It's a kneejerk conservative rag at the moment, a fact which partially explains its sad financial state. Even the odd "olive branch" delivered to people of other political persuasions is met with cynical qualifications, another fact which speaks to the outlandish bias that paper espouses. I absolutely despise the National Post, not just because of its leaning, but its advocacy, which goes beyond anything Canadian journalism has ever seen. The paper ignores, downplays stories, which put Dear Leader in an unflattering light.
Apologists will point to other publications, accusing them of similar biases, but that argument doesn't hold water. You want to target the Toronto Star, I remind you of a McGill study which showed relatively favorable coverage for the Conservatives in the 2004, 2006 elections. You want to point to the CBC, I suggest you consider a four person round table looking into the Afghan detainee issue that included Tom Flanagan and John Ivison. On the other hand, you can't point to one example of counter presentation with the National Post, it's unbridled Conservative cheer leading all the time, on every issue. Any diversion is just that, a bit scrap presented, but the overall thrust always remains the same- it's actually a dangerous rag, in that the less sophisticated don't understand the propaganda component. The National Post operates with a mission, every bit as biased as Fox, every bit as woefully unfair. The National Post is such a useless rag, disguised as journalism, it doesn't even garner ONE nomination for the journalist awards, never mind actually winning anything. This fact speaks to the crap component, the lack of contribution to journalism as a whole.
With all these facts in mind, I've actually enjoyed watching the NP flounder. This isn't to say I want to see all the local Canwest papers go belly up, but as for the flagship, the sooner the better. Addition by subtraction for Canadian journalism.
Today's news of a bid for the National Post, along with two other papers, brings reason for optimism, primarily because of the players. Jerry Grafstein has past Liberal ties, as well as an impressive media resume and while this may not translate, at least it speaks to less ideological rigidity. Beryl P. Wajsman has an impressive resume that shows a progressive streak. Ray Heard worked for John Turner, but he also supported Peter Kent, so there is an air of balance to his inclusion. In other words, I get no sense of right wing ideology within this new group. Grafstein is already on record saying he won't change the editorial board for NP, but I see room for long term optimism. Grafstein also spoke to losing money in Toronto and finding a way to connect with that audience. Playing Harper's print stooge isn't a recipe for success in this market, so that admission is another indication that business as usual isn't in the eventual cards.
I don't want a Liberal mouthpiece. As a matter of fact, if the NP were to morph into a decidedly centrist publication, I'd appreciate the balance, it's not about mirroring my own bias. The Globe and Mail is a perfect example, pisses you off one moment, refreshing the next, what fair journalism tends to do, taken with a panoramic view.
Maybe the National Post can become an asset to Canadian journalism, rather than propaganda with a runny consistency. If not, I'll revert to my previous opinion, DIE AND DIE FAST.