F U Bell: CTV News Vancouver GONE

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Sure, but is it because you have little to no regard for a 4th Estate, never mind one that's funded by the 3rd Estate?

Nope, it is because I have little regard for government subsidy.

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

First of all, we need to be clear in our communication here, and not overstate things.  Some people believe that the CBC is a valid source.

More specifically, this is about CTV and my point is about a larger media landscape in Canada.

I haven't seen local news run by trolls, I don't think it would work.

Michael, this can go on forever.

I only went in that direction to appease you with your questions.

I think what Bell did is atrocious for local television news.  It basically leaves one tv source in most cities (and even provinces). Newspaper monopolies have gone the same way. All the news we get is now determined by corporate headquarters.

I have said enough.

EDIT. Wait, one last thing, why on earth would we subsidize monopolies? That is what our tv news and newspaper distributors have become.

Edited February 13 by ExFlyer

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Nope, it is because I have little regard for government subsidy.

Fair enough. A subsidy however is not the same as a dedicated budget for a public broadcaster.

[OftenWrong]

On 2/11/2024 at 11:28 PM, herbie said:

Disgusted! And will be intentionally avoiding any service Bell provides from now on.

Yeah, stick it to the man! They took your woobie away.

But not too worry, you'll find a new safe space soon enough.

Meanwhile there's still a plethora of web-based news. Like Natural News, featuring Mike Adams, "The Health Ranger"!

 

[Michael Hardner]

10 hours ago, eyeball said:

Fair enough. A subsidy however is not the same as a dedicated budget for a public broadcaster.

Speaking of subsidies, the trans mountain subsidy overrun (not the budget) since 2018 would fund the CBC for 20 years.

I know you're in business like I am so you keep track of these things...

[Nefarious Banana]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Speaking of subsidies, the trans mountain subsidy overrun (not the budget) since 2018 would fund the CBC for 20 years..

Apples & oranges . . . TransMountain will make $$ / CBC, not so.

[Perspektiv]

I also grew up watching CBC and CTV. They as far as I can see, haven't adapted to the changes in consumer habits. 

Cable TV no longer is popular, nor are newspapers.

There is a growing distrust for what they call news, and failure to combat that, likely will put you out of business. 

I remember seeing Global news posting an excerpt of something Pierre Poiilievre had said. No commentary, just watch the entire clip for yourself, and make of it as you please. Context and all.

Many others are only interested in putting hit pieces and divisive diatribe, to get clicks.

Its hard to get news, nowadays.

I personally have to watch CNN, Fox, Time, NY Times, and several others, just to get somewhat of a balanced message. 

I never used to do homework to watch news.

I would rather follow independents, who understand many of their viewership isn't low IQ, and as such, don't insult their intelligence by trying to be the next viral video, at the expense of integrity.

I don't think this is sad. What has become of what used to be objective information, is truly what is sad.

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Apples & oranges . . . TransMountain will make $$ / CBC, not so.

Make $ for who ?  

1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

 

I would rather follow independents, who understand many of their viewership isn't low IQ, and as such, don't insult their intelligence by trying to be the next viral video, at the expense of integrity.

I don't think this is sad. What has become of what used to be objective information, is truly what is sad.

You have likely hit on the solution.  A rework of old school media, but independent and hungry.

I recommend Canadaland, as well as local news outlets such as serve small towns via X/Twitter and Facebook.

For long form policy and morality debate, don't look to news look to places like this/MLW.

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

There is a growing distrust for what they call news, and failure to combat that,

There's dedicated effort to produce fake news and a public broadcaster is the best way to combat it.

By keeping a much closer eye on the government responsible for funding it.

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, eyeball said:

There's dedicated effort to produce fake news and a public broadcaster is the best way to combat it.

By keeping a much closer eye on the government responsible for funding it.

Both are true.  The public is more aware of neoliberal bias but oddly is also embracing propaganda from offshore.

Is there any hope ?  Maybe just the basics of information hygiene... and am I wrong or are they seeping into common use ?

Asking for cites ?
Rejecting ad-homminems ?
Speaking out against close relations who spout tinfoil chuddery ?

And maybe the final piece of the puzzle is accepting that your racist uncle, or your tinfoil cousin isn't going to shut up or die anytime soon, so you have to accept them as part of the community ... even if you screamed in his face that he's an antivax/racist/conspitard at Thanksgiving and Aunt Ruth got upset and ... and ...

[eyeball]

40 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Both are true.  The public is more aware of neoliberal bias but oddly is also embracing propaganda from offshore.

Is there any hope ?

I don't think so. Transparency is the key and its absence in so much of our governance is why people don't or can't more to the point, trust it or anything it touches.

Take the word president out of the following and simply insert the word leader or government and I think this capture a sense of where we're at these days. 

 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

There's dedicated effort to produce fake news and a public broadcaster is the best way to combat it.

 

The public broadcaster is the one dedicated to producing fake news.

Danielle smith letter, truckers funded by white supremist americans (or maybe russians), etc etc etc

 

[CdnFox]

5 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

The public broadcaster is the one dedicated to producing fake news.

Danielle smith letter, truckers funded by white supremist americans (or maybe russians), etc etc etc

 

Sigh - i see that rather than actually address the point i made above @ExFlyer chose to 'downvote' me instead.

