Archive.fm

CANADALAND

(Short Cuts) Global: Spanked, Not SLAPPed

What’s going on in Han Dong’s defamation case against Global News? Last week, Ontario Superior Court Justice Paul Perell made a decision in that case. And, rightly or wrongly, it was scorching.


With The Epoch Times at the centre of a fraudulent money-laundering crypto scam, what does that mean for the Canadian columnists who write for them? Jonathan dives into the strange world of Shen Yun, Falun Gong, and propaganda rags.


Host: Jonathan Goldsbie

Credits: Aviva Lessard (Producer), Sam Konnert (Producer), Caleb Thompson (Audio Editor), Karyn Pugliese (Editor-in-Chief)

Guest: Lisa Taylor

 

Further reading: 


 

Sponsors: Douglas, Squarespace, 

If you value this podcast, Support us! You’ll get premium access to all our shows ad free, including early releases and bonus content. You’ll also get our exclusive newsletter, discounts on merch at our store, tickets to our live and virtual events, and more than anything, you’ll be a part of the solution to Canada’s journalism crisis, you’ll be keeping our work free and accessible to everybody.  

 

You can listen ad-free on Amazon Music—included with Prime.




Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Duration:
39m
Broadcast on:
27 Jun 2024
Audio Format:
mp3
This episode is brought to you by Douglas. You ever notice how many myths there are about sleep? That your mattress doubles in weight every 10 years? That you swallow eight spiders a year or a month or a day or an hour or whatever? Neither of those things are true. But you know, mattresses do get icky. So if you're tired of sleeping on your yellow pancake mattress, upgrade to a Douglas. It has a moisture-working machine washable cover to keep things fresh. Douglas is giving our listeners a free sleep bundle with each mattress purchased. Get the sheets, pillows, mattress, and pillow protectors free with your Douglas purchase today. Visit Douglas.ca/cannadoland to claim this offer. That's Douglas.ca/cannadoland. This episode is brought to you by Douglas, the mattress. The mattress that is trusted by more than 200,000 Canadians from coast to coast to coast. I'm one of them. It's an excellent mattress and it sleeps cool and are increasingly sweaty hot summers. It has eco-light cooling gel foam on the top layer. Douglas is giving our listeners a free sleep bundle with each mattress purchase. This is a great deal. The sheets, pillows, mattress, and pillow protectors free with your Douglas purchase today. Visit Douglas.ca/cannadoland to claim this offer. One more time. Have a look, Douglas.ca/cannadoland. (upbeat music) Lisa Taylor, former journalism professor at Toronto Metropolitan University, current journalism professor at Kings and Halifax, and also a real-life lawyer. Welcome to shortcuts. - Great to be here, Jonathan. - Today on the show, global news gets burned after reading or read after burning, depending on your preferred turn of phrase, and an outlet that serves as a side gig for several post-media colonists is embroiled in an alleged mind-monitoring scheme. Welcome to shortcuts where we talk shit about the news. (upbeat music) This episode is brought to you by Tamara Murphy, Mary Ellen Hind, Renee Burkel, Ryan Sagert, Henry Bailey Brown, Yang Yang Yang, Joy Lacey, and Rob. - Hi, I'm Rob, a media studies professor who lives in Toronto. I started listening to Canada Land while living in the US. I don't think Jesse Brown wants to hear this, but Canada Land may be more to move to Canada. Not because Canada is some sort of paradise, but because it seems like a good place to wrestle with important things, like the role of media in a democracy, and what is to be done about the impossible pain of colonial history. I love all the shows, but I want to send a special shout out to Pretendians and Rat Fucker. (upbeat music) - In early April, Robert Fife and Stephen Chase, the Globe and Mail, took the stage to accept a Canadian Hillman Prize for their reporting on foreign interference. - I think it's fair to say that after their truly earth-shattering investigation into foreign interference in Canada, this country will never be the same. - Later that month, they were honored by the National Newspaper Awards in the politics category for their work on the same subject. - And the award in the politics category goes to obeisings not gonna like this one bit. - Robert Fife, Steve Chase, the Globe and Mail. (upbeat music) - At the same time, Sam Cooper, who's reporting for global news, was similarly responsible for placing the issue of alleged foreign interference, particularly by China, at the center of Canada's political conversation last year. He was defending his reporting in a court of law, or at least wherever it was that he was cross-examined on the details of his journalistic methods. Last week, the Ontario Superior Court, specifically Justice Paul Parell, handed down a decision in that case, and rightly or wrongly, it was scorching. To back up a moment, last year, MP Handong sued global. Cooper and several of Cooper's then colleagues, he's no longer global, over a number of stories they published, most particularly a couple, one that was from February of last year, that ran online with the headline, Leerbell MP, allegedly tied to Chinese interference, colon sources, another from March of 