CP’s editor-in-chief defends reporters breaking the law

Scott White

You have to wonder what world the Media Party live in when they blame being ignorant of the law as an excuse for their behaviour:

The Canadian Press was among the media outlets that toured the suite, sending both a photographer and a reporter to the apartment, where a landlord invited them inside.

“We believed the landlord had the authority to let us in and that we were there legally,” said Scott White, Editor-in-Chief of The Canadian Press. “We went in and reported on it because there is a public interest in Canadians learning who the accused are, and learning how they lived is part of that.”

Even scarier though is this comment by a journalism professor:

Ross Howard, who teaches journalism at Langara College in Vancouver, said the case raises ethical questions about balancing the rights of Nuttall and Korody against the public’s right to know. He said it would clearly be wrong to break into the apartment, but in this case, the landlord invited the reporters inside.

“This one is a tough call — the public probably has lots of interest in knowing more about these people … and that kind of information might be possible to glean from going through some of the stuff in their apartment.

“But no doubt, the reporters were invading the privacy of people who have only been accused but not yet found guilty of anything. That’s the two sides of it, and I’m not 100 per cent sure which side to come down on.” (see here)

Imagine them accepting that answer from a politician.

It’s never comfortable defending the property rights of someone accused of plotting a bomb but that’s the entire premise of having civil rights – they are for everyone and not just for those who are easy to sympathize with.

You can’t, for example complain about the RCMP seizing guns in High River (see here) and then turn a blind eye to these lunatic al-Crackheads because ‘they deserve it’. I’ll leave that to the Lefties and Media Party to continue being hypocrites.

This incident also struck a personal cord with me as I’ve had a recent experience with one vindictive Ottawa reporter using media resources to dig into my personal information in an attempt to silence me through intimidation.

All he really accomplished though was to strengthen my resolve.

Update: J-source shreds the media for entering the bombing suspects’ suite

Even a cursory review of relevant laws and court cases would reveal to even the greenest of media lawyers, editors, producers and publishers that a landlord rarely possesses what is called ‘lawful possession of a property’  and therefore is not authorized to grant anyone else entry to a private residence. (see here)


9 Responses to “CP’s editor-in-chief defends reporters breaking the law”

  1. Kelowna Lorne Says:

    “We went in and reported on it because there is a public interest in Canadians learning who the accused are, and learning how they lived is part of that.”

    That may very well be however there is no necessity for the public to know now rather than at some time in the future when the proper authorities allow them access to the residence.

    They wanted to “break” the story and were willing to do use unlawful access to do so. There is no denying that.

    • BC Blue Says:

      Pretty easy to insert that excuse into anything that reporters want to do isn’t it?

    • Stan Says:

      It’s probably pointless to try to explain to the media finger painters that privacy is in thepublic ionterest, and for that matter, truth in reporting is also in the public interest.

  2. Ian Says:

    What always irks me about the media is that they constantly criticize our government when they want to bring in various laws which they claim is a violation of our privacy, yet have no problem violating others’ privacy to get a story, or condone the violation of privacy rights if it is in line with their ideology (seizing guns).

  3. Pissedoff Says:

    I was under the impression that even the landlord was not allowed in unless invited by the tenants. So all I am interested in is when are they all going to be arrested for B & E.

  4. don morris Says:

    The landlord had no right to let the Press in to the apartment.

    There has to be a legitimate reason to request entry

    And letting the Press have a snoop at their apartment is NOT a legitimate excuse to inspect the place.

    From the BC Government website, Residential Tenancy Branch:”When can a landlord enter the tenant’s home?

    A tenant is entitled to exclusive possession of a rental unit, including reasonable privacy, and quiet and peaceful enjoyment.

    A landlord may enter the tenant’s home only under the following circumstances:

    there is an emergency such as a fire, damaged or blocked pipes or flooding;
    the tenant is at home and agrees to let the landlord in;
    the tenant agreed, not more than 30 days before, to let the landlord in for a certain reason;
    the tenant has abandoned the rental unit;
    the landlord has a Residential Tenancy Branch order or court order to enter the rental unit;
    the landlord has given the tenant written notice at least 24 hours and not more than 30 days in advance. The notice must give the reasons for entering, which must be reasonable, and the time that the landlord will enter the rental unit. The time in the notice must be between 8 a.m. and 9 p.m., unless the tenant agrees to another time.”

    • Pissedoff Says:

      Exactly, the landlord and the gutter press were trespassing. So where are the charges, get out of Timmies cops and charge them.

      • Ian Says:

        The charge would be Unlawfully in a Dwelling House. You can guarantee that if curious neighbors would have gone inside here would have been charges. The media are no better than anyone else who feels they have an entitlement. The problem is that the media always feel they are entitled. Entitled to take photos of Rob Ford while he’s sitting in his yard, entitled to follow him and see what he eats. Entitled to chase celebrities at high speeds on motorcycles through tunnels where they eventually crash and die. Entitled to make frivolous acces to information requests wasting numerous people’s time in order to dig up private information about politician they don’t like. And I could go on.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: