Sixth Estate At Risk

[scribblet]

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/con...1215_141991.htm

The article referenced above, addresses the threat to the freedom of the Internet

from the big carriers. As we all appreciate, this powerful freedom, sometimes

called the sixth estate, is a major factor in politics and social policy today,

enabling the opinions of ordinary people to be disseminated and assessed.

When the CPC forms the government, I hope it will look at this area very

carefully and propose appropriate safeguards.

[Chronic]

As I hope you all know a Federal Election is coming up on Jan 23.

There is one more Leaders Debate scheduled on Monday.

There is a petition collecting signatures to stop the TV executives from being the ones who decide who is allowed in the debates. Right now for a party to be recognized as an official federal party, they must get at least 2% of the popular vote. Once this happens they recieve funding from taxes and are regarded as an offical party.

At this point in time they should be being included in all Federal Political Events. That isnt the way it works though when it comes to the televised debates. Regardless of the criteria already set out for federal parties, the television executives arbritarily decide who can be invloved. Which means that they are subverting the federal election process if they follow any guidelines except the established governmental regulations.

For a brief refresher (or maybe new knowledge) there are 308 ridings across canada. In the last election only four parties ran a candidate in every riding. To me this is important, because if you wish to be a federal party that represents the whole country, shouldn't you have represenatives across the whole country? The four parties were; the Liberals, Conservatives, N.D.P. and The Green Party.

The following link is to a petetion at the Green Parties website. This has nothing to do with any poll or survey, and it is not about supporting the Green Party. It is about allowing the democratic principles that our country is about to work as they were meant to.

Nowhere does it say that televion executives should have the power to decide who has access to the leaders debates.

By monday's scheduled debate, we need to collect another 10,000 canadian signatures.

Just ask yourself this, wouldnt you at least like to see the leader of the Green Party have a chance to say his peace, especially considering a couple of million tax dollars went to them since the last election?

Here's the link

http://www.info-greenparty.ca/petition/

Let's let the democratic process work without hinderance from the television executives.

Tom Adshead

[Slim MacSquinty]

Hey moderater, delete this friggin jerk posting the same stupid petition on every bloody thread.

[Chronic]

No, actually just every thread that relates to this...

[geoffrey]

I've heard all I need to hear from Harris. Fringe party's have no relavence in this election.

TV execs will air what people actually want to hear, no rumblings from a party that will not elect a candidate in this election. I find that the NDP and Bloc already waste too much time in debate, adding Harris who just cries that he's been wronged by the system he used to be part of really has no appeal to me, or to many Canadians.

Now about the actual post before it was interupted completely off-topic by this hired mouthpiece.

I agree there is some real concerns about this. In a recent labour disruption, Telus blocked access to a Union website for its users. Pretty creepy hey.

However, what would you propose as a solution to this? They own the communications systems... they pretty much can do whatever they want. I think it comes down to free market dollar votes, those that get pissed off at the censorship of one carrier will simply move their money elsewhere. Other ideas anyone?

[scribblet]

I've heard all I need to hear from Harris. Fringe party's have no relavence in this election.

TV execs will air what people actually want to hear, no rumblings from a party that will not elect a candidate in this election. I find that the NDP and Bloc already waste too much time in debate, adding Harris who just cries that he's been wronged by the system he used to be part of really has no appeal to me, or to many Canadians.

Now about the actual post before it was interupted completely off-topic by this hired mouthpiece.

I agree there is some real concerns about this. In a recent labour disruption, Telus blocked access to a Union website for its users. Pretty creepy hey.

However, what would you propose as a solution to this? They own the communications systems... they pretty much can do whatever they want. I think it comes down to free market dollar votes, those that get pissed off at the censorship of one carrier will simply move their money elsewhere. Other ideas anyone?

The U.N. has made noises about 'taking over the internet'. While I believe they can't or don't have the ability to do this, the fact that they are musing about it is troubling. Kofi Anan says United Nations wants only to ensure the Internet's global reach, and that effort is at the heart of this summit.

