Cartoonist fired over Politically Incorrect Drawing

[Vetalia]

Why would they need to clear it up? What benefit is it to them?

It also needs to be noted that this guy technically was not terminated from employment. He (as a business entity) had a contract with the company in question. He is self-employed and the company used his services through contract with his business entity. The company in this case terminated the contract of services with his entity. Being an independent contractor and being an employee are different, legally speaking. But being an independent contractor has benefits in other ways especially in creative sense as you have more control over you own invention, as being under employment tends to make most of the work you do the product of the company rather than you personally.

I think in such a politically charged environment it wouldn't hurt to defuse some tensions.

[US-SSR]

You know, they could clear this up straight away by giving a reason why he was terminated...otherwise, there's no getting around the optics that make it look like it was politically motivated.

If that's the case that it was politically motivated, this bullshit where people are persecuted for their political views via attacking their employment needs to stop; all that does is create a chilling effect on free speech where everyone is intimidated and walking on eggshells to avoid setting off the wrong person. Political cartoons are supposed to be controversial and thought provoking, even offensive at times to stimulate debate and bring attention to issues.

Why would they need to clear it up? What benefit is it to them?

It also needs to be noted that this guy technically was not terminated from employment. He (as a business entity) had a contract with the company in question. He is self-employed and the company used his services through contract with his business entity. The company in this case terminated the contract of services with his entity. Being an independent contractor and being an employee are different, legally speaking. But being an independent contractor has benefits in other ways especially in creative sense as you have more control over you own invention, as being under employment tends to make most of the work you do the product of the company rather than you personally.

It also needs to be noted that the employer owns and controls all the English-language papers in the province, so it's not like they're going to lose subscriptions unless people want to go without print news. An object lesson in the evils of monopolism. Sinclair is angling for a similar monopoly over local TV news here in the States. This corrput, venal, callous, lawless, feckless administration is not about to stop them either.

[Tekania]

Why would they need to clear it up? What benefit is it to them?

It also needs to be noted that this guy technically was not terminated from employment. He (as a business entity) had a contract with the company in question. He is self-employed and the company used his services through contract with his business entity. The company in this case terminated the contract of services with his entity. Being an independent contractor and being an employee are different, legally speaking. But being an independent contractor has benefits in other ways especially in creative sense as you have more control over you own invention, as being under employment tends to make most of the work you do the product of the company rather than you personally.

It also needs to be noted that the employer owns and controls all the English-language papers in the province, so it's not like they're going to lose subscriptions unless people want to go without print news. An object lesson in the evils of monopolism. Sinclair is angling for a similar monopoly over local TV news here in the States. This corrput, venal, callous, lawless, feckless administration is not about to stop them either.

I'm assuming that what you meant when using the wrong term "the employer" is the company that owns the papers. You should not use "The employer" as they were not an employer of the person in question. The artist was a freelancer and provided cartoons via a freelancing contract they had with the company. There are extremely important and relevant differences between a freelancer and an employee in the context of law. A freelancer does not have many of the rights and protections that employees have while having much more rights and control over their own work and how they go about producing it.

[US-SSR]

It also needs to be noted that the employer owns and controls all the English-language papers in the province, so it's not like they're going to lose subscriptions unless people want to go without print news. An object lesson in the evils of monopolism. Sinclair is angling for a similar monopoly over local TV news here in the States. This corrput, venal, callous, lawless, feckless administration is not about to stop them either.

I'm assuming that what you meant when using the wrong term "the employer" is the company that owns the papers. You should not use "The employer" as they were not an employer of the person in question. The artist was a freelancer and provided cartoons via a freelancing contract they had with the company. There are extremely important and relevant differences between a freelancer and an employee in the context of law. A freelancer does not have many of the rights and protections that employees have while having much more rights and control over their own work and how they go about producing it.

And what would you call someone who employs a freelancer? While we're at it, how much control do Uber drivers have over their own work, other than when they choose to do it? btw nice way to deflect from the entire thrust of the argument, which is about the monopolization of news media, not the employment conditions of journalists.

[Mushet]

In trump america, any and all criticism of the president is a heinous offense. Donald Trump is defending American freedom by taking away freedoms

In other words, I wish we could make George orwell fiction again

Nice try,this happened in Canada

So...Diet America.

[Tekania]

I'm assuming that what you meant when using the wrong term "the employer" is the company that owns the papers. You should not use "The employer" as they were not an employer of the person in question. The artist was a freelancer and provided cartoons via a freelancing contract they had with the company. There are extremely important and relevant differences between a freelancer and an employee in the context of law. A freelancer does not have many of the rights and protections that employees have while having much more rights and control over their own work and how they go about producing it.

