Some of the bought & paid for media

[Fishbone Jones]

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?”

Perhaps we're running past each other here.
You're arguing the actual content direction and what you are saying is right. It could very well be inflammatory, I don’t know because I still haven’t read it.

My feelings are personal, outside the narrative. Meaning the information contained there means nothing to ME, where it does to others. I take a quick scan for key words. When my eyes land on certain words, that's where I start. I read a sentence or two where those words are and if they have what I'm after, I pull that out. I don't pay attention to anything else. Or in this case, a hyperlink, which takes you to an article and chart on CBC (gasp).

I can understand why we couldn't land on the same beach. We weren't talking the same thing.

Anyway, if you wish to discuss it further, PM me and we can end the hijack here.

 

[CBH99]

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.

So I ask this question objectively...

Why does Rebel News get painted as not having any professional morals and/or not living up to a professional standard - and CBC does?

I know Rebel News can be controversial, and we've all seen some of the drama their reporters get themselves into. But do they report to the public information they know is untrue at the time of reporting?

 

[Remius]

So I ask this question objectively...

Why does Rebel News get painted as not having any professional morals and/or not living up to a professional standard - and CBC does?

I know Rebel News can be controversial, and we've all seen some of the drama their reporters get themselves into. But do they report to the public information they know is untrue at the time of reporting?

Rebel News - Bias and Credibility

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no

mediabiasfactcheck.com

Start here.

Then there is the shady 3rd party advertiser thing that has happened more than once.

Rebel News loses bid to quash fines for violating election law on third-party ads

OTTAWA — The Federal Court of Appeal has dismissed Rebel News Network’s latest bid to quash $3,000 in fines levied against the right-wing media outlet by the commissioner of elections. The fines were imposed in 2021 after an investigation by the commissioner’s office into lawn signs erected by...

halifax.citynews.ca

Federal debates chief says he was unaware Rebel News had registered as advocacy group

The head of the Leaders’ Debates Commission said Thursday he wasn’t aware that right-wing media group Rebel News — which was permitted more opportunities to question leaders after Wednesday’s debate than most mainstream outlets — had registered as an official third party in the federal election.

www.ctvnews.ca

So actually registered as an advocacy group…

And even the Federal court has stated that it doesn’t qualify as real journalism.

Federal Court upholds CRA decision denying Rebel News journalism tax credits; Rebel to appeal - Law360 Canada

The Federal Court has upheld a federal government decision denying journalism tax credits to the Rebel News based on a finding that it doesn’t produce enough original news content.

www.law360.ca

Legit news sources adhere to codes of conduct and are those codes of conduct are overseen by various associations and councils (don’t have the names off hand). As far as I can see, Rebel news has no code of conduct listed on its site and does not follow established journalistic norms.

 

[MilEME09]

Rebel News - Bias and Credibility

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no

mediabiasfactcheck.com

Start here.

Then there is the shady 3rd party advertiser thing that has happened more than once.

Rebel News loses bid to quash fines for violating election law on third-party ads

OTTAWA — The Federal Court of Appeal has dismissed Rebel News Network’s latest bid to quash $3,000 in fines levied against the right-wing media outlet by the commissioner of elections. The fines were imposed in 2021 after an investigation by the commissioner’s office into lawn signs erected by...

halifax.citynews.ca

Federal debates chief says he was unaware Rebel News had registered as advocacy group

The head of the Leaders’ Debates Commission said Thursday he wasn’t aware that right-wing media group Rebel News — which was permitted more opportunities to question leaders after Wednesday’s debate than most mainstream outlets — had registered as an official third party in the federal election.

www.ctvnews.ca

So actually registered as an advocacy group…

And even the Federal court has stated that it doesn’t qualify as real journalism.

Federal Court upholds CRA decision denying Rebel News journalism tax credits; Rebel to appeal - Law360 Canada

The Federal Court has upheld a federal government decision denying journalism tax credits to the Rebel News based on a finding that it doesn’t produce enough original news content.

www.law360.ca

Legit news sources adhere to codes of conduct and are those codes of conduct are overseen by various associations and councils (don’t have the names off hand). As far as I can see, Rebel news has no code of conduct listed on its site and does not follow established journalistic norms.

