social media

Wednesday April 10, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday April 10, 2019

Foreign interference in 2019 election ‘very likely’: report

The 2019 federal election is “very likely” going to be the target of foreign cyber interference, with voters being the most likely targets of this anticipated meddling, a new report from Canada’s electronic spy agency warns.

April 12, 2018

The report is also putting renewed spotlight on the risks of not having more robust cybersecurity and transparency requirements for social media platforms and political parties in place in advance of this year’s campaign, given these two areas are cited as being potential targets for foreign actors.

“An increasing number of foreign adversaries have the cyber tools, the organizational capacity and a sufficiently advanced understanding of Canada’s political landscape to direct cyber interference during the 2019 federal election, should they have the strategic intent,” the report states.

The report is an update to the 2017 Cyber Threats to Canada’s Democratic Process report published by the Communication Security Establishment (CSE).

September 17, 2015

The 2017 report noted that Canada’s electoral process would not be immune from potential interference by outside actors, and that federal candidates, parties, and voters are all at risk. The update notes that the likelihood of online election meddling has increased as the amount of cyber interference in other countries has increased over the last two years.

Now, CSE says that it is “highly likely” that interference in Canada’s democratic process will be done using similar tools that have been implemented in other countries, such as amplifying polarizing political issues, promoting one party over another or discouraging participating in the election altogether.

The document repeatedly cites Russia as an example of a foreign country that has been proven to be conducting this kind of cyber interference, including during the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign. Though a CSE official speaking to reporters on background said it is not anticipated that interference in the Canadian election will be on the same scale as what Americans experienced.

The intention of cyber interference is to compromise or gain access to information, or to use online means to “covertly manipulate online information” in order to influence voters’ opinions and ultimately the outcome of the election. (Source: CTV News) 

 

Congrats Social Media Donkey!

It’s election time in Canada which means the Internet becomes very active with rhetoric and persuasion, from all sorts of contributors, from political parties, opinion writers, Russian bots, trolls, and idiots.

Congratulations anonymous Twitter account holder Can Neo Cons purveyor of a robust chop shop of editorial cartoons. He (and he is a he) describes himself on his Twitter profile as, “I believe in standing up for what I think is right, Too much hatred going on in the world. I am into politics. All in the meme. Left Wing Populist.” He’s made quite a hobby out of extracting caricatures from editorial cartoons and reassembling them in tell tale bold bordered boxes with hackneyed thought bubbles peppered with spelling and grammar mistakes. He is the latest useful idiot to be used as a prime example to others why it’s not a good thing to repurpose professional satire to convey pea brained musings.

He isn’t the first person to do this and he won’t be the last, but there is a consistent hideousness in all of the reworked intellectual property that points to a pathological affliction among such individuals so obsessed by stealing other peoples work.

The behavioural pattern is very familiar. An artist will share work on a social media platform and among the discussion thread below will suddenly appear a chop shop art thief posting his awful repurposed work, in some vain attempt to flatter the artist. When alerted to their misdeed it is almost always the same: They’ll demonstrate immediate guilt, apologize for ripping off your art, and promise not to commit anymore vandalism to your art. Then they won’t bother to remove the offending rip offs of your art from their threads. After a little more back and forth between thief and the original creator, the thief will quickly dig in his heels, cite freedom of expression, telling the original creator that it’s the artist’s fault for sharing their art on social media. Then the fraudster will unleash a volley of insults.

Now, some of my colleagues have passive attitudes to these bottom feeders. Their follower counts are minuscule and in all likelihood there are mental disorders afflicting the individuals behind such accounts. Why bother giving them a broader audience?

In my view, they ought to be treated like any other thief of intellectual property. As we are taught in grade school we are to design our own work. We are told to cite supporting sources of our essays or creations. We are told at a young age that there are consequences for destroying property not belonging to us, intellectual property, or otherwise. This isn’t parody, it is theft, and if some people are so willing to engage in such wreckless activity, one has to wonder what other things such people might be up to. Let this serve as a convenient flag to authorities in case he has other shameful behaviour he thinks he’s hiding.

