A newspaper should be a place where, first and foremost, you read the truth (and today, getting that isn’t even remotely a “given” as you know); but secondly, it should present it using proper grammar, spelling, and it ought to be devoid of typos and missing words.
“There’s still plenty of time for the Liberal juggernaut to awaken, but we’ve seen no sign of it thus far. The Liberals don’t yet seem to quite why they need this big mandate, and are having trouble painting their main rival as unelectable without stepping in mud in the process.”
What’s being said is true, even if it is an opinion, so a checkmark goes there. But apparently, despite my tax dollars being sprayed all over the ever-so struggling news media by that over-hyped Liberal juggernaut Justin Trudeau, they can’t even edit an article properly, in this case leaving words missing. How could anyone have read that and signed off on it?
Our taxpayer money is going into this, thanks to Justin Trudeau’s Liberals — and thanks to the newspapers for accepting it. So, as taxpayers, we deserve better — like value for our money. Now that the news media has accepted our tax dollars — which should be an election issue in and of itself, but God knows THEY won’t make it one — they need to justify it and show taxpayers some respect, and like they’re putting it to good use. Maybe demonstrate in the most basic way that the largess is paying off. We expect more of welfare recipients! … Wwhich they really are, too…
The newspapers have an added responsibility to their readers now — to their corporate or shareholder interests of course, but now also one to the taxpayers, and it should honor that responsibility.
Here’s another goof in the same article:
“The Liberals tabled what an election ready budget in the spring as part of their “build back better” agenda, but …”
It’s funny that the article is about the Liberals finding election issues, and yet here’s one — the newspapers getting state funding as if we’re a communist state — and that isn’t even brought up in this article —an article which itself presents a poor argument for state funding.
It may seem picayune and niggardly of me, but I don’t care, it’s important to me, as a taxpayer, that we don’t literally fund a lowering of standards.