Thursday, 31 March 2011

Why is a senior media personality threatening a 21 year old university student?

On March 28, 2011, the following tweet appeared on the Twitter account of a local Saskatchewan talk show host.  My question is:  Why is a senior media personality publicly threatening the newly elected president of the University of Regina Students Union?


34 comments:

parkadeboy said...

That tweet is the second defamation that has been committed against Mr. Peterson by Rawlco Radio and one of their employees. It was issued on the official twitter account of a well known Rawlco program.

Saskatoon said...

Poor JJG - he's acting all scared and stuff of Kent - Kent must really be doing his job well since Johnny's so upset.
The more the bully attacks, the more a'scared he his.
Go Kent!

Larry Hubich said...

How is this acceptable behaviour from an experienced talk show host? Where is the evidence to back up such spurious allegations?

Mike from Vita said...

Just wondering if you listened to John's response on his radio show? Swallow your pride, open your ears and listen...you may learn something!!

I am a Union Member in Manitoba

Zitts said...

The failed politician really does believe his threatening letter had some impact even though the original post remains.... No wonder nobody listens to his radio show.

Zitts said...

John tells Larry to block him on twitter only to take to his radio show to complain to his few listeners that he was blocked... Amazing Trent buys into this stuff.

Mike from Vita said...

Zitts...did you forget to take your meds this morning? And people wonder why narrow minded individuals are called "Blockheads".

Zitts said...

Mike, maybe you can admit that Gormley is not some great god.

Larry Hubich said...

Thank you to all for participating in this blog thread.

As for your first comment Mike from Vita, I rarely listen to Mr. Gormley's show. (Like the rest of the vast majority of Saskatchewan citizens (90+%) I have much better things to do with my time). So no, I didn't hear what he had to say today. Perhaps you can share it with us.

I'm glad you are union member in Manitoba. Which one?

Sask Man said...

Zitts, the post from rightwingbob WAS changed after Gormley stated that you can't slander or imply a working lawyer cannnot perform or is a bad lawyer. He then changed the post to remove the offending part. Larry if you are talking about acceptable behaviour Mr. Peterson / rightwingbob is certainly not innocent and you should look in the mirror yourself. He made a mistake, fixed it and hopefully learned a lesson on how far you can take certain comments.Now instead of dropping it you keep up with the incredulous attitude that nobody buys except the dyed in orange left.

Sask Man said...

Parkadeboy, before you pile on next time you should double check the definition of what you are saying;

the act of defaming; false or unjustified injury of the good reputation of another, as by slander or libel; calumny: She sued the magazine for defamation of character.

Show me how Gormleys tweet was defamatory?

Kevin Miller said...

I'm just going to throw out this small nugget of relevant information that people seem to be glossing over. Kent Peterson isn't Right Wing Bob.

That is all.

Larry Hubich said...

Sask Man,

Thank you for participating in this blog.

I have yet to see any evidence to support the allegations that Mr. Peterson is this "rightwingbob" individual.

Absent such evidence any comments connecting the two (whether on twitter, a blog, or on air) are spurious, deliberately misleading, and some might say, bordering on slander and libel.

If you have that evidence, or know anybody who does, send them my way. I'd love to see it.

Larry Hubich said...

Kevin,

Ya think?!

Thanks for your comment.

Mike from Vita said...

Zitts, where in my post did I state that Gormley was a god? Are you seeing something in my post that I am unable to see. Gormley stated his reasons for his actions on his radio program. Maybe you need to swallow your pride, open your ears and listen too!!

By the way, I'd like to see where the stats are located that 90% of Saskatchewan DON'T listen to Gormley? Who did the survey; the same one who did it for the CBC, who happened to be a former employee of Ignatieff? That would definitely give an accurate view of who is listening to Gormley.

History has taught me that the people, who have a problem with outspoken persons, are people who have something to hide? What skeletons don't we want to be made public?

I am a member of the MGEU and an associate member of the STF

Larry Hubich said...