And what would you call someone who employs a freelancer? While we're at it, how much control do Uber drivers have over their own work, other than when they choose to do it? btw nice way to deflect from the entire thrust of the argument, which is about the monopolization of news media, not the employment conditions of journalists.

One does not "employ" a freelancer, one contracts with a freelancer. If you are putting them in employment then they are not by definition a freelancer.

Uber drivers have plenty of control. They can service areas they want to, choose when they want to be available, own their own vehicles and are free to operate with competitors.

There are other papers than the ones operated by the Irvings. While they operate some of the main papers there they by no means hold a complete monopoly over print in the area. Nor even remotely a complete monopoly over print globally. Nor is Irving the only one he contracts with to supply cartoons for.

[Highever]

Well clearly you are not even trying to be serious.

It's a bit hyperbolic but the premise is still true. Canada occupies a submissive role to her hyper-aggressive and violent neighbor.

Oh yes, I have forgotten all the times the US has threatened to invade Canada the past few years, and how the 49th parallel has essentially become the Korean DMZ

[Aureumterra]

The cartoonist was “fired” because, as the article says, the newspaper wanted to bring a crowd favorite cartoonist back in favor of him. Also, Kowani, can you name which free speech person is “silent” on this?

TL;DR: Ignore the OP and just look at the article

[Aureumterra]

It's a bit hyperbolic but the premise is still true. Canada occupies a submissive role to her hyper-aggressive and violent neighbor.

Oh yes, I have forgotten all the times the US has threatened to invade Canada the past few years, and how the 49th parallel has essentially become the Korean DMZ

Hey, if anything, Canada has the upper hand in this, they have been the only country in history to burn down the white house you know?

[Highever]

Oh yes, I have forgotten all the times the US has threatened to invade Canada the past few years, and how the 49th parallel has essentially become the Korean DMZ

Hey, if anything, Canada has the upper hand in this, they have been the only country in history to burn down the white house you know?

And they have thoroughly wiped the floor with every American invasion attempt.

[The Emerald Legion]

Reading the article you posted it look like all parties involved agree that you're lying.

"All parties involved"

By that you mean 1/3 parties. Excellent math.

You mean 2/3. The guy fired and the company both said it didn't have to do with the cartoon. Some random third guy said it did.

Also, Canada doesn't have free speech anyway. Why would I get upset over something they never had?

Hey, if anything, Canada has the upper hand in this, they have been the only country in history to burn down the white house you know?

And they have thoroughly wiped the floor with every American invasion attempt.

You do realize the last actually American invasion was two hundred years ago right? Well before the US became a super power, and funnily enough it was the British Empire, not Canada, that defended Canada from them? Canada didn't even exist at the time.

[Aureumterra]

And they have thoroughly wiped the floor with every American invasion attempt.

You do realize the last actually American invasion was two hundred years ago right? Well before the US became a super power, and funnily enough it was the British Empire, not Canada, that defended Canada from them? Canada didn't even exist at the time.

r/whooosh

[Gormwood]

Replacement for the cartoonist who drew Trump golfing over migrant bodies rejects the job after backlash

So much for that excuse.

[Saiwania]

I actually like that they got fired, but they shouldn't keep being unemployed if that is their talent and there is demand for it. They can perhaps go over to be hired by a Leftist outfit such as TYT. That is where they should be.

[Aureumterra]

Replacement for the cartoonist who drew Trump golfing over migrant bodies rejects the job after backlash

So much for that excuse.

Would you want to be harrsssed on social media for association with the company that allegedly fired someone for being anti Trump?

[Aureumterra]

Still waiting for OP to be edited

[Highever]

You do realize the last actually American invasion was two hundred years ago right? Well before the US became a super power, and funnily enough it was the British Empire, not Canada, that defended Canada from them? Canada didn't even exist at the time.

r/whooosh

Indeed.

[Chernoslavia]

In trump america, any and all criticism of the president is a heinous offense. Donald Trump is defending American freedom by taking away freedoms

In other words, I wish we could make George orwell fiction again

The hell are you talking about? People talk smack about the guy here all the fucking time, especially the media.

You wanna talk Orwellian fiction? Let's talk about the left wanting to suppress ''hate speech''.

[The Emerald Legion]

r/whooosh

Indeed.

The initial joke was a joke. Hence why I responded to the elaboration saying 'Canada' has repelled US invasions. Canada didn't exist. It's not a joke. Because a joke would have to be humorous.