Heather Mallick’s happy ramblings

- September 11th, 2010

When I was first tipped off to Heather Mallick’s column the other day where she wrote about Fox News, Sun TV News and her connection to both of them I was seriously worried that I would learn that Ms. Mallick had slept with someone in my office.

This is no irrational fear, Mallick has already written about people she has slept with in her Toronto Star columns. That’s right, the woman who worries that Sun TV will soon lower the standards of journalism and discourse in Canada used up space in her column to tell the world about a one night stand from her ancient past.

“This was the lowest point of my digital life: I was playing a news conference online while researching a column and a distant emotional bell tolled. Something seemed oddly familiar. I looked at the screen. ‘Oh my god,’ I said aloud. ‘I slept with that guy.’

And it was true. I had, decades ago, in my early 20s.”

Beyond worrying that Sun TV will take standards lower than exposing our sex lives Mallick doesn’t want to have an alternative news channel offered in Canada because she’s convinced it will inspire racism, push an agenda and make stuff up.

Recently The Star wrote up a story about Tibetan monks en route to Canada being held up at the border due to visa problems. The only problem is there were no visa problems. The monks, part of an advance team preparing for the Dali Lama’s visit to Canada in October, were actually held up for reasons that had nothing to do with visas or the Canadian government.

Now, if you read Heather Mallick you would think a correction would have been promptly issued. Here’s what Mallick wrote as she ranted and raved about Fox and Sun TV.

“When real journalists make a mistake, we feel a sickness in our soul. It’s humiliating, it should, and will be, publicly corrected and so-workers avert their eyes. Fox isn’t like that. They seemingly make up numbers, flying unburdened through their fenced-in no-fact zone.”

Heather, you should start reading your own paper. And speaking of things that have agendas….

One of the main criticisms of Sun TV is that it will be agenda driven. Mallick calls it a propaganda machine. How many Canadians know about the Atkinson Principles? The Toronto Star is run according to a set of principles laid out by Joseph Atkinson a multi-millionaire that died in 1948.

Among Atkinson’s many beliefs, the ones still guiding the newspaper 62 years after his death, was the idea that all utilities should be owned by the public. That may not seem controversial if you think utility means electricity and water but check his idea of what constituted a utility. From The Star’s own web site,

“He favoured public ownership of gas, electric light, electric power, coalmines, oil wells, timber, pulp and paper, telephone, telegraph, radio, television, railways, airlines and streetcars.”

Notice what is absent? Newspapers. While he wanted all other media to be owned by the government Atkinson wanted to keep amassing his fortune which continues to fund left wing causes today through his foundation.

Atkinson also used his newspaper’s pages to push for a greater role for labour unions in Canada while also seeking to limit the influence of unions at The Star.

Eccentric media barons, dead or alive, can have whatever wacky ideas they want, the point here is that The Star has, and always has had its own agenda. Joseph Atkinson took over The Toronto Star with the support of wealthy backers so they could turn it into the voice of the Liberal Party.

That’s what the paper was in Atkinson’s day, that’s what it remains today.

Categories: General

Subscribe to the post

41 comments

  1. Rufus says:

    Brian, truer words were never spoken. Mallick is case and a half.

  2. Guest says:

    Mr. Lilley: I’m sure you’d be happy to give equal attention to the following whopper which ran in Sun papers some time ago without correction. Salim Mansur wrote:

    “The facts Middle America must consider about the two men vying for its votes is Obama’s record of barely 143 days in Congress…”

    While identical claims appear in a chain email campaign, Voter fact check services, and major media identified it as completely erroneous before Mansur used the figure.

    FactCheck.org debunks the email claim that Obama “logged 143 days of experience in the Senate. That’s how many days the Senate was actually in session and working”:

    “Wrong”, says FactCheck, “That’s not the number of days the Senate was in session. From the time Obama was sworn in on Jan. 3, 2005, until the day he announced his exploratory committee on Jan. 16, 2007, the Senate was in session 304 days, according to the Secretary of the Senate’s official count”.
    http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/how_long_have_obama_and_mccain_been.html

    In addition to that figure being wrong, the number of days the Senate or House of Representatives was in session is not the same as time served as a Senator or Congressman.

