Good piece. I am also exceedingly disappointed -- not only by Ling's ambivalent take on this nonsense but by the reticence of so many prominent Canadian journalists & columnists to speak up forcefully against it. Kudos to those who have, and to the CAJ. For those who haven't, why not? You've just witnessed a former MP / former ambassador abuse his influence to smear one of your colleagues under cover of Parliamentary privilege at a hearing of a Parliamentary Committee charged with providing oversight of Canada's national security. This is a serious lapse by the Committee. The chilling effect of this kind of thing is pernicious, and you need to push back against it. It's a professional responsibility, full stop. Any of us who have reported as journalists or worked as researchers on armed conflict, defense issues or any other highly polarized matters stand to lose so much -- not only from apparent attempts to squelch independent, neutral and impartial work, but also, eventually, from self-censorship.
Good piece. I am also exceedingly disappointed -- not only by Ling's ambivalent take on this nonsense but by the reticence of so many prominent Canadian journalists & columnists to speak up forcefully against it. Kudos to those who have, and to the CAJ. For those who haven't, why not? You've just witnessed a former MP / former ambassador abuse his influence to smear one of your colleagues under cover of Parliamentary privilege at a hearing of a Parliamentary Committee charged with providing oversight of Canada's national security. This is a serious lapse by the Committee. The chilling effect of this kind of thing is pernicious, and you need to push back against it. It's a professional responsibility, full stop. Any of us who have reported as journalists or worked as researchers on armed conflict, defense issues or any other highly polarized matters stand to lose so much -- not only from apparent attempts to squelch independent, neutral and impartial work, but also, eventually, from self-censorship.