The complainant, Marc Poitras, objected to the characterization of a platform speech by the Liberal Party leader as “striking hopeful notes.” He’s right – there was no justification and it appeared to be editorializing in a news piece.
COMPLAINT
You wrote to highlight part of a story about a policy speech given by Liberal Party leader Justin Trudeau. The story, entitled “Justin Trudeau vows to end 1st-past-the-post voting in platform speech,” carried two bylines, Rosemary Barton and Trinh Theresa Do. You assumed the story had been written by Ms. Barton (reasonable assumption) and you thought she had editorialized in her characterization of the Liberal leader’s speech and the way it was contrasted with the Conservative Party’s policies. The line in question was this:
His speech struck many hopeful notes and drew a stark contrast between the Liberals and the “cynical” Conservatives under Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
CBC Ombudsman REVIEW
I agree that this sentence falls short of CBC standards.
The difficulty here was that since the whole sentence was unclear, it might not have been obvious to you that this was in fact a quotation. It compressed so many thoughts into one short sentence that it lost clarity. It left the impression of bias.
On this score, the article fails. I
recommend CBC news managers review how this happened so that those involved can
learn from the mistake.
Read the full complaint and review
here.