So many gaffes, so little vetting

Someone didn’t do their homework. That much is obvious from the multitude of candidates and party operatives caught in video and social media gaffes halfway through this federal election.

People in all three major parties, whose job it is to vet candidates and avoid potential embarrassment, haven’t quite grasped the challenge posed by society’s widespread engagement with Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and a host of other social media platforms.

As a result, just this past week, there were awkward revelations concerning at least seven individuals with all three parties forced to respond. Recent cases include Liberal candidate Joy Davies, who dropped out in South Surrey—White Rock, B.C., after Facebook posts came to light in which she claimed marijuana reduces family violence and that growing it in the home does no harm to children.

Conservative candidate Tim Dutaud was booted from the race in Toronto-Danforth after discovery of YouTube videos he posted making obnoxious crank calls, including one in which he pretended to be mentally disabled. And NDP Leader Tom Mulcair’s communications director, Shawn Dearn, ended up in hot water over two-year-old tweets in which he used an expletive concerning the Pope and attacked what he called a “misogynist, homophobic, child molesting” Catholic Church. Hired in February, Dearn was allowed to keep his job after issuing an apology and the increasingly familiar refrain that his offensive statements “do not reflect my views.”

That’s just a smattering of the more than a dozen social media gaffes, outrages, ill-advised actions and downright stupidity committed by federal politicos unearthed so far in this campaign. And there’s very likely more to come.

To avert similar humiliations in future elections, political parties need to be better at screening candidates and key election staff — in particular, probing their history of online activity. This will likely require hiring people with special skills in this area. Old-school staffers and volunteers probably aren’t in the best position to handle such investigations.

Given the great many social media platforms that now exist, and the various forums in which a long-forgotten offensive statement might lie dormant, embarrassments can’t entirely be avoided. But some obvious and mortifying campaign meltdowns might well be headed off.

There’s also a lesson here for future candidates and, indeed, for anyone tempted to indulge in inappropriate rants and obnoxious behaviour while online. Social media lasts forever. So these transgressions may be brought to the attention of any prospective employer — not just the electorate — and result in a painful rejection.

Assorted tips for avoiding social media embarrassment are abundant (where else?) online, including sound advice such as staying offline when drunk and steering clear of excessive complaining, sexual over-sharing and offensive jokes.

For those who do slip up, whether or not they’re pursuing a political career, a bit more leeway might be in order. There’s no excuse for hate speech, threats or displays of disgusting behaviour (such as urinating in someone’s mug — ugh!). But there may be a case for ignoring relatively harmless gaffes that are typically the result of youthful exuberance.

It’s a judgment call. And in the context of the current election, the judges have spoken. Candidates in all three main federal parties have been found wanting. Canada’s political class will need to do better to avoid a spate of similar disgrace in the future.

All three major federal parties are guilty of inadequate candidate screening