Ban Draws Canadians to Blogs

3 comments
Source Title:
I Got Gommeried
Story Text:

I guess Canadians are nosy. A week ago I noticed no PR blogs had written anything about the Gomery Commission into the Canadian sponsorship scandal, so I thought I'd post an item. Just a wrap-up of recent CBC, Globe and Toronto Star coverage. I noticed a slight uptick in hits to this site, but that happens sometimes.

As the story got more interesting, I added to the postings.

Today, my three Gomery-related postings generated more hits in one day than I've received for the two months I've been writing about marketing, communications and technology.

Go to Google.ca, and under Sponsorship Scandal, I'm the seventh link from the top. Misspell Gommery, as I accidentally did on my first posting, and my blog shows up in the first two or three links on most search engines.

At least one U.S. blog has a fairly detailed description of Brault's testimony, hence the sudden interest in what bloggers have to say about the inquiry.

Comments

Cool

From what I understand it has the right ingredients - lack of available information (scarcity drives up demand), political scandal (we all like a juicy story, especially when the mighty fall), potential impact on PR industry (a cluster who are getting into blogging almost as much as techies) - was bound to draw interest :O)

Canadians are flocking to the web to get info

A public inquiry gets a publication ban as the details come out making everyone suspect that this really does have the potential to bring the gov't. down.

So, we have a public inquiry that is all of a sudden no longer public and a gov't. already plagued by this inquiry. Unless there is no else in the room to hear testimony there can be no publication bans.

Canadian blogs reporting this information are in breach of the publication and could find themselves prosecuted.

Gomery

The Judge Gomery has a rather quaint idea about publication bans: the media here is banned from giving any details about the testimony of the witness Jean Brault, however it is still possible to go to the courtroom and watch the proceedings. So leaks are inevitable, and the net allows access to sites which are not covered by the ban.

A couple of US-based blogs are defying the ban, but the conventional media here (who can't say anything) are reporting that the blogs include inaccurate information.

So we have the traditional media who can't cover the event, and the bloggers who don't have any responsibility regarding the accuracy of the reporting. As Canadians, we are even worse than being in the dark: the disinformation and rumor-mill is far worse than allowing the testimony to be published in full.

The inquiry is important: it could mean criminal charges against important members of the present and previous federal governments, a potential general election, and much more.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.