2023 that ran online with the headline, Leerbell MP Handong secretly advised Chinese diplomat in 2021 to delay freeing two Michaels, colon sources. A series of stories by global news surrounding Handong. He is resigning from the liberal caucus. That decision, following a global news report yesterday, which alleged Daong advised a Chinese diplomat against Beijing's releasing of the two Michaels. Let me be clear, what has been reported is false, and I will define myself against these absolutely untrue claims. This past spring, the defendants, that is to say global, Cooper at all, brought an anti-slap motion to have it dismissed, and I shall just mention or disclose here that they happen to have the same council that Candelan has in Theresa Kilburger's lawsuit against us. So normally I'd offer an explanation here of what an anti-slap motion is, but Lisa, given that you're an honest goodness lawyer and journalist and professor, why don't you do the honors? - I would be happy to, a slapped suit or anti-slapped legislation is a wonderfully common sense bit of business in our legal system because sometimes we file lawsuits because we really have been wronged. And sometimes we file lawsuits because we're just trying to shut someone up. We're just trying to tell them to stop talking smack about us or they'll be in more trouble. So anti-slapped legislation allows a judge to take a fairly cursory look at a case and determine, yeah, this has merit, it could go either way or no, this is just someone being a bully. And if it's someone being a bully, we're gonna shut this thing down now. We're not going to wait until this kind of wins it's way through the court process. So that was the attempt that global made and to say they weren't successful would be a bit of an understatement, I think. - Yes, the anti-slapped legislation, basically this is applicable to Ontario and BC, which have near identical laws. The key passage of Justice Perel's decision or maybe one of the key passages as related to the slapped test is that in the immediate case, in my opinion, there is little public interest in protecting the defendant's expression from the scrutiny of a defamation trial. In the immediate case, freedom of expression on a matter of public interest is advanced, not curtailed, by allowing Dong's defamation action to proceed in order to test the righteousness of global news's revelations about Dong's communications with the Chinese. It is a matter of considerable public interest that there be a defamation trial. If it is true that Dong assisted the Chinese government and thereby betrayed the electorate and the two Michaels, then he should be disgraced. If it is not true that Dong disgraced himself, then it is of considerable public interest that he vindicate himself because the Canadian public is not in favor of baseless character and career assassination and irresponsible news reporting. Dong may be a villain or he may be an innocent, the defendants may have outered a villain and be lauded for it, or they may have wrongfully accused an innocent man, and if so, they should be embarrassed and they should pay reparations. One side or the other will be vindicated. He continues, and it is in the public interest to have that determined and not decided on technical grounds pursuant to the anti-slapped legislation. That actually part is actually the relatively even-handed part because elsewhere in the analysis, with much that I like talking about the various tests that are involved, a lot of it comes down to a judge assessing, based on what's before them, if this were to go to a full trial, what is the plausible range of outcomes that a judge trial could arrive at? In Justice Perel, in this case, took the opportunity to very bluntly say it is quite conceivable that a judge, a trial would, was it too much to say offended or outraged by what he sees as a lack of responsibility in the reporting? - I'm gonna suggest that that may take it too far because Perel is also pretty cautious about saying that he's making this determination on a limited record and that he understands there will be so much more evidence. But you're right, based on what he does have before him, he's not terribly impressed with what he's seeing. But we can't over read this because all Perel had to do was to say, I think when the whole case is before a trial judge, it's entirely plausible that this could go either way. So it's not a slam dunk one way or the other, and once Perel saw that, he was fairly confident, and then the other part that Perel points out that is just so plainly true, is he says, this is not a slap suit. Again, remember, slap suit protects little guy from big guy. There's not a clear David and Goliath relationship here. In fact, one of the first times we ever started talking about what eventually became slap suits anywhere in the Western world involved protesters, I think in the 1980s in the famous McLible case, which was a couple of unemployed activists with placards complaining about McDonald's, do little guys against a giant multinational with a hamburger behind it? That is considered kind of classic slap, kind of power imbalance, little guy versus big guy. We don't have that here. And also slap suits require that the litigation is launched for an improper purpose, like I said, to stifle free expression, to