If you want further proof that the left KNOWS the cbc is corrupt and is upset we're talking about it - there you go.  Bet he does it with this one too - he and the other lefties here are the 'cancel culture' type - better to do something to repress someone than talk about a plain truth like an adult.

[eyeball]

23 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

The public broadcaster is the one dedicated to producing fake news.

Given how many people unthinkingly hold this belief it behooves us to dispel it by making the broadcaster so transparent it would be impossible to take seriously.

Notwithstanding the truly hard-boiled partisan sycophants who will anyways.

[Michael Hardner]

14 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Given how many people unthinkingly hold this belief...

Asking for examples is particularly hilarious.... "Look at Rosemary Barton's face when the guest says this..." vs "I will watch and share this 25 minute YouTube propaganda funded by Russia to make us think NATO is not in our interest"

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Given how many people unthinkingly hold this belief it behooves us to dispel it by making the broadcaster so transparent it would be impossible to take seriously.

 

First off i gave real examples - and the fact you'd blow that off shows that you know you're being dishonest.  You HAVE to lie to try to protect a misinformation source you approve of rather than address the simple and verifyable truth.

Second what you suggest is impossible. Especially for an 'arms length' broadcaster.

 The ACTUAL way to make it impossible is to shut them down.

Quote

Notwithstanding the truly hard-boiled partisan sycophants who will anyways.

We call those 'cbc journalists".

Hey -you want it, you can dig into your own pocket and pay for it. Nobody can complain about that. Except you,

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

First off i gave real examples

You gave real examples of Nazis, commies and wokies conspiring with the PMO/CBC/CTV/MSM to deceive and brainwash everyone? No you didn't or you would have provided the emails, minutes to meetings, whistle blowers and audiovisual recordings etc as evidence. You got anything like that?

No of course you don't. You got squat as always and all you ever produce in that position is hooey.

Edited February 14 by eyeball

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Asking for examples is particularly hilarious.... "Look at Rosemary Barton's face when the guest says this..." vs "I will watch and share this 25 minute YouTube propaganda funded by Russia to make us think NATO is not in our interest"

I literally gave specific examples.

And you wonder why so many people call you out for being dishonest in your debates.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

You gave real examples of Nazis, commies and wokies conspiring with the PMO/CBC/CTV/MSM to deceive and brainwash everyone?

Oh is this the game where you pretend to be dumber then you are (whcih is a challenge) because you're unable to refute the points?

I asked YOU for examples of those but they don't exist apperently.

I gave examples of CBC creating and distributing fake news and misinformation. And hey - you can feel free to ignore that - but when the CBC is defunded and you're like 'but but but but but can't we talk about it' just remember-- we tried.  Just like the trans activitst are discovering.

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Oh is this the game where you pretend to be dumber then you are

Not getting it is entirely your shtick.

'so what you really said'

'so what you mean is'

'did you just say'

Sound familiar?

[CdnFox]

29 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Not getting it is entirely your shtick.

So you mean you really don't get it and you're not faking?
 

Quote

 

'so what you really said'

'so what you mean is'

'did you just say'

Sound familiar?

 

Yeah - its crap you often say and i didn't  

if you have to lie to make a point, it's not a very good point,

And i suppose it's getting late in the day - this IS around when your brain often melts and you have your little hissy fits so that makes sense   

[herbie]

I feel genuine pity for people who won't hear the news on CBC-CTV-Global_CITY or read it in the Vancouver Sun or the Globe and Mail "because it's biased"

Genuine pity..... we all can't be blessed with reason and common sense and that's just too hard for some to learn.

[CdnFox]

17 minutes ago, herbie said:

I feel genuine pity for people who won't hear the news on CBC-CTV-Global_CITY or read it in the Vancouver Sun or the Globe and Mail "because it's biased."

 

 

Everyone else feels genuine pity for people who do hear the news on CBC-CTV-Global_CITY or read it in the Vancouver Sun or the Globe and Mail because it's biased

Well - for those who watch cbc-ctv anyway

[Michael Hardner]

First segment of Canadaland short cuts reads between the lines on the BELL Cuts:

https://www.canadaland.com/podcast/963-for-whom-the-bell-trolls/

TLDR version:
- Media was a minor part of the cuts, which BELL overplayed to make Trudeau look bad, because the Liberals allowed 3rd parties to get access to their Fibre network.  They want to help Poilievre, who they hope will be more friendly.
- They assert that big conglomerates can't do local media well

[ExFlyer]

38 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

First segment of Canadaland short cuts reads between the lines on the BELL Cuts:

https://www.canadaland.com/podcast/963-for-whom-the-bell-trolls/

TLDR version:
- Media was a minor part of the cuts, which BELL overplayed to make Trudeau look bad, because the Liberals allowed 3rd parties to get access to their Fibre network.  They want to help Poilievre, who they hope will be more friendly.
- They assert that big conglomerates can't do local media well

"Conservative and NDP MPs backed a 2022 amendment to the Online Streaming Act, opposed by the governing Liberals, that allowed Canada's private broadcasters to save about $120 million a year in regulatory fees.

Bell's share of those savings was $40 million -- the precise total of annual operating losses the broadcaster's parent, BCE Inc., cited when it slashed 4,800 jobs last week." https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/conservative-motion-backed-by-ndp-produced-40m-in-regulatory-relief-for-bell-1.6765785

So 33% of the money the government gave to bail out media went to Bell.