When Maclean's editor Ken Whyte said he's rather go out of business than allow some Muslim law students run unedited copy in the magazine, I agreed with his point of view. After all, Canada's Newsmagazine should be written by journalists striving for objectivity.
I'm such a Pollyanna. Obviously, I'm too long in the tooth to understand modern journalism, in which flacks mingle with the hacks to make sure we swallow the Harper-Rogers corporatist line.
Today's question: why is self-styled "rogue historian" Sean M. Maloney, now seconded to National Defence Headquarters' Historical section after a rather, um, interesting departure from Royal Military College writing five-page articles for Maclean's on Afghanistan? There's not a word in the magazine about Maloney's employment for the military.
And my sources in Spookworld tell me Maloney's trip was paid for by taxpayers. He was protected by the military and was introduced around Afghanistan as a historian working for National Defence. The CIDA people interviewed by Maloney supposedly had no idea their words would end up in Maclean's.
Headgaskets are popping at CIDA, the military's pissed, the readers of Maclones are reading articles written by historians on the military payroll, and Mark Steyn continues to do his "poor me" schtich while his employer does whatever he can to get some buzz.
Blair Fraser, where are you now?
As usual, Steyn has picked out a couple of words while ignoring my whole argument, which is Maclean's deterioration into a rag that now runs articles by writers who are on the military payroll, without mentioning that fact.
I use the word "corporatist" because there's a strong element of fascism in the present version of Maclean's. I believe strongly in liberty, democracy and an honest press. In the latter case, Maclean's doesn't make the cut.