get people to stop pamphleting the neighborhood. Here, it's pretty clear that an MP's reputation has been left pretty torn apart by this. So the stated purpose, which is reputational repair, is clearly the purpose here. And Pearl was really, really unflinching on that point. - The legislation has also written in a way that something doesn't have to strictly be a slap suit in order to be dismissed under this legislation. So sometimes judges will or often they will be in it, but I think this is a slap, or I think this is not a slap, but that's just one factor and a more comes down to the series of tests of basically of whether the defendant has or does not have a valid defense, or whether that what would happen in a trial, as well as generally the balance of protecting the expression versus protecting the person's right to vindicate their own reputation. Dong has always emphatically denied the allegations, and in response to this ruling, released a statement continuing his call for global to apologize and retract the to Michael's story, saying, quote, "I've been clear from the beginning. I never advocated or supported in any way the violation of the basic human rights and continued wrongful detention of Michael Spaver and Michael Kovrig. The accusations made by Global News are false," end quote. And Global, for its part, told the Canadian press and other outlets, "While we are disappointed in the decision, we are encouraged by the recognition of foreign government interference as a matter of public interest in Justice Pearl's ruling." End quote. What stuck out most to you about this decision? - What stuck out most for me was, if we want to get into the kind of factual matrix of this, one of the things is Pearl's comments about the lack of evidence that can be produced in court. So he's critical of Sam Cooper and the fact that what this whole story hangs on, and I'll quote, is multi-degree hearsay of a translated phone conversation. So let's really factually just kind of fill that in. This all goes down to a conversation that Han Dong had with an official in the Chinese consulate. And what it appears that Cooper and the other defendants do not have is any kind of tangible evidence of that phone call because that phone call was conducted in Mandarin. There was some kind of readout or summary produced, the confidential sources, and that's also an interesting part of this. The confidential sources have access to that, but the evidence before us tells us that Cooper doesn't have that to bring to the court. Cooper did not see that. So the judge is saying this is kind of a tenuous kind of point to point to point state of relationship. This is, there's no smoking gun that Cooper or Global has in its hands here. And the judge is pretty clear on that fact. So it does speak, just how solid that evidence may be or may not be, but there is. Since you like the tests, Jonathan, there is the responsible communication defense that could be applied against this at some point. - But to get back at GED, this is the question of the documentary evidence. I mean, something that I think it came out shortly after this global story was officially published, the globe said, you know, passed, slipped in a passage in one of their stories. Like, we had also heard this too, but we chose not to run with it because we weren't able to independently verify it. And it was later elaborate, yeah, that they couldn't get them their own hands on the documents or an audio recording to independently check it. And so decided not to run with it. There's the question of the journalistic ethics or at least they're not ethics, so much as the diligence and responsibility and what degree is necessary and global clearly believe that having two independent sources who they had already had, otherwise who definitely had confidence in, they've felt that that method test of meeting, of basically of it being publishable or potentially publishable, what Cooper explained in his cross-examination was that while his understanding at the time was that the Globe and Mail had had one source, whereas he had two and that's why he ran it. And they did not. Having one single source tell you something explosive is especially when it will do harm to a specific individual entity, that's generally not the thing that you could run with unless you're able to independently verify it. Is there a number of sources that would be more, like obviously more sources are the better, but what do you think about like a two-source story for something as closely like this? - We often hear as a general rule, or I said as a general rule in journalism, that two independent sources is the minimum required. So that's what we're up against. In so many contexts, those two independent sources will be enough to kind of get the rubber stamp of yeah, this is good investment in journalism. In this case, the stakes are so high that if it were my newsroom, I'm not convinced that two independent sources is sufficient just because of the nature of the allegations. And the question of whether or not more reporting could have provided a better evidentiary foundation if more time had been taken. Because again, that's also something that a trial judge will look into if and when this goes to trial, and that is just was there a time sensitive nature here? Was there