the Legislature is actually sitting, the rules have been changed to neuter any real checks and balances there. As Grant Notley the best Premier we never had was fond of saying: “where everyone thinks alike, no one thinks much at all.”
As usual there are no young Albertans in this picture of older fools, believing every lie these reformers feed them. What a surprise. As someone who under Klein made it a habit of attending as many conservative gatherings as I could I am living proof that 80 to 85 percent of the gatherings were seniors and older Albertans and the stupidity I witnessed was sickening. To quote Ralph Klein “These idiots would believe anything I said”. Klein had a ball making them look like damn fools. I knew him well enough to know by his silly grin when he was lying and I have met other people who said they did also.
Alan K.Spiller: I’ve noticed the same thing. Both Ralph Klein and Danielle Smith have a look on their faces that show there is something devious going on. I’ve seen gatherings where Danielle Smith is present. A good percentage of those in attendance happen to be seniors.
As an older fella (not quite a senior, but close enough), I chuckle at the wild generalization of the term “Seniors”. The folks depicted in the presser photo are just the background props for the photo ops. It’s a two-way street, btw. Politicians speak at events in return for the photo ops and the groups get to share said photos with their community/business group/company in their newsletters and internal communications. I’ve posed in many of these industry photo-ops over the years.
Having said that, I think it is very risky to lump groups of people into huge, broad categories. You’re correct that a lot of the attendees at political events are seniors. This is, in part, because they have the time and income to attend these events. Young families that have to arrange for sitters and travel are not likely to attend. But we cannot assume that the entire UCP base is a bunch of rural seniors. The people who have been charged at the Coutts border insurrection were armed and ready to murder RCMP officers. None of them were seniors. The UCP kool-aid is being offered to and consumed by all age groups 🙁
Yes, there is an important distinction between what a government can try and do compared to at a political event. No doubt this will be lost on the UCP or ignored as they try to continue control communications. However, that may not go so well.
Alberta’s main stream media is often somewhat docile, but no one likes being overly managed or restricted in what to do. So this might lead to some rebellion and certainly some in the media based outside Alberta that cover Alberta politics are sometimes less deferential.
In any event, there are important issues involved here that merit continued public discussion regardless of whether Premier Smith wants to answer many questions or not. If not, we might just fill in the blanks and continue this discussion without her, which in the end could be worse for her.
Don’t worry: she’ll blab on at the first opportunity to attempt to insert three feet into her substantial mouth and blame everyone else for the predictable outcome.
Report that private clinicians are asking public health places for “loans” of specialized equipment!! How much more are we to do for this quest for ‘privateers’ in government and health care?
I used to hang out with reporters. My dad was a CBC news cameraman in Hogtown back in the photographic-film days and he often brought me along to carry batteries—back when cameras were very heavy and otherwise totally mechanical. That kept me pretty busy in the punctuations between looooooong, stultifyingly boring hours waiting in the galleries of Queen’s Park, City Hall, or the Law Courts—waiting for something to happen. I remember everyone was fairly pleasant (I’d have lunch in the parliamentary cafeteria, telling fishing stories with Premier Davis one day, cold coffee while listening to Moby Grape with Councilman Sewell the next, or tolerate Bill Copp’s —my dad’s reporter at the courthouse—dumb jokes, everybody killing time until everything happened all at once, really fast).
As a typical, young teenaged lad, I was probably too much of a dullard to notice the finer points of the news-crew’s craft—like: how did they know a politician would try to sneak out the back-door of the building so’s to waylay him by the garbage cans? Usually I’d still be catching my breath from the sprint by the time it was a wrap. Spending the whole day to get twenty seconds of film into the can seemed weird to me, but then the next big rush was to to get the film to the lab for developing, then more cold coffee and waiting around the office, then *yawn* the screening room, then the 40-mile commute home to watch it on TV while eating our warmed-over dinner. At least those parts of the day made sense to me *Zzzzzzzzzz….*
Yet I do seem to recall the odd occasion when otherwise competing reporters would huddle to co-ordinate questions in order, I’m guessing, to get that follow-up when the subject tried to limit not only the number of questions per reporter, but the number of questions, period. If I recall correctly, it would be agreed who would ask the first question and who would get the follow-up.
As usual, I wasn’t paying that much attention—at least not on how to coordinate teamed queries (I was more fascinated with how different people are on camera than they are when just shooting the breeze, killing time and being fairly amiable with each other. And then of course the funny trash-talking on the way back to the office).
Do reporters still do that in situations when politicians try to limit questions? I know a lot of things have changed since the 60s—like, wow!—video!!—but, in politics, some things don’t ever seem to change.
I guess it really depends on how cooperative reporters are with each other. I mean, reporters are smarter ‘n’ robots or cyborgs, yet, right?
Scotty: Are there enough reporters left in most towns nowadays to huddle in a corner? I’m sure this still goes on where numbers warrant. In my reporting days, I’d always try to corral everyone and get them to agree on the crowd size, if nothing else. DJC
But they do have drones nowadays, don’t they?
David, you may wish to check the french spelling in your response to Bob’s April 16, 2023 message April 16, 2023 at 11:49 pm.
“I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the diogt d’honeur shows up again. DJC”
should it not be “doigt d’honneur”
[email protected]
PS immensely enjoy your site.
E.W.: You are correct. If only I could find it I would fix it. DJC
Does the government own any folding chairs?
Three comments and an opinion:
1) Tucker Carlson, the U.S. whiny far right duplicitous, ass kisser should get the f**k away from Canadian politics.
2) Tucker Carlson, Calgary hates you.
3) Tucker Carlson, the U.S. billionaires funding your little shows in the ole U S of A are gettin a might nervous, and Canada is now the new target for fear and hate.
Whether by a journalist or a reporter, the verified facts matter every time. Truth and verifiable facts build trust in government, in neighborhoods, families, communities, sports teams, everywhere people come together for a common goal.
We all have a gut feeling when it comes to some things..
Since turnabout is fair play, taking inspiration from Danielle Smith’s edict, I received a call from some UCP hack on my mobile. It surprised me that they had my number, but no matter. The person of the other end asked me if “Premier Danielle Smith” could count on my support on election day.
My reply … is that your question?
His reply … yes…ummm…that is my question. Can Premier Smith count on your support?
You’ve just asked me two questions.
Ummm…yes, I did …
I am only allowing one question per phone call. You have used your question. Good bye.
Well done! DJC
Just Me……
BRAVO …Heavy applause, and much laughter!!!!! the perfect tonic for the day, that was….
Touche` !!