Mike from Vita,

Thank you for your additional comments and questions. I can not answer those that have been directed at other participants on this thread, but I can answer the ones that appear to be intended for me.

I'm sorry if you are confused about the stats that indicate Newstalk Radio in Saskatoon and Regina (CKOM and CJME) have a very low market share. It appears from the BBM Ratings that both stations enjoy a market share of well below 10%, in fact, it appears to be well below 5%. Which means that easily 90% of Saskatchewan listeners do not tune the stations in at all.

You seem to think that these numbers are suspect or that they have been derived from some sort of biased or unreputable organization. If you would have clicked on the (90+%) link in my previous comment it would have taken you to another post on my blog that indicates where the market share ratings come from.

But for convenience I have reproduced a link to the organization that does those industry measurements. (i.e. the BBM Ratings)

The BBM Ratings come from BBM Canada:

"BBM Canada, Sondages BBM in Québec, is a not for profit, member-owned tripartite industry organization, which has been operating since 1944.

We provide broadcast measurement and consumer behaviour data, as well as industry-leading intelligence to broadcasters, advertisers and agencies. Our sophisticated data tracking and measurement technologies and services gather relevant information on audience behaviours during and after broadcasts, giving our members business critical insights into the impacts of broadcast content and consumer behaviours. By providing important audience and consumer behaviour information and intelligence, we enable broadcasters and advertisers to deliver high quality and relevant programming that meets the clearly defined needs and wants of Canadians."

So it appears that the industry's own "member-owned" organization (which I assume Rawlco Radio is a member of) has given them the dismal ratings.

Perhaps its because people are not interested in listening to biased one-sided reporting and conservative cheerleading.

Trent said...

Larry, I must have missed something because the link you posted is for women 18 - 54 years old. Last time I checked about half the population of Saskatchewan is male yet the graph you posted does not reflect that.

Once again, I'm sure I must have overlooked the graph showing the entire provincial BBM numbers, so if you could be so kind as to repost them.

Thanks.

Larry Hubich said...

Trent,

Thank you for your comment, and for participating in this thread.

You haven't missed or overlooked anything. The graphs that have been posted on my other article reflect women aged 18 - 54. (Hence the title of the blog posting: Saskatchewan WOMEN send NewsTalk radio a Dear John letter)

Unfortunately I was not provided with a slide/graph illustrating the demographic you are requesting. But for your convenience, I did calculate a total number from the information I was provided.

For your information: including men aged 18 - 54 the aggregated market share for adults aged 18 - 54 (CJME and CKOM) elevates slightly to 6.6%, which reinforces my original point that significantly more than 90% don't tune those stations in.  (I am sorry that the BBM numbers that I have been provided with show such a dismal market share for your favourite radio stations, it's beyond my control.)

If you have additional BBM statistical analysis and information that I don't, I would be delighted to see it.

Trent said...

Thanks, Larry. And FYI Howard 100 is my favorite radio station.

Mike from Vita said...

Hubich:

You've been in politics too long; you can't even answer a question without putting a spin on it. Where did I mention the word "Confused" in any of my posts? I'm not confused...you are doing exactly what Gormley suggests your doing...spinning the truth to make yourself look right...just like the intellectuals of the Renaissance who said the world was flat. "Making your own calculations"...based on my calculations, you need help!!!!

Larry Hubich said...

Mike from Vita,

Thank you for your additional comments.

I'm sorry that my answers are making you angry, and that you are allowing your anger to get the best of you.

I have shared the information that I have from the BBM Ratings and analysis that has been forwarded to me. If you (or anyone else) has data that contradicts it, please by all means, share it here.

I don't know what else it is that you would like me to answer.

All of the foregoing aside, the central question remains: "Why is a senior media personality publicly threatening the newly elected president of the University of Regina Students Union?"

And that leads to a 2nd question: "What evidence is there to back up the spurious allegations that Mr. Peterson is this "rightwingbob" character?"

Finally, you clearly are confused. I never made any calculations .... from YOUR calculations. My data comes from BBM Canada.

Best wishes.

Mike from Vita said...

