Media Bias [Merged]
- Thread starter Cloud Cover
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 5,963
- Points
- 1,260
GAP said:
The reason
- Reaction score
- 4,199
- Points
- 1,260
That actually seems like a reasonable compromise between keeping a national broadcaster (which tends to cover mostly parts of Canada that have lots of people, but that's another thread). Public content + helping private get 'er done.E.R. Campbell said:
Oh, oh - a reasonable compromise? Did I just jinx the chances of that happening?
- Reaction score
- 21,901
- Points
- 1,360
Radio Canada International is actually a very respectable news program, IMO. It is like the neutral BBC of the airwaves. That should be kept. Everything else can go...although I do like The Hour with George Stombolopolous (he's actually an asset to the CBC, but would do well independently as well.)
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
Good2Golf said:
Kill it all. When CBC was formed, it was probably necessary to get TV coverage for the whole country. A whole lot of BBC types were hired and English accents were common on local programming. In the current days of 100s of networks profiting well, why is it necessary to spend a billion dollars annually on a network few watch?
Tomorrow is a perfect opportunity to kill CBC by means of the budget. Or is it Liberal, Tory, same old story. This spring is the time for the conservative agenda if, in fact, there is one. I don't know about anyone else but I did vote for the wink and nudge.
- Reaction score
- 8,234
- Points
- 1,160
E.R. Campbell said:
I think you would have to work really hard to find a community in Canada that does not have "Cable" TV (even if it is wireless). Equally, I believe that most of those systems have the ability to disseminate local current affairs programmes. All they need, I believe, is access to content.
Alternately, as is the case with CKUA here in Alberta, and many if not all radio stations, the internet does a marvellous job of streaming programming to my laptop wherever I go.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 360
SeaKingTacco said:
It would inform the discussion if we knew where the money is: does CBC TV cross-subsidize radio? (Or, is the net subsidy given to the CBC greater or less than the cost of radio?)
- Reaction score
- 5,963
- Points
- 1,260
N. McKay said:
This is from the CBC's 2009-2010 Annual Report, page 44:
OPERATING EXPENSES:
2009-2010
CBC Television $655 36%
Télévision de Radio-Canada $459 26%
CBC Radio $202 11%
Radio de Radio-Canada $145 8%
Specialty services $118 7%
Other $211 12%
$ 1,790 100%
CBC Radio (French & English & RCI) costs $465M.
The same report, same page, says the Parliamentary appropriation for operations was $1,018M and advertising revenue was $309M. I think we can assume that, at auction, CBC TV might be worth $500M to $1.0B – no more, I shouldn't think.
The subsidy (appropriation) is net to the corporation; advertising revenues apply to TV only.
Edit: typo
- Reaction score
- 4,199
- Points
- 1,260
<sarcasm>Hey, let's not forget how much CBC pumps into the economy - just ask them:</sarcasm>
Can't wait to see more on this....
- Reaction score
- 4,199
- Points
- 1,260
If you believe these sorts of processes make a real difference, have at 'er!
The portal seems to be in testing phase because when you click on the "Comment" or "Make a Comment" links, you don't go anywhere with comments or with a system to post comments.
Watch and shoot.....
The portal seems to be in testing phase because when you click on the "Comment" or "Make a Comment" links, you don't go anywhere with comments or with a system to post comments.
Watch and shoot.....
- Reaction score
- 6,026
- Points
- 1,160
milnews.ca said:
I was able to post a comment.
It looks like the CBC is getting their asses handed to them.
- Reaction score
- 2,827
- Points
- 940
Yes, but it's not yet noon on a Saturday.recceguy said:
The left-wing's welfare-society commentariat aren't out of bed yet
- Reaction score
- 6,026
- Points
- 1,160
Unless it's a stacked deck, with the typical foregone conclusions. The CRTC going through the motions and putting all the checks in the box, meanwhile coming up with some obscure reason why the majority of the existing comments don't count and the State Broadcaster gets to carry on it's merry way.Journeyman said:Yes, but it's not yet noon on a Saturday.
The left-wing's welfare-society commentariat aren't out of bed yet
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/06/17/pol-mandatory-minimums.html
"States cut drug penalties as Canada toughens them"
The article states nothing of value about what the Conservatives are trying to change, just enough talk about America changing to provoke the typical emotional response...
"States cut drug penalties as Canada toughens them"
The article states nothing of value about what the Conservatives are trying to change, just enough talk about America changing to provoke the typical emotional response...
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
Levant: Where’s the apology?