Personally I tend to doubt this, and believe that they would like to excercise some control over it.

[River_God]

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/con...1215_141991.htm

The article referenced above, addresses the threat to the freedom of the Internet

from the big carriers.

When the CPC forms the government, I hope it will look at this area very

carefully and propose appropriate safeguards.

ARE YOU HOPING THAT THE CPC SAFEGUARDS THE NET SO THAT IT CAN ONLY BE USED FOR PRO-CONSERVATIVE DISCUSSIONS SCRIBLETT (as on the Free Dominion Blog)?

I wonder about you because of you past posts.

[tml12]

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/con...1215_141991.htm

The article referenced above, addresses the threat to the freedom of the Internet

from the big carriers.

When the CPC forms the government, I hope it will look at this area very

carefully and propose appropriate safeguards.

ARE YOU HOPING THAT THE CPC SAFEGUARDS THE NET SO THAT IT CAN ONLY BE USED FOR PRO-CONSERVATIVE DISCUSSIONS SCRIBLETT (as on the Free Dominion Blog)?

I wonder about you because of you past posts.

River,

Your absolute fear of a Conservative government is as bizarre as it is cute.

At least your rants aren't as loathing as other lefties on the board though...

[River_God]

River,

Your absolute fear of a Conservative government is as bizarre as it is cute.

At least your rants aren't as loathing as other lefties on the board though...

What's not to fear tml? Say something positive and constructive to change my mind.

[tml12]

River,

Your absolute fear of a Conservative government is as bizarre as it is cute.

At least your rants aren't as loathing as other lefties on the board though...

What's not to fear tml? Say something positive and constructive to change my mind.

Let me first say I am not doubting your theories. I just know there are a lot of people on the Internet who use it to spread lies and false propaganda. And even if everything you wrote is true (which, since I am not a fan of the current US administration, I may be inclined to believe) that does not support a neo-Fascist takeover of this country's government. Martin has already been doing Bush's bidding secretly, he is only anti-American during minority government and election time. Chretien just did everything secretly to please the hateful left element (like Carolyn Parrish) in his party.

I want Canada to be strong. Federalism has consistently failed under the Liberals, especially Chretien.

I want good Canada-US relation and a government that will not practice double-think, that I think neither of us like.

[PocketRocket]

(Following quote addresses Green Party as part of debate spam from Chronic)

Hey moderater, delete this friggin jerk posting the same stupid petition on every bloody thread.

While I don't agree with posting the same message in several threads, I don't see that there would be any harm in including the Greens as part of the debate.

I mean let's look at the situation just a few years ago.

The PDC's had been reduced to two (???) seats, and were still included as part of the leaders' debate in the next election, even though they had lost party status.

The Greens have a credible platform, at least as credible as some others, and, as it has been argued here, if the BLOC is included in a so-called "Leaders' Debate", when they have no desire to either form a government, or, for that matter, even to advance Canada is any way (hard to do when you're trying to split up the country), then I see no reason that the Greens should be excluded.

[tml12]

(Following quote addresses Green Party as part of debate spam from Chronic)

Hey moderater, delete this friggin jerk posting the same stupid petition on every bloody thread.

While I don't agree with posting the same message in several threads, I don't see that there would be any harm in including the Greens as part of the debate.

I mean let's look at the situation just a few years ago.

The PDC's had been reduced to two (???) seats, and were still included as part of the leaders' debate in the next election, even though they had lost party status.

The Greens have a credible platform, at least as credible as some others, and, as it has been argued here, if the BLOC is included in a so-called "Leaders' Debate", when they have no desire to either form a government, or, for that matter, even to advance Canada is any way (hard to do when you're trying to split up the country), then I see no reason that the Greens should be excluded.

I think you'll see people supporting the Greens being at the debates if they win a seat in the election. After all, the PC party was the number one party for years before that.

[scribblet]

I'm beginning to think they should be included in the debates as they did garner a number of votes, which, I believe, under proportional rep. would have given them a few seats. They seem to be picking up a bit of momentum.