I’m still parsing the results of the Alberta election. I don’t understand how Danielle Smith can have breached the ethics code and still be elected.
In particular, I don’t understand how a UCP candidate (who has been told she would not be allowed to sit in caucus if elected) can compare trans children to feces in cookie dough and still win her riding.
And I’m still going over the results (in my copious spare time…) to figure out how it can be so close, and yet, the UCP have a majority government.
Meanwhile, I’m working in Halifax while the fires are going on. It’s not directly affecting me, as I’m in the downtown and the fires are 20km from where I’m staying and working, but you can smell the smoke. And I’m getting emergency alerts on a regular basis.
This case has the potential to turn into a giant headache for the courts. It makes perfect sense that an anti-vax doctor would be supported by people who use Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Arguments and other misunderstandings of the legal system!
I’m curious if my learned friends in the legal profession have run into many of these ‘Freemen on the Land’ style arguments in Canada. @Northern_Piper ? @Spoons - anything you are able to share? (I beg your pardon if I’ve missed any other Canadian lawyers who are here on the SDMB…)
I’m familiar with their work, but have never had to deal with one in person.
The courts won’t give them the time of day, especially in Alberta. A now-retired judge of the Court of King’s Bench wrote the definitive encyclopedia on them, which has been cited in courts around the world:
That’s a fascinating read! I remember reading the Illuminatus trilogy, and a bit of the ‘Church of the Sub-Genius’ back in the early 80s, but I had always taken it as a bit of social satire. I’m very surprised to see there are people taking this seriously!
I’ve never dealt with any Freemen-on-the-Land/Sovereign Citizens in a professional sense. Between warnings from the Law Society and the Meads decision, mentioned upthread, much has been done in warning the legal profession about the signs that demonstrate that a wannabe-client. If such a person calls me, and I get the feeling that they might be a FotL/SovCit, I won’t take their matter.
However, I did get matched up on the golf course with somebody who exhibited a couple of the signs (as Meads indicates, there are many). Most prominently, he had recently heard of the “Accepted for Value” thing, where the number on the back of your birth certificate can be used to access your secret bank account that the government has for you. And something about a method that can be used to legally avoid income tax. He was thinking about trying these theories out.
But that was as far as that went. The rest of that day’s conversation was about golfing, with occasional forays into discussing pro sports, the weather, women, cars, and so on.
I prefer to get my news from the CBC, and check their site at least twice a day. I do miss hearing about articles from other reliable sources, hearing reviews of friends’ work, and seeing opinions that I might not otherwise see.
But the thing that sets me off is that the vacuum has been filled with advertising and trashy memes spreading disinformation from dubious sources…
Reddit is not affected and they have a dedicated news tab. I also subscribe to the (gasp!) Toronto Star digitally, so I get my Daily Main Stream Media upload.
I’m not even sure what it means to get news through Facebook. Does that mean that your friends were posting links to articles that sound interesting? Or were you subscribed to the Facebook page for CBC News or some other news source?
A lot of media companies get people to their website after social media users click on a link to a story they find interesting. Media companies both depend on this increased traffic and are upset they may not be paid for the original information provided in the link.
The former - whether it’s using the link to provide context and the source of a quotation, giving the factual background for an opinion, bringing attention to a friend’s upcoming show or a review from a friend’s show that just opened, showing support for someone’s cause or opposition to someone else’s cause, my friends and I post links to news sites regularly.
I have very strong opinions about social media and the negative effects they are having on society to begin with, but this interference in a government policy that addresses a legitimate concern, eg. the survival of our news media and journalistic integrity, goes too far. Our democracy depends on accurate information.
You, of course, are entitled to your own informed opinions on the question.
I think that the web advertising bubble is about to burst, for original providers like news sites and for ‘content aggregators’ like social media both.
I’ve long suspected that entities like YouTube and Spotify interrupt what you’re watching/listening to with advertising not because they’re making money off the ads, but because the ads are supposed to irritate you enough that you pay for the premium, ad-free version. I don’t, however, have any hard evidence like a leaked memo or off-mic remark for that suspicion.
You make a very good point, Gorsnak, but I would argue that Google has a very different model for ad revenue - as the world’s largest search engine, they have the ability to bump where your company is in the algorithm, so that anyone searching for theremin parts gets to see Gorsnak in the top three searches (with the little square indicating that it’s an ad, of course) as well as in the body of the search return. Whereas Le Ministre’s theremin parts may be superior, but because he didn’t pay to get optimized to the top of the list, or even the first page, business is kinda slow.
Plus Google can chase you from page to page as you surf, sometimes in a very creepy manner.
Whereas newspapers can only try to provide the best, most interesting content and hope you’ll follow one of the other links on their page.
Perhaps I’m entirely wrong - perhaps newspapers tried to prolong a business model that has become hopelessly out of date, and now, they’re stuck selling buggy whips in a brick and mortar store. But what concerns me more is what’s going to replace them, and how accurate and accountable they will be.