Ezra Levant
Sunday, June 26, 2011, 2:00:30 AM
For years, irresponsible left-wing extremists have smeared our Canadian Forces in Afghanistan, accusing our Canadian men and women of being war criminals.
Take Ujjal Dosanjh, who used to be the Liberal Party’s defence critic.
On the CBC, he demanded to know who “ordered” the torture of the Taliban, and who “sent” them to be tortured.
Notice, he took it as a fact the torture did in fact happen, and Canadian soldiers were somehow involved.
John McCallum, another prominent Liberal MP, went further. He actually accused the Canadian Forces of “war crimes.” Ironic, that. In Afghanistan, the Taliban commits crimes against humanity every day — but the only war crimes the opposition was interested in were the ones they claimed our Canadian Forces were committing.
The left is obsessed with slandering our Canadian Forces. In fact, they asked more than 1,200 questions about Taliban prisoners in question period. They did so because they knew their friends in the Media Party were just as eager to blacken the name of the Canadian Forces, and the war against Islamic terrorism in general.
Twelve-hundred opposition questions impugning the virtue of our soldiers.
How many questions did the opposition ask about how the Taliban throws acid in the face of little Muslim girls who want to go to school, and how our Canadian Forces are the ones protecting those girls?
Zero, of course.
After years of demanding to see confidential military, diplomatic and intelligence documents, they finally got their way.
This past week, 4,000 pages of classified documents were released to the public. The CBC sent no less than eight reporters to comb through those documents. They must have been positively euphoric — finally, they’d prove all of their smears and innuendos.
And, just in case they missed something, the CBC invited the public to comb through the documents, to make sure they don’t miss anything salacious.
The result: Nothing. Not a single shred of evidence Canadian Forces were involved in any torture whatsoever.
Of course not. That only existed in the minds of the opposition, and their anti-war friends in the Media Party.
Remember how those 4,000 pages were chosen. A multi-party committee, including former Liberal leader Stephane Dion himself, went through about 40,000 pages of documents. Most were irrelevant or redundant, but they chose the 4,000 most interesting.
Those were then reviewed by a panel of three judges, who blacked out information that would jeopardize our national security. Three judges made those blackouts — not politicians, not bureaucrats, not Stephen Harper.
This was Stephane Dion’s process.
This was the opposition’s process. Twelve million dollars was spent going through these documents.
And now: Nothing. No smoke, no fire, nothing to base their slanders on. Twelve-hundred questions in question period.
Millions of words in the mainstream media’s newspapers, TV and radio shows lobbying mud at our troops.
What do you do when you make a false accusation, when you insult someone, when you question their morality — and you’re wrong?
Well, you apologize. You apologize and you beg for forgiveness.
That’s what the CBC has to do now, what Stephane Dion and John McCallum and Ujjal Dosanjh should do now.
Frankly, it’s what James Moore, the boss of the CBC, who funds these anti-Canadian, anti-soldier smearers ought to do, too.
The Taliban committed the war crimes. Our Canadian Forces went there to stop it.
The Liberals, and James Moore’s CBC, and the rest of the Media Party, have disgraced themselves.
Ezra Levant
Sunday, June 26, 2011, 2:00:30 AM
For years, irresponsible left-wing extremists have smeared our Canadian Forces in Afghanistan, accusing our Canadian men and women of being war criminals.
Take Ujjal Dosanjh, who used to be the Liberal Party’s defence critic.
On the CBC, he demanded to know who “ordered” the torture of the Taliban, and who “sent” them to be tortured.
Notice, he took it as a fact the torture did in fact happen, and Canadian soldiers were somehow involved.
John McCallum, another prominent Liberal MP, went further. He actually accused the Canadian Forces of “war crimes.” Ironic, that. In Afghanistan, the Taliban commits crimes against humanity every day — but the only war crimes the opposition was interested in were the ones they claimed our Canadian Forces were committing.
The left is obsessed with slandering our Canadian Forces. In fact, they asked more than 1,200 questions about Taliban prisoners in question period. They did so because they knew their friends in the Media Party were just as eager to blacken the name of the Canadian Forces, and the war against Islamic terrorism in general.
Twelve-hundred opposition questions impugning the virtue of our soldiers.
How many questions did the opposition ask about how the Taliban throws acid in the face of little Muslim girls who want to go to school, and how our Canadian Forces are the ones protecting those girls?
Zero, of course.
After years of demanding to see confidential military, diplomatic and intelligence documents, they finally got their way.
This past week, 4,000 pages of classified documents were released to the public. The CBC sent no less than eight reporters to comb through those documents. They must have been positively euphoric — finally, they’d prove all of their smears and innuendos.
