Media Bias [Merged]

[Danjanou]

So how much of a taxpayer funded pension will he now get for one days employment with Pravda oops I mean the MotherCorp?

:whiteflag:

 

[The Bread Guy]

"Your honour, I had a plan in place to stay within the speed limit, but the plan failed - it was just a mistake, so I should be found not guilty".

The CBC isn’t getting taken to the woodshed for airing vote results to western Canada on election night.

In a letter to a complainant in British Columbia, Elections Canada said since the state broadcaster didn’t intend for their signal to hit screens in the west, no penalties will be dealt.

“This matter has been discussed with the CBC. They have assured this office that there was an operational plan in place to prevent such transmissions and that the incident complained of was a mistake,” the letter reads.

“The CBC acted as soon as possible to address the problem and has undertaken to prevent a recurrence in the future. The exercise of the commissioner’s authority to take enforcement action regarding possible violations of the Canada Elections Act is only enforced if there are sufficient grounds to support a reasonable belief of an offence under the Canada Elections Act.” ....

QMI/Sun Media, 30 Aug 11

 

[a_majoor]

Want to apply some more pressure?

http://www.cbcoptout.ca/

 

[a_majoor]

English language CBC is one thing, but this.....

http://www.ottawasun.com/2011/10/06/cbc-out-of-control-in-quebec

CBC out of control in Quebec

By Eric Duhaime ,QMI Agency

First posted: Thursday, October 06, 2011 04:03 AM EDT | Updated: Thursday, October 06, 2011 04:07 AM
   
For those of you who are shocked when the English CBC lets its slip show to expose its left-leaning bias, it’s probably because you don’t know the French CBC, which doesn’t even bother wearing anything over its slip.

Over the past few weeks, one of my friends, Frederick Tetu, has been doing a weekly feature called Radio-Canada Watch for a Quebec City radio show, in which he airs a few of the most revealing excerpts illustrating how anti-Conservative the French wing of that Crown corporation has become.

He doesn’t have to look very hard or for very long to find them.

On Sept. 16, for example, the president of a major Quebec union, Louis Roy of the CSN, was invited — for the second time in the season — to be the week’s guest on the CBC’s Medium Large.

Roy said that we need a public broadcast network to ensure that other opinions — implying the leftist ones — could be expressed because private stations recycle the same ideas over and over again. He had the full approval of Catherine Perrin, the show’s host.

On Aug. 29, the main news show Telejournal correspondent Sophie Langlois reported from a Somalian refugee camp in Kenya about the horrible starvation there.

Out of nowhere she dropped the line, “Somalians are becoming the Palestinians of Africa.”

The UN has warned us recently that more than 750,000 people could die as Somalia’s drought worsens.

How many thousands of Palestinians are on the verge of death by starvation right now? Zero, but for this reporter the plight of the Palestinians can be used as a general analogy for any catastrophe! The fact that the news section of Radio-Canada is ideologically contaminated is no secret.

What’s worse is that it is now infecting even the variety shows of the organization. Here are more examples.

On Aug. 20, on a quiz show called Pouvez-vous repeter la question? (Can you repeat the question?), participants were asked which prime minister was the second-most popular in our recent history after Pierre Elliott Trudeau.

When the correct answer came out that it was Stephen Harper, the host apologized and let us know that he had not determined the answer.

On Sept. 24, a comedy show, A la semaine prochaine (Until next week), did a sketch where they pretended to hide microphones in a Conservative caucus to show how the government prepared for the new parliamentary session. We then heard Harper saying, “Friends, we can now finally pass the law that is so dear to us: To set traps to catch the francophones in the west and set them loose in the great north.”

Very funny.

These examples speak for themselves. Canadian taxpayers shouldn’t pay more than $1.1 billion every year to get that kind of disinformation and unfunny jokes as the propaganda machine at CBC/Radio-Canada doesn’t even bother hiding its agenda.

Let my personal message to the Conservative MPs be even bolder: What the #@! are you guys waiting for before you privatize or cut them off?

Don’t do it for partisan reasons. Do it simply for the principle: CBC/Radio-Canada is out of control.

Unless the Conservatives are into S&M, this show must not go on.

