Foxnews NORTH?

[Smallc]

Canadian news channels, especially CTV and Global, don't really pedal any kind of ideological viewpoint. Only extremists seem to see it that way.

[Bonam]

Canadian news channels, especially CTV and Global, don't really pedal any kind of ideological viewpoint. Only extremists seem to see it that way.

Every news channel, every reporter, has their own bias, which, even if they try to suppress it, still shows through in how they word and present things.

[Smallc]

Every news channel, every reporter, has their own bias, which, even if they try to suppress it, still shows through in how they word and present things.

Of course everything has bias. That said, the bias is generally very limited on networks like CTV, Global, CBC, and CNN. MSNBC and Fox....not so much.

[Bonam]

That said, the bias is generally very limited on networks like CTV, Global, CBC, and CNN.

Says you. Some of those networks have more/different bias than others. The CNN slant on things and the CBC slant on things are leagues apart if you haven't noticed.

Edited June 12, 2010 by Bonam

[Smallc]

I haven't noticed. Both are comprehensive information networks. They also share stories and reporters depending on the situation (the same way CTV does with ABC). I don't find much of a slant from either CBC or CNN.

Og course, I'm not looking for key phrases in some kind of attempt to expose something. I want information from news. I don't care for overt bias.

Edited June 12, 2010 by Smallc

[Bonam]

I haven't noticed. Both are comprehensive information networks. They also share stories and reporters depending on the situation (the same way CTV does with ABC). I don't find much of a slant from either CBC or CNN.

Read these two articles and tell me you don't get a different impression from them:

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/05/30/israel-gaza.html

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/05/31/gaza.protest/index.html

Both stories are on the same topic (the Flotilla incident), published on the same day (May 31st). For fun, here's the same article on the Guardian, obviously showing significantly more pronounced differences in tone and emphasis:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/31/israel-accused-state-terrorism-assault-flotilla-gaza

Edited June 12, 2010 by Bonam

[Smallc]

Ummmm, you did see where the CBC story came from, right? In case you didn't, I'll give you a hint - CBC staff didn't write it. Anyway, the titles are quite comparable. Assault, attack...both indicate some kind of wrong doing on the part of Israel.

[Bonam]

Ummmm, you did see where the CBC story came from, right? In case you didn't, I'll give you a hint - CBC staff didn't write it.

Doesn't matter. The CBC ran it.

Anyway, the titles are quite comparable. Assault, attack...both indicate some kind of wrong doing on the part of Israel.

Heh, try reading past the title I guess?

[Smallc]

Doesn't matter. The CBC ran it.

Along with everyone else who subscribes to the AP wire.

Heh, try reading past the title I guess?

Why would I compare CBC and CNN using a story that isn't even written by CBC and would have been carried by almost every media outlet, the same way a Canadian story written by the Canadian Press would have been carried by everyone but Sun Media and Canwest?.....even Quebecor probably used the AP story....probably even Fox based what they carried on the AP story. CNN doesn't need to, because they have the second (or is it third now?) largest news gathering organization in the world.

Edited June 12, 2010 by Smallc

[Bonam]

Why would I compare CBC and CNN...

If you refuse to compare, of course you will fail to notice any difference...

If you don't like that particular example for the reasons you stated, feel free to pick another example of reporting over a somewhat contentious issue and check out the difference.

[Smallc]

There is, really, very little difference. The biggest difference is that CNN is more sensational, though they have become less so.

[Smallc]

I read both CTV.ca and CBC.ca several times a day. They focus on different stories at times, but generally carry the same stories overall, and I find the same information in the stories. In general, CBC seems more likely to put politics on the front of it's pace...or international news, than CTV.

Edited June 12, 2010 by Smallc

[Smallc]

.

Edited June 12, 2010 by Smallc

[Bonam]

I have CNN and CBC news stories both automatically show up on my google front page, and so by default often read stories from the two. While sometimes their stories are similar, at other times they differ quite substantially. Oh, and the comments sections of course differ drastically, and that too must be considered these days.

[Smallc]

The comments section is filled with idiots...and has no bearing on the story. The left is drawn to public broadcasting no question....idiots it seems, are drawn to comment sections. As for CNN stories vs CBC, I wouldn't expect them to be the same. They are, after all, in different countries, which is why I used CTV as a comparison.

One thing I will say though - CTV has far better health related stories.

[sharkman]

If you refuse to compare, of course you will fail to notice any difference...

If you don't like that particular example for the reasons you stated, feel free to pick another example of reporting over a somewhat contentious issue and check out the difference.

There is little benefit in trying to reveal the truth in this area Bonam. It's like you are messing with the left's religion. See how smallc's first response to my previous post was to attack me as a rightwinger and not address the points I made?

Do you recall the fuss that was made when it was announced that Fox would receive a license to broadcast in Canada? The CBC went quite silly. Why would it matter to them that a network who caters to the opposite of the spectrum(in other words, not their viewers) enter the Canadian marketplace? Because the CBC, for all of their more recent attempts to downplay it with the CPC in power, are ideology driven and can't stand it if the views they disagree with are expressed. Just like some around here. They agree with freedom of speech as long as you don't say global warming is inconclusive or government should be run like a business.