And, just in case they missed something, the CBC invited the public to comb through the documents, to make sure they don’t miss anything salacious.
The result: Nothing. Not a single shred of evidence Canadian Forces were involved in any torture whatsoever.
Of course not. That only existed in the minds of the opposition, and their anti-war friends in the Media Party.
Remember how those 4,000 pages were chosen. A multi-party committee, including former Liberal leader Stephane Dion himself, went through about 40,000 pages of documents. Most were irrelevant or redundant, but they chose the 4,000 most interesting.
Those were then reviewed by a panel of three judges, who blacked out information that would jeopardize our national security. Three judges made those blackouts — not politicians, not bureaucrats, not Stephen Harper.
This was Stephane Dion’s process.
This was the opposition’s process. Twelve million dollars was spent going through these documents.
And now: Nothing. No smoke, no fire, nothing to base their slanders on. Twelve-hundred questions in question period.
Millions of words in the mainstream media’s newspapers, TV and radio shows lobbying mud at our troops.
What do you do when you make a false accusation, when you insult someone, when you question their morality — and you’re wrong?
Well, you apologize. You apologize and you beg for forgiveness.
That’s what the CBC has to do now, what Stephane Dion and John McCallum and Ujjal Dosanjh should do now.
Frankly, it’s what James Moore, the boss of the CBC, who funds these anti-Canadian, anti-soldier smearers ought to do, too.
The Taliban committed the war crimes. Our Canadian Forces went there to stop it.
The Liberals, and James Moore’s CBC, and the rest of the Media Party, have disgraced themselves.
None. They let the thousands of men and women in CADPAT do the asking.mad dog 2020 said:
We're not some vigilante militia. We're still accountable for our actions on a world stage.
Well damn all the major opposition parties for exercising democracy. If only the Tories hadn't refused to give up the information in the first place.mad dog 2020 said:
source?mad dog 2020 said:
Could this be any more right wing? I feel like I'm reading a FOX newscast.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
I dislike fox news as much as the next guy but I don't feel this to be a political statement. I never expect anyone to come up and shake my hand and tell me a job well done for what I do. Just don't try to make more people look down on me and spit on my uniform for something I didn't do. I don't care about an apology or any sort of contradicting article. I will still go to work tomorrow wearing the same uniform and see the same guys I have known for years. I love what I do.
- Reaction score
- 35
- Points
- 560
The question about releasing these documents has been discussed elsewhere, but a brief recap is the people asking had neither the security clearance nor the "need to know" for these documents, and there was certainly a reasonable expectation that despite the security classification(s) of these documents they would have been leaked for partisan political gain, endangering people and operations the CF was undertaking at that time.
I don't think the question about clearance or security has ever been answered, so anyone asking for these sorts of documents will have to wait while things are vetted, cross referenced etc. and cleared for release, then you might get to see a heavily redacted document.
As Ezra Levant says, the only reason for all the noise and bluster was to try and score partisan points against the government (although that might well have backfired; the first known instance of Taliban falling into Canadian hands is in late 2002, during the mandate of the Chreitien government...). I think we can all see the line between legitimate questioning of the government and attempting to smear or embarrass the government; yes the subject itself is legitimate but the ways and means were far beyond any reasonable fact finding mission (even the lack of any questioning about the 2002-2006 period does not speak well of the opposition or media).
I don't think the question about clearance or security has ever been answered, so anyone asking for these sorts of documents will have to wait while things are vetted, cross referenced etc. and cleared for release, then you might get to see a heavily redacted document.
As Ezra Levant says, the only reason for all the noise and bluster was to try and score partisan points against the government (although that might well have backfired; the first known instance of Taliban falling into Canadian hands is in late 2002, during the mandate of the Chreitien government...). I think we can all see the line between legitimate questioning of the government and attempting to smear or embarrass the government; yes the subject itself is legitimate but the ways and means were far beyond any reasonable fact finding mission (even the lack of any questioning about the 2002-2006 period does not speak well of the opposition or media).
kawa11 said:
I'm not sure if you've read Ezra Levant's columns before, but this is his MO. Everything he writes is labelled "opinion" and as such doesn't require him to source anything. As a result he has been successfully sued/held accountable for libel several times. Most notably for stating that George Soros collaborated with Nazis as a child which caused Sun Media to issue an apology and a retraction.
For instance he makes such a huge point about John McCallum blaming the Canadian Forces of war crimes. But John McCallum never said that and specifically pointed out that "they" referred to the government and not the troops. That is just Levant taking the statement of context to fit his narrative.