    CNN’s “The Facts” reports “Obama served 743 days in the Senate from his swearing in to the announcement of his exploratory committee…”.
    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/22/fact-check-did-obama-only-serve-300-days-in-the-senate-before-he-became-a-candidate/

    AssociatedContent.com: “Another anti-Obama piece circulating on the Internet claims that Obama only has 143 days of Senate experience… This is Incorrect”.
    http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/832119/is_is_true_that_barack_obama_only_has.html

    The Washington Post: “Obama served 743 days as a senator before presidential bid”.
    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/10/20/the_daily_double_obama_and_pal.html

    Greensboro News-Record: “If you do intend to send us a letter you can help expedite it being published by citing your sources, especially for statistics. One letter writer wrote to point out Obama’s mere 143 days in the U.S. Senate. Problem is, the number is just plain wrong…”
    http://blog.news-record.com/staff/outloud/archives/2008/09/this_weeks_colu_96.shtml

    Mansur’s number was incorrect by any count, and worse, seems to have come from an anti-Obama chain email campaign. Perhaps you could address your own paper’s errors, methods, and standards.

  3. Largs says:

    Heather Mallick is one very hateful person. I suppose the reason she writes about her sex life is that she doesn’t get very much. Can you imagine waking up next to this venom spewing harpy.

  4. David says:

    This is a pretty typical “I know you are but what am I” defense.
    The sort of schoolyard mentality that Heather seemed to be alluding to.
    Of course, you didn’t refute what Heather said, only tried to smokescreen it with stories about the paper where she works, and 62 year old stories at that. Pretty unimpressive.

  5. Sandra says:

    Geez there Lilly, considering your writings I suggest you have no right to criticize anyone.

    Amazing how he refers to a man that died 62 years ago. That’s a long time bud and people do move forward.

    Don’t like Mallick? Don’t read her stuff – simple.

    The last person I would trust as a journalist is Lilly.

  6. Guest says:

    And about accuracy, has David Akin’s September 7 claim that “Trudeau beat Joe Clark in 1974” been corrected yet?

  7. Carl says:

    Let’s also not forget that the Atkinson foundation funds groups like People for Education who the Star likes to prop up in their paper regularly in their effort to pander to public education. Handy no?

  8. Dave says:

    Why has no one mentioned the CBSC and the RTNDA during all of this? These organizations exist in Canada to prevent unfactual media outlets like Fox News from setting up here in Canada. All of Qubecor/TVAs assets are a part of these organizations. Wouldn’t SunTV News follow the same principles?

  9. Guest says:

    About that Toronto Star report, here is the sentence: “’They are currently held up with Visa problems,’ Namgyal Nangsetsang, spokeswoman for the Tibetan cultural centre said Sunday.” Is Mr. Lilley suggesting that spokeswoman lied, or that the Star misquoted her? Perhaps he could clarify, or provide facts.

  10. The T.Star was one of the only few papers that endorsed the Liberal leader in 2008 for Prime Minister.

    The fact the H.M. is paid to provide support for Liberalism and the failed ideology is nothing new. Cheerleaders for sale in vertical and horizontal positions is not unusual.

  11. Wayne Major says:

    I agree with Lilley.
    Heather Mallick, lost all credibility with me when I was first introduced to her writing. She had returned to Kapuskasing for her high school reunion, a town she had only lived in for five years, and in a July 21, 1996 Toronto Sun column proclaimed the experience “like travelling to another planet.” That I recall, that was about the nicest thing she had to say.

    As publisher of the local paper, my readers were mortified and wanted blood. After suffering through the tedious ramblings she titled “Northern exposure” (truly original title Heather!) all I could tell them was she desperately needed to befriend an editor.