time to investigate out this story a little bit further? So I don't know if two is really cutting it here. Back to this whole idea of what we owe someone before we as journalists owe someone before we're about to drop. And boy, this terminology is something. I just quickly, let's go back to the judge's decision. He says, it's unclear whether the defendants exercise the appropriate level of investigation before dropping a cluster bomb on DONG's reputation. Okay, so the word is in journalism. If you are about to drop a cluster bomb on someone's reputation, you need to one, describe that cluster bomb in a pretty fulsome way and to give people time to flee the scene, come up with an explanation, whatever it takes. Without a very specific unpacking in that email to DONG that says, part of this story is going to say that you make comments that deliberately led to kind of the slow walking of the two Michaels to being freed. That is key to what we call the sting of the defamation. Okay, that you stopped people from being freed when they never should have been incarcerated in the first place, big deal. So if that is missing, that is the first real gap here and it appears that that is missing. We also know the more explosive the allegation, the more the law tells us we need people to take the time to sort this out. And then the other part that I think is also worth unpacking for a non-journalism audience is it might not be as telling as I first imagined it was when I read that the defendant's notes didn't necessarily have all the important elements. Journalists who deal with confidential sources have to sort of their own way of kind of doing their job professionally. And for some, the belief is that it's just plain stupid, like dead stupid, to put critical details in notes that can then in fact be ordered through production orders in court. So this may not be an indication of sloppy practice. This may just be one of those peculiarities of investigative journalism. That being said, from a judge's perspective, it's not a good look. - In terms of keeping notes, I mean, there are a number of notes that were produced in as part of the motion record. There are some questions and cross-examination that some answers suggested they weren't the entirety of the notes. One of the interesting things that came out in his affidavit, just like a little detail was that one of the sources he met with came with some documents, not the documents showing this, but came with some documents as well as a bit lighter and indicated that he was planning to burn them at the end of their conversation after he went away. There was actually a line in the decision. So Pearl observed that in the immediate case, it is conceivable that a court, meaning in a flapping full trial, might decide that the defendants ought to have forgotten the explosive March 2023 article about Dong's alleged advice to the Chinese Consul General until the defendants had something more than the hearsay revelations of the confidential sources. I mean, what do you think about that? About the observation, like a judge's observation that well, you could have just held off 'til you had more. - Yeah, the Supreme Court, I wish I could remember which case it comes from. The court has been reasonable in understanding that news is, and I'm quoting from one judgment, I wish I could remember which, the news is a perishable commodity. But within that whole idea of perishable commodities, we have to look at just how time sensitive a particular story is. So maybe a story of potential foreign interference weeks from a federal election, that's a tell it right now story. I don't have all the evidence before me, but from the outside looking in, it's hard to imagine that there was, there's nothing about, that I can tell, that letting this story kind of unfold for a few more days, a few more weeks, that it wasn't really going to change anything. And was there a rush to publish? There's no denying that it looks damning when we have the globe saying, yeah, we had the same stuff and we wouldn't go there. Perhaps that looks more damning than it should be because again, back to different editorial decisions being made, but that does add credence to the idea of why publish then, was there more to be gotten on this? Could they have had a better case against dong or could they have had evidence that told them to kind of hold their fire with a bit more reporting? That's a big question. The judge puts an awful lot of emphasis on the whole, you know, this needs to see the full light of day. We need this matter to go to trial. Defamation suits don't go to trial. There's going to be a settlement. The terms are going to be confidential. I think that's where we will go. It would be wonderful to see this thing play out in a public courtroom. It would give us so much more public insight into investigative journalism processes. It would certainly shed light more on the how much intelligence is there in an intelligence report. I think it would even speak to the challenges individuals have in putting themselves out there in public office and the reasonable and unreasonable kind of challenges they face. I'd love for it to happen. I'd be in the front row with you watching this thing happen. It's not going to happen. - This episode is brought to you by Douglas. Lisa, did you