I just listened to Judy Foote explaining how "it was okay" to make public a private conversation because:
A - she was asked by reporters
B - the fellow is no longer a politician
I will let the readers decide - If I can determine that certain politicians will not be running again in the next election or if the media asks me a question - should I disclose private conversations I had with politicians - if it helps the public ascertain the likelihood that these politicians or their party will be feeding them a line when next people go to the polls - or if it helps the public decide whether or not the promises these people have made or will make are likely to be worth the paper it is not written on.
Right now we know that Jim and Judy have different stories on the conversation - should I provide information that might help the reader decide who they believe?
Also what if I can provide information that demonstrates that political ethics are up for grabs?
You would be very surprised!
Geez the rocks are flying through the glass houses now. I will go to the gym - find a Liberal and a Tory on the treadmill side-by-side and see if I get an epiphany. Hopefully I can get some feedback before the Tory/Liberal leaders appear on Cross-Talk.
3 comments:
my view is that no you shouldn't talk about conversations with anyone you've had in a public forum like open line or this blog. Politician or constituent - I don't think it should make any difference... unless they give you consent to do so.
So what do you make of the Foote commentary?
So go ahead and say what you know, if you know it.
Post a Comment