    Following is a sampling of what Ms Mallick thinks of her fellow man:
    “We sat there (with her husband) and watched women come out of the hair salon with the worst hair in existence, hair that literally looked as if it had been set by a Mixmaster, beehives with giant unblended curls, and the victims looking terrified, and I said, there do you understand small towns now or do I have to take you back into Wal-Mart? Do you want me to gain weight and look 52 at 36, like that woman in the bright green sweatshirt that reads, “When Irish eyes are smiling, they’re usually up to something”? Would you like to move to a small town and raise a passel of kids? Would you like to get up from supper every night and head off for your shift at the mill, picking those oft-used plugs out of the ashtray and shoving them in your ears? Go out to dinner on Saturday night and eat cream of carrot soup and hot pork with a side order of toast? One word from you and we can do that! Stop saying my town is charming!”

    Maybe she is correct, Canada doesn’t need its own version of Fox News. It already has Heather Mallick.

  12. wilson says:

    This is why we need Sun TV!
    Let the truth be told about the TS and the CBC being the voice of the Liberal Party.

    also
    Irving family – Almost complete newsprint monopoly in New Brunswick with extremely strong ties to both federal and provincial Liberal parties. Jamie Irving was at the center of the “Wafergate“

    Ivan Fecan, CEO CTVglobemedia – Well known Liberal fundraiser for Jean Chretien and Paul Martin

    Jack Fleischmann, RobTV GM – Oversaw the election advertising for the Liberal Party of Canada

    Izzy Asper, Canwest Global – Was close friends with Jean Chretien and Paul Martin. He ran as a Liberal and was leader of Manitoba’s Liberal Party

    h/t
    http://bcblue.wordpress.com/2010/09/10/liberals-and-their-relationships-with-media-bigwigs/

  13. John West says:

    I want to know what kind of razor Heather uses to shave her back hair … electric or manual. If manual, do you ever cut yourself?

    Can you get a close enough shave so your back is stubbly and rough like a man’s five o’clock shadow, or can you pass for a woman in the sack.

    Just asking.

  14. Maureen says:

    Sandra says:
    September 12, 2010 at 9:17 am

    Don’t like Mallick? Don’t read her stuff – simple.

    Exactly!! And if you don’t like the idea of Sun TV? Don’t watch – simple.

  15. andycanuck says:

    I heard on a radio programme many, many years ago but haven’t seen confirmed elsewhere since that all Star board (or editorial board?) members have to be card-carrying members of the LPC.

    And the Atkinson point, Sandra, is that the newspaper is still run according to his ‘principles’ the 62 years later, thus raising a dead man as an issue. (Check out the Star Wiki entry for the details.)

  16. Geoff says:

    Hello!!

    62 year old stories… I think not. When the paper still follows those principles they are living, not distant history.

    I sent off a complaint about Mallicks column based upon “facts” which she presented a few spurious links and then concluded that Sun TV News was racist and bottom of the barrel journalism.

    I guess Heather wants no competition for the bottom of the barrel…

    And, it isn’t tough to spell Lilley correctly….. I have found Brian’s writing to be improving by leaps and bounds. His articles are fun to read, comtemporary, and he writes about what I care about.

  17. Sandra says:

    Well, as far a I can see Maureen, whatever you think of Mallick, she doesn’t misinform and lie – HUGE difference.

    You want to be a sucker for this garbage, go ahead. Whatever Rupert wants as part of his control and the Sun has been suckered in.

    Murdoch in legal troubles with Cameron in Britain and hey, Murdoch has no principles – he so hungry for money he does business with North Korea.

    So, go ahead folks on the right, but Murdoch’s suckers

  18. jgriffin says:

    I find the volume of time and effort by other other media organizations to stifle competition very interesting. Assuming that SunTV is going to be associated with other Sun media I would like to know if similar allegations have been filed against those organizations in the past (i.e. their behaviour may be a good indicator of what to expect from SunTV.)

    Also, aren’t the current efforts of the Toronto Star to prevent another media organization from forming a clear conflict of interest? Actually, couldn’t this be considered an anti-competitive practice?

