Conservatives for , False and Misleading news

[Shakeyhands]

All of it - it's entirely speculation, nothing but their opinion - devoid of actual facts.

Right, the Liberals opinion.... The Star is just reporting it. As could the rest of the media if they chose to...

[Pliny]

Right, the Liberals opinion.... The Star is just reporting it. As could the rest of the media if they chose to...

The opinions were indeed expressed based upon the facts. You have to be able to distinguish between them.

Fox news for instance expresses a lot of opinion and in order to appreciate it you have to be able to tell the difference between opinion and hard factual news. I suppose, in your view, what comes out of Jack Weber's mouth is nothing but hard fact.

Edited February 11, 2011 by Pliny

[guyser]

All of it - it's entirely speculation, nothing but their opinion - devoid of actual facts.

so nothing is false , but merely what they thought was going to be implemented.

And thats cause for such vitriol?

[Shakeyhands]

The opinions were indeed expressed based upon the facts. You have to be able to distinguish between them.

Fox news for instance expresses a lot of opinion and in order to appreciate it you have to be able to tell the difference between opinion and hard factual news. I suppose, in your view, what comes out of Jack Weber's mouth is nothing but hard fact.

Everything that comes out of Jack's mouth is gold!

Read the article again.

[scribblet]

so nothing is false , but merely what they thought was going to be implemented.

And thats cause for such vitriol?

What vitriol ?

course, it could just be the ramblings of deranged citizens of Left Wing Kookville....

[guyser]

What vitriol ?

course, it could just be the ramblings of deranged citizens of Left Wing Kookville....

Apologies , got a couple things mixed up. So no vitriol.

But as far as the Star article, arguments put forth suggesting fakse and misleading are far fetched

[madmax]

I agree with both MoonBox and Guyser.

Neither of whom wants to "Legitimize" False and Misleading News"

I think those who think the clause "False and Misleading News" needs to be changed, are as nutty as that right winger Zundell.

Why one would use a convicted holocaust denier as a reason to lower Broadcasting standards is bizzare.

Edited February 11, 2011 by madmax

[scribblet]

The committee is not using Zundel as the reason to request change, but are using SC ruling.

Of course suggesting that conservatives (or anyone else) actually wants false and misleading news is far fetched. In fact, the title of this thread is false and misleading news, so the OP could be charged.

[Shwa]

Many.

Take the constant "predictions" about Reform. "They never make a party status"...... later..."They never make it out of Alberta".... later.... "they never form the Official Opposition...... later "they never form a federal government".... now it's "they never gain a majority".....

"Gun control".... not even one information from CBC correct. Hundreds of lies. And we pay for it.

"Many" you say? Then you should be able to go on to the CBC website and post a few links for us to honestly examine in order to believe you right?

Well were is one citation?

Are you going to or are you going to simply concede the point to Shakeyhands and admit you don't know what you are talking about?

You don't have to actually admit to anything of course, just that you not being able to cite anything implies to anyone else reading this that Shakeyhands took you out with a single shot.

Edited February 11, 2011 by Shwa

[Jack Weber]

"Many" you say? Then you should be able to go on to the CBC website and post a few links for us to honestly examine in order to believe you right?

Well were is one citation?

Are you going to or are you going to simply concede the point to Shakeyhands and admit you don't know what you are talking about?

You don't have to actually admit to anything of course, just that you not being able to cite anything implies to anyone else reading this that Shakeyhands took you out with a single shot.

Mr. No Facts strikes again!!!!

[scribblet]

Here's a fer instance, the Star should be ashamed of itself, and maybe could be charged under current law for spreading false news. Let's get this right...The university receives an anonymous access to information request for two professors - so the Star points immediately to the CPC as likely ‘culprits’ based on pure speculation and unconfirmed suspicions on the part of the Star - say it isn't so LOL

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/02/11/from-the-toronto-star-possibly-the-lamest-front-page-exclusive-in-the-history-of-canadian-journalism/

Now here’s the actual story: Some anonymous Canadian has filed a freedom-of-information request to get expense information related to two University of Ottawa professors.

That’s it.

Could this anonymous freedom-of-information requester be a Tory? Yes. Could he be a Liberal? Yes. Could he be a person of no particular political affiliation sitting at home in his pajamas? Yes. Could he be one of the professors themselves? Yes. Could he be someone at the Star itself? Yes.

