daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 29,768
- Points
- 1,160
Some of the bought & paid for media
- Thread starter The Bread Guy
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 3,570
- Points
- 1,260
CBC's & Global's foreign bureaus aren't what they used to be, either. Another symptom: reporting on country x, y or z being done by someone in country a, b or c. Like some Gaza coverage I see/hear from reporters based in London.
Closer to home, though, it's one thing to have foreign eyes looking at a foreign situation for a Canadian network, but quite another to have fewer eyes available to look at events in Canada for Canadians.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 10,543
- Points
- 1,260
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 10,620
- Points
- 1,160
For events in the ME, Ukraine, I get them hours/days on the web, before the MSM reports on them, using pretty much the same source material. For other international stuff, I go to some trusted SME's, as much will never be reported in the MSM here. (like Burma, Ed Nash is quite good) But without all the inane chatter from talking heads that know little. For Canada, the Canadian MSM do a better job. For local I check in with the online version of our two local papers, they struggle with a small staff and also use a few local online sources, but add enough content that I would otherwise miss.
FJAG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 12,775
- Points
- 1,160
They should but it's not realistic to expect that. CBC's reporting of the competition by Canadian athletes was adequate and better, IMHO. It was the panel that bored me. You do need panel discussions but they should advance the narrative of the competition or give relevant background on the sport and the athletes. Again, IMHO, this was poorly done. Maybe it was the panelists themselves or the directors, editors or research staff that failed but, all in all, it was weak. We pay enough for the CBC, and there should be good advertising revenue, that they can devote some good funding to this once every four years. We shouldn't need to rely on anyone else.
Double Bingo. You're talking to a guy who grew up to watching Walter Cronkite do the news. Later on, I used to religiously watch the 11:00 o'clock news. Remember Mike Duffy? Now I absolutely despise the "entertainment" and "opinion" trash that has taken hold such as that which permeates Fox. For the last ten years or more I just scan various diverse news sites on the internet - yes, even Fox. I have better things to do than wait for the TV reports. I'm betting that I'm not alone in that and that the surveys have noticed our absence, adjusted ad revenue accordingly and thereby caused the shrinkage of the newsrooms.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 10,543
- Points
- 1,260
Why ? Why would we expect them to do that ?
Its a genuine question, because I truly don't understand that position.
- Reaction score
- 5,391
- Points
- 1,060
If there is a profitable market for Canadian produced news, someone will fill it.
CTV is my only Canadian news station. Not by choice. I only get local news and then it's only Mon-Fri.
CTV is my only Canadian news station. Not by choice. I only get local news and then it's only Mon-Fri.
FJAG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 12,775
- Points
- 1,160
Because, IMHO, something like the Olympics is about the coming together of the athletes of the world and there should be a focus on all of them; even the ones that aren't the superstars.
One obviously can't get away from the fact that any given broadcaster will spend the majority of their time covering athletes from their own country and there will always be a difference of opinion as to what is the right ratio. One of my pet peeves is that a broadcaster will probably run the same item on a given athlete of theirs several times during the day when some of that time could be given to others from elsewhere.
- Reaction score
- 5,391
- Points
- 1,060
Because, IMHO, something like the Olympics is about the coming together of the athletes of the world and there should be a focus on all of them; even the ones that aren't the superstars.
- Reaction score
- 3,570
- Points
- 1,260
Same here for international news.
That's the issue - more below.
In the bigger centres (especially like the "red triangle" where 1/2 of Canada lives in southern/SW Ontario), no problem. How about the Lethbridge's, Oromocto's, Kenora's of the world, though? Or should people there just move to where the news is? Don't know how to make covering courts, city hall & school board in small centres profitable.
One man's meh break dancer could be another's Eddie "The Eagle" or Jamaican bobsled team.
- Reaction score
- 16,360
- Points
- 1,280
The CBC shouldn’t even need ads. The ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corp, not the American one) has zero ads in any of its TV/radio/digital platforms, YouTube excepted (and that’s a YT thing, not an ABC thing).They should but it's not realistic to expect that. CBC's reporting of the competition by Canadian athletes was adequate and better, IMHO. It was the panel that bored me. You do need panel discussions but they should advance the narrative of the competition or give relevant background on the sport and the athletes. Again, IMHO, this was poorly done. Maybe it was the panelists themselves or the directors, editors or research staff that failed but, all in all, it was weak. We pay enough for the CBC, and there should be good advertising revenue, that they can devote some good funding to this once every four years. We shouldn't need to rely on anyone else.
Double Bingo. You're talking to a guy who grew up to watching Walter Cronkite do the news. Later on, I used to religiously watch the 11:00 o'clock news. Remember Mike Duffy? Now I absolutely despise the "entertainment" and "opinion" trash that has taken hold such as that which permeates Fox. For the last ten years or more I just scan various diverse news sites on the internet - yes, even Fox. I have better things to do than wait for the TV reports. I'm betting that I'm not alone in that and that the surveys have noticed our absence, adjusted ad revenue accordingly and thereby caused the shrinkage of the newsrooms.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 10,543
- Points
- 1,260
Because, IMHO, something like the Olympics is about the coming together of the athletes of the world and there should be a focus on all of them; even the ones that aren't the superstars.
