This @CBCManitoba article quotes:

- Landlord who owns/manages 25 properties
- VP of a property mgmt firm/spokesperson for the Professional Property Managers Association
- Provincial spokesperson

Not a single tenant. This is propaganda, not journalism. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/manitoba-evictions-landlords-coronavirus-1.5569961

Again, CAJ guideline: "We give people, companies or organizations that are publicly accused or criticized opportunity to respond before we publish those criticisms or accusations. We make a genuine and reasonable effort to contact them, and if they decline to comment, we say so."

If journalists want to claim neutrality, they better start showing it with their sourcing for articles. That means:
- People who use drugs when reporting on drug use
- Families of victims of police violence when reporting on police violence
- Workers when reporting on workplaces.

Not sure why I just spent the last week working incredibly hard on a single article, interviewing sources from every imaginable perspective, when I could instead just dismiss fair criticism with: "You can't fit everyone into a box." https://twitter.com/theCJS/status/1262764303087632386

You can email concerns about this article to the CBC Ombudsman: [email protected]

The journalist who wrote the article just blocked me on Twitter. I have never spoken or interacted with her, and did not tag her in any of my tweets about the article.

The reporter is currently doubling down on her article, implying that because the tenants had previously been evicted from a property they therefore deserve eviction again? Or forfeit their right to respond to public criticism from someone in a position of power over them?

Have heard from two people that this reporter is married to a former Winnipeg Police officer — who has an extremely right-wing presence on Twitter and recently berated a journalist for critiquing the language of "officer-involved shooting" by media. This would be, uh, noteworthy.