Tom Korski on MoneyTalks
13:44 Share

I'm certainly in that camp that says the media could play an incredible role in whatever way you want. I mean, informed public, of course, is key, but raising the level of integrity in our debate, all of those things. I find it fascinating, though, that how much of that quality media has...

has migrated into independent media. I'm thinking of people like we have Terry Glavin on the show with The Real Story. We've had Sam Cooper on the show. Brilliant work when it comes to Chinese interference, the Bureau. And of course, my favorite is Black Locks Reporter.

Why? Because they break so many stories, bring so many stories to our attention that literally isn't being covered in the mainstream media. But I think key to understanding how Ottawa works, where our tax dollars are going, for goodness sakes, and so many other subjects, Tom Korski is the managing editor of

of Black Locks reporter. Tom, first of all, great to have you on. And again, let me just give you a huge pat on the back. I'm very keen on quality media, and I go to Black Locks for so much of it. This is going to be the nicest conversation I have all week. Thank you very much, Michael. I appreciate it. Well, it's a huge and important role, though, that as I say, so many different things, whether, you know, the coverage, I know these are hot button topics right now, but of

things like ArriveCam. Thank goodness you're there reporting on that for ages. You're not new to that story or many, many others. I'm not doing it justice at this moment, but yeah, I think it's key. And that's why I was very concerned when we got a new court ruling about what I would call, again, from a layman's point of view, I pay for my Black Locks subscription.

And it's very clear to me that that is paying for the work your team does, the original research your team does, the sitting for hours upon hours in committee meetings, going through parliamentary notes, all of those things that take a lot of time and energy. And of course, we pay to support that. So I was shocked to see this judge say, no, I could share that indiscriminately. I just, to me, someone who believes in, you know, that people...

should be repaid for their quality work. I just found that flabbergasting. Now, that's an oversimplification. So I'd ask you to elaborate on that, please.

I don't think it is an oversimplification, Michael. I mean, the judge said shoplifting is okay. Let's just be frank. It's just electronic shoplifting. So he tried to dress it up a little bit. It's an interesting story, but this is, we think, a very far-reaching court ruling that affects many, many people in, obviously, the digital economy, which is the economy now,

And we think it's a G7 first. I don't know of another G7 country that has said you can share a password nine times without payment or permission. Now, that's a judge said that, but he was upholding an argument from the Department of Justice. The defendant in the case was the government of Canada.

And that's exactly what he said. His judgment, I read from the federal judge's ruling. He said the simple act of reading by officials with an immediate interest in articles for business-related reasons is fine. He said this is, you can share your password nine times, and that's how many times there was in this case. Yeah.

if you want it just for business purposes. So now we're contracted, for instance, by a contractor who says, well, can I share my password to the National Building Code, which is very expensive? And we'd say, well, the judge just said, yes, you can. That sounds like business-related reasons. It is wide open. It is jokers wild on passwords now.

And I appreciate that description. I see it as a tactic. And again, obviously, as I said up front, I'm concerned about the quality of the media. We're getting it delivered by people who are independent, who rely on people-paid subscriptions for their livelihood and to finance all the research that's required to come up with that background, et cetera. And I just see it's a huge attack on independent media. My opinion?

I don't think it's a conspiracy theory, Michael. I happen to agree with you because it's part of the entire package of initiatives by the usual suspects. The Department of Justice, one of the biggest law firms in the country. They have 600 lawyers. For the biggest corporation in Canada, it's called the Government of Canada. What have they done? Well, they've come in with very lavish subsidies.

by application or publishers they like you have to be approved

And, well, what's the benefit? You win the lottery. Almost $30,000, $29,750. Let's call it a $30,000 subsidy per newsroom employee by payroll rebate per year. You find me a small business in Canada that couldn't use a $30,000 annual rebate per employee, but only if you are approved publicly.

publishing by cabinet. 15% subscription tax credits. They get six-figure media monitoring payments. In my opinion, that's straight-up payola. And we found in one case there's been cash for coverage payments by federal agencies to their favorite television network, the CBC. But if you're independent, and we are, and you don't apply for subsidies because you don't want their money,

It can't be independent of government influence and reliant on government subsidies at the same time. Very simple ethic in our shop. If you don't play ball, we can see, and in this case with the judge, it happened to be the Parks Canada agency, but there's 14 other plaintiffs, Michael. They've shared passwords literally hundreds of times.

to access literally thousands of works for nothing. That only has one meaning in our business. That means if you play ball, you get all the carrots. And if you don't play ball, you will get the stick. It's that raw.