One obviously can't get away from the fact that any given broadcaster will spend the majority of their time covering athletes from their own country and there will always be a difference of opinion as to what is the right ratio. One of my pet peeves is that a broadcaster will probably run the same item on a given athlete of theirs several times during the day when some of that time could be given to others from elsewhere.
Thanks, I appreciate you expanding on that.
RangerRay
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,367
- Points
- 1,260
When I was a kid watching the Olympics, I found the CBC coverage more interesting than American coverage because while the focus was always on Team Canada, they would also show important events even if no Canadians were playing and also talked about other notable foreign athletes. The American coverage was extremely jingoistic and wouldn’t mention the world record holder from Botswana in the event that beat pants off the Yanks. Instead, they would be completely baffled at how the Botswanan beat their athletes.
CBC news coverage still sucks though. It’s just getting worse with time.
CBC news coverage still sucks though. It’s just getting worse with time.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 29,768
- Points
- 1,160
Terrifying...
Is the CBC is a biased broadcasting institution?
Absolutely!
I worked there for years and was amazed at the editorial decisions that were made. We once tried to get someone to describe verbally on CBC radio what the Charlie Hebdo cartoons were (as it was very newsworthy after the attacks) and were told to kill it. Didn’t want to offend anyone by offering a truthful description of the cause of a terrorist attack.
Edit 2024:
Here's a story that reflects CBC and their approach to indigenous issues:
The story is about an indigenous person's struggle to get their child's name spelled in their dialect on a birth certificate. They were “fighting” (i.e. filed a document request) for 13 months. The reporter shoehorns in some quasi-religous story and noted the parents don't consider it respectful or a win as “it should have been done ages ago.”
The story was filed in BC, which has a huge, multi-cultural population. The reporter completely misses the fact that this wasn't targeting indigenous person's - no one who speaks Chinese, Russian, Hebrew, Urdu, Thai, Greek, or any language that's not using the roman alphabet can use that language on their birth certificate or passport.
The bigger story is that BC is actively giving rights to one group of people that no others have. It's a massive story as it is legislated discrimination against anyone who is non-indigenous. But the reporter completely missed the big picture.
Also, the person who filed the complaint has a reputation for nuisance suits as well, she kept smudging in her non-smoking apartment and then sued her landlord when everyone complained. That story was also painted as a victory.
Anyhow, the point is that CBC is so drunk on white guilt that they won't ask basic journalistic questions when it comes to indigenous stories. Their bias is very much apparent. And in the current environment it would be career suicide for any journalist or editor to question the story. They would be instantly canceled.
(Edit 2020: Someone in comments said I had no proof of a biased story, so here is a recent one.)
Another example is this story:
The headline blares "
Police raid on Anthony Aust's apartment didn't match tipster information, court documents show"…
Except the police found exactly what the tipster said they would - cash, cutting agents, over 100 grams of fentanyl and heroin, and a replica gun. The reporter obviously doesn't know the Criminal Code because use of a replica weapon during an offence counts as a real weapon. The story exalts the offender and lambasts the police - stating "But there was no gun recovered." and then goes on to describe how the police found drugs and a gun.
This is a typical CBC technique - paint the offender as a victim and try to muster outrage at the police.
(2024) In hindsight I realized the timing of the story coincided with the Breonna Taylor shooting in the US. The CBC was trying to muster outrage as Aust killed himself during a no-knock warrant being served. They like to pretend there are parallels with the US and Canada that just dont exist. Here is their follow-up:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/anthony-aust-2-year-anniversary-1.6610785
I love the quote “One of the only ways we can demand justice for Anthony Aust is if we defund, disarm and dismantle the police.”
Apparently their community is under attack, but they don't mention Aust was a known drug dealer who possessed an illegal handgun.
The CBC also HEAVILY censors their comments section, with no recourse for the user or explanation why. This was particularly heavy handed during COVID where they would pull comments that even had medical journal citations as the source. This means they have employees going through the comments and removing ones that don't align with their stance.
The CBC has a strong hiring policy for “underrepresented” Canadians which means the actual newsrooms look quite different from the Canadian cities they are in. This then results in an echo chamber where certain stories are amplified and repeated. If you have a "Diversity and Inclusion" reporter then of course every story that person produces will be biased.
They are also heavily unionized which plays into the coverage - at one point I was in the CEP (communication energy and paperworkers) the CMG (Canadian Media Guild) the WGC (Writers Guild of Canada) and ACTRA (Alliance of Canadian Cinema Television and Radio Artists) all at the same time! My union dues were crazy.
That being said there were only a few crusaders who felt they had to provide “opposite” coverage to the majors. Most of the bias was due to self interest, pure laziness, and reliance on the same sources.
