CBC's damning retraction of an unsubstantiated non-scandal in Alberta

[CdnFox]

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/colby-cosh-2

CBC News cried “uncle” yesterday in its long-running quarrel with Alberta premier Danielle Smith, as you may have read in your National Post. In January, a story from the network claimed that some member of the new premier’s staff had sent emails directly to Crown prosecutors ordering them to let up on COVID rulebreakers. This created a nasty suspicion that the premier’s office was interfering directly in individual criminal prosecutions, and it rightly led to an investigation by the province’s ethics commissioner, Marguerite Trussler. In the meantime, the CBC stood stubbornly behind its story. 

Well, yesterday the CBC added a 300-words editor’s note to the head of its January story expressing regret and a touch of humiliation. “Our sources,” the note reads, “have insisted that Crown prosecutors felt political pressure regarding the Coutts cases, but they are not able to confirm that the emails they originally described were sent directly from the premier’s office to the Crown.” (Maybe they should have been asked to “confirm” this information before publication in the first place?) “As such, we have updated this story and related pieces, removing references to direct contact between the premier’s office and prosecutors — which the premier has vehemently denied. CBC News regrets reporting direct contact by email.” 

 

So - CBC releases an OBVIOUSLY FAKE story JUST BEFORE an election that attacks a conservative politician, then JUST AFTER the election admits it was all bullcrap and they're soooooo sorrry.

These guys have got to go. They're not even pretending to be anything but political activists at this point.  They are NOT a news agency.

[myata]

Everybody around can. Why not us? Yes and we can too! No limits!

Edited July 8, 2023 by myata

[RedDog]

The CBC is irrelevant and should be shut down. Government broadcasting is something I associate with China or the Soviet Union 

[betsy]

On 7/8/2023 at 10:16 AM, CdnFox said:

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/colby-cosh-2

CBC News cried “uncle” yesterday in its long-running quarrel with Alberta premier Danielle Smith, as you may have read in your National Post. In January, a story from the network claimed that some member of the new premier’s staff had sent emails directly to Crown prosecutors ordering them to let up on COVID rulebreakers. This created a nasty suspicion that the premier’s office was interfering directly in individual criminal prosecutions, and it rightly led to an investigation by the province’s ethics commissioner, Marguerite Trussler. In the meantime, the CBC stood stubbornly behind its story. 

Well, yesterday the CBC added a 300-words editor’s note to the head of its January story expressing regret and a touch of humiliation. “Our sources,” the note reads, “have insisted that Crown prosecutors felt political pressure regarding the Coutts cases, but they are not able to confirm that the emails they originally described were sent directly from the premier’s office to the Crown.” (Maybe they should have been asked to “confirm” this information before publication in the first place?) “As such, we have updated this story and related pieces, removing references to direct contact between the premier’s office and prosecutors — which the premier has vehemently denied. CBC News regrets reporting direct contact by email.” 

 

So - CBC releases an OBVIOUSLY FAKE story JUST BEFORE an election that attacks a conservative politician, then JUST AFTER the election admits it was all bullcrap and they're soooooo sorrry.

These guys have got to go. They're not even pretending to be anything but political activists at this point.  They are NOT a news agency.

 

 

That's why CBC  shouldn't be funded by taxpayers! 

 

 

[Michael Hardner]

Ah yes... shut down the CBC because they made a mistake.  Paint nation sponsorship in media as being Soviet when pretty much every country does it.

Cancel Culture at its worst, and not just to fire an addled hockey commentator but to ensure that corporate media owns all broadcasting...

[Michael Hardner]

In comparison, the Toronto Sun published a story that was "sourced" (I hate to call it that) from a columnist reading ONLINE COMMENTS that stated that something happened and published without verifying it.  They were admonished by the Press Council and refused to own up to it.

No retraction, no source involved who made a mistake.

