Unless the story is completely fabricated, I don't see an angle here. If anything, the slant of the article is pro-DEI, which is...not what I would expect from American propaganda in 2025.
I would imagine the devil's in the details.
Who's assessing the artifacts to make that determination?
It's really not that complicated. If a typical organization is presented with two equally-qualified candidates, one of whom is a minority (of any kind, not just a racial minority), the organization will hire the non-minority candidate nearly every time. DEI policies exist to combat that sort of institutional bigotry.
This one's a little strange - I assume the province must have some information that they're not sharing, because it seems like there was at least one layer of separation between the government and the Boom Done Next (ugh) contract, and the company's co-owner says that Marni Larkin recused herself from the process.
This bit was interesting, though:
John Q's website says its profits are split between its shareholder municipalities. CBC News reached out to the 12 shareholders and only heard back from two.
The RM of Rosser said no money has been received so far by the municipality from John Q.
The RM of St Andrews says it also has not received any funds from John Q.
I don't know how much profit they're planning to make from day care centres...
For me, it's hard to top the Paramount+ ad from a few years ago that gave us this:
I just assumed every British actor had to do a tour of duty...
I have a friend who tracks the leaks and rumours pretty regularly. It's madness.
First: Maybe it’s all just a coincidence. The leaks were unintentional, and that standout line in "Lux" is simply one of those absurd, once-in-a-blue-moon alignments of fiction and reality.
It's funny that this "possibility" hinges on the notions that leaks and rumours are some kind of new phenomenon that RTD wouldn't already have been intimately familiar with, and aren't completely predictable.
Second: Somehow, Russell T Davies had a prophet-like vision, saw it all coming two years in advance, and wrote it in.
This one gets my vote. It's got to be supernatural.
Third: What if the leaks aren’t accidental at all? There were a couple from the opening episode that were accurate, and now some in the follow-up. Perhaps they were planted deliberately, but only small, mostly harmless titbits, and are meant to prime the fandom discussions without giving too much away. The rest? A bluff, just noise to muddy the waters.
This one is actually plausible. RTD knows how to play the game. I don't think I'd go so far as to suggest he's planting "leaks," but he's never been above stoking speculation.
fourth...what if every single leak was planted as part of a larger meta-marketing campaign, with the story eventually folding that chaos into itself?
Okay...I don't really think so, but with the final episodes being called "Wish World" and "The Reality War", I wouldn't be at all surprised if there's some more meta-commentary along the way. As I mentioned in the discussion thread, I do feel like the trio of fans will return.
It was great. I had a ball doing that. And I mean, again, during the “Star Trek” world, it’s lovely people, and it was nothing but pleasure, and it was a dream wish fulfillment for me to be able to be in “Star Trek.” I play a very interesting, complicated guy, bad guy, I suppose. I’m a bad guy. Yeah, I guess I’m a bad guy. But yeah, so I dunno what more I can say about that without giving too much away.
I’m in more than one episode. I have a little arc through this season. I reappear and become more problematic as the show goes on.
I think the only path forward is for journalists to get serious about defining and protecting their job. No government is going to step in to do it because of the optics, but many sectors have colleges that define and enforce standards of behaviour.
It's time for journalists to step up and do the same.
I don’t doubt that this is true on balance
view more: next ›
I reject the framing of DEI as a "right buzzword." Don't let them co-opt it.