In fact, the story might have been entitled “Hosni Mubarak accused of digging up dirt on ‘Liberal’ profs.” That accusation would have precisely the same amount of proof behind it.

---

-not the slightest scintilla of proof. Just a bunch of people, egged on by Star reporters with an embarrassingly obvious agenda, inhabiting a world of pretend.

[Shakeyhands]

Here's a fer instance, the Star should be ashamed of itself, and maybe could be charged under current law for spreading false news. Let's get this right...The university receives an anonymous access to information request for two professors - so the Star points immediately to the CPC as likely ‘culprits’ based on pure speculation and unconfirmed suspicions on the part of the Star - say it isn't so LOL

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/02/11/from-the-toronto-star-possibly-the-lamest-front-page-exclusive-in-the-history-of-canadian-journalism/

Ummm.... The "Tories" were accused of it, by the two Profs... What don't you get?

[scribblet]

What part of "anonymous access to information request" don't you get.

[ironstone]

Under pressure from the Conservative government, the CRTC has opened the door to U.S.-style attack broadcast journalism, proposed a change to the rules on false or misleading news broadcasts on radio or television. The law currently says a broadcast licensee “shall not broadcast any false or misleading news.”

I can't wait for all the fake, lying and misleading news to come from Harpers former director of communications, Kory Teneycke "False and Misleading News" station in waiting.

I am not sure why there should be an undermining of Broadcast news.

What exactly is wrong with providing NEWS that isn't False or Misleading?

It is a strange request.

Regardless of any Broadcast News Station, I do not want to see them Broadcasting False or Misleading News.

Nor should this get rubber stamped in the CRTC.

But I have been reading comments on this within the online papers and it appears that Conservatives are braying loudly and vocally for this change.

Why does this not surprise me

Innocent until proven guilty?Not in the bizarre,twisted world of the left apparently.What evidence do you have of this "false or misleading" news?How about omission of news?Does that bother you at all?Try going to the CBC website and finding a mention of David Cameron's very recent statement about the failure of multiculturalism.Unless I missed it,no mention of it in the rather left leaning Ottawa Citizen either.They are seemingly reluctant to report news that does not compliment the socialist agenda.In the Ottawa Sun,they publish a poll of Canadian Tamils which shows that a lot of these so called refugees regularly go back to Sri Lanka where they claim to face persecution.Again,no mention of this in the Citizen.

It's rather foolish to condemn a news station that IS NOT EVEN ON THE AIR YET!And they won't even be supported fully by tax dollars like some other corporation that shall remain nameless,so what's your problem?

[/quote

[Keepitsimple]

Edititorial from The Sun this morning....pretty well covers the Star's mud-slinging mis-information:

Typical hysteria from the left

If we were not so pleased with the approaching launch of Sun News Network -- pilloried wrongly by the left as the evil spawn of Fox News North -- we'd be tempted to sue the bastards for libel.

That's what the left would do, but our skins are much thicker.

Instead we'll simply call them out for doing precisely what their fears said we will do on Sun News -- which is spread "false or misleading news."

They have no proof. How could they? We've haven't even gone to air.

All the left have is their usual paranoia, coupled with their belief that conservative thought and argument are down-market, and free speech in this country only applies to them.

What cranked up this bogeyman hysteria once again was NDP MP Charlie Angus' linking the CRTC's recent proposal to lessen restrictions on misleading information directly to the upcoming birth of the Sun News Network.

This led to one uber-left columnist at the most leftist newspaper in the country to go wingnut by stating this CRTC initiative "slithered out of the Prime Minister's Office as a way of protecting Sun TV from spouting lies."

What could be more "false or misleading" than this ridiculous statement?

Yet it is nonetheless stated as fact by this columnist. Without proof. Without example. And obviously without thought.

The absurdity of the allegation, and the fact this critic is doing precisely what the left fears Sun News will do flies completely over the writer's head.

But this is what the Sun has always dealt with.

Presumptive babbleheads.

Attacking the credibility of Sun News before it has even gone to air is an attack by the elitist left on the entire Sun Media chain, now the largest newspaper chain in Canada, simply because its conservative stand on important issues has a strong audience.

But let's face it. Sun Media did not become the biggest by being footloose with truth and wishy-washy in its opinions.

It became the biggest by reporting the facts and sticking to its founding principles: No sacred cows, no editorial taboos, and a mandate to tackle the misguided right and the arrogant left whenever the occasion demands.

