Well, I mocked and I teased but in the end, I couldn't resist. Year-end retrospectives might be trite, but dagnabbit, they're also a lot of fun. So here's my picks for the "Top Five Media Bites Moments of 2012", also known as the "Top Five Times the Canadian Press Was Inadvertently More Interesting Than the Stories They Were Trying to Cover."
It has not gone unnoticed that Rob Anderson, the Wildrose MLA for Airdrie and representative of the hard right so-con side of the party - Anderson being the man who insisted on running Alan "Lake of Fire" Hunsperger - has been stepping out into the spotlight more as of late. Then, just this past week, a video link hit local social media.
Although the punditry failure in Alberta made headlines, it's not the first time "experts" have been completely and utterly wrong. For instance, I did a little historical research and discovered several examples of failed pundit predictions: "No Cabinet Minister will ever pay more than $14 for a glass of orange juice."
Almost all of Canada's brightest journalistic lights wrongly predicted that the incumbent Tories would get turfed out in favour of the upstart Wildrose Party. The press' obsession with viewing all Albertan political happenings through the narrative prism of dynasties -- either current or in-waiting -- has helped turn the actually fairly precedented rise of Wildrose into something much more gothically dramatic, presumably because gothically dramatic stories are way more fun to write about.
EDMONTON - A sample of what Alberta election polls showed in the runup to Monday's vote:April 23 (Actual Results): Progressive Conservatives 43.9, Wil...
A self-described "filmmaker" and "activist" has come out with a "subversive strategic voting video" urging Albertans to vote for any party that has the best chance of beating the Wildrose party. The actors in the spot are ever-so-hip, ever-so-diverse and ever-so-obnoxious. I suspect anyone who was on the fence before seeing this video will decide to vote Wildrose.
Today, Albertans essentially have a choice between two directions. The choice isn't big government versus small government, as some commentators have argued. Neither of the front running parties has any plans to reduce the size or scope of government. The choice is between centralization and subsidiarity.