So, Michael Labelle, retired guy from Cornwall, Ontario, turned intellectual property thief, your misdeeds aren’t so anonymous after all. Your true identity is only mere clickity-clicks all over social media. 

 

Past Recipients of the Social Media Jackass Award. Each winner eventually removed stolen items from their feeds but it always took persistence:

Canadian Pride

“Teflon Jim” Stewart

HarpersGotaGo

Ontario Liberal Press Secretary’s Office

CJ Kalish

Facebook’s email!

UPDATE: Tuesday March 12, 2019

It took a week of waiting but after a complaint was lodged against Michael LaBelle’s theft his repurposed use of my intellectual property was scraped off the bottom of Facebook’s shoe.

Most of it, anyway. I listed 25 violations of intellectual property theft.

Tonight, Facebook sent me an email message following up on a complaint I lodged last week, and confirmed that Michael LaBelle had indeed violated Facebook’s rules regarding unauthorized use of Intellectual Property and has removed the offending material from his page Can Neo Cons. 

A quick scan through Michael LaBelle’s Facebook thread of awfulness will reveal a few more of my cartoons that were overlooked on a morning of logging infringements when I could’ve easily been more productive with my time than picking away at some loser’s pathetic hobby. Still, there remains extracts of cartoons drawn by well known cartoonists whose work has been degraded and repurposed to convey this thief’s twisted thoughts for all eternity.  The word needs to get out that this behaviour is unacceptable and that it won’t be tolerated. While some may wonder why I bother to devote more than a few seconds of fuming towards some cretin that pops up on my Twitter notifications, this is really meant for the future Michael LaBelles.  Michael LaBelle, rather stupidly, opted to react unwisely when his dirty hobby was exposed even when he was given the option to recant. Let this serve as an example to other Michael LaBelles that before the DMCA takedown happens you’ll be shamed first, and you’ll become the next useful idiot, like Michael LaBelle.

 

Friday February 15, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday February 15, 2019

High-stakes war of words between Trudeau, Wilson-Raybould on tap

In the wake of Jody Wilson-Raybould’s resignation from Justin Trudeau’s cabinet, a war of words between the prime minister and his former attorney general seems inevitable. If the developments of the past few days are any indication, it could get ugly.

February 13, 2017

Wilson-Raybould would hardly have resigned if her interpretation of the interaction she had with the Prime Minister’s Office over the handling of the criminal prosecution on corruption charges of engineering giant SNC-Lavalin matched Trudeau’s.

She would not be seeking legal advice as to how much, if anything, she can disclose from former Supreme Court justice Thomas Cromwell if she were not exploring the option of giving her version of events.

April 3, 2012
Justin Trudeau wins charity boxing match
Liberal MP Justin Trudeau beat Conservative Senator Patrick Brazeau in their charity boxing match in Ottawa Saturday night.

As an aside, Cromwell’s credentials can only make the advice Wilson-Raybould acts on harder to challenge either by the government — should the former SCOC justice lay out a legal rationale for her to speak up — or by the opposition parties if he advises her to remain silent.

In hindsight, Wilson-Raybould is probably congratulating herself for seeking top-notch legal advice.

Judging from the prime minister’s reaction to her resignation, Trudeau and his team are in a take-no-prisoners mood.

February 9, 2019

To listen to the prime minister on Tuesday, one would have been hard-pressed to find any lingering sign of the pride that attended Wilson-Raybould’s appointment as Canada’s first Indigenous attorney general three years ago. Hers was not a run-of — the-mill cabinet casting call.

Back in 2015, her elevation was seen as a powerful signal of the depth of Trudeau’s commitment to reconciliation with Canada’s Indigenous peoples. 

