Normally, I don't bother with stuff I can't link to, and Globe and Mail columnists are only available on a pay-to-view basis. But Jeffrey Simpson does make a point both worth noting and discussing today.

Here's an excerpt from his column about the Judy Sgro/Harjit Singh imbroglio:

The Sgro affair ought to set off reflections in the Canadian media, and not just for how the file got covered, but because it illustrated how the media have become part of a dysfunctional political culture in which assumptions of wrongdoing are pervasive, cynicism abounds, negativity prevails and few, if any breaks, are given to anyone who serves in public life -- except, of course, those we pay to be watchdogs on those we elect, such as auditors-general, judges, whistleblowers, prosecutors, inquiry heads, Democracy Watchers, ethis "experts."

There ought to be, as in the United States, robust media criticism and analysis from the universities, newspaper ombudsmen, blogs and people in the industry. In the United States, schools of journalism and communications -- to say nothing of the great institutes about the media at Harvard, Penn., Columbia and elsewhere -- are seriously and steadily critiquing the media. In Canada, heaven only knows what goes on in the journalism schools, such as they are.

There isn't an industry in the country that hands out more criticism than the media industry, or that is more thin-skinned about criticism it receives and less eager to promote serious self-reflection about its own mores and practices.

Interestingly, the one journalist worthy of praise in all this is Marina Jimenez -- a Globe colleague of Simpson's (note: I work for CTV, a Bellglobemedia company, which makes the Globe a corporate cousin of my employer).

One quick counterpoint: What should the media do when a person of dubious character makes allegations about the minister of the Crown?

That's the nub of the problem: I thought the allegations were preposterous, but do you not report them at all?

The tone I remember from the coverage was less "a-ha!" than "what the?". I remember CTV's Mike Duffy saying before the Singh bombshell he thought Sgro was basically a good person who had made some enemies and was dying the death of a thousand leaks

Certainly the media should take a good look at who's making the allegations, but sometimes, truthful allegations can come from people of dubious character.

And people of outwardly upstanding appearance can use that as a shield to deflect criticism of their actions.

One problem I have with Simpson's column is that it doesn't mention specifically who was the source of the "out-for-blood" coverage. Some specific examples would have been nice.

Anyways, gotta go to work. If you've got some thoughts on the issue, please leave them below.