  19. Kelly says:

    Sandra, you’re an ass. People rely on good, honest reportage and Mallick does neither. Quit drinking the kool-aid.

  20. parnel says:

    lilley can’t even write the English language properly:

    “laid out by Joseph Atkinson a multi-millionaire “that” died in 1948.”

    Must be sun staffer!!!!

  21. ted says:

    sandra,s rebuttal to maureen is simply hilerious. it should be posted for all to see.really, that comment should shut down all further remarks.but sandra i sure would like some of your other ideas on the media.

  22. Alberta Girl says:

    “Well, as far a I can see Maureen, whatever you think of Mallick, she doesn’t misinform and lie – HUGE difference.”

    Really Sandra?? Hmmmm – sweetie, Heather typifies misinformation. The fact that you can’t see that tells me that you watch entirely too much CBC and are unable to think for yourself.

    As for lying…well she certainly stretches the truth, Sandra…much like yourself!

  23. Alberta Girl says:

    “lilley can’t even write the English language properly”

    Well parnel…he may have made an “grammatical” error, but at least he probably doesn’t call it “language”.

    When you correct, expect to be corrected.

    BTW, could you or Sandra tell me what you are so afraid of about SunTV? After all, don’t you guys stand up for freedom of speech and aren’t you against censorship?? Strange that you would be so up in arms about another viewpoint.

    As someone pointed out, you don’t have to watch, just like I NEVER watch CBC! I do object to my tax dollars supporting it though….SunTV isn’t asking for your tax dollars so I just wonder what has the left so afraid.

  24. Mark says:

    Sandra, really now you think Mallick doesn’t misinform or lie.
    You really have got it badly. Mallick is the biggest waste of time you can ever read. She spews nothing but mis=informstion and lies.

  25. Stan says:

    The CBC keeps attacking SunTV for potential bias, but they continue to run a BBC segment on their newscasts.
    The BBC admits being biased.

  26. simus says:

    This constant libleft vituperation is a bit confusing when you consider that the CBC is one of the top advertisers during Rogers’ slot times on big audience Fox News programs.

  27. Sandra says:

    Sandra,, your funny,, defending Mallick,, have your read the trash she was writing about our country well writing for a British paper. The lady is so far to the left of the media that she is going slowly insane at the thought that a conservative govt is still in power in this country. For proof of this insanity I offer up her writings over the last year. She is slipping and slipping fast

  28. Sandra says:

    Alberta Girl – don’t call me sweetie. Trying to act like some toughy or something – crass.

    For you that are the supposed free speechers – you can’t take it.

    Losers – suckered in by Rupert Murdoch.

    The Sun has and always will be garbage – they exploit blood and gore and scandals and crap.

    And, their ink comes off in your hands.

    You want to keep being treated like you’re stupid and be suckers, go ahead.

    Sad

  29. 900ft says:

    distortion, quoting out of context, red herrings…way to go, Lilley. Are you really such a bad writer with no grasp of logic and argumentation, or do you just have a complete lack of respect for your readers?

  30. john says:

    The whining journalists here who speak in knee jerk defense of one of their own and attack Sun TV don’t matter.

    I will subscribe to Sun TV. I will watch it. I will inform the advertisers that I watch it and it will succeed. The same way Fox is destroying the competition in the U.S. Don’t like it? — Tough.

  31. beentheredone that says:

    Is Sandra, Heather Malick in Drag.

  32. Alberta Girl says:

    “or do you just have a complete lack of respect for your readers?”

    speaking of lack of respect, how ’bout that Ian Davey calling those who want to watch SunTV “illiterate”….hmmmmm – arrogance AND stupidity all in one fell swoop.

    Ah, yes Beer and Popcorn moments…gotta love ‘em!

    Brian..I hope you are keeping track of the senseless natterings of the left wing media who are scared S*$#LESS that once Sun TV comes to be, they will be floundering out in left field with no readers and no listeners.