Hubich:

What colour is the sky in your world? Reading your responses, I shake my head because you make no logical sense. Me angry? No....just shaking my head because I fear for your safety.

From your post to Trent (and these are YOUR words, NOT mine)
"But for your convenience, I did calculate a total number from the information I was provided." Have you forgotten already????

The reason Gormley threatened legal action was outlined in his talk show. If YOU don't want to do the research and hear the answer, then stop griping about it. The info is in the public forum

http://www.newstalk650.com/audio/john-gormley-live/20110401-john-gormley-live-april-1-2011-ultimate-open-lines

start listening at 19:30

IF you don't want to hear the response, stop making accusations!!

Larry Hubich said...

Mike from Vita,

I listened to Mr. Gormley's explanation of his tweet and his continued allegations that Kent Peterson is "rightwingbob".

I still have seen no evidence to support the allegations. Just because Mr. Gormley states something on his show does not make it factual, or accurate.

If someone, including you, or Mr. Gormley can prove to me that Kent Peterson is "rightwingbob" my questions will be answered. And I will share that evidence on this blog.

I haven't accused anybody of anything, I'm just asking for reasons why Mr. Peterson is being accused, and asking for evidence to support those reasons.

All of the angry, inflammatory, vile, and vitriolic rants against me do nothing to support the allegations and threats made against Mr. Peterson.

Thank you for your comments.

p.s. I'm not sure why you would be "fearing for my safety".

Sask Man said...

Then why did Rightwingbob / Kent Peterson change the post?

Larry Hubich said...

Sask Man,

I have no idea. Maybe you should go over to that blog and ask.

Mike from Vita said...

Hubich:

IF you want to know the truth, take Gormley's invitation and meet with him. Who else is going to give you the goods if not the person with the concern? Go to the source.

As for your safety, I fear that one day you are going to get the feeling you are invincible and do something like walk in front of a moving vehicle, or stick your fingers in an electrified light socket.

Larry Hubich said...

Mike from Vita,

As far as I'm aware, there is no invitation from Gormley to have a meeting between him and I on this topic. (Although I only listened to the segment you referred me to, so if it happened later I wouldn't know that).

In any event, if he wants to extend an offer to share his evidence with me, he knows my phone number. He and I have exchanged voice mails this past year on another subject.

The alternative of course would be for him to post his evidence here, or to post it on his own website/blog for everyone to see.

It appears he has no apprehension about making the allegations, both on twitter and then verbally on his show. Shouldn't be too difficult to put it out there for everyone to see for themselves.

Thanks for your comments.

Mike from Vita said...

A simple yes or no answer...will you debate Gormley on this issue?

Larry Hubich said...

I would agree to a meeting with officials and/or representatives from Rawlco radio to discuss their evidence or lack thereof.

They can bring whomever they like.

Are you the person who coordinates the calendars and arranges meetings for the senior management team at Rawlco?

Sask Man said...

That blog stopped taking comments and or answering questions?

Couldn't stand the heat I suspect.

Mike from Vita said...

i don't work for Rawlco...I just want you to put up, or be quiet!!

Sask Man said...

Just an FYI, if the post had not been changed it would have meant legal action from Gormley. Through this it would have been revealed / confirmed who rightwing bob is.

Larry you are many things however stupid is not one of them. Please don't assume that the readers of your blog are.

Larry Hubich said...

Sask Man,

I guess you'd have to ask whoever it is that runs that blog for the reasons comments are not allowed. I can't help you with that.

But hey, whoever it is, maybe they will see this thread and put up an explanation. That would be nice.

I've had too much fun today, but now I need to spend some time with my wife. I hope you've had an enjoyable weekend.

Larry Hubich said...

To date I have seen zero evidence to support or prove the spurious allegations that Kent Peterson is this "rightwingbob" individual.

Accordingly, I have looked up a couple of definitions and share them with you below:

lie:
1. a) to make a statement that one knows is false, esp. with intent to deceive.
    b) to make such statements habitually.
2. to give a false impression; deceive one.

liar:
a person who lies.