And it should be, and it is, by the way, I think it is a massive concern, but I would like to emphasize it should be a bigger concern. You know, and obviously the CBC is not popular in the country, and I can give a myriad of reasons. I mean, it's not like they haven't supplied the public with reasons, you know, 1.4%.

billion dollars in tax dollars. But now that CBC model extends, as you elaborate there, to other aspects of the mainstream media. And, you know, you look at, Tom, you look at the poll results and there's two groups near the bottom. It's politicians and journalists. And I think this does taint journalists. And yeah, it's very difficult. But the other side of this I want to bring forward, though, is

How could, you know, a smaller publication like Black Locks, at least there's not a lot of you in there. You've done very well because people do support the quality there. But, you know, how do you afford to take on the government? I mean, they have literally endless amounts of money to make sure you can't go forward legally.

Well, in this case, you know, it was point of pride. It cost us half a million dollars. We've been going in and out of courts or court hearings for eight years on this to get a judge saying that you can share passwords nine times. And now we're supposed to litigate in the court of appeal the definition of the word password. The judge in this case actually said, I'm not making this up.

He actually said it wasn't obvious what password meant. He said there's no evidence on the definition of password. You know, I was saying to counsel, well, how about the Bible? Why don't we just submit the Bible where it talks about you can't enter the walled city, you can't pass into the city if you don't know the secret word. Password. How am I doing on password definitions? What they've done is...

The government has interfered in newsrooms in our country to an unprecedented degree in peacetime. That's not an exaggeration for the sake of effect. On their best day, Michael, my two cents, they're just incompetent. I mean, they can't even run the post office or the passport office. Come on. This is beyond them. But there's also inherent conflict there.

The government seeks re-election every four years. You are unbelievably naive if you do not think they expect quid pro quo from a paid press. I can give you an example of the corrupting influence of subsidies. I'll keep it short. There was a fall economic statement last November by Finance Minister Freeland. And in that budget update,

She doubled the payroll rebates to $30,000 a year at a cost to taxpayers of $120 million.

Now that was detailed in a budget lockup. All the reporters were in this five-hour lockup all day long. You'll never guess how many of them ran out of that lockup to call that story into their city desk. You're not going to believe this, boss. They just doubled the rebates to $120 million a year as a taxpayer charge.

Nobody. They didn't even have to be told to play ball. That's the corrupting influence of subsidies in our business. It's absolutely dreadful.

That is an excellent example, though. You know, first of all, obviously, taxpayers are very concerned how their money spent. That's why we have an auditor general. We have the Parliamentary Budget Office. But it's clear. I mean, you don't have to guess. Do people care how the money spent? Look at the explosive response you guys got to the ArriveCamp scandal and how that all evolved. I mean, many, many other examples. Unfortunately, many, many other examples.

So there's, I mean, absolutely no excuse. Taxpayers want to know where their money's going. And as you say, a major expense paid for by individual taxpayers, and it doesn't get reported. No, that's not acceptable.

And yet, you know, they pulled on it. We don't have to guess what the public thinks. I agree with your intuition. The Privy Council office, that's the very top of the federal bureaucracy, does in-house polling all the time. It's very expensive. They spend $800,000 to $1 million a year on continuous focus groups, Vancouver all the way to St. John's.

constant focus groups the only polls we read because their internal polling that provides the only data that cabinet reads and it's very often a precursor what is coming down the pipe

And they polled Canadians, everyday Canadians. What do you think about media? Isn't it just so sad about what's happening to the newspapers? Wouldn't you feel terrible if the newspapers folded? Wouldn't you like to keep up substance? You know what people said? I could care less. I get my information online. I could care less what happens to the legacy press. There is more, thanks to the internet, today.

there is more primary research information available you don't need the filter of the reporters who set in a walk-up beat like stenographers within the issue being told what to write by the minister of finance canadians have no interest in this which tells you there's a political interest a very small number of people are interested michael and it's called the cabinet

uh it's an unbelievable story and as you say this isn't isolated there's been an attack on on the independent media you know different bills that kind of thing uh you know that have come through the list is too long but the latest as i say in this regard i find outrageous as i say uh the expense i mean the whole goal is that you guys backlog has led this

This, you know, defense of the independent media and the attack against just this free password sharing. And yeah, it's just it's onerous. It should be a huge, a huge concern for Canadians. And I'm going to add one more thing, though, I was going to mention, but so.

i recommend that people subscribe to black locks and i want people who've listened to this show for years and years to think about how infrequently i ever recommend anything uh that way but i will with black locks is i don't think you can find out what's going i agree there's some good stuff on the internet but you've got to find out what's going on minding the business of ottawa and i'll tell you this uh we'll tell you the details in a second but we will uh pay for your subscription we're gonna award one subscription today

to Blacklocks that will pay for it, Money Talks, because as I say, first of all, the challenge is just huge for you. And my thanks and my congratulations to you, Tom, and the Blacklocks team for all that you're doing, including on this file. So thank you. Michael, I'm overwhelmed by the generosity. This is really very gracious. We think it's worth it. And I can't tell you how exciting it is to know that you think it is too. I think this is just fantastic. Thank you. Well, great stuff. Thanks for being with us.