But on Tuesday, the picture he painted of his former minister was anything but flattering. Trudeau questioned her integrity. He said her actions were at odds with their private conversations. He might as well have called Wilson-Raybould a loose cannon. (Continued: Hamilton Spectator)  

Autopsy of a Twitter Pile-on

Embarking on this investigation it is necessary to remind us all with a simple statement:

NOT ALL EDITORIAL CARTOONS ARE MEANT TO BE FUNNY

However, given the state of editorial cartooning in recent years, especially in North America, it’s not at all surprising that readers have come to always expect a funny gag to elicit a chortle or smile at the expense of a divisive politician. Think Donald Trump.

Sometimes the easiest path for some editorial cartoonists to take is to spread the laughter around equally with the aren’t-all-our-politicians-stupid gags. Though increasingly, editorial cartoon comedy has moved out of the realm of politics, and replaced by not so hard hitting commentary on crazy weather, sports, entertainment, or any other non-political arena which will offend the least sensibilities.  On editorial pages across the spectrum, newspaper editors without staff cartoonists, will often opt to run syndicated cartoons which will offend the least number of readers thereby ensuring their daily routine won’t be interrupted by irate phone calls. Sadly, a rising number of newspapers have done away with editorial cartoons, running photos, or more text in their traditional boxes.

All this said, one would think the above statement goes without saying given the popularity of editorial cartoons which pull at heartstrings. Whether it’s editorial cartoon commentary on the passing of famous personality entering the pearly gates, a feel good Hallmark card cartoon greeting on any given calendar holiday, or a tear provoking editorial cartoon following headline tragedies in the news. People should understand that editorial cartoons, watered down to provoke emotion, aren’t always meant to be funny.

So here’s another statement :

EDITORIAL CARTOONS MAKE PEOPLE ANGRY

They’re also supposed to make people think. Not in a long time has a cartoon of mine garnered as much attention on Twitter – critical comments, yet a sizeable number of likes & retweets, here, and along with a similar cartoon drawn by Michael de Adder here.

The above editorial cartoon certainly demonstrated that fact.  With orchestrated social media outrage and offence clouding logical thought and spreading like a virus designed to manipulate and whip up anger using tangents unrelated to the point of the satire. One would think it easily conveys to readers a classic scenario of power oppressing the afflicted. In order to depict the power imposing its will on the oppressed, a cartoonist sometimes has to draw uncomfortable images to convey the message.

Despite references to gag metaphors in the media to describe the situation demoted cabinet minister Jody Wilson-Raybould presently finds herself, being unable to give her account due to Solicitor-client privilege as federal Attorney-General in the SNC-Lavalin affair, the illustrated depiction of that situation was evidently too much for some readers to stomach. 

I get it. This cartoon has caused anger. It’s especially galling to supporters of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. He rode into office with overwhelming support, on a feminist mandate, to improve Ottawa’s relations with indigenous peoples, and to bring about greater government openness and transparency (and as a bonus, his boxing prowess, capitalized by his supporters, is in full ridiculous view.) The cartoon exposes perceived breaches on all those fronts. His brand is under attack and the mounting doubts and speculation because of it could send the Liberal Party’s House of Commons seat count downward after the coming Federal election. While many obviously understand this message, others are lashing out giving their own misunderstood definitions of what satire is:

…And just attacking the editorial cartoonist: 

Which is fine. I, like all other editorial cartoonists, have been called everything from all sides of the political spectrum.

Sure, some people might think that they appreciate satire, it only works for them if the satire isn’t exposing the folly of their political heroes. What is worrying is the growing trend by readers to spread false accusations, to report or clamp down on satire, whenever they feel offended by an editorial cartoon. This is particularly true of the toxicity that spreads on a platform like Twitter.

This one takes the absolute cake for wrangling in the RCMP, as if Canada were some police state, while making a mockery of actual hate and violence promotion. 