  33. mot says:

    Hey Sandra…

    CBC Ombudsman Vince Carlin subsequently conducted a review of Mallick’s article. He noted that Mallick is not a CBC employee (she is a freelance writer) and is therefore not subject to the same rules as CBC employees. However, he noted that Mallick presented several statements as facts without any justification. He noted that “there is no factual basis for a broad scale conclusion about the sexual adequacy of Republican men” and “that type of comment, applied to any other group, would easily be seen as, at best, puerile.” He also noted that Mallick’s “characterization of Palin supporters as white trash lacks a factual basis.” Carlin wrote that he had asked Ms. Mallick to explain the basis for these characterizations and although she explained her opinions of Ms. Palin, she “did not provide a factual justification for the statements.”[9]

    Carlin stated that Mallick “is entitled to her opinions, and those opinions should not be censored, but those opinions must also be expressed in a manner that meets our Journalistic Standards and Practices. Liberty is not the same as license [sic].”[9] Carlin also noted that it is not the responsibility of the CBC only to publish viewpoints that are favoured by the majority of Canadians but rather “the CBC should not shy away from pointed opinions, but it should seek out the broadest range that can be found.”[9] Carlin also resisted the “impulse to suppress opinions that cause upset, or to issue a blanket defense of freedom of opinion” but rather called for the development of “standards to ensure that vigorous opinion thrives while ensuring that journalistic and quality standards are met.”[9]

    On September 28, 2008, an apology and retraction of the column was issued by the CBC. The article was characterized as “a classic piece of political invective….it is viciously personal, grossly hyperbolic and intensely partisan.” [8] Heather Mallick herself did not respond to the CBC’s apology, and did not personally retract the column.

    I would have to agree with Greta van Susteren “Heather Mallick is a pig”

  34. Yoda says:

    Terrified..Liberals are….
    Of this alternate voice, ..expose them… it will.!

  35. TJC says:

    Wow, Lilley – you sound like a highschool cheerleader who thinks she’s been “dissed.”

    Come to think of it, the quality of your argument is that of a highschool cheerleader who thinks she’s been “dissed.”

    It seems you’re the real Heather in this conversation.

  36. Arty says:

    Hey parnel! Thanks for demonstrating that old chestnut, ‘the last refuge of a lefty is his spelling and grammer checker’. I can just see you salivating over that misused ‘that’. You probably pull your groin rushing to the comment section in order to be the first to blurt it out.

  37. Daniel Martin says:

    Maureen: Don’t like Mallick? Don’t read her stuff – simple.

    Exactly!! And if you don’t like the idea of Sun TV? Don’t watch – simple.

    …Except the Sunboys want Canadians to subsidize their business, want to skirt the regulations that all other tv outlets have to pass through and be gifted a spot on the dial. They can buy it, and you can watch it, but it should be a specialty channel, just like its counterpart Al Jazeera…

  38. Jamie MacMaster says:

    It must be the use of the much hackneyed “Oh my God” that separates the “real” journalists of Mallick’s caliber from those who would lower the standards of journalism and discourse in Canada.

  39. scatmaster says:

    Oh Danny boy it is not going to be on regular cable you are going to have the option to have it but you are going to have to pay for it. Get your facts straight leftard.

  40. burkanuck says:

    I LOVE how liberals are always screaming about “freedom of speech” but how it is never extended to those with whom they disagree. This is precisely why we DO need this station.
    Of course the liberal intelligentsia are afraid that the unwashed masses will be taken in by the “hateful” conservative views which will be presented because the average Canadian isn’t bright enough to distinguish truth from propaganda. I mean, we all know that the CBC is just about as middle of the road as they come, right?

  41. bclion says:

    Ms. Mallick is simply a grade 5 bully. She enjoys trashing people who cannot respond or challenge her back. She is condescending, ignorant, arrogant, narrow-minded and vicious. She is also a very good writer, funny and clever, and charming around her like-minded sycophants.

    Personally, I think she is the antithesis of an ethical journalist. But mostly, she is just another schoolyard bully-girl, who inflicts all kinds of contempt and abuse on those she disapproves of.

Comments are closed.