Jump to content

Disintegration of Canadian media


myata

Recommended Posts

Honestly, I don't read Canadian news sources much of late. Not in an "echo chamber" I read regularly, daily or almost, news from several international sources, to form a balanced, level and hopefully mostly objective view of the current environment. The problem with Canadian sources is simple: I cannot separate any longer facts, the objective reality and an objective view of it from various and diverse agendas. Not interested in reading between the lines and figuring out motives. Don't care about induced and instilled agendas, however progressive and generally good they sound. I'll just get my news elsewhere.

What is happening to journalistic and generally, professional ethics and standard in the country? Does the duty of objective and honest reporting; verification of facts; objectivity and impartiality; prevention of manipulation and misinformation still exist and being fulfilled by the country's news services? The level of degradation in these areas in the recent years has been nothing less than astounding.

Is it an exaggeration, not an objective view in itself? What has been your experience, and opinion?

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, myata said:

I read regularly, daily or almost, news from several international sources, to form a balanced, level and hopefully mostly objective view of the current environment. The problem with Canadian sources is simple: I cannot separate any longer facts, the objective reality and an objective view of it from various and diverse agendas.

Is it an exaggeration, not an objective view in itself? What has been your experience, and opinion?

I watch and read news from around the world too and aside from a few more local stories usually near the end of their broadcast, the news is much the same everywhere you look.  I strongly suspect if I drill down to the level of local TV stations the day to day similarities of people's lives will be even more familiar.

When everyone is usually reporting the same thing on any particular day it's because it's what happened.  Colour me surprised when I tune in Euronews, al Jazeera or CTV on Dec 25th and lo and behold everyone's talking about Christmas.  It's like there's an agenda or a conspiracy or something. Is it insidious?

Based on my own experience I'd have to say your reaction to Canadian media is due to an exaggerated bias of some sort. How do you know you're not seeing the same biases internationally.  You think the globalist's agenda is just a quaint localized custom peculiar to Canada?

 

 

Edited by eyeball
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cited a recent example: all major news services carried U.S. Supreme Court decision on vaccine mandates in their top stories; it just could not be found on CBC short of a deliberate search. This is not the only recent example, and not by far. Misinformation can happen not only by a deliberate misrepresentation (though that appeared to have happened too) but also, omission, deliberate confusion, hiding misplacing miswording and so on. I consider all of that being under the standard of professional ethics; the profession of public information, journalism is not about some minimal grade of plausibility, but explicit intent and practice of impartiality, objectivity and honesty. The others you can call loudspeakers, influence/propaganda workers I couldn't care less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, eyeball said:

Based on my own experience I'd have to say your reaction to Canadian media is due to an exaggerated bias of some sort. How do you know you're not seeing the same biases internationally.  You think the globalist's agenda is just a quaint localized custom peculiar to Canada?

There's really not much to discuss with this sort of thread.  Up until you posted it looked like it was just going to get ignored, which was all the attention it deserved.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

TVO, Agenda. One of the programs I used to consider more informative. Right now. Bill-21 (Quebec) discussion panel. All three of the talking heads are against the bill.

What is it? How can you have a "discussion" when only one point of view is present? Is it a parody on objectivity, or already it, the new dawn objectivity? I give up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/26/2022 at 4:42 PM, eyeball said:

I watch and read news from around the world too and aside from a few more local stories usually near the end of their broadcast, the news is much the same everywhere you look.  I strongly suspect if I drill down to the level of local TV stations the day to day similarities of people's lives will be even more familiar.

When everyone is usually reporting the same thing on any particular day it's because it's what happened.  Colour me surprised when I tune in Euronews, al Jazeera or CTV on Dec 25th and lo and behold everyone's talking about Christmas.  It's like there's an agenda or a conspiracy or something. Is it insidious?

Based on my own experience I'd have to say your reaction to Canadian media is due to an exaggerated bias of some sort. How do you know you're not seeing the same biases internationally.  You think the globalist's agenda is just a quaint localized custom peculiar to Canada?

 

 

It's not the same news around the world at all, did you think the news was the same on 9/11, on US news stations as it was on al Jazeer. no not the same news at all, one was reporting on a terrorist attack and the other was reporting Muslims around the globe cheering....It is crazy to think that everyone is getting the same news, in china, Russia, Ukraine etc...

Even here in Canada there is a large difference in reporting from a right point of view and the others from a left point of view, same stories different coverages, different angles different perspectives. i mean why do people on here not take some sources serious and other gospel. Rebel news for instance same news way different take on it...

The media is reporting news to make a buck not becasue they want to do you a favor and let you know whats going on, so yes they are going to put lipstick on every story becasue it sells... and if you can't see that, then maybe you have become nose blind to all the shit, everyone has been pushing as news... 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Army Guy said:

It's not the same news around the world at all, did you think the news was the same on 9/11, on US news stations as it was on al Jazeer. no not the same news at all, one was reporting on a terrorist attack and the other was reporting Muslims around the globe cheering....It is crazy to think that everyone is getting the same news, in china, Russia, Ukraine etc...