get that heat wave in Cape Breton last week? - I was in Halifax at the time of Montreal and I got that heat wave in both places. I was really warm. - Oh my goodness. It was apparently quite bad in Toronto. I was also somewhere in the States where it was also quite bad in the '40s. It was a intensely air conditioned hotel room, but goodness, if I had been here where I do not have air conditioned the bedroom, but a Douglas mattress, however, has you covered. Not only is it a very comfortable mattress, it's got an Ecolite cooling gel foam top layer and a moisture-wicking cool scents cover to help you stay cool. Another neat thing about a Douglas mattress is that you can try it out in the comfort of your own home for 365 nights, plus it comes with a 20 year warranty. Douglas is giving our listeners a free sleep bundle with each mattress purchase, get the sheets, pillows, mattress, and pillow protectors free with your Douglas purchase today. Visit Douglas.ca/cannadoland to claim this offer. That's Douglas.ca/cannadoland. This episode is brought to you by Squarespace. Lisa, what's the least fun job you've had? Selling individual long-stand roses outside of liquor store in North Sydney, Nova Scotia. That is an excellent answer. Thank you for asking. One of the worst I've ever had did involve cleaning up dog poop, but a nice thing about not being in team here anymore is I don't have to take jobs that involve cleaning up dog poop. I just do it voluntarily with my dog. One way you can go about getting jobs that don't involve picking up dog poop is by setting up a Squarespace website. It's all-in-one website platform for entrepreneurs to stand out and succeed online, whether you're just starting out or managing a growing brand, Squarespace makes it easy to create a beautiful website, engage with the audience and sell anything from products to content to time, all-in-one place, all in your terms. Head to squarespace.com/cannadoland for a free trial, and when you're ready to launch, use code "cannadoland" to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain. Lisa, on this show, we like to Julie note things. I'd like to know Julie's day that Julian Assange is free. It's finally happening. Those people who email us about why don't you tell why aren't you talking about Julian Assange and how he's in jail. Well, maybe now stop emailing us, although maybe they'll take issues with my snarky comments here. He is back in Australia, heading to Australia after he was freed by a US court. Yeah, he recently broke up with the United States, pleaded guilty to one count. He was sentenced to time already served. He spent past five years or so in a jail in the UK, and he was able to enter that, register that plea in a court in Saipan, which is one of those places that I feel like I should have known where it was for the purpose of crossword puzzles and playing along with Jeopardy at home. But it's in the Northern Marianna Island, which is one of the US territories I always forget about and it hadn't even occurred to me that they have a US federal courthouse there. So the Espionage Act has never been used by the US before to pursue a publisher or journalist like Assange. And as part of his plea, he'll be required to store information provided to wick leaks. It was not clear if this was ever going to go to trial. It would have been interesting to see what would have happened and if that would have created a precedent one way or the other. But I also think that it's pretty clear that if you're publishing things that certain state actors don't want you to publish, they will find ways to go after you regardless of what the precedent on the books may or may not be. - Dooley noted. - What would you like to note, Dooley today? - What I would like to note, Dooley, perhaps because we're talking about investigative journalism here and it's kind of in the crosshairs at the moment, when we assess this particular case. So I'd like to look more generally at a book that talks about the very best of investigative journalism and that's Journalism for the Public Good by Kim Carons. It's written in honor of the 50th anniversary of the Mitchner Deacon Awards, okay? So this speaks to the Mitchner Awards and really does unpack some of the greatest journalism that has unfolded investigative journalism that has changed policy, has changed law, has led to public inquiries. It's not that really transforms us and I appreciate what Kim is doing in this book but what really got me on it was a lot of Tory comment by Howard Law who runs Media Policy.ca and is a wonderful commentator on this and he says in an awesomely plain spoken way and I'm gonna adopt these words, okay? If you, if after reading this book, you can't respond with respect and gratitude to journalists. Buddy, you're a dead loss to humanity. So in the interests of not being a dead loss to humanity, I would like to Dooley note that Kim Carons book journalism in the Public Good reminds us why so many of us got into this rap race in the first place. - Cool, Dooley noted. I'd also like to note Dooley a quick follow up to something I talked about on the show a few weeks ago which was at the time a forthcoming open letter to the CBC from the Racial Equity Media Collective and the documentary organization of Canada that was cosigned by hundreds of Canadian