I've been reading Ottawa Citizen reporter Glen McGregor's blog for awhile now (i.e. pre-Robocalls).
In fact, I really enjoyed it when he called himself 'Sushiboy' and ran the thing on an amateur platform like the rest of us.
Now he's got a proBlog and, while he doesn't post as meanderingly (read: interestingly) or as often, there is still good stuff there.
Today he offers insight on how complicated stories, one of which he wrote recently based on investigative digging he did together with Postmedia's Stephen Maher, are often misunderstood/misinterpreted by one's readers.
So he takes a Mulligan and tries again.
Here is McSushiboy's (b)lede:
The gist of the thing?
Well, the fact that the bills from Rogers Communications that the M. Burke campaign supplied to the Elections Canada have account numbers that do not match those sent to the person or persons in charge of the IP address used by the so-called Pierre Poutine does say anything about 'involvement' or 'non-involvement' of anyone, regardless their political affiliation (or not).
Importantly, E-Canada has the subscriber information regarding the account linked to the IP address used by Poutine, while McGregor and Maher do not. Thus, the latter cannot, and have not, written anything definitive on the matter.
But that's just my interpretation.
Go read Mr. McGregor's entire/complete story of what he really wants people to know based on what he, himself, actually/for sure knows.
On a blog.
It's an interesting way to go about things, eh....In fact, it's kind of like what H. Caulfield wanted....You know, when he mentioned that he'd like to be able to call up the author of something interesting to find out what he or she really thought about the thing...Personally, that's all I ever want from a reporter who knows stuff - to find out what they really think....In fact, if I was going to be really forthcoming here, I think that may be why I give a couple of the local pundits such a hard time on these here pixels - because sometimes I am convinced they are not telling us what they really think...Now I know, based on what little I know about how the journalism business actually works, that things can't go that way all the time (or even most of the time), but on things that really matter, when the reporter/pundit really does know what is really going on/went down....Well?