What you're talking about here is different perspectives. US stations and al Jazeera were reporting the same news but from different viewpoints and of course with different biases.  

Quote

Even here in Canada there is a large difference in reporting from a right point of view and the others from a left point of view, same stories different coverages, different angles different perspectives. i mean why do people on here not take some sources serious and other gospel. Rebel news for instance same news way different take on it...

Again, same news but with a different perspective.

Quote

The media is reporting news to make a buck not becasue they want to do you a favor and let you know whats going on, so yes they are going to put lipstick on every story becasue it sells... and if you can't see that, then maybe you have become nose blind to all the shit, everyone has been pushing as news...

Of course I can see that.  What we're often all too blind to are the real behind the scene stories that are closed to both us and the media. Of course the media puts lipstick on its stories, because that's the only way it can sell them. I don't know why the fuck you can't see how often we are in agreement on things and yet you talk right past me like you're talking to some ghost of a caricature of a lefty that Tucker Carlson, Ezra Levant or Rush Limbaugh planted in your mind.    

The media has no more apparent clue than we do when it comes to political news.  We've all seen how uselessly their questions bounce off politicians.  So what do they do, they apply lipstick!  They spin, they speculate, they trigger people - it's like they can't stand a story that doesn't bleed on its own.   Let's face it this murky speculative political environment is precisely where the rubber hits the road when it comes to issues right and left wingers have with regards to how people regard the media.  It's gotten so bad our issues with one another are the freaking story half the time.

Probably won't be long until there is some blood to report on.

Nose blind...FFS!

  

Edited by eyeball
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, eyeball said:

Again, same news but with a different perspective.

Maybe if we include the absence of a news, or spin on the news, or news with a spin, or mostly spin with a tiny bit of news as a "perspective" and sure, left especially is world-famous for this sort of creative language. Take for example the news on US Supreme Court on mandatory vaccinations - it barely appeared in some of this country's main news" services.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, eyeball said:

What you're talking about here is different perspectives. US stations and al Jazeera were reporting the same news but from different viewpoints and of course with different biases.  

Again, same news but with a different perspective.

Of course I can see that.  What we're often all too blind to are the real behind the scene stories that are closed to both us and the media. Of course the media puts lipstick on its stories, because that's the only way it can sell them. I don't know why the fuck you can't see how often we are in agreement on things and yet you talk right past me like you're talking to some ghost of a caricature of a lefty that Tucker Carlson, Ezra Levant or Rush Limbaugh planted in your mind.    

The media has no more apparent clue than we do when it comes to political news.  We've all seen how uselessly their questions bounce off politicians.  So what do they do, they apply lipstick!  They spin, they speculate, they trigger people - it's like they can't stand a story that doesn't bleed on its own.   Let's face it this murky speculative political environment is precisely where the rubber hits the road when it comes to issues right and left wingers have with regards to how people regard the media.  It's gotten so bad our issues with one another are the freaking story half the time.

Probably won't be long until there is some blood to report on.

Nose blind...FFS!

  

1. The stories are not even close to each other, the US side was talking about the tragedy, mourning their loses, and rumors of revenge... while across the globe they were covering people celebrating Americas loss, and planning for more of the same types of actions...How is that the same story...It is not perspective it is an entirely different story altogether....

2. This lipstick I'm talking about changes the story and narrative. for instance just take the convoy story they are media outlets that are not covering the story but instead vilifying it, part of the problem has been the media taking sides , where it was once good journalist behavior was to cover the story with no emotion, just the facts...

Now add to all this the fringe media outlets where false news and bullshit is the main stream and for the consumer , well they just say fuck it who is telling the truth... Appling this lipstick has gotten to the point where the story is no longer the same, it is not about a group who are protesting it is about white nationalist and racist mother truckers planning something bad... not the same story at all. 

It is not my intention to talk though you, I read the OP and it was my opinion that he has some very good points, ones that the usual group here dismissed as some right wing lunatics. I choose to reply to your post as i thought you would atleast put some thought into it. 

3. I see it in another light i see it as the Canadians people not willing to call the politicians or journalists out on all of it. Instead we sit back and enjoy being force feed all the bullshit, until you can't tell truth from lies...to the point we just don't care... or we just spew it all back up and consider it gospel.

There is very little political environment here in Canada, it is either liberal light, liberal or far left or extreme left, the key here is the right is disappearing quickly on the political front, the small group of people still begs for the right to make a come back and keep holding on to that, while getting frustrated that there is no one representing them... This country has become so divisive no one wants to sit down and talk or debate, it is my way or the highway... like this op...STFU we don't want to hear it...The media is just one problem there is many more that divides us every day, right left, French English, religion, race, sexual preference, infinite genders, false news,  all of it meant to divide very little to unite on any side... 

And Ya nose blind to all the bullshit....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/26/2022 at 3:56 PM, Aristides said:

Why would anyone think foreign media doesn't have the same issues?

Of course they have the same issues. The hope is that they aren't as biased as our own media is when they cover Canadian stories because they don't have a vested interest in our political parties. 

Xinhua, Tass, NoKo News, Al Jazeera, BBC, CNN, etc are all as bad as our own news networks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

From the guy who said "Man-made climate change is a joke." 