But, no, let's shut down a national information service that is not beholden to corporate interests or is MAJORITY American-owned like the National Post because the source misrepresented the source of information.

Better yet, let's shut down CTV too because they try to play the middle, and let's let the newspapers die so we have True North and offshore-funded disinformation channels on YouTube telling us to quit NATO and so on...

It's so transparent with you guys who the elite really are.  You would hand your wallet to anyone who makes fun of "woke"...

[Michael Hardner]

To add: 

This was only part of the story.  The Ethics commissioner already found that she violated the conflict of interest rule, and my understanding is they have her on tape talking about interfering.  This is more than Mario Dion had on Trudeau for the SNC Lavalin scandal, and yet we still all think Trudeau was guilty.

So... is Smith exonerated ?  No.  

https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/ethics-probe-finds-danielle-smith-violated-conflict-of-interest-rule-but-no-sanctions-ordered-against-her-1.6404433

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

To add: 

This was only part of the story.  The Ethics commissioner already found that she violated the conflict of interest rule, and my understanding is they have her on tape talking about interfering.  This is more than Mario Dion had on Trudeau for the SNC Lavalin scandal, and yet we still all think Trudeau was guilty.

So... is Smith exonerated ?  No.  

https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/ethics-probe-finds-danielle-smith-violated-conflict-of-interest-rule-but-no-sanctions-ordered-against-her-1.6404433

Oh she absolutely is.   What you're talking about was a completely different charge and she never tried to hide that.  She broke the rules but didn't realize that what she was doing was wrong. 

But that's a completely seperate allegation and i've heard that tape, she absolutely does not say she's going to be doing anythning illegal or inappropriate.  She wanted to help him with the case, she felt  it wasn't fair he was being charged, she did not attempt to hide that.  But there are legal  ways she can do that. 

[Legato]

On 7/12/2023 at 8:58 AM, Michael Hardner said:

Ah yes... shut down the CBC because they made a mistake.  Paint nation sponsorship in media as being Soviet when pretty much every country does it.

Cancel Culture at its worst, and not just to fire an addled hockey commentator but to ensure that corporate media owns all broadcasting...

Not so much a single mistake but one of many the CBC is guilty of. This was a rather intentional smear job just before an election.

[CdnFox]

6 hours ago, Legato said:

Not so much a single mistake but one of many the CBC is guilty of. This was a rather intentional smear job just before an election.

This is it. If it was their first foray into deliberate fake news then that'd be one thing. Even if they were a LITTLE bias once in a while that could be tolerated.

But it's becoming embarrassingly frequent. Constantly underplaying or ignoring stories that hurt the libs or the left, constantly overhyping and fanning stories that hurt the right, and regularly engaging in fake news like this story or how the truckers were mostly funded by american republicans etc etc etc.

[ironstone]

On 7/12/2023 at 8:58 AM, Michael Hardner said:

Ah yes... shut down the CBC because they made a mistake.  Paint nation sponsorship in media as being Soviet when pretty much every country does it.

Cancel Culture at its worst, and not just to fire an addled hockey commentator but to ensure that corporate media owns all broadcasting...

Not necessarily shut them down, just cut off the taxpayer funding. Why is the CBC not capable of standing on its own?

I'm not sure they made a mistake either. Perhaps the purpose was just to get a big negative story out there before election day. 

[Nationalist]

The CBC...Canada's broadcasting joke. I used to think they served a good purpose but it's obvious they are a political entity.

Defund them.

Elect Polievre, defund this joke of a broadcasting entity, turn Canada's resource industries lose and reevaluate the loopholes Quebec has been gifted with regards to equalization.

Then, watch the west flourish like never before.

Edited July 15, 2023 by Nationalist

[CdnFox]

21 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

The CBC...Canada's broadcasting joke. I used to think they served a good purpose but it's obvious they are a political entity.

