• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Some of the bought & paid for media

Fair enough, but if CBC's good enough for Team Blue to advertise ...
Because it reaches their intended audience…current red-leaning voters.

GoC advertising a feel-good, pissing-in-a-dark-suit, Kumbayah message on CBC would primarily target the seals that already know how to clap.
 
Because it reaches their intended audience…current red-leaning voters.
Did seem to work last summer (among other buys) to get PP's profile a bit kinder and gentler.
GoC advertising a feel-good, pissing-in-a-dark-suit, Kumbayah message on CBC would primarily target the seals that already know how to clap.
cynical-you-be.jpg
 
Ladies & gentlemen, golf clap, please ....

Perhaps a bit early for the golf clap…
The board said the decision is to discontinue what CBC refers to as "performance pay" and adjust salaries of affected staff to compensate them.
So “discontinue [bonus]” and “adjust [base] salaries…to compensate” 🤔

Many would/should prefer a pensionable increase in base salary in place of a non-pensionable bonus/performance pay.

The question is will the CBC’s salary envelope decrease? I bet it doesn’t…
 
It's pretty obvious what funded entity holds the heart of the government. Joseph Goebbels would be proud.
Meanwhile CSIS operates on a budget of $703 million. It's no wonder our country is overrun with bad foreign actors, spys, drug cartels, money launderers and influencers.

CBC received an estimated $1.38-billion in 2024-25. Carney has promised another $150 million this year.

Canadian Security Intelligence Service $703 million

Communications Security Establishment $1.04 billion

Dept of Justice $948 million

Dept of Western Economic Diversification $321 million

Immigration and Refugee Board $334 million

National Security and Intelligence Review Agency $18 million

Northern Pipeline Agency $570 thousand

Office of the Auditor General $127 million

Commissioner of Lobbying of Canada $6 million

Lots more here - https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-b...re-plan-main-estimates/2024-25-estimates.html

Edit to fix typo.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps a bit early for the golf clap…

So “discontinue [bonus]” and “adjust [base] salaries…to compensate” 🤔

Many would/should prefer a pensionable increase in base salary in place of a non-pensionable bonus/performance pay.

The question is will the CBC’s salary envelope decrease? I bet it doesn’t…
So they won't do bonuses anymore...

But they'll adjust the certain people's base salary to compensate for the lack of bonus?


Between Carney's promise of increasing CBC's budget and Pierre's promise of eliminating CBC funding altogether...at this point I am personally in favour of the latter.
 
The Libs will double down on the CBC and increase funding thus ensuring the LPC has a friendly platform.
They already have one of the largest budgets, outstripping that of more important agencies, like CSIS.

CBC received an estimated $1.38-billion in 2024-25. Carney has promised another $150 million this year.
Canadian Security Intelligence Service $703 million
 
Did he though? I haven't been following.
Well, it's out there (for the past few weeks) - including in Irish media, in case you don't trust Canadian media ...
A little dated with some changes since, but if someone wants to smear Scheer as being a US citizen, they should at least mention the rest. Dual, Triple Citizenship MP's Shaping Canada's Political Destiny
Since we're picking on sources of information with "agendas", I'll take yours with a grain of salt, too :)
 
Well, it's out there (for the past few weeks) - including in Irish media, in case you don't trust Canadian media ...

Since we're picking on sources of information with "agendas", I'll take yours with a grain of salt, too :)
Like I say. Prove the numbers wrong. Are the names and numbers false? Those two things are all that is required. A fair person would concentrate on the data and leave the fluff. So is the data wrong? Prove it and I'll admit that it's shenanigans. Yourself, and others, are dismissing it out of hand because of other non connected articles and personal bias. The crux of its place in the discussion is 'how many parliamentarians hold citizenship in other countries.' The data shows Scheer is not an outlier. The data is all that is needed. Not the commentary. If I do a search and one of the first hits provides the data, that's all I need. I can skim and get what I need without worrying about left/ right bias. To counter your point, CAP is not a whole lot different than posting a CBC article to back your point. We know that they are biased and regularly print leftist mistruths. Yet people quote their articles all the time and it doesn't turn into a shitfest.

So, bottom line, disprove the data, as of time of publication.

Thanks for the Carney confirmation. Everything he says needs checking, because you can't trust him with the truth.
 
