Author Topic: Patrick Brown #MeToo  (Read 3930 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

guest7

  • Guest
Re: Patrick Brown #MeToo
« Reply #375 on: February 16, 2018, 08:32:48 pm »
I agree but a errant mouse click meant the wrong response was posted (mod: anyway to reverse a response once clicked?).

I don't think so.  I tried to reverse an inadvertent dumb vote once, and JMT said it couldn't be done.
Sad Sad x 1 Informative Informative x 1 Useful Useful x 1 Optimistic Optimistic x 1 Creative Creative x 1 Dumb Dumb x 1 View List

guest7

  • Guest
Re: Patrick Brown #MeToo
« Reply #376 on: February 16, 2018, 11:08:23 pm »
Normally I reciprocate with "dumb votes", but I'm going to take that one in the spirit it was obviously intended...

Offline Michael Hardner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12477
Re: Patrick Brown #MeToo
« Reply #377 on: February 16, 2018, 11:21:04 pm »
God made the least photogenic human ever.  And he said "Lord, I'm gonna sell hash, then run for office"


Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Patrick Brown #MeToo
« Reply #378 on: February 16, 2018, 11:23:59 pm »
He probably has the same contacts brother Rob had.

Offline Michael Hardner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12477
Re: Patrick Brown #MeToo
« Reply #379 on: February 16, 2018, 11:34:37 pm »
Like Like x 1 View List

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Patrick Brown #MeToo
« Reply #380 on: February 17, 2018, 12:20:03 am »
Like Like x 1 View List

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5033
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: Patrick Brown #MeToo
« Reply #381 on: February 17, 2018, 11:39:23 am »
Why CTV? They pursued a very important story, they interviewed the accusers and at least one person one of them confided in years ago, they immediately made corrections when they were identified. It sounds like there was also a lot of related stories about his time on Parliament hill that the general public was not aware of and has come out after this story,

Name one.  As far as I know we're still at two accusations.

All that has come out is that it's general knowledge in Barrie that Brown liked to go to bars and try to meet women.

I am sure there were members of the media that heard those stories years ago but didn't report them until we got to this level of detail. What did CTV do wrong? How should the media handle stories, not report anything, or only report what you want to hear?

Yes there need to be journalistic standards met. What make you think that CTV didn't meet them. A story of this prominence would have many senior CTV officials and legal team vetting it, or so I would expect. This is not like the standard bullcrap that rags like the Rebel put out and you never seem to have problems with them.

Brown's lawsuit against CTV will probably focus on


 -failure to disclose a connection between the reporter and the constituency office staff member Brown allegedly tried to kiss.   CTV claims that it looked at this and found no connection between the reporter and witness. That's been contradicted by Kate Malloy, their editor at Hill Times, who said that the two certainly did work together and know each other. There's clearly a strong potential for bias that the reader would usually be made aware of. We normally see disclosures like "Bell Media is a parent company of CTV News" when relationships exist that might suggest a potential for bias. Why not in this story?

 -failure to do adequate research. Failing to verify that Brown lived where the first accuser said he lived, or talk to the bartender who allegedly served the girl all this alcohol before she went home with Brown, or talk to other people who were at the house party where the staffer claims he tried to kiss her, for example.  They talked to the first girl's bestie but didn't find anybody who might provide a more objective recollection of events.  That they only interviewed witnesses that would support their story seems highly selective. One wonders if that might be because of bias (see prior point) or perhaps CTV was looking for a blockbuster story.

 -if I recall correctly they didn't give Brown much opportunity to respond before going to press with the story. They didn't give names or dates and only gave him a short time to respond.  If they had confronted him with the allegations and given him a chance to say "look, I didn't even live in a 2 story house at the time" CTV wouldn't have ended up wearing so much egg on their face when the accuser had to change her story.

I am not a lawyer, obviously, but those are 3 areas where I think CTV **** up this story badly. And those are the areas I would concentrate on if I were Brown's lawyers.  I think there's a legitimate case to be made that CTV didn't do their due diligence, and therefore that CTV participated in defaming Brown and causing him substantial professional and personal harm.

 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline Michael Hardner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12477
Re: Patrick Brown #MeToo
« Reply #382 on: February 17, 2018, 12:08:44 pm »
All of that may be true but how does it lead to a successful lawsuit, ie. awarding of money, if the substantive facts are true ?

So, revelation of these relationships results in him stepping down (ostensibly) and/or the party assessing him to be unelectable and dumping him.  He tries to sue by saying the reporter knew a witness, or they got the number of stories in his house wrong ?

Doesn't seem enough, but let's see if he puts the money up to try to sue CTV.  I'm sure they have lawyers.

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5033
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: Patrick Brown #MeToo
« Reply #383 on: February 17, 2018, 12:34:29 pm »
All of that may be true but how does it lead to a successful lawsuit, ie. awarding of money, if the substantive facts are true ?