Canadian broadcast standards council is one,

Also the rebel also does very little organic content. Less than 15% the rest is them regurgitating others. Which makes them more a medium then a source.

 

[YZT580]

Canadian broadcast standards council is one,

Also the rebel also does very little organic content. Less than 15% the rest is them regurgitating others. Which makes them more a medium then a source.

if the standards council permits the kind of coverage I saw from CBC throughout the election then their standards are suspect and their rulings are as questionable as they perceive Rebel to me (for disclosure I seldom look at Rebel news)

 

[MilEME09]

if the standards council permits the kind of coverage I saw from CBC throughout the election then their standards are suspect and their rulings are as questionable as they perceive Rebel to me (for disclosure I seldom look at Rebel news)

The CDSC is just like any other watch dog, they can't be everywhere, so unless someone files a complaint, it likely gets missed.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Legit news sources adhere to codes of conduct and are those codes of conduct are overseen by various associations and councils (don’t have the names off hand). As far as I can see, Rebel news has no code of conduct listed on its site and does not follow established journalistic norms.

Having seen first hand reporting by the MSM on events and projects I was involved in, those "journalistic norms" are not worth much. Global TV was so bad at twisting things my RDG out here refused to do anything with them that was not broadcast live.

 

[Remius]

Having seen first hand reporting by the MSM on events and projects I was involved in, those "journalistic norms" are not worth much. Global TV was so bad at twisting things my RDG out here refused to do anything with them that was not broadcast live.

Sure. The default setting though should not be relying on pseudo news sites with conspiracy laden twists to feed one’s own preconceptions and confirmation bias.

There are great independent news sources. The ones I see peddled here at times are not it.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I was questioned by a reporter while working on the LNGCanada project, with lots of leading questions about the pipeline and the protests. I asked them about what the Haisla thought about the project and all the good it would bring them. They knew nothing about that, gave them the Chief contact and there was no follow through. They would not report on it. Going with the "poor natives standing up against "Big oil" was better for getting views, clicks and fed into the reporter/editors own views. I have met some good reporters, but most were either naive or very intent on getting a particular view out.

I am utterly jaded on mainstream media. Even when my sister was a Labour Judge, the story they would report and what my sister told me about the same case, was often completely different.

 

[YZT580]

Sure. The default setting though should not be relying on pseudo news sites with conspiracy laden twists to feed one’s own preconceptions and confirmation bias.

There are great independent news sources. The ones I see peddled here at times are not it.

like the CBC?

 

[Halifax Tar]

I am not sure you can find media that isn't biased anymore.

A notable exception for me would be The Line.

I suggest people frequent: Ground News

 

[Remius]

I am not sure you can find media that isn't biased anymore.

Media has always been biased.

A notable exception for me would be The Line.

The Line is excellent.

I suggest people frequent: Ground News

I doubt that anyone that distrusts media will be swayed by that resource.

 

[MilEME09]

I was questioned by a reporter while working on the LNGCanada project, with lots of leading questions about the pipeline and the protests. I asked them about what the Haisla thought about the project and all the good it would bring them. They knew nothing about that, gave them the Chief contact and there was no follow through. They would not report on it. Going with the "poor natives standing up against "Big oil" was better for getting views, clicks and fed into the reporter/editors own views. I have met some good reporters, but most were either naive or very intent on getting a particular view out.

I am utterly jaded on mainstream media. Even when my sister was a Labour Judge, the story they would report and what my sister told me about the same case, was often completely different.

situations like this i'd ask is it really the journalists fault? or is their producer pushing them to get a certain angle

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I am not sure you can find media that isn't biased anymore.

A notable exception for me would be The Line.

I suggest people frequent: Ground News

I was pushing Ground News here for awhile. It didn't seem to garner much support. Even had someone here try ridicule me for the choice. The forum is full of Alpha males, whose biases are well ensconced and can't find a way to compromise.