And how is the CBC reacting?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-q2m5OcCQQ&feature=player_embedded

 

[lethalLemon]

English language CBC is one thing, but this.....

http://www.ottawasun.com/2011/10/06/cbc-out-of-control-in-quebec

And how is the CBC reacting?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-q2m5OcCQQ&feature=player_embedded

WOW 

 

[PJGary]

WOW 

I second that  :brickwall:

 

[Nemo888]

Luckily the Sun is unbiased and nothing like Fox News  :facepalm:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism

There are many people who like CBC just the way it is and wish it were more left of centre. They are not served by traditional corporate media. They pay taxes and want an alternative voice to the MSM. Their political views are such that without public funding their ideas would not get airtime on corporate stations. Is a world view that does not agree with yours so terrifying that it must be destroyed? We need disagreement and differing viewpoints in our public forums. Why do you care so much what is on the news that you don't  watch? Stop regurgitating what right wing think tanks are programming you to say. Give it a rest and go read a book.

 

[Container]

So a viewpoint that is only supported by people that cant be bothered to support it financially has to be paid for by everyone?

So the government should pay for two of these "news" channels and then expand as necessary to make sure that everyones view are covered off and no one is "destroyed"? Its a strange argument youre presenting.

CBC can exist in whatever form it likes- on its own merit as a business. Not on public money. It isnt a protected heritage site or a piece of art it has to do its business well like everyone else or fold.

 

[Edward Campbell]

The Broadcasting Act says, inter alia:

http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/B-9.01/page-2.html#h-4

3. (1) It is hereby declared as the broadcasting policy for Canada that

(a) the Canadian broadcasting system shall be effectively owned and controlled by Canadians;

(b) the Canadian broadcasting system, operating primarily in the English and French languages and comprising public, private and community elements, makes use of radio frequencies that are public property and provides, through its programming, a public service essential to the maintenance and enhancement of national identity and cultural sovereignty;

(c) English and French language broadcasting, while sharing common aspects, operate under different conditions and may have different requirements;

(d) the Canadian broadcasting system should

(i) serve to safeguard, enrich and strengthen the cultural, political, social and economic fabric of Canada,
(ii) encourage the development of Canadian expression by providing a wide range of programming that reflects Canadian attitudes, opinions, ideas, values and artistic creativity, by displaying Canadian talent in entertainment programming and by offering information and analysis concerning Canada and other countries from a Canadian point of view,
(iii) through its programming and the employment opportunities arising out of its operations, serve the needs and interests, and reflect the circumstances and aspirations, of Canadian men, women and children, including equal rights, the linguistic duality and multicultural and multiracial nature of Canadian society and the special place of aboriginal peoples within that society, and
(iv) be readily adaptable to scientific and technological change;

(e) each element of the Canadian broadcasting system shall contribute in an appropriate manner to the creation and presentation of Canadian programming;

(f) each broadcasting undertaking shall make maximum use, and in no case less than predominant use, of Canadian creative and other resources in the creation and presentation of programming, unless the nature of the service provided by the undertaking, such as specialized content or format or the use of languages other than French and English, renders that use impracticable, in which case the undertaking shall make the greatest practicable use of those resources;

(g) the programming originated by broadcasting undertakings should be of high standard;

(h) all persons who are licensed to carry on broadcasting undertakings have a responsibility for the programs they broadcast;

(i) the programming provided by the Canadian broadcasting system should

(i) be varied and comprehensive, providing a balance of information, enlightenment and entertainment for men, women and children of all ages, interests and tastes,
(ii) be drawn from local, regional, national and international sources,
(iii) include educational and community programs,
(iv) provide a reasonable opportunity for the public to be exposed to the expression of differing views on matters of public concern, and
(v) include a significant contribution from the Canadian independent production sector;

(j) educational programming, particularly where provided through the facilities of an independent educational authority, is an integral part of the Canadian broadcasting system;

(k) a range of broadcasting services in English and in French shall be extended to all Canadians as resources become available;

Now, while in subsequent sections the Act does mention both the CBC and CBC television, as far as I am concerned all of those requirements are satisfied by CBC Radio - and not by any other service, public or private. CBC TV - broadcast or cable, in my opinion, need not exist to meet the essential requirements of the Broadcasting Act.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

There are two key words, used a number of times, in the document Edward posted.

They are:

'shall' - indicating that something must happen or somebody is obliged to do something

meaning "the Canadian broadcasting system shall be effectively owned and controlled by Canadians" allows for no one else to own or control the CBC.

and

'should' - used to express the conditionality of an occurrence and suggest it is not a given, or to indicate the consequence of something that might happen

meaning "(i) the programming provided by the Canadian broadcasting system should

(i) be varied and comprehensive, providing a balance of information, enlightenment and entertainment for men, women and children of all ages, interests and tastes,
(ii) be drawn from local, regional, national and international sources,
(iii) include educational and community programs,
(iv) provide a reasonable opportunity for the public to be exposed to the expression of differing views on matters of public concern, and
(v) include a significant contribution from the Canadian independent production sector;

The above document is so full of wiggle room on the key points, as to be a joke. What most Canadians consider the mandate of the CBC, is in effect, simply a collection of 'suggestions' that the CBC neither takes seriously, or is bound by rule of law to follow.

