| Revision as of 21:28, 16 June 2006 view sourceArthur Ellis (talk | contribs)1,447 edits →External links← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:22, 22 June 2006 view source Arthur Ellis (talk | contribs)1,447 edits →Kinsella controversy: de-verbiagedNext edit → | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
| ==Kinsella controversy== | ==Kinsella controversy== | ||
| He drew attention to his blog in ] for comments about former ] aide ]. |
He drew attention to his blog in ] for comments about former ] aide ]. Kinsella served a statement of claim for ], saying that the post insinuated his involvement in the ]. Bourrie retracted parts of the post and Kinsella abandoned the lawsuit. | ||
| ''Yet another Warren Kinsella quote today in the National Post, this time about Tory strategy at the end of the campaign. Kinsella, who hates ] much more than he loves the Liberal Party, seems delighted in the destruction of Martin's government. He hopes to have his own flagging political career revive when there's a Liberal leadership change. It's not going to happen. Both Liberals and Tories now know that Kinsella's loyalty is to Kinsella. And they remember Kinsella was executive assistant to ] ]. Kinsella was the guy who foisted ] on the bureaucracy. He was a key actor in the sponsorship kickback scandal. And that scandal is about half the reason Paul Martin is on the skids.'' | |||
| Kinsella threatened a lawsuit for ], saying that the post insinuated his involvement in the ]. Bourrie clarified the statement on the blog, changing the last "he" to Guite and explaining he did not believe Kinsella was part of the kickback scheme (Jan. 26). Kinsella, however, filed a statement of claim, which was settled when Bourrie issued an unqualified apology on his site, which read: | |||
| ''"The manner in which my January 14, 2006 blog entry was worded made it seem that Mr. Kinsella had been a party to illegal conduct when this was clearly not the case. I apologize without reservation to Mr. Kinsella for that error on my part."'' | |||
| Bourrie subsequently added a post questioning why "no matter who's right or who's wrong, no matter how clear or how subtle the case is, no matter whether one or both parties in the case are card-carrying assholes -- it takes $100,000 in unrecoverable fees (for each side) and three or four years to get a case like Kinsella v. Bourrie in front of a judge. Libel law works if it's a corporation suing another corporation (and its insurance company), but effectively there are no civil courts available to small business people, working stiffs, students, etc. who may be wronged, either by being libelled or by being hit with a slap suit. There is something seriously wrong with the justice system." | |||
| ==Family== | ==Family== | ||
Revision as of 23:22, 22 June 2006
Mark Bourrie (born 1957) is a Canadian blogger, journalist and a doctoral student at the University of Ottawa. His doctoral work is on the press censorship system in Canada in World War II. His master's thesis was on the media's role in banning cannabis in Canada. Born in Toronto and now a resident of Ottawa, Ontario, he has been a member of the Canadian Parliamentary Press Gallery since 1994.
Bourrie is also an internationally-recognized amateur paleontologist, specializing in trilobites.
Journalism career
Bourrie worked for two decades as a freelance news and feature writer, primarily for The Globe and Mail from 1981 to 1989, and the Toronto Star from 1989 to 1999. His freelance writing has also appeared in the Vancouver Sun, Calgary Herald, Edmonton Journal, Winnipeg Free Press, Windsor Star, London Free Press, National Post, Ottawa Citizen, and Montreal Gazette newspapers. His magazine writing credits include Toronto Life, Ottawa City, Canadian Business, Canadian Lawyer, Law Times, Canadian Geographic, This Magazine and The Next City. His articles carried by the Inter Press Service (IPS) have been republished by newspapers throughout the world.
He won a National Magazine Award (2000) and honorable mentions in 2001 and 2003. As well, in 2003 he was nominated for a Canadian Association of Journalists award in the magazine writing category. He won a Canadian Archaeological Association public writing award (1989) and several Ontario Newspaper Awards (formerly Western Ontario Newspaper Awards). His 1979 eyewitness account of an F5 tornado in Woodstock, Ontario helped earn his newspaper a National Newspaper Award certificate of merit. Most of his NMA-nominated work focussed on issues related to people wrongly accused of criminal offences or terrorism. In the CAJ-nominated article, Bourrie found new evidence that a man hanged in Ottawa in 1936 was probably innocent.
Kinsella controversy
He drew attention to his blog in 2006 for comments about former Liberal Party of Canada aide Warren Kinsella. Kinsella served a statement of claim for libel, saying that the post insinuated his involvement in the sponsorship scandal. Bourrie retracted parts of the post and Kinsella abandoned the lawsuit.
Family
Mark Bourrie is married to intellectual property law student Marion van de Wetering, who is author of two regional history books, An Ottawa Album (Dundurn, 1999) and A Kingston Album (Dundurn, 2000). Van de Wetering's mother, Maria van Holten, has published several novels based on her experiences as an immigrant fleeing post-war Holland (van Holten's father was murdered in a Nazi concentration camp). Her family is noted for its art scholarship. Ms. van de Wetering's uncle Ernst van de Wetering is the world's foremost expert on Rembrandt. Bourrie and van de Wetering have three children.
Works by Bourrie
- Chicago of the North (Annan and Sons 1993)
- Ninety Fathoms Down (Dundurn 1995)
- The Parliament Buildings (Dundurn 1996)
- By Reason of Insanity (Dundurn 1997)
- Parliament (text of Malak Karsh's photo essay on Parliament Hill) (Key Porter 1999)
- Hemp (Key Porter 2003)
- True Canadian Stories of the Great Lakes (Key Porter/Prospero 2004)
- Many a Midnight Ship (Key Porter/University of Michigan Press 2005)