In choosing its latest president (SEE HERE), the U of O has made itself home to a failed politician who was ethically challenged, who had bungled most major media-reported dossiers to cross his desk, who now appears to be in the pocket of outside interests, and who wants to spend more time out "in the world" than on campus.
That former politician was a Liberal and he has made the school an instrument of Liberal propaganda. As a result, he has exposed the school to severe and sustained conservative media criticism of "Canada's university" - as he likes to call the University of Ottawa.
Ever since the Coulter fiasco for which Allan Rock was responsible (according to his own late admission), CanWest has gone after Mr. Rock and the reputation of the University of Ottawa. This suggests a federal election battle in the near future.HERE is the latest example in the second national newspaper of corporate Canada. It is a hummer of a well structured beating from hell.
That's bad for Rock but it's good for the university (and it's good for Burma). It's good for the university because the criticism is well deserved and is a criticism of malfeasance by the university's corporate executives. It's good for the university because it's true. It's good for the university because it pushes its bosses to clean up their act.
The Rock administration's response has been to spin and to cover up.
Not good. Allan Rock needs to learn to shorten the time between public exposure and apology, not lengthen it. Beyond that, Allan Rock needs to clean this up: An independent public inquiry into covert surveillance at the U of O is past due, way past due.
Mister Rock needs to stop the cover up. He could start by removing his illegal refusal to receive a labour law grievance about THIS covert surveillance and its cover up.
For all the background in this sordid affair of the Rock administration see HERE.
2 comments:
It amazes me to no end that Mr. Rancourt seems to see no problem with battering media organizations that don't do what he wants (an earnest group of young journalists at the Fulcrum), while glorifying those that suit his needs (the ever so fair and balanced National Post).
He rants about journalistic ethics all the while publishing this series of vitriolic and self-interested posts that contain only enough truth to avoid a libel lawsuit. It seems to me that Denis Rancourt stands for nothing but his own self-interest.
Well said Anonymous. You seem to have inside knowledge: What do Maureen Robinson and Frank Appleyard of the Fulcrum stand for? Journalistic ethics or earnest enthusiasm? uh hum.
Post a Comment