 

[Haletown]

The CBC is proudly socialistic-left of center and can't figure out what is wrong with having taxpayers fund a public megaphone for such ideas.  They are proud to be biased because self-labeling as "Progressive" allows them to convince themselves they are better than others.

Our CBC . .  The Canadian Broadcorping Castration.

That sound you hear is $1.1 Billion dollars flushing down the toilet . . . or is it the sound of so many lips locked on the public teat and sucking madly away.

The two sounds are so similar.

 

[Edward Campbell]

The bits I quoted comes before the parts that apply, specifically, to the CBC. Those quoted provisions apply to the all broadcasters: CBC, SUN TV and even independent radio stations like CFRC in Kingston.

 

[a_majoor]

Nemo, in a 500 channel universe anyone who wants a "Progressive" station can pay for it via specialty channel. There are @ 7% of the Canadian viewing public who actually watch the CBC; do you think they are willing to pony up $1.1 billion themselves to watch a CBC specialty channel? (I'm going to assume from the tone and content of your reply you are one of them). You can also find newsfeeds and blogs that are agreeable on the internet; there are millions to choose from.

No, they are unwilling to pay for it themselves, but more than willing to demand *we* pay for it. Time to pony up for what you want, I'm perfectly willing to pay for channels I want to watch and not ask you to pay for them, do us the same courtesy.

(Incidentally, the 7% might be overly generous):

http://www.theteamakers.com/2010/04/...#comment-12069

Actually, most Canadians don't watch the CBC.

It's pretty easy to estimate CBC's market share. Just go to the Bureau of Broadcast Measurement (BBM) site (bbm.ca), and you'll find down at the bottom of the links on the left hand side the "Top 30 TV programs for the week".

http://bbm.ca/index.php?option=com_c...=108&Itemid=87

During the playoffs, it's not unusual to see the hockey games in the top five or ten. During the regular season, HNIC usually makes it into the top 10 each week. The CBC's highest rated tv shows are: Hockey Night in Canada, and .... wait for it .... Jeopardy. Its next highest rated program that actually makes the top 30 (virtually all CBC tv shows do not make the top 30) is news:

CTV's nightly news (the 6-ish version) usually pulls in about 1.3 million viewers. CTV's late night display with Lloyd Robertson draws slightly less, at about 1.2 million. Global National draws just under a million.

CBC's news? It rarely shows up in the top 30, which means it is is outdrawn by, say, America's Funniest Home Videos, which has less than 800,000 viewers. CTV and Global combined draw about 3 times as many as the CBC.

700k viewers in a country of 33M works out to just over 2%. If there was truth in advertising, their slogan would be "CBC - 2% of Canada lives here!".

Here's another link that explains CBC's market share:

http://hlbtoo.wordpress.com/2010/04/...bc-news-story/

This year, 2010, we looked at 59 programs during the same period. (The Olympics made 11 weekdays not applicable.) This time the National averaged 644 thousand, CTV News — 1257 thousand. That’s almost exactly double. [...]

Two other small observations. Last year, there were 9 days when The National actually got higher numbers than CTV. This season, it never got close. The other thing is that we picked a period when The National‘s ratings were actually UP! If you were to look at the September-December stretch, CTV’s numbers were regularly more than double, sometimes, even triple those of CBC’s flagship news program… The numbers are even more startling than we expected.

http://www.theteamakers.com/2010/04/...#comment-12069

 

[vonGarvin]

There are many people who I don't like CBC just the way it is and wish it were more left of centre balanced. They are not served by traditional corporate media all Canadians. They I pay taxes and want an alternative voice to the MSM. Their political views are such that without public funding their ideas would not get airtime on corporate stations . Is a world I don't want to pay for a view that does not agree with mine yours so terrifying that it must be destroyed? We need disagreement and differing viewpoints in our public forums. Why do you care so much what is on the news that you don't  watch insist that I continue to pay for something that could not otherwise survive due to its marginal support? Stop regurgitating what right left wing think tanks are programming you to say. Give it a rest and go read a book.

So, I modified your message to make it my own.  Your last statement, asserting that I am regurtiating what I am programmed to think implies that my intelligence is such that I don't have independent thought.    It's akin to saying "You don't agree with me, so instead of listening to you, I'm going to label you as stupid."  This is more commonly known as an ad hominem argument, and is a logical fallacy.  It is fallacious because it ignores the points put forth and instead diverts the discussion to the point of character assassination.

