Peter Mansbridge recently wrote an opinion piece in Macleans in which he makes a strange and insensitive comparison between his interview with Moe and his potential future interview with serial rapist and murderer Paul Bernardo. Below are some reader's responses that have been forwarded to me by email: ================== July 28, 2005 Peter Mansbridge is right about one thing. Few - if any - of us have enough sympathy for Paul Bernardo to want him granted a television interview. But a growing number of people understand the injustice of racial profiling and terrorism-driven fear mongering that has led to the incarceration of Mohammad Harkat and the other "Secret Trial Five" Muslim men, without trial and without charge for a total of over 211 months (as of July 2005). For Mansbridge to compare Bernardo and Harkat is misleading and inaccurate - one is a proven sexual predator - the other is a man fighting for his life against horrific allegations that have destroyed him and his family without ever having being proven in a court of law. That one of Canada's most acclaimed journalists cannot differentiate between the two is an unfortunate but rather telling comment on the state of media bias in this country. Stories like Harkat's must continue to be told for the sake of truth and human rights, not to mention journalistic integrity. Ayesha Adhami Toronto, Ontario =================== July 28, 2005 Sent to Maclean's and posted on my website: "Prime-time killers - How much can you believe when you interview vicious criminals on the air?" How much can one believe of what Mansbridge says in his newscasts? I've heard him state a number of things as fact that were - too late to change the public perception - proven false. But what point is Mansbridge attempting to make in his rather sulky article? That it's not worth the trouble to interview high profile jail inmates? I doubt it, since I'm sure he is well paid for doing so, and it attracts viewers who might not otherwise tune in. I'm glad to see him admit that he was aggressive with Harkat - he should interview CSIS that aggressively - but the reason he learned nothing new was because there wasn't anything to learn. It was vital, however, that the public have a chance to see that Harkat was a human being, not just a secret CSIS file or some kind of monster. Paul Bernardo is a different kettle of fish altogether, and it was crass of Mansbridge to imply otherwise. Corinne Allan http:/www.yayacanada.com ============= July 27, 2005 The article was rather decent of Mansbridge, that Mansbridge mentioned that people were unhappy with his "aggressive" coverage of Harkat, and that Bernardo would not generate the negative response against mansbridge's comments, since being aggressive towards a murderer doesn't generate the same kind of sympathy. The article could have been worse, like his interview with Harkat for instance. Being "aggressive" in a human rights situation especially violation of international law is not particularly an intelligent way of doing interviews. In Solidarity, Maria Al-Masani ===========