Edited June 12, 2010 by sharkman

[Michael Hardner]

CNN and CBC do have that baked-in bias that comes from professional journalists, who come from ... well, where they come from. Television news is a poor source of information anyway, kind of like talking to a guy at the counter of the donut store - but better dressed.

The AP wire story is a non-starter.

[Michael Hardner]

They agree with freedom of speech as long as you don't say global warming is inconclusive or government should be run like a business.

If there were a news service that came out and said global warming was inconclusive, that would be a good argument for shutting them down. Just as if they said that cigarettes were good for you, and there was a way to beat the lottery.

Of course, we could let the market decide I suppose, but good information (through science) and rational thinking over superstition is what gave the west the edge over the rest of the world.

[kimmy]

When Al-Jazeera arrived in Canada, was there a similar outcry? I honestly can't recall it. The only complaints about bias I can recall went something along the lines of "they won't license Fox, but they'll license Al Jazeera?!"

For those disputing a CBC bias: the CBC has provided or continues to provide time slots for left-leaning journalists like Anna Maria Tremonti and Avi Lewis, as well as "documentaries" from people like Naomi Klein and Roger Moore and Al Gore. Can you provide examples of balancing programming that has aired on CBC?

-k

[Jack Weber]

When Al-Jazeera arrived in Canada, was there a similar outcry? I honestly can't recall it. The only complaints about bias I can recall went something along the lines of "they won't license Fox, but they'll license Al Jazeera?!"

For those disputing a CBC bias: the CBC has provided or continues to provide time slots for left-leaning journalists like Anna Maria Tremonti and Avi Lewis, as well as "documentaries" from people like Naomi Klein and Roger Moore and Al Gore. Can you provide examples of balancing programming that has aired on CBC?

-k

Kimmy

There's no denying the CeeB is left leaning(I do like the At Issue panel),but consevative thinking people have many outlets to watch a more balanced approach,or a right of centre slant...

I find CTV(founded my known conservative,John Bassett) leaning more to the business/conservative side of things.I don't think it's a bad thing,by the way.The print media is full of right leaning editorial boards.We have right of centre talk radio all over this country...

I guess I don't understand the complaint,other than hard line conservative types simply don't want true balance(CTV fits that bill,in my opinion),they really just want to hear a conservative echo chamber/reaffirmation session and not listen to anyone else they might disagree with.

[Michael Hardner]

Good point about CTV there, Jack. They are at the same level of integrity as CBC, and founded by a Conservative.

[Smallc]

Good point about CTV there, Jack. They are at the same level of integrity as CBC, and founded by a Conservative.

Yes, I wantch both interchangeably. They both do a good job (in their news programing) of presenting the facst with very little bias.

[sharkman]

When Al-Jazeera arrived in Canada, was there a similar outcry? I honestly can't recall it. The only complaints about bias I can recall went something along the lines of "they won't license Fox, but they'll license Al Jazeera?!"

For those disputing a CBC bias: the CBC has provided or continues to provide time slots for left-leaning journalists like Anna Maria Tremonti and Avi Lewis, as well as "documentaries" from people like Naomi Klein and Roger Moore and Al Gore. Can you provide examples of balancing programming that has aired on CBC?

-k

Good points and no one has even tried to give examples of programming from right of center airing on the CBC to balance hard left 'documentaries'.

M. Hardner, so the fact that one of the major sources of data for global warming was exposed spiking information which disagreed with their(and your) preconceived ideas on GW means nothing to you, eh? And what the press did for the most part, attacking the whistle blowers, probably got a big thumbs up from you. Meanwhile, those inconvenient truths hidden(and you know if such a prestigious organization was willing to hide the truth then others were doing it too) remain hidden so kool-aid drinkers like you can keep the cherry mustache. How sad.

[lukin]

This channel is much needed. Anyone who doesn't think the CBC is the media arm of the Liberal party is out to lunch. As for CTV...just listen to Craig Oliver, Jane Taber, Bob Fife, Tom Clark on a regualr basis and you will realize who they support.

As for Fox News. they are more fair than the average lefty will have you think. They report many newsworthy stories that the other networks won't touch. Fox News is necessary in the USA, and something similar is greatly needed in Canada to counter the liberal spin of the CBC and CTV.

Here's an interesting study on media bias conducted by the UCLA.

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664.aspx

[Michael Hardner]

M. Hardner, so the fact that one of the major sources of data for global warming was exposed spiking information which disagreed with their(and your) preconceived ideas on GW means nothing to you, eh? And what the press did for the most part, attacking the whistle blowers, probably got a big thumbs up from you. Meanwhile, those inconvenient truths hidden(and you know if such a prestigious organization was willing to hide the truth then others were doing it too) remain hidden so kool-aid drinkers like you can keep the cherry mustache. How sad.

Those comments were completely misunderstood by the public, due to the quotes not being examined properly. The worse thing I heard was one doctor saying he tried to lobby a publication to not include questions on some paper. That is being investigated.

That doesn't amount to much, though. Much of the focus was one two sentences, one of which had been stated publicly, the other one was about math formulas used on a minor part of one theory - that was framed as though there was deception happening.

I've seen pretty convincing arguments on it here:

potholer45