So, I too am a taxpayer, and I have widely divergent views on many things from the current social breeze.  Shall I call the CBC and have them spew forth my opinion?  I doubt it. 

The point is this: taxpayers, all taxpayers, are funding the CBC.  For the CBC to ignore the majority of those taxpayers and simply focus its "message" on a select group to the exclusion of all others is a travesty.  If Sun Media wishes to only focus on a certain group, it will sink or swim according to the support it gets from the private sector.  It appears to be doing just fine, thank you very much.

 

[PuckChaser]

Luckily the Sun is unbiased and nothing like Fox News  :facepalm:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism

There are many people who like CBC just the way it is and wish it were more left of centre. They are not served by traditional corporate media. They pay taxes and want an alternative voice to the MSM. Their political views are such that without public funding their ideas would not get airtime on corporate stations. Is a world view that does not agree with yours so terrifying that it must be destroyed? We need disagreement and differing viewpoints in our public forums. Why do you care so much what is on the news that you don't  watch? Stop regurgitating what right wing think tanks are programming you to say. Give it a rest and go read a book.

How about you take your own $1.1 Billion to fund the CBC? Just as I do not want tax dollars funding right of centre news like Sun, I don't want my tax money going to left of centre news like the CBC. Especially if that corporation refuses to open its books to the taxpayers that fund it. On what world is that normal?

 

[Edward Campbell]

Let's assume, for a moment, that those early provisions (a. to around j.) in 3 of the Broadcasting Act are good public policy. That being stipulated:

1. They must apply, equally and evenly, to every single broadcaster who uses the radio spectrum,* and they ought to be applied evenly and fairly to all;

2. In so far as a public broadcaster is needed to meet all of therm on a reasonably consistent basis, and I believe a case can be made that is true, then CBC Radio does the job; and

3. Thus CBC TV (English and French services) is redundant and should get no public funding. Let is wither and die on the vine.

__________
* I would argue that carriage by physical cable (or wire or fibre), but not by satellite, need no such regulation because it is an entirely private matter between cable/fibre provider and the customer; and the government, and its minions like the CRTC, have neither the need nor the legal justification to be involved.

 

[aesop081]

want an alternative voice to the MSM.

The CBC is not an alternative to MSM........it IS MSM.

We need disagreement and differing viewpoints in our public forums.

Too bad we only get one-seded rubbish from the CBC then.

 

[Nemo888]

TINA (There Is No Alternative) is a horrible social disease that has gotten steadily worse for the last 30 years. I would love to try some new ideas. So much of our society is based on social experiments from the last 100 years. Most especially the think tanks and social engineering developed after WWII. Think tanks were bought out and subverted by moneyed political ideologues. They stopped having new ideas and all had an axe to grind. They influenced public opinion and changed the way people think. Journalists and politicians are only puppets of public opinion. A millionaire called Fischer started over 150 think tanks, all proselytizing his strange beliefs about economics and social engineering. I don't really think the CBC is the problem.

Weather is too nice to stay in.

 

[ModlrMike]

Regardless of any sense of bias, the more important issue is the CBC's refusal to disclose where the taxpayers' money is going. There is no justifiable reason to with hold this information. One can make all the excuses about "artistic control" one wants, but at the end of the day, it's not the CBC's money, it's ours. If other organs of government are required to be accountable for their spending, then so is the CBC. For their president to claim that only a judge can force them to disclose the information is ludicrous. It defies sense to think that a government funded agency can take the government to court to prevent financial disclosure.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Luckily the Sun is unbiased and nothing like Fox News  :facepalm:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism

There are many people who like CBC just the way it is and wish it were more left of centre. They are not served by traditional corporate media. They pay taxes and want an alternative voice to the MSM. Their political views are such that without public funding their ideas would not get airtime on corporate stations. Is a world view that does not agree with yours so terrifying that it must be destroyed? We need disagreement and differing viewpoints in our public forums. Why do you care so much what is on the news that you don't  watch? Stop regurgitating what right wing think tanks are programming you to say. Give it a rest and go read a book.

So if someone bashes, your pet, the CBC, they are a bunch of red neck, right wing troglodytes. However, just normal everyworkman types like you can slam the Sun network with impunity because it's just the natural order of things.

OK, I get where your slanted liberal leaning takes you. You can only have a valid opinion if it's in lockstep with your's

Thinking like that finally woke people up and gave PM Harper his majority.

There is always, at least, two sides to a story. Just because you have conviction, doesn't make your's right.

Perhaps your the one that should go do some reading. You still seem to think Trudeau is the PM.