Long gone are the #JeSuisCharlie hashtags when people added their supposed support for satire with fingers clicking the mouses, but not actually understanding what satire actually is. Despite the articles, the panel discussions, the in-depth primers on the long history of the craft and the importance of freedom of expression, the actual term “freedom of expression” is being used in a pejorative way on university campuses, and elsewhere, worldwide.  

The sad reality is, it’s having an effect, made evident by the fact that editorial cartoonist positions at newspapers are in fast decline. It’s not helped when those in journalism, politics, and academia thrash about demonstrating willful ignorance of satire, opting to join a chorus of virtue signallers feigning outrage on unrelated tangents which have nothing to do with the message in the editorial cartoon.

Godwin’s Law was invoked to the writer of that last doozy. Just for the record, at least one account holder was reported for threatening violence and had their account placed on suspension.  A stiff 7 day cooling off period ought to give offenders a taste of a world without Twitter.

Eventually, every political movement comes to an end to be replaced by another. The pendulum swings. Some day Justin Trudeau will be gone and his party will be replaced by another. Politics will always be around, but the trends show that with the demise of print media, satire in the form of editorial cartoons will be watered down to irrelevance, unless the easily offended aren’t resisted.

There are countless expressions humans have to express freedom of expression, but a particular one that guides me is:

Hate the cartoon, dislike the cartoonist, but do not impose your own decree on what cartooning is intended to be. 

Update – Monday February 18, 2019

My colleague Michael de Adder opted to apologize for his cartoon.

 

The above cartoon is cited in this Huffington Post article. The Comments section are overwhelmingly supportive of the points expressed in this cartoon, and those drawn by other editorial cartoonists. An acknowledgement of thanks goes out to the many likes, retweets, and comments in support of the cartoon on Twitter.

Also, as of this afternoon, Gerald Butts, resigned his position as Chief of Staff to the Prime Minister. The plot thickens. 

Update – Wednesday February 20, 2019

Trudeau said he apologized to Jody Wilson-Raybould in caucus:

“I wasn’t quick enough to condemn in unequivocal terms the comments and commentary and cartoons made about her last week, they were absolutely unacceptable and I should have done it sooner.”

 Update – Sunday February 24, 2019

The Clerk of the Privy Council has registered his own disgust at at least one of the cartoons, although he didn’t specify which one.  Speaking about Jody Wilson-Raybourn, Michael Wernick testified at the House Justice Committee, stating:

“She was the decider, the full and final decider. She can’t be the fettered solicitor and battered decider in that horrible, vile cartoon, at the same time. It’s one or the other.”

More write-ups appeared. A rambling piece sympathetic to Michael de Adder’s apology for his cartoon, and another one from Canada’s far right Rebel blasting him for caving in. Here’s a nice analysis summary of the week that was.

On the Canadaland podcast, an interview show about media, host Jesse Brown devoted much of the show unpacking the protest convoy, better known as “United we Roll”, which I drew on.  Then, changing subject to the SNC-Lavalin scandal, at the 38:08 mark, Jesse feigns sympathy for “these poor son-of-a-bitch editorial cartoonists”, ironically, as he panders to a feminist guest about inferred misogyny, “…they’re not good cartoons.”

Gee, thanks, Jesse.

Update – March 2, 2019

CBC’s The National highlighted “cartoons that crossed the line” in the second segment of its Friday night broadcast. This cartoon closed out the report:



 

Letters to the Editor, Hamilton Spectator, February 21, 2019

Cartoon warrants an apology  RE: Feb. 15 editorial cartoon

As a long time subscriber to The Hamilton Spectator I was appalled to see Graeme MacKay’s cartoon and equally disappointed that you made the decision to print it.

That Mr. MacKay views violence against women as amusing and worthy of drawing this disgusting cartoon and The Spectator’s decision to print it, given the alarming statistics regarding VAW and femicide in this country is inexcusable.