They DID serve a good purpose.  For the longest time they provided news and tv programming and radio content to areas where it was absolutely not commercially viable to do so. Hundreds of thousands  of Canadians had access to information about the world and the country that they absolutely would not have had without a 'free' broadcast company that wasn't worried about profitability.

But - those days are gone. There's nowhere that can't get satellite internet, and almost no where left that can't get a land line internet connection for that matter. And the gov't and the companies continue to expand that.  So now people everywhere have access to all the information they could possibly want.

So the reason for the CBC has expired.  And now all they are is a politically motivated propaganda outfit  They have to go.

[ExFlyer]

On 7/12/2023 at 8:58 AM, Michael Hardner said:

Ah yes... shut down the CBC because they made a mistake.  Paint nation sponsorship in media as being Soviet when pretty much every country does it.

Cancel Culture at its worst, and not just to fire an addled hockey commentator but to ensure that corporate media owns all broadcasting...

Show me a news organization, be it a newspaper, tv news, radio news or online news, let alone twitter, facebook etc that has not made a mistake, misquote, mislead?

Some print retractions, some admit mistake others do not. The ones that take ownership are far and few between.

 

Edited July 15, 2023 by ExFlyer
taking ownership added

[WestCanMan]

This "before the election news" vs "after the election news" is a recurring theme lately.

Pre-election: "RACIST GUN-OWNERS WERE BUSTED IN A PLOT TO KIDNAP GOVERNOR WHITMER!!!!!!"  

Post-election: "It was an FBI entrapment scheme which they just randomly 'solved' 1 month before the federal election despite the fact that they couldn't even give free money to the "willing participants" to buy guns and ammo. Nuthin ta see here."

Pre-election: "RUSSIAN DISINFORMATION ALERT: THERE'S RUSSIAN DISINFORMATION COMING OUT ABOUT HUNTER. OH MY GOD LOOK - THERE IT IS! 50 FORMER INTEL OFFICERS SAY THAT THIS STORY IS RUSSIAN DISINFORMATION TO INFLUENCE ANOTHER ELECTION! THIS IS A HIGHLY OFFICIAL RUSSIAN DISINFORMATION ALERT! BAN ANYONE FROM SOCIAL MEDIA WHO SAYS "LAPTOP", EVEN THE NY POST!!!!!!! ANYONE WHO TALKS ABOUT IT IS A TRAITOR!! PEOPLE, YOU ALL KNOW HOW BAD RUSSIAN DISINFORMATION IS! THIS IS A MAGNITUDE FIFTY-ELEVEN RUSSIAN DISINFORMATION ALERT!!!"  

Post-election: "The FBI already knew the intel was legit because they had the laptop in their possession for 11 months, and  all of the 'former intel officers' who were in the know were aware if it too. It also came from Delaware which isn't technically a part of Russia but it's close enough by MSM standards. The NY Post was banned from Twitter for telling the truth, it was just the FBI, the Dems, the MSM and the former intel officers that were lying, again. Hehe. It's ok, nothing will ever happen to them and their credibility isn't diminished among the credulous dolts who still watch CNN/CTV."

 

You can tell leftards right now that there will be more false FBI "October surprises" in the upcoming elections but they actually love it. They still don't care that their ballot was basically cast for them by FBI liars and criminals. 

 

Edit: FWIW I think that the Demonrats got the idea for the Russian collusion show trial from watching the Canadian MSM dog Harper for 3 years because of "NINETY K DUFFYGATE!! AAAAAAAHHHHHHH - IT'S THE BIGGEST SCANDAL EVERRRRRRR!!!!!!!!"

The general pubic here still don't know that they were duped, and collusion-tards in the US are no better. 

Edited July 15, 2023 by WestCanMan

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Show me a news organization, be it a newspaper, tv news, radio news or online news, let alone twitter, facebook etc that has not made a mistake, misquote, mislead?