So, revelation of these relationships results in him stepping down (ostensibly) and/or the party assessing him to be unelectable and dumping him.  He tries to sue by saying the reporter knew a witness, or they got the number of stories in his house wrong ?

Doesn't seem enough, but let's see if he puts the money up to try to sue CTV.  I'm sure they have lawyers.

The most lurid part of the allegation-- "underage" and "highschool" turned out to be completely false.  I think there's a reasonable argument to be made that this story would have been viewed much differently by the general public if it had been presented as "19 year old meets man in bar, goes home with him, gives him consensual hummer."  And as I explained above I think this is something CTV could have easily avoided if they had confronted Brown with the details of the allegation before going to press.  They failed to do adequate research, at great cost to Brown's reputation and career.

As for the other accuser, it's a "he-said she-said" story where CTV never told the audience the "he-said" part, and failed to disclose that the reporter and the accuser are friends.   CTV claimed that they did their due diligence on that aspect, so it was apparently important to them defending themselves. CTV clearly got it wrong... is it still important?


Do you disagree that CTV's reporting on this story was seriously flawed, Michael?

 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline Michael Hardner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12477
Re: Patrick Brown #MeToo
« Reply #384 on: February 17, 2018, 01:04:26 pm »
They got some key facts wrong, but if they were misinformed by their sources it might be hard to show malicious intent, negligence, or damages.

Offline waldo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8715
Re: Patrick Brown #MeToo
« Reply #385 on: February 17, 2018, 01:31:22 pm »
And as I explained above I think this is something CTV could have easily avoided if they had confronted Brown with the details of the allegation before going to press.  They failed to do adequate research, at great cost to Brown's reputation and career.

timeline I read has Brown being contacted 6 hours before the news report was released publicly... a period in which he, apparently as described, did not offer comment back. However, during that period Brown called the last-minute news conference to deny a pending news report about sexual misconduct, and decry it as "categorically untrue."

Per Canadian Press Feb 16:
Quote
Statement from CTV News:

CTV News stands by our reporting and will actively defend against any legal action. We welcome the opportunity to defend our journalism in court. - Matthew Garrow, Director of Communications, CTV News

Per TorStar Feb 14:
Quote
Matthew Garrow, director of communications at CTV News, said the network “continues to stand by its reporting on Patrick Brown.”

“Patrick Brown’s allegations regarding our reporting are false. As we reported once again last night, the two women have reiterated their allegations of sexual misconduct by Patrick Brown,” said Garrow.

“His attacks on our journalistic practices are groundless and wrong. CTV News continues to ask Patrick Brown if he thinks the two women accusing him of sexual misconduct are lying. He has yet to respond,” he said.

“CTV News will continue to report on this matter undeterred by Patrick Brown’s groundless allegations.”

Offline SirJohn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5801
Re: Patrick Brown #MeToo
« Reply #386 on: February 17, 2018, 03:04:20 pm »
They got some key facts wrong, but if they were misinformed by their sources it might be hard to show malicious intent, negligence, or damages.

They also interviewed the guy who allegedly went into the bedroom with Brown and the second woman, and he said it never happened. Since he didn't corroborate the story but actually contradicted it they decided not to mention the interview. That doesn't sound unbiased to me. It sounds like they only wanted to include information which supported their narrative.
"When liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals won't do." David Frum

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: Patrick Brown #MeToo
« Reply #387 on: February 17, 2018, 03:17:57 pm »
failure to disclose a connection between the reporter and the constituency office staff member Brown allegedly tried to kiss.

Failing to verify that Brown lived where the first accuser said he lived, or talk to the bartender who allegedly served the girl all this alcohol before she went home with Brown, or talk to other people who were at the house party where the staffer claims he tried to kiss her, for example.

if I recall correctly they didn't give Brown much opportunity to respond before going to press with the story.


The connection not being disclosed would be an issue, if it is true.

They had a story about the source and Brown, it was about what happened, the location had zero relevance at the time. This was a story of circumstances, not a criminal investigation.

Brown was obviously contacted before the story went to press because he is the one that broke the story to the public. The only timeline I am aware of is between when Brown broke the story, and CTV published it. The more important times are when CTV went to Brown for comment, and when they originally intended to break the story; do you have any insight into those times because they are the only one relevant to your comment.

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: Patrick Brown #MeToo
« Reply #388 on: February 17, 2018, 03:21:48 pm »
They also interviewed the guy who allegedly went into the bedroom with Brown and the second woman, and he said it never happened. Since he didn't corroborate the story but actually contradicted it they decided not to mention the interview. That doesn't sound unbiased to me. It sounds like they only wanted to include information which supported their narrative.

Yes, if they interviewed someone with contradictory evidence then that should have been part of the story. Do we have any confirmation on that detail?

Offline Michael Hardner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12477
Re: Patrick Brown #MeToo
« Reply #389 on: February 17, 2018, 03:22:06 pm »
Why is it an issue if the witness and reporter knew each other?