CBC also competes against commercial internet, radio, and tv while using public funds so it’s a peculiar position for commercial tv and radio stations in Canada. Part of the taxes they pay go to a state funded entity that competes with them! This leads to a contrarian attitude against “regular” media. In fact, when I went online recently four of the top five CBC stories were directly sourced from the Associated Press, Canadian Press, Thomson Reuters, and AFP. CBC is getting paid to post freely available stories other newscasts pay for.
www.quora.com
Is the CBC is a biased broadcasting institution?
Absolutely!
I worked there for years and was amazed at the editorial decisions that were made. We once tried to get someone to describe verbally on CBC radio what the Charlie Hebdo cartoons were (as it was very newsworthy after the attacks) and were told to kill it. Didn’t want to offend anyone by offering a truthful description of the cause of a terrorist attack.
Edit 2024:
Here's a story that reflects CBC and their approach to indigenous issues:
The story is about an indigenous person's struggle to get their child's name spelled in their dialect on a birth certificate. They were “fighting” (i.e. filed a document request) for 13 months. The reporter shoehorns in some quasi-religous story and noted the parents don't consider it respectful or a win as “it should have been done ages ago.”
The story was filed in BC, which has a huge, multi-cultural population. The reporter completely misses the fact that this wasn't targeting indigenous person's - no one who speaks Chinese, Russian, Hebrew, Urdu, Thai, Greek, or any language that's not using the roman alphabet can use that language on their birth certificate or passport.
The bigger story is that BC is actively giving rights to one group of people that no others have. It's a massive story as it is legislated discrimination against anyone who is non-indigenous. But the reporter completely missed the big picture.
Also, the person who filed the complaint has a reputation for nuisance suits as well, she kept smudging in her non-smoking apartment and then sued her landlord when everyone complained. That story was also painted as a victory.
Anyhow, the point is that CBC is so drunk on white guilt that they won't ask basic journalistic questions when it comes to indigenous stories. Their bias is very much apparent. And in the current environment it would be career suicide for any journalist or editor to question the story. They would be instantly canceled.
(Edit 2020: Someone in comments said I had no proof of a biased story, so here is a recent one.)
Another example is this story:
The headline blares "
Police raid on Anthony Aust's apartment didn't match tipster information, court documents show"…
Except the police found exactly what the tipster said they would - cash, cutting agents, over 100 grams of fentanyl and heroin, and a replica gun. The reporter obviously doesn't know the Criminal Code because use of a replica weapon during an offence counts as a real weapon. The story exalts the offender and lambasts the police - stating "But there was no gun recovered." and then goes on to describe how the police found drugs and a gun.
This is a typical CBC technique - paint the offender as a victim and try to muster outrage at the police.
(2024) In hindsight I realized the timing of the story coincided with the Breonna Taylor shooting in the US. The CBC was trying to muster outrage as Aust killed himself during a no-knock warrant being served. They like to pretend there are parallels with the US and Canada that just dont exist. Here is their follow-up:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/anthony-aust-2-year-anniversary-1.6610785
I love the quote “One of the only ways we can demand justice for Anthony Aust is if we defund, disarm and dismantle the police.”
Apparently their community is under attack, but they don't mention Aust was a known drug dealer who possessed an illegal handgun.
The CBC also HEAVILY censors their comments section, with no recourse for the user or explanation why. This was particularly heavy handed during COVID where they would pull comments that even had medical journal citations as the source. This means they have employees going through the comments and removing ones that don't align with their stance.
The CBC has a strong hiring policy for “underrepresented” Canadians which means the actual newsrooms look quite different from the Canadian cities they are in. This then results in an echo chamber where certain stories are amplified and repeated. If you have a "Diversity and Inclusion" reporter then of course every story that person produces will be biased.
They are also heavily unionized which plays into the coverage - at one point I was in the CEP (communication energy and paperworkers) the CMG (Canadian Media Guild) the WGC (Writers Guild of Canada) and ACTRA (Alliance of Canadian Cinema Television and Radio Artists) all at the same time! My union dues were crazy.
That being said there were only a few crusaders who felt they had to provide “opposite” coverage to the majors. Most of the bias was due to self interest, pure laziness, and reliance on the same sources.
CBC also competes against commercial internet, radio, and tv while using public funds so it’s a peculiar position for commercial tv and radio stations in Canada. Part of the taxes they pay go to a state funded entity that competes with them! This leads to a contrarian attitude against “regular” media. In fact, when I went online recently four of the top five CBC stories were directly sourced from the Associated Press, Canadian Press, Thomson Reuters, and AFP. CBC is getting paid to post freely available stories other newscasts pay for.
Why does everyone hate the CBC?
Answer (1 of 7): The CBC is federally funded, yet is blatantly partisan. It is also a source of propaganda reinforcing Canada’s antiquated ties to the British monarchy. Lately it has been the following the crowd of regressive leftism, blindly championing ‘equality’ (of outcome) and ‘diversity’ a...
