I have been a reader of The Telegram for all of my adult life. Over the years the paper has provided a lot of very timely articles and, at times, provided a lot of information about our provincial government and, at times, criticized it and other times praised it when it did something good.
It seems to me that The Telegram has now taken on the role of an alternative government.
It appears that every Telegram columnist now sees his or her role as condemning the incumbent government for everything it does.
They decide, many times without having all the facts, that no matter what the present government does must be bad. Is there a vendetta against the government because the people at the paper do not like the changes to the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act because they cannot get every scrap of information they want, whether it is beneficial to them or not? If that is the case, they should lay out in detail exactly how they are negatively affected by this Act and what changes they would like to see, and concentrate on that.
This alone should not be the reason they write so negatively all the time. There must be some good things the government does right. The Telegram columnists would have you believe that they are the only ones who know what is good for us. There are other opinions out there, too, that are not critical.
I guess that if the government changes after the next election they, too, will be criticized for everything they do. It’s like the old radio program, “The Shadow,” as in “The Telegram knows.”
I think it is time for the paper to review its role and present some unbiased views on matters of interest to their readers. Their sole reason for existence should not be to criticize but too offer some positive views where they are justified. Why are they always right?