Like I say. Prove the numbers wrong. Are the names and numbers false? Those two things are all that is required. A fair person would concentrate on the data and leave the fluff. So is the data wrong? Prove it and I'll admit that it's shenanigans. Yourself, and others, are dismissing it out of hand because of other non connected articles and personal bias. The crux of its place in the discussion is 'how many parliamentarians hold citizenship in other countries.' The data shows Scheer is not an outlier. The data is all that is needed. Not the commentary.
If the commentary (or, to use another word, opinion) isn't needed, why's the headline not about the data, but an opinion? "Dual, Triple Citizenship MP’s Shaping Canada’s Political Destiny"

Data could be correct, but one can differ on the conclusion drawn from said data.
... posting a CBC article to back your point. We know that they are biased and regularly print leftist mistruths. Yet people quote their articles all the time and it doesn't turn into a shitfest.
You're right -- nobody ever mentions leftist bias and "bought and paid for media" around here, sprinkled in as throw-away, discussion-seasoning tidbit, even in between posting links to stuff from said media that proves a point the poster agrees with or wants to highlight (like all those Communist Globe & Mail articles on Chinese interference, or Red/Toronto Star editorials calling for Trudeau to GTFO).
So, bottom line, disprove the data, as of time of publication.
I haven't done a tally, but I'll grant you the numbers of MP's with multiple passports are bang on.

Next up: proving that data does, like the headline & article say, "shape Canada's political destiny." Big claims need big proof. And based on other analysis I see by the same folks on other issues in that outlet, we'll have to agree to disagree that this constitutes "big proof".
 
To counter your point, CAP is not a whole lot different than posting a CBC article to back your point. We know that they are biased and regularly print leftist mistruths. Yet people quote their articles all the time and it doesn't turn into a shitfest.

So, bottom line, disprove the data, as of time of publication.
Comparing CAP to CBC News is like insisting your cousin's conspiracy blog is just as credible as the New England Journal of Medicine—because “everyone has bias.” Come on, man. One is a federally regulated public broadcaster with named journalists, editorial standards, and actual sourcing; the other is an anonymous digital chalkboard scribbled with anti-immigrant fever dreams and zero citations. The fact that you still think this is a valid equivalence isn’t just baffling—it borders on epistemological malpractice. At some point, you’ve got to stop digging.
 
If the commentary (or, to use another word, opinion) isn't needed, why's the headline not about the data, but an opinion? "Dual, Triple Citizenship MP’s Shaping Canada’s Political Destiny"

I haven't done a tally, but I'll grant you the numbers of MP's with multiple passports are bang on.
The title is part of the fluff. It’s unfortunate some can't separate the wheat from the chaff.

The numbers were the whole point. See my first sentence.

CBC or CAP. Neither is any different to me. I don’t care who publishes the information I need, if the article has the data I want, I'll use it.

The article I posted about the new Speaker was from Western something or other. I don’t really know the outlet. However, I knew the pertinent info in the article was true, as I had just watched it on TV. No more need to search for another source more copasetic to someone else's sensitivities.
 
Comparing CAP to CBC News is like insisting your cousin's conspiracy blog is just as credible as the New England Journal of Medicine—because “everyone has bias.” Come on, man. One is a federally regulated public broadcaster with named journalists, editorial standards, and actual sourcing; the other is an anonymous digital chalkboard scribbled with anti-immigrant fever dreams and zero citations. The fact that you still think this is a valid equivalence isn’t just baffling—it borders on epistemological malpractice. At some point, you’ve got to stop digging.
when looking at the traffic, yeah low trust, low organic hits,

1748296396924.png

1748296428053.png

Quick dig shows its hosted in Council Bluff's Iowa, and very little organic traffic, targeting canada almost exclusively, using triggers for key words anything for former PM JT, LGTBQ+, muslims, and immigration as triggers to put it self to the top of search lists.
 
The title is part of the fluff. It’s unfortunate some can't separate the wheat from the chaff.

The numbers were the whole point. See my first sentence.
If the numbers were the kernel of the story, there would only be a table showing “what”, not conclusions drawn from the numbers showing “so what?”
 
CBC or CAP. Neither is any different to me. I don’t care who publishes the information I need, if the article has the data I want, I'll use it.
Someone skipped the scientific method lessons back in the day lol. If you're looking for certain numbers, the data you want, you're exposing yourself to all sorts of misinformation as long as it suits your narrative. How do you know CAP or any other Rebel News adjacent is actually operating in good faith and not making numbers up out of thin air? How do you know they aren't misrepresenting the truth? These kinds of outfits have no standards and frankly, no professional morals. Instead of CBC as a comparison, would you use Jacobin? Because that is a lot closer of a comparison.
 
Back
Top