filmmakers and other media workers demanding that the public broadcaster address what they described as an apparent pattern of Islamophobia and anti-Palestinian racism in both the CBC's news and documentary divisions. The concerns expressed about CBC news cited existing reporting particularly from the review of journalism and the breach but the concerns about the CBC's documentary unit largely related to a previously unreported series of incendiary social media posts from a production executive with commissioning power there. The letter called for several commitments such as staff trading on Islamophobia and anti-Palestinian racism and the publishing of equity data with regard to, you know whose work this actually gets commissioned. Well, the letter came out and some of the more notable signatories included the filmmakers Sarah Pauli, Khazik Radwanski, Elmaa Taelfeathers, Dini Gulay, Alithya Arnikuk Burial and the restaurateur Janag. The CBC's senior management including president and CEO Katherine Tate replied a week later and while they generally skirted discussions of specific commitments, they did acknowledge, quote, acknowledge the hurt some individuals have experienced, quote, and committed to, quote, "regaining the trust within the documentary community," end quote. And now as first reported by the industry publication playback the racial equity media collective says they've been informed that the production executive whose social media posts partly sparked this uproar has now been reassigned to a non-editor role in another department at the CBC and will not be returning to the documentary team. Dooley noted. It calls itself North America's fastest growing newspaper, the Epoch Times. The financial officer behind the far right propaganda rag known as the Epoch Times has been indicted on allegations of a massive money laundering scheme. So what the hell is the Epoch Times? If you have a 40 minutes to answer that question you can go back and listen to our 2020 episode that we produced called "What the Hell is the Epoch Times?" by our then producers, Tiffany Lamb and Casham Hilovich. But if you don't have that time, then I do recommend you listen to it and this is something that, you know, I think half of the listeners will probably be like, "So I'm like, I know what the Epoch Times is by now." And the other half will be like, "Oh yeah, what the hell is that thing?" It's been an odd picture on the streets and on the computer screens of Canada, US. I think chunk of the world for the past couple of decades, Lisa, what do you know about the Epoch Times? - I paid enough attention to see a pretty interesting kind of development in the Epoch Times. I know it's kicked around for about 20 years that it is essentially a fallen gong, promotional publication designed or was originally designed to kind of present negative information or propaganda against the Chinese Communist Party. And then it found just like true love, this really interesting kind of allegiance with the right-wing politics of the US and suddenly became very Trump-focused, Trump-centric. So I know that's what's going on there. I've never understood what's cause and what's effect. I've never understood what the real kind of ideological attachment is or is this just a way to get more eyes on a publication? - Yeah, no, it's definitely, it's a very good question. Started as almost a newsletter/anti Chinese Communist Party, propaganda publication from Falun Gong, which is a, the Chinese government considers a cult and which would say is at least a sect. It's a kind of, it's a practice. It's a quasi-religious sect. - Falun Dafa, also known as Falun Gong, is an advanced self-cultivation practice that improves mental and physical wellness through physical exercises and the development of one's character. - Which, you know, has this sort of surprisingly successful media empire that started with Epoch Times, a television channel called New Tang Dynasty, as well as Shen Yun, which is this ballet/performance troupe that seems to be everywhere all of the time. - Before communism, China had a glorious past. What if you could bring it back? Since 2006, Shen Yun has been reviving the essence of Chinese civilization. - I mean, I wish every news outlet had a sort of an adjacent dance, theatrical opera performance troupe. - Be careful what you wish for. I want you to stop and think about that before you go too far. But okay, if you say that you think we should all have that, that's fine, it's confounding to me. Shen Yun is confounding. This almost feels like a through the looking glass version of Amazon that I can get the bags to pick up my dog poop from Amazon. They can send me my groceries and they can entertain me on TV tonight. I mean, what we have here are these three sister companies, one which is a propaganda/media organization, one which is kind of a traditional with air quotes, you know, song and dance review show. And then we have the faith-based aspect of what Falun Gong is, which, you know, from the outside looking in when you see peaceful people in a park moving so slowly and gracefully. I mean, it feels like a religion that, I don't know if Gwyneth Paltrow didn't invent it, she could have, it's lovely, it's soft, it's elegant. We like elegance. So how these three fit together, they go together like nuts and