IF it's privately owned - fine. If fox news wants to print whatever and risk lawsuits that's fine

But - when it's the public's money, and it's a "state media" group, they  have a duty to be BEYOND that kind of partisan nonsense like we saw with smith.  THey have to DELIBERATELY walk the path of non partisanship.

And they didn't. That was obviously a partisan play.  ANd one of many. And they all just magically happen to favor the left.

Let them go private and defund them, and see if lefties are willing to pay for their garbage out of their OWN pockets instead of the pockets of others.

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

IF it's privately owned - fine. If fox news wants to print whatever and risk lawsuits that's fine

But - when it's the public's money, and it's a "state media" group, they  have a duty to be BEYOND that kind of partisan nonsense like we saw with smith.  THey have to DELIBERATELY walk the path of non partisanship.

And they didn't. That was obviously a partisan play.  ANd one of many. And they all just magically happen to favor the left.

Let them go private and defund them, and see if lefties are willing to pay for their garbage out of their OWN pockets instead of the pockets of others.

BS.

If it is a news deliverer or service or organization, and they make mistakes, the owe it to their subscribers to correct errors or else they have false news spreaders, like you LOL

[CdnFox]

59 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

BS.

If it is a news deliverer or service or organization, and they make mistakes, the owe it to their subscribers to correct errors or else they have false news spreaders, like you LOL

They ARE the false news spreaders.  What they said about smith was entirely and unequivicably untrue and they stuck to it despite proof to the contrary - until after the election

And it's one example.  And i can provide several more where the 'mistakes' are all in favour of the left point of view. Can you name any where it's in favor of the right? No? Hmmmm.

IF what you're saying is true then they ABSOLUTELY should be de funded entirely -  and the customers can decide if they're fake news or not. Taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for it.

[ExFlyer]

20 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

They ARE the false news spreaders.  What they said about smith was entirely and unequivicably untrue and they stuck to it despite proof to the contrary - until after the election

And it's one example.  And i can provide several more where the 'mistakes' are all in favour of the left point of view. Can you name any where it's in favor of the right? No? Hmmmm.

IF what you're saying is true then they ABSOLUTELY should be de funded entirely -  and the customers can decide if they're fake news or not. Taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for it.

Your post is about CBC admitting their mistake and making a retraction.

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Your post is about CBC admitting their mistake and making a retraction.

My post is about them deliberately making an unfounded accusation about a politician during an election when it would affect their chances,  and then admitting they had done something wrong after - not a mistake mind you, they admitted they had not upheld the standards of journaistic integrity.

Do you honestly think that being dishonest about what happened is going to convince anyone that the cbc should stay? If anything your dishonesty proves that there's NO negotiating or trying to 'fix' anything with die hard lefties who will tolerate ANY level of corruption if it suits their purpose.

There's no option but to defund them entirely.  Maybe the gov't can give it's advertising dollars to sun news or the NP or something instead, i'm sure you'll be the first in line to defend them if they 'make a mistake' about the liberals right?  

[ExFlyer]

15 hours ago, CdnFox said:

My post is about them deliberately making an unfounded accusation about a politician during an election when it would affect their chances,  and then admitting they had done something wrong after - not a mistake mind you, they admitted they had not upheld the standards of journaistic integrity.

Do you honestly think that being dishonest about what happened is going to convince anyone that the cbc should stay? If anything your dishonesty proves that there's NO negotiating or trying to 'fix' anything with die hard lefties who will tolerate ANY level of corruption if it suits their purpose.

There's no option but to defund them entirely.  Maybe the gov't can give it's advertising dollars to sun news or the NP or something instead, i'm sure you'll be the first in line to defend them if they 'make a mistake' about the liberals right?  

I understand that you have expressed frustration with what you perceive as dishonesty and a lack of willingness to negotiate or address corruption among individuals who you seem to claim to think  as left-leaning. It is important to approach political discussions with an open mind and a commitment to understanding different perspectives which you are incapable of. While it is true that some individuals may prioritize their political goals over addressing corruption as you do, it is not accurate to generalize this behavior to all left-leaning individuals.