Like now.

Link: http://www.torontosun.com/comment/editorial/2011/02/11/17246066.html

Edited February 12, 2011 by Keepitsimple

[Esq]

Does anyone know what happened with the CRTC decision on this?

It was suppose to happen Wednesday.

[Bitsy]

What part of "anonymous access to information request" don't you get.

What part of speculation by the targets is ‘spreading false news”?

[scribblet]

Edititorial from The Sun this morning....pretty well covers the Star's mud-slinging mis-information:

link here - sounds right on to me also.

http://www.torontosun.com/comment/editorial/2011/02/11/17246066.html

[Shakeyhands]

What part of "anonymous access to information request" don't you get.

What does that have to do with anything? The two Professors are free to speculate whatever they want. Further, the Star can print their suspicions well within the bounds of the current law. No story here my Conservative friends. Further yet, the Star printed the response from the PMO denying any link to it. Where is the false and/or misleading news again?

Now, if you were to ask me, I full heartedly agree that it is someone with links to either the PMO itself or at the very least the CPC itself. Why else would someone request that amount of information? I mean, it's not like that CPC hasn't tried to discredit others that are vocal against them. Is it?

[Bitsy]

link here - sounds right on to me also.

http://www.torontosun.com/comment/editorial/2011/02/11/17246066.html

Anyone got a link to the original mudslinging article? I do not need to read an opinion from a newspaper competitor, I rather decide for myself.

[Keepitsimple]

Anyone got a link to the original mudslinging article? I do not need to read an opinion from a newspaper competitor, I rather decide for myself.

Actually, the Star had two articles on it.........all over an "anonymous" FOI request:

Tories Accused of Digging up Dirt on "Liberal" Profs: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/936704--tories-accused-of-digging-up-dirt-on-liberal-profs

Professors Fight Back in Information War: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/937569--professors-fight-back-in-information-war

Edited February 12, 2011 by Keepitsimple

[Scotty]

Ummm.... The "Tories" were accused of it, by the two Profs... What don't you get?

The story was basically a non-story, with all sorts of people speculating that perhaps the Tories did it, for some ulterior, sinister motive. But there's not a single shred of evidence of that. Filling a news story with what is basically alarmist suspicions seems kind of unprofessional to me.

In that sense it resembles their other "news story" which was basically Liberals speculation as to what evil things the provincial tories might put in their election platform next election.

Edited February 12, 2011 by Scotty

[guyser]

Here's a fer instance, the Star should be ashamed of itself, and maybe could be charged under current law for spreading false news. Let's get this right...The university receives an anonymous access to information request for two professors - so the Star points immediately to the CPC as likely ‘culprits’ based on pure speculation and unconfirmed suspicions on the part of the Star - say it isn't so LOL

Reading comprehension my friend.....from the Star article....Note it is they who are speculating

"but Mendes and Attaran are convinced that it’s part of an academic witch hunt by the governing party — part of a wider campaign to silence university voices that may be critical of the Conservatives"

'“The information makes me think it’s somebody who is essentially trying to amass a file on critics of the government,” he said in an interview"

ME aint the reporter for the Star.

I suppose you can issue a retraction, because this is a bogus thread and your allegations do not hold any merit whatsoever

[Saipan]

The two Professors are free to speculate whatever they want. Further, the Star can print their suspicions

Yes, just like The National Enquirer or other tabloids.

[scribblet]

Reading comprehension my friend.....from the Star article....Note it is they who are speculating

-------------

I suppose you can issue a retraction, because this is a bogus thread and your allegations do not hold any merit whatsoever

I suppose not, The Star title is Tories accused of digging up dirt on ‘Liberal’ profs - hmmm it is all pure speculation with no basis in fact, one person tries to access FOI on two professors who speculate that it might be a conservative - really - and this is journalism - reporting on speculation and innuendo - oh wait it's the Star, should've known. Of course the fact that the CPC has denied making the request doesn't mean anything to rumour mongers.

This is not journalism, it's paranoid delusional and too many people are willing to buy into fantasies put forward by them. Many people for many reasons attempt to access information through the FOI, but one has to wonder what these professors have to hide to make them so fearful.

As one commentator said: Hooked on a feeling, high on believing.....paranoia is a very interesting condition for which there are several options in treatment. :lol:

Edited February 13, 2011 by scribblet