gum. It's a strange, strange mix. I remember dragging my kid when I was still a Toronto person past those bright colored posters in the subway because I didn't want to go see that damn show, but it's ubiquitous. It is so part of kind of, I think, Toronto, musicals for tourists, that's it. - Yeah, I mean, all over. - Yeah, you see them in, you see posters for it in cities across North America, probably more often than you see posters for touring productions of Wicked. So the long time CFO, the Epoch Times, Wei Dong Bilguan was charged by US attorneys earlier this month with two counts of bank fraud and conspiracy to commit money laundering. They allege that he basically embroiled or used the Epoch Times as part of this scheme involving fraudulently obtained employment insurance benefits, prepaid debit cards, and cryptocurrency. You basically funneling money into the media company as a means to disguise its ill-gotten origin. When asked about it would say this was subscription revenue or donation revenue or what have you. They also make a point of saying that these allegations do not concern the editorial and news gathering operations of the publications or outlets in any way. So that's of course set off a whole, you know, crisis that there are seemingly, the very least a shake up with the publication. He's, the CFO has been suspended a few days later, the board accepted the resignation of the CEO, although we don't know exactly what his involvement may or may not have been, if any. They have an interim management team and then the head of the Falun Gong movement is now, you know, has written a couple, they're like op-eds or editorials, which he seems to be chastising the publication and the people there for having jumped into partisan politics, not with saying the CCP stuff, but to jump into American partisan politics, like why are you doing all of this? It's a very strange series of events at a very strange publication. Have you been following any of this? - I have been following a good bit of it and it is interesting because I'm trying to figure out this incredible increase in revenue. Was that the opportunity presented? Is that part of the theory of the case, which could be, well, hell, if there's so much more extra money coming in, who's going to notice a few million here or a few million there? That certainly seems to be it, but there's so many things that just don't quite hang together here. I mean, I don't think we see too often where a senior executive in a corporation is working with members of a division within that corporation and in this case, the division was known as the Make Money Online team, which is just such a lousy name. You notice by taking this subject out, they skate safely there, right? It's like, who's making money online? Anyhow, we have a named corporate executive, we have an entire team of people working in that organization, yet the publication itself is not one of the named defendants. So that is really interesting 'cause that normally means that someone is acting well outside the scope of their kind of their workplace authority, which seems surprising. And then I'm not so surprised that we have someone closely related kind of admonishing this publication because if you look at its origin story, the idea is that it was created to kind of soft pedal this anti-communist party rhetoric, but also kind of as a kind of hearts and minds community engagement. And it was a publication dropped in communities all over the world at a time when some of the other news organizations are kind of shutting down. So being in this very contested space of aligning with kind of populist politics, seems to run kind of stray from the like, let's just get some good PR and also thump the communist party on its head. I don't quite get the confluence of all of this at the same time. (speaks in foreign language) And he's basically like in his own sort of quasi religious sect leader way, telling them to touch grass as it were. Which could really just be reading the room that it's the right thing to say at this time. - So many of you who are involved in various media platforms need to start connecting your work with raising awareness and helping to free people from danger to their souls. If your only aim is to increase your click rate, that's hardly the spiritual state of a Daphra practitioner. You are wasting large amounts of the limited time that is meant for rescuing people in these final days, exclamation point. You are going to regret that one day also exclamation point, which is, I mean, it's a harsh thing to hear from, I don't know if he counts as their boss, but on the other hand, I don't know, that's good advice. Like, is good advice, maybe all for all journalism? Is your work actually helping people? We're talking about this also, because it has a very, has and has long had a fairly significant presence in Canada, offices in Canada. They have, I mean, they have additions for many countries, but they definitely have stuff specifically, a lot of materials and a lot of things in content, specifically targeting Canada. But one of the interesting things is how it has become a home for, or a home, or at least a side gig for a lot of post media columnists, some of the more prominent ones. They've been writing for them for several years. I mean, Conrad Black is actually one of their big names. He's written my count 186 columns since the start of 2020. It's about 41 a year. Barbara Kay, also longtime national post columnist. 