I would expect an apology.

Barbara Howe, Hamilton

Cartoon hit the mark  RE: Feb. 15 editorial cartoon

Good for you, for this cartoon that exposes Justin Trudeau for what he really is. He calls himself a feminist, but he is really just another white male bully who thinks nothing of oppressing the views of women, in this case of Jody Wilson-Raybould. Thanks for putting this hypocrisy front and centre.

J.D. Peltier, Hamilton

 

 

Friday April 13, 2018

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday April 13, 2018

‘We do not participate in Twitter diplomacy’: Russia responds to Trump

November 3, 2017

In the wake of President Trump’s tweet taunting Russia while promising a missile attack on Moscow’s ally Syria, Russian politicians and officials are jumping at a chance to show they are the more mature and serious party. Here’s how Russian officials from the president on down have responded to Trump.

President Vladimir Putin did not address the tweets directly while greeting new foreign ambassadors to Moscow at the Kremlin. But he reiterated his frequent call for global stability — which can only be accomplished, in the Kremlin’s view, by giving Russia a prominent role in a “multipolar” rather than U.S.-led world order.

“Indeed, the state of things in the world cannot but provoke concern. The situation in the world is increasingly chaotic. Nevertheless, we hope that common sense will prevail in the end and that international relations will become more constructive — that the whole global system will become more stable and predictable.”

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov responded to the tweets in comments to Russian journalists. While he dismissed Trump’s Twitter diplomacy, he left unmentioned that Russia’s own diplomats in London are no stranger to it.

Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova quickly took to Facebook, wondering whether an American strike would only be a pretext for erasing all evidence of a chemical-weapons attack that Russia has described as staged.

“Smart missiles should fly in the direction of terrorists and not a legal government that has been fighting for several years against international terrorism on its territory.… Or is the whole idea to quickly wipe away the traces of a provocation by striking them with smart missiles, so that international inspectors would have nothing left to find in terms of evidence?” (Source: Washington Post) 

Published in the Waterloo Region Record

SaveSave

SaveSave

Thursday April 12, 2018

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday April 12, 2018

Zuckerberg: regulation of social media firms is ‘inevitable’

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg told a House oversight panel Wednesday that he believes it is “inevitable” there will be regulation of the social media industry and also disclosed to lawmakers that his own data was included in the personal information sold to malicious third parties.

March 27, 2018

“The internet is growing in importance around the world in people’s lives and I think that it is inevitable that there will need to be some regulation,” Zuckerberg said during testimony before the House Energy and Commerce Committee. “So my position is not that there should be no regulation but I also think that you have to be careful about regulation you put in place.”

Larger, more dominant companies like Facebook have the resources to comply with government regulation, he said, but “that might be more difficult for a smaller startup to comply with.”

Lawmakers in both parties have floated possible regulation of Facebook and other tech companies amid privacy scandals and Russian intervention on the platform. It’s not clear what that regulation would look like and Zuckerberg didn’t offer any specifics.

March 21, 2018

Zuckerberg was answering a question from Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., when he informed lawmakers about his personal data, a reference to the Cambridge Analytica scandal that has rocked his company over the past several weeks.

His remarks came as he opened the second day of a congressional inquisition in the wake of the worst privacy debacle in his company’s history. A day earlier Zuckerberg batted away often-aggressive questioning from senators who accused him of failing to protect the personal information of millions of Americans from Russians intent on upsetting the U.S. Election.

The stakes are high for both Zuckerberg and his company. Facebook has been reeling from its worst-ever privacy failure following revelations last month that the political data-mining firm Cambridge Analytica, which was affiliated with Trump’s 2016 campaign, improperly scooped up data on about 87 million users. Zuckerberg has been on an apology tour for most of the past two weeks, culminating in his congressional appearances this week.

But what comes next is unclear. (Source: Chicago Tribune) 

Published in the Hamilton Spectator

SaveSave