Political ideologies are complex and diverse, encompassing a wide range of beliefs and values. It is essential to recognize that people's motivations and priorities can vary significantly within any political group. While there may be instances where individuals on the left or any other political spectrum tolerate corruption, it is not fair to assume that this applies universally.

Negotiation and the pursuit of solutions require open dialogue, empathy, and a willingness to find common ground. It is crucial to engage in respectful conversations, again, which you seem incapable of, that focus on the issues at hand rather than making broad generalizations about entire groups of people. By fostering understanding and seeking common goals, it is possible to bridge ideological divides and work towards positive change.

In conclusion, it is important to approach political discussions with an open mind and avoid making sweeping generalizations about any group of people based on the actions or beliefs of a few individuals. Engaging in respectful dialogue and seeking common ground can lead to more productive conversations and potential solutions.

EDIT: This  response is from AI. canfux post was fed to AI for it to give comment and it did. canfux will not like it but it looks at what canfux wrote and gave an AI response. Seems AI recognized canfux as the BS artist he/she/it is.

Edited July 16, 2023 by ExFlyer

[CdnFox]

5 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

I understand that you have expressed frustration with what you perceive as dishonesty and a lack of willingness to negotiate or address corruption among individuals who you seem to claim to think  as left-leaning. It is important to approach political discussions with an open mind and a commitment to understanding different perspectives which you are incapable of. While it is true that some individuals may prioritize their political goals over addressing corruption as you do, it is not accurate to generalize this behavior to all left-leaning individuals.

Political ideologies are complex and diverse, encompassing a wide range of beliefs and values. It is essential to recognize that people's motivations and priorities can vary significantly within any political group. While there may be instances where individuals on the left or any other political spectrum tolerate corruption, it is not fair to assume that this applies universally.

Negotiation and the pursuit of solutions require open dialogue, empathy, and a willingness to find common ground. It is crucial to engage in respectful conversations, again, which you seem incapable of, that focus on the issues at hand rather than making broad generalizations about entire groups of people. By fostering understanding and seeking common goals, it is possible to bridge ideological divides and work towards positive change.

In conclusion, it is important to approach political discussions with an open mind and avoid making sweeping generalizations about any group of people based on the actions or beliefs of a few individuals. Engaging in respectful dialogue and seeking common ground can lead to more productive conversations and potential solutions.

 

Blah blah blah bullshit bullshit -  There's nothing 'complex'  about it.

And it's very left wing of you to demand people understand other's point of view while being insulting and dismissive of others in the same breath.  In short - your position is "you must be tolerant of my ideas, while i am intolerant of you and your ilk".  Yeah - not how it works.

I think most conservatives would have welcomed the idea of being open and honest and having a rational discussion. But that's not the choice the liberals have made in general and as we can see from your post it's not the choice you have made personally either.

Your hypocrisy is of no interest to me.

The problem you'll run into is not that people like me are incapable of understanding where you're coming from - it's that we do.   And we'll start with wiping out the cbc. 

[Michael Hardner]

On 7/14/2023 at 6:57 PM, Legato said:

Not so much a single mistake but one of many the CBC is guilty of. This was a rather intentional smear job just before an election.

And yet the main facts remain and weren't retracted?

[eyeball]

12 hours ago, ironstone said:

Why is the CBC not capable of standing on its own?

Because it was never the intent that it should.

[CdnFox]

47 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

And yet the main facts remain and weren't retracted?

No, they turned out to be false and they said as much - no evidence they were ever true, they shouldn't have run the story, blah blah.  All well and good after the fact.

But that's been mentioned. I guess continuing to tell a lie is your way of coping?

39 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Because it was never the intent that it should.

thats true.  It was specifically there because it was not commercially viable to provide service to huge parts of canada

It is now.  So why do we need it?