The Toronto Star responded to the Philpott resignation with racist smear against JWR

These are certainly illuminating times.

The Toronto Star joined the rest of the media in expressing shock at the resignation of Treasury Board President Jane Philpott, who was a prominent member of Trudeau's cabinet.

While some pundits were hesitant to look too much into the timing of the resignation, it did come shortly after several opinion articles were published in defence of the PMO.

Katie Telford, who allegedly touted her journalism connections to former AG Wilson-Raybould, must be absolutely loving the Toronto Star right now.

Not even one hour after Minister Philpott resigned from cabinet, the Toronto Star posted an asinine article by UofT Journalism prof Jeffrey Dvorkin, who has also held senior positions at NPR and the CBC.

The Facebook post, for whatever reason, links to the wrong article.

The article starts by echoing the now-familiar line that the author is absolutely astonished that anyone gives a crap about the fact that we perhaps now have the first scandal in Canadian history with international significance and criminal implications.

He slams the Canadian media for falling into a frenzy out of:
(1) Remorse for having fallen for Trudeau for so long;
(2) Schadenfreude at Trudeau's misfortune;
(3) Rushed journalism out of desperation for a scoop;
(4) Because of Trump (as if Canadians were desperate for a flashy scandal);
(5) And get this, a culture of victimhood! Apparently journalists are simply incapable of not falling for the perfect victim story "[i]n this intersectional age".

Desperate racist smear

The professor goes on to suggest that JWR has not been sufficiently scrutinized about her cultural background. I could not believe my eyes when I read the exact words.

Also what about Wilson-Raybould’s own background? She comes from an environment of Indigenous leadership. How has that influenced her as a federal politician? Are the cultural imperatives of her background make her more or less able to deal with the cut-and-thrust of Parliamentary politics? Her principled stand seems at variance with the ideal of consensus governance in Aboriginal society. Can that be explained journalistically?Jeffrey Dvorkin for the Toronto Star

What are the suggestions here?

How dare we irresponsible journalists not even mention that maybe she just couldn't handle the corruption like the white folks can?

How dare we irresponsible journalists not even point out the hypocrisy of someone from a background that values "consensus governance" being so "difficult to work with"?

How dare we irresponsible journalists, at the very least, not question whether "an environment of Indigenous leadership" can really prepare someone for the white man's leadership?

Check your privilege, Canada!

That same afternoon, the Toronto Star re-posted an op-ed titled “SNC-Lavalin controversy? Just put it to bed”, which I had written about earlier that day.

The caption read, in its entirety:

ICYMI: Do young people even notice this story? No, they have bigger problems. Check your privilege, Canada. It’s the kind of upmarket quarrel we are fortunate enough to have but it needs to end before it does real damage, writes Heather Mallick.Facebook post by the Toronto Star

Again, this was posted very shortly after the Philpott resignation, although the article being linked had been published prior to the resignation.

An "upmarket quarrel we are fortunate enough to have" but "needs to end before it does real damage". Nice one.

How dare you common folk not see the danger in having this kind of discussion about one of the most foundational principles of our state?

What about the environment, you ignorant peasants? Do you really think the integrity of our judicial system compares to the importance of reducing our share (about 1.7%) of the world's carbon emissions?

What kind of climate-change denying "neanderthals" do you have to be in order to suspect that the carbon tax has an ulterior motive?

The Editorial Board speaks

The two articles I mention above are opinion pieces, which are not necessarily the view of the news organization itself.

Luckily, the Star Editorial Board let Canadians know their perspective.

It tells voters to look at the "bigger issues involved — including jobs and climate change and much else where his government has made serious progress".

It's about the bigger picture, people!

The Toronto Star think it would be tragic for this government to fall on something as trivial as the recent scandal.

This is all despite acknowledging that Trudeau probably did not realize that his cabinet gender quota might give him "ministers at the cabinet table who took his rhetoric about change seriously and weren’t prepared to compromise their principles just to get along".

At least the Toronto Star offers the prime minister a solution to finally fix this mess and put this matter to bed.

Apparently, if only the prime minister would directly confront these nasty distractions with a "robust counter-narrative", Canadians would finally see what the PMO and the Toronto Star have been seeing all along.