I was questioned by a reporter while working on the LNGCanada project, with lots of leading questions about the pipeline and the protests. I asked them about what the Haisla thought about the project and all the good it would bring them. They knew nothing about that, gave them the Chief contact and there was no follow through. They would not report on it. Going with the "poor natives standing up against "Big oil" was better for getting views, clicks and fed into the reporter/editors own views. I have met some good reporters, but most were either naive or very intent on getting a particular view out.

I am utterly jaded on mainstream media. Even when my sister was a Labour Judge, the story they would report and what my sister told me about the same case, was often completely different.

Now add in being utterly jaded on the government, the banks and the state of them. You then have a whole bunch of disenfranchised people who have no faith, except in themselves and just stop participating in society. A sad situation, but also a dangerous one

 

[The Bread Guy]

situations like this i'd ask is it really the journalists fault? or is their producer pushing them to get a certain angle

May not even be as simple as any producer doing it. Some of it is the culture of the newsroom/news biz, in theory looking out for the "underdog."

On Indigenous/Aboriginal issues, I've seen all sorts of media miss all sorts of information that would add a bit of nuance to stories around First Nation problems because it didn't fit the narrative (Big Gov't Fucking FN Over, no matter what) - and that covers media covering both Red & Blue governments going back to the early 2000's, so this ain't new.

I can't read hearts/minds, but with most MSM, it felt more like "didn't have the resources or background knowledge to call more than 2-3 of the usual suspects" (even in the salad days of newsrooms relatively packed with reporters). In the case of CBC, it seemed like an institutional take, even 20+ years ago - when it came to FN issues, no government, Liberal or Conservative, seemed to get any break.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I was pushing Ground News here for awhile. It didn't seem to garner much support. Even had someone here try ridicule me for the choice. The forum is full of Alpha males, whose biases are well ensconced and can't find a way to compromise.

I appreciate its work and breadth of provided articles. I also appreciate its exposure to what is being over and under reported on by various news agencies.

See News Blindspots | Ground News | Media Bias Check

See breaking news stories that are underreported by liberal or conservative media. The Blindspot feed exposes in an unbiased way how media bias can shape political narratives.

ground.news

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I appreciate its work and breadth of provided articles. I also appreciate its exposure to what is being over and under reported on by various news agencies.

See News Blindspots | Ground News | Media Bias Check

See breaking news stories that are underreported by liberal or conservative media. The Blindspot feed exposes in an unbiased way how media bias can shape political narratives.

ground.news

It's a great resource. It's nice to look at a story and read the whole gambit of opinion, side by side and readily available. Somewhere in all that opinion, a person can usually find enough solid info to make their own informed choice.

 

[PrairieFella]

I am not sure you can find media that isn't biased anymore.

A notable exception for me would be The Line.

I suggest people frequent: Ground News

I'll recommend the Winnipeg Free Press. The last paper of record in Canada not owned by foreigners. Owned by community actual community members and independent of any global corporation. They're mostly regionally focused but have some good national coverage and excellent investigative stories.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

May not even be as simple as any producer doing it. Some of it is the culture of the newsroom/news biz, in theory looking out for the "underdog."

On Indigenous/Aboriginal issues, I've seen all sorts of media miss all sorts of information that would add a bit of nuance to stories around First Nation problems because it didn't fit the narrative (Big Gov't Fucking FN Over, no matter what) - and that covers media covering both Red & Blue governments going back to the early 2000's, so this ain't new.

I can't read hearts/minds, but with most MSM, it felt more like "didn't have the resources or background knowledge to call more than 2-3 of the usual suspects" (even in the salad days of newsrooms relatively packed with reporters). In the case of CBC, it seemed like an institutional take, even 20+ years ago - when it came to FN issues, no government, Liberal or Conservative, seemed to get any break.

I knew one reporter that was really good, sent a good report in, where the editor butchered it into something else, not just to save space but to twist the story. She was utterly pissed and apologized to us.

 

[YZT580]

The CDSC is just like any other watch dog, they can't be everywhere, so unless someone files a complaint, it likely gets missed.

except they could actually watch the news to ensure compliance instead of waiting for a filed complaint which generally means any corrective measures are too late