|
In The Georgia Straight, Donald Gutstein presents a tale of two columnists:
Compare Steyn’s adulatory treatment with the vicious attacks the same media commentators directed at former Globe and Mail columnist Heather Mallick for a piece she wrote for the CBC’s Web site.
Very different reactions to very similar words...
The double standard is illustrated by the Globe’s Margaret Wente. In Wente's view, Steyn “has probably offended 99 percent of the readers at one time or another. That’s the kind of guy he is. The offending piece is vintage Steyn: provocative, highly coloured and wildly overdrawn.”
Sounds like a description of Mallick’s work, but Wente has different words for her: she is a “sour, narrow-minded writer” who produces simple “vitriolic drivel”. Mallick is a “racist”, presumably for dissing white Republicans. Steyn is not a racist even though he demonizes Muslims. Go figure! (as Wente herself exclaimed in another context).
The Globe’s editorial board continued the double standard. Steyn: “a brilliant writer who sometimes pushes the boundaries of mainstream opinion”; Mallick: a “grotesque attack” and “offensive left-wing drivel”.
And over at the National Post, comment-pages editor Jonathan Kay called Mallick’s work “over the top, hateful, anti-American speech” filled with “childish vulgarity” and “hypocrisy”. Steyn’s work, on the other hand, is simply “brilliant”.
Why the difference in treatment?
Well, yes, we are getting different treatment. Ms Mallick's writing attracted a lot of beastly criticism from foreign radio and TV hosts. Whereas my writing was subject to three judicial investigations, the last of which carried with it a statutory penalty upon conviction that would have prevented Maclean's (and by extension any other Canadian print outlet) from ever publishing me again.
Also this: Ms Mallick is published by a government agency. I have spent a lot of money fending off government agencies.
I love this line of argument. A columnist in The Ottawa Citizen thought the fact that there was a "controversy" over me and a "controversy" over Henry Morgenthaler illustrated the health and vigor of Canadian debate. Er, not really. In the first case, the state was trying to shut me down just for contributing to the "debate". In the second, the state garlanded the bigtime abortionist with an Order of Canada and a few people objected. Not quite the same.
Or, if you think it is, reverse the roles, and figure out the likelihood of Morgenthaler getting a "human rights" complaint vs me getting the Order of Canada.
|