You may get more of a sense that your views are on the fringe as you get older...

You may have to admit that your a liar, based on several of your comments from jbander's covid thread from this very day. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Army Guy said:

The media is reporting news to make a buck not becasue they want to do you a favor and let you know whats going on, so yes they are going to put lipstick on every story becasue it sells... and if you can't see that, then maybe you have become nose blind to all the shit, everyone has been pushing as news... 

That's what I originally thought about CNN, back when they were putting out incendiary lies to keep the Michael Brown riots going, but after the rioting went away and the lying continued unabated I had to consider other reasons. 

Sadly I've come to the conclusion that news organizations are affiliated with political parties and their coverage of daily events isn't centred around truth, information or accuracy at all, it's about supporting the political narratives of their chosen party. 

Believe it or not, people are happier being lied to than they are to find out that the other party was right about something. 

Depending on what news station you watch the Suleimani drone strike was either a brilliant success or patricide. The Afghan withdrawal was a debacle or a stroke of military brilliance.

Profits are the same regardless of which side a news corp takes because the stories are compelling enough either way. Riots are compelling. Whether they're awesome or criminal depends on your political stripe. At least they are if you're a leftist. If you're a conservative, riots are always bad. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Of course they have the same issues. The hope is that they aren't as biased as our own media is when they cover Canadian stories because they don't have a vested interest in our political parties. 

Xinhua, Tass, NoKo News, Al Jazeera, BBC, CNN, etc are all as bad as our own news networks. 

You forgot Fox, maybe because it is worse.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

That's what I originally thought about CNN, back when they were putting out incendiary lies to keep the Michael Brown riots going, but after the rioting went away and the lying continued unabated I had to consider other reasons. 

Sadly I've come to the conclusion that news organizations are affiliated with political parties and their coverage of daily events isn't centred around truth, information or accuracy at all, it's about supporting the political narratives of their chosen party. 

Believe it or not, people are happier being lied to than they are to find out that the other party was right about something. 

Depending on what news station you watch the Suleimani drone strike was either a brilliant success or patricide. The Afghan withdrawal was a debacle or a stroke of military brilliance.

Profits are the same regardless of which side a news corp takes because the stories are compelling enough either way. Riots are compelling. Whether they're awesome or criminal depends on your political stripe. At least they are if you're a leftist. If you're a conservative, riots are always bad. 

The good news is if you have the time you can watch unfiltered footage and full interviews and draw your own conclusions. It's why I knew much of the Trump narrative in the mainstream media was a lie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Sadly I've come to the conclusion that news organizations are affiliated with political parties and their coverage of daily events isn't centred around truth, information or accuracy at all, it's about supporting the political narratives of their chosen party. 

Maybe in Canada it's more like a club. All the same people, politics, industry, media; judicial too, moving around in circles and trajectories. Ideologies and narratives follow of course. And there's nothing, just none, independent and external to the circle with any influence.

Interesting how UK is at least trying balanced approach while its former colonies pretty much all of them in the first world are descending into all-out authoritarianism. It may mean something. It may mean that the foundation of democracy in Britain is not in the formal institutions and procedures but somewhere else, less obvious and tangible. Tradition, history you name it. Something that cannot just rewritten and copied over. So something is missing. And without it what's left is virtually unchecked power. And now, thanks to the virus (ironically) someone is figuring that out.

Edited by myata
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, eyeball said:

Unless it's the Proud Boys or Q-anon on a bus tour of Capitol Hill. Then it's just exuberance or something.

No one cheered on the Capitol Hill riot.

No one said that the riots should keep happening until after Christmas. 

No one suggested that the people who committed crimes shouldn't be punished.

High ranking members of the GOP didn't set up a bail fund.

There was no GOP district attorney saying "we can't put these people in jail because of covid".

No one called the riot a "mostly peaceful protest" aside from when they did it in jest, to point out Dem hypocrisy.

 

On the bright side, you managed to pack a massive amount of stupidity into a very small word count there. You could run for office in California or the GTA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Aristides said:

You forgot Fox, maybe because it is worse.

Fox is far better than the others. You are obviously speaking from ignorance or you'd know that.

Maybe Fox would like to be able to lie as much as the others and they just can't because there's so much more scrutiny on them, or maybe it's because their own viewers have so much more integrity than the cellar dwellers who watch CNN/CTV etc, but it is what it is Aristedes. They're just better.

You could take advantage of having an actual news source to watch instead of continually getting sucked into saying stupid things that you saw on your propaganda outlet of choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

No one cheered on the Capitol Hill riot.

President Trump called on his supporters to march on Capitol Hill to fight and force Congress to reject President-elect Biden's lawful election.

That's about as clear a case of cheering on as it gets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, eyeball said:

President Trump called on his supporters to march on Capitol Hill to fight and force Congress to reject President-elect Biden's lawful election.

That's about as clear a case of cheering on as it gets.

You're lying. 

Calling for people to walk to the Capitol is not the same as cheering on rioting after it started. 

If you don't know that you were lying then you're just extremely stupid. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,714
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    wopsas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Venandi went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...