I feel compelled to answer because your post, no doubt given in good faith, dealt with my post. I have been a Toronto resident for 53 years, and I have actually worked for both the Star and the Globe at various times. I disagree with pretty well everything you say other than that the Sun is rag and The National Post is right of centre (it is aimed at a higher income and highly educated demographic . . . at least that is its intention . . . its articles are, however, very well written).
Originally Posted by Dragonlady
The websites supported by the Star, its writers and the organizations that receive its support are perhaps the source of your information, or perhaps it is the paper you follow and believe. I think, with all due respect, the facts, however, speak somewhat differently.
I won't go on ad nauseum, but let's just say it is very questionable that the Star has much influence with its readership. If it did, Ford would not have been elected Mayor of Toronto with 50 per cent of the vote, and Harper (our prime minister) would not have won a single seat in Toronto (he won more than a few). Other examples, are too numerous to mention. (As you have written to the Star, I am sure you are familiar with what goes on in Toronto.) I am not saying that the Star was wrong in its political position (maybe even it has been proved right), but if you want solid proof of that newspaper's influence, those are two good examples.
Its writers are like DiManno: there for entertainment, not to persuade. That is how they are read. They can write good articles as well as bad, but the nasty ones are taken with a grain of salt. It is well read, but, with social media, it has no longer the impact that it perhaps might have many years ago.
The nursing home and goverment legislation comment is a bit of a red herring, but:. Ya, newspapers pat themselves on the back and give themselves awards and, through marketing, call themselves things. (This brings back memories of The National Enquirer and its marketing campaign.) And anyway, my point is that where influence really matters is with the readership.
Regarding your comments about the Globe and Mail being right of centre, people who read it everyday might beg to differ. Both of its lead editorial writers, Martin Lawrence (who wrote the authorized biography of Jean Chretien) and Jeffrey Simpson are big L Liberals. John Stackhouse, the editor, is certainly no Tory either (and when he took over the editorship, he made significant changes in the columnists to bolster the slightly centre-left of centre slant. (Margaret Wente, who is painted right wing, voted Liberal in the last election, btw.) This is our "national paper" and it is read and thought highly of as a quality paper by people of all stripes. Now, this paper does have some traction. But again, my point is that what matters is the effect on the readership (and who that readership is). There is a reason why Starbucks carries Globe and Mail newspapers, but not the Star.
If you were to go to the Toronto Cricket Club (ie probably the demographic most interested in skating) and ask people which newspaper they read, the vast majority would tell you the Globe and Mail. That is no stretch.
Yes, everyone who really reads and follows figure skating will read at least the two newspapers in Toronto, combing for news of figure skating. Pretty well any press is good press given the state of coverage in Canada. But there is a difference between readership and influence.
The bottom line, going back to the purpose of this thread, is that no one took notice of the article or, if they did, were not influenced by it.
Last edited by phaeljones; 12-09-2012 at 08:36 AM.