92 columns since 2019, it's been 19 a year. Anthony Fury was a longtime sun editor, national post podcast host, failed mayoral candidate in Toronto. There's been about 91 columns for them, first from starting November of 2022. Michael Taub, 56 columns since May 2022, Peter Menzies. These columns, like in many ways are, they're not like necessarily like wacky things. I mean, many of them are, the headlines are such that, you know, you could imagine this being, you could imagine it being like a John Ibbitson column, like most recent Conrad Black one is, it is time for creative constitutional thinking on by Lagneulism and Quebec's place in Canada. But it is also a remarkable part of the strategy and the state as well to start bringing in prominent names. What do you think of this being of the side gig for a lot of prominent marquee national post and post media columnists? Certainly from the epic times side of things, bringing in these kind of high visibility characters who are generally perceived as right of centre, but not distressingly so, seems like such a wise move. What's in it for a Barbara Kay or a Conrad Black? I mean, I guess an e-transfer of whatever their standard column fee is right now. I can't see that there's anything there for them to get behind or get engaged with ideologically. And as you said, it's not as if the column focuses tend to be kind of connected to the front page news. I guess it's nice when journalists have another act, that's all I've got. Yeah, beyond the remuneration, I cannot see a single thing that really works in the favour of a right of centre Canadian columnists looking for somewhere to drop their byline in. Beyond just the bank fraud allocations, which are not connected to the news gathering operations, the heavy conspiracy theory leanings, the fact that it's published by a sect. It has always been an odd publication, all the thing out. Is it ethical, do you think, to write for them? Ethical decisions, of course, are individual. I wouldn't want my byline in the epic times, not in a heartbeat. There's a sufficiency of evidence that I think it's really okay to state plainly that this is a propaganda vehicle masquerading as a journalistic publication. I'm happy to quote on a limb and say that. If that's the case, I would say that all I'll do is tarnish my brand as a journalistic commentator or columnist if my work appears in those places. You know, the contrary view will be, what matters is what I say in that space that I have for my 700 words and that's what matters. But no, I'm not, it seems a little uncomfortable. That's shortcut to this week. Thanks for joining me, Lisa. It was great to be here, thank you. We are on Twitter, @CanadaLand. You can email me at Jonathan@CanadaLand.com if you'd like to complain about how fast I'm speaking or any other such things. People can also find me on blue sky these days. Where can people find you, Lisa? I have not stepped onto Mastodon Blue Sky any of the new stuff and I've left the mean old bird. So I'm email, that's about it. Makes it tougher if you think I'm talking too fast I'm harder to find. And they can take your courses at Kings University, I imagine. I think that would be an excellent idea. This episode is produced by Viva Lazard with additional production by Caleb Thompson and Sam Conert. Our production manager is Max Collins and our editor-in-chief is Campelliazzi. The music is by so-called syndication is by CFUV, 101.9 FM in Victoria. Visit them online at CFUV.ca. If you value this podcast, please support us. We rely on listeners like you paying for journalism. As a supporter, you'll get premium access to all of our shows ad-free, including early releases and bonus content. You'll also get our exclusive newsletter, discounts on Canada Landmerch, invites and tickets to our live and virtual events and more than anything, you'll be a part of the solution to Canada's journalism crisis. And you'll be keeping our work free and accessible to everybody. Come join us now. Click the link in your show notes or go to CanadaLand.com/join. You can listen and ad-free on Amazon Music, included with Prime. (upbeat music) - Selling a little or a lot? Shopify helps you do your thing, however you cha-ching. Shopify is the global commerce platform that helps you sell at every stage of your business. From the launch your online shop stage to the first real-life store stage, all the way to the did we just hit a million orders stage, Shopify's there to help you grow. Shopify helps you turn browsers into buyers with the internet's best converting checkout. 36% better on average compared to other leading commerce platforms because businesses that grow grow with Shopify. Get a $1 per month trial period at Shopify.com/work. Shopify.com/work. - In 2021 Afghanistan fell to the Taliban. The lives of Raha and Maua, two 20-year-old women and best friends, were forever changed. One decided to stay. - I feel like I have no words in it. - And the other to leave. - We got our tickets today to the Germany. - These are their audio diaries. - I could only carry my body without muscle. - Listen to inside Kabul, wherever you get your podcasts. [MUSIC PLAYING]