Why am I forced to pay for this social liberalism agenda?

[Riverwind]

It will be dedicated to the open broadcast of lesbian sex acts. The "best" and most explicit programming will be shown at 3:45pm local time across the country.

A red herring that is not relevant to the discussion because such programming would violate current broadcast laws which apply equally to public and private broadcasters.

[Hydraboss]

Hydraboss Corp? HBC? I like that! Can I have a HBC Reward Points program, too? That'd be nifty.

So, I have to meet all criteria? Okay. Naked lesbian jello-wrestling (sports), LNIC (sports), farm reports (let's not go there), Lesbian Film Festival (arts), live coverage of the Federal "common bawdy house" debate (political), the STD Report (science and health), and OF COURSE...I will broadcast overseas for our military boys!!! (international coverage)

I don't like what I pay for on the CBC, and I have no say into it. So why should you have any say into what I broadcast? I just want your money.

Do you see how the "other side" feels about MotherCorp? A lot of their content disgusts me, so I turn the channel. But I HAVE NO CHOICE but to pay for it. But if the tables were turned.....

[Hydraboss]

It will be dedicated to the open broadcast of lesbian sex acts. The "best" and most explicit programming will be shown at 3:45pm local time across the country.

A red herring that is not relevant to the discussion because such programming would violate current broadcast laws which apply equally to public and private broadcasters.

Fine, I'll move the "best" to a more appropriate time slot, and I'll put a documentary about lesbian lifestyles in it's place. Any other concerns?

[Spike22]

As they say at work ditch the bitch(CBC). I think they should show porn after 12 am might bring some ratings to the old cow. Sorry CBC signs off at midnight (unionized you know) or after the 1920's talkie movie they sometimes show no later than 1 am. CBC however is great for insomniacs as they will be lulled into a comma with the fine (ZZZZZzzzz) programming there. Many times I have drifted off while catching a Road to Avonlea episode or the Beachcomers or another awesomely dull CBC produced pile of turd waste.

[geoffrey]

the STD Report (science and health)

Get with the program Hydra. It's STI, Sexually Transmitted Infections. It's not the fault of the people that get them, sex is a natural thing that everyone should be doing with one another, without protection, 24 hours a day!

I actually watched some program on the CBC that was talking about this new sex ed program in the schools that "reduces stigma attached to STD's". It's ok to have herpes!

People with STD's are obviously trouble, so why reduce stigma. Teens need to fear STDs 24/7, not think that they are an acceptable part of society.

I still call them VD's, but apparently I'm politically incorrect?

It's stuff like this on CBC that makes me want to bring in some kind of common-sense board of review for them. I can't believe anyone can put a positive spin on such disgusting ideas.

[BubberMiley]

I actually watched some program on the CBC that was talking about this new sex ed program in the schools that "reduces stigma attached to STD's". It's ok to have herpes!

People with STD's are obviously trouble, so why reduce stigma. Teens need to fear STDs 24/7, not think that they are an acceptable part of society.

I still call them VD's, but apparently I'm politically incorrect?

I think the idea was that education and stigma reduction would make people more aware of what they have and know that they can deal with it medically--not for them to think getting STDs is cool.

Also, I think they call them STDs now so people have a better idea of how they can get them. Venereal implies intercourse and that isn't necessary to get an STD. It's not to be "politically correct," a term I'm surprised people still use. It always struck me that people who complain about the "politically correct" are criticizing the speech of someone by complaining about them criticizing their speech, so it's like this infinite critical deathward spiral catch-22 thing.

The things you think about when you're blasted.

[shoop]

Completely agreed on the first point.

Geoff was right at the start of his little rant. The correct term is now STI. I guess *disease* is a little too traumatizing.

I think the idea was that education and stigma reduction would make people more aware of what they have and know that they can deal with it medically--not for them to think getting STDs is cool.

Also, I think they call them STDs now so people have a better idea of how they can get them.

The things you think about when you're blasted.

[JerrySeinfeld]

Could you please enlighten us with an example from your experience in Canada? Or are you just going to use these fictitious *experiences* of yours derail the conversation. Like a *social conservative* calling for more government expenses/money in broadcasting?

CBC has an agenda.

The ironly your first paragraph against that next sentence almost made me fall down. Or is that hypocrisy?

Ahem...

Uhhhh...could you please enlighten us with an example from your experience in Canada? Or are you just going to use these fictitious *experiences* of yours derail the conversation. Like the CBC having an *agenda*

CBC has an agenda. What tin-foil hat nonsense.

You're half-right. The CBC is so entrenched in it's Toronto-Centric, Nanny State thinking it doesn't even KNOW that it has an agenda!

[shoop]

more than a third of the Liberals MPs come from the GTA and environs (South Duram & York, Brampton, Mississauga, Oakvlille).

Barely 1/5th of the CPC MPs are from Alberta. Yet you are far more likely to hear the CPC referred to as having Alberta roots, than you are of anything *officially* connecting the Liberal party to Toronto. The CBC is the most egregious of the offenders.

You're half-right. The CBC is so entrenched in it's Toronto-Centric, Nanny State thinking it doesn't even KNOW that it has an agenda!

[Big Blue Machine]

If the CBC stopped making such awful material, then there wouldn't be a problem.

How can you say that.

Everyone wants to see another rendition of Trudeau with another look-alike actor.

Everyone needs to see Mansbridge the Winnipeg Airport announcer giving his two cents worth from someplace outside Canada.

More investment in every corner of the media circus to try to improve the audience numbers.

CBC....Canadian But Crappy.

The network in the centre of the universe(Toronto) for those who are there, and those who wiish they were there.

That's why only 500,000 Canadians watched Trudeau II.

I like Peter Mansbridge and the CBC but some of the shows are just awful, like the Tournament. I love Da Vinci's City Hall though.

[speaker]

I don't like what I pay for on the CBC, and I have no say into it. So why should you have any say into what I broadcast? I just want your money.

Do you see how the "other side" feels about MotherCorp? A lot of their content disgusts me, so I turn the channel. But I HAVE NO CHOICE but to pay for it. But if the tables were turned.....

I don't really see how your side feels about it, or more correctly I don't see how you can feel that way and yet completely ignore my comments to the effect that I would go through the normal channels to try and change your programming so that it was allowable on the air in Canada. There are normal channels and you have every right to try and change the programming at CBC or any other publicly regulated media, which at last word was all of them.

I expect that the reason that you and others here haven't is that you feel powerless against the mainstream thought in Canada, and can see a pile of work in front of whoever tries to set the mandate of media acceptability. Well, you can fight city hall.

[Hydraboss]

And what, exactly, is the "mainstream thought in Canada"? Powerless against it? No. Just thoroughly disgusted. Go through channels? That is the equivalent of saying, "If you do not like what your boss is doing, please fill out Complaint Form #3 and give it to your boss. He will ensure that it is considered, and action is taken."

IN MY OPINION, the CBC produces crap. Period.

However, if they only broadcast what I want, they should still do it without government funding. Your tax dollars should not be used to support what 817 Albertans want, but the rest of Canada doesn't. If the "mainstream" (meaning majority?) likes what it sees and hears, then there should be no problem putting it to a referendum. But that will never happen because the CBC knows they would lose their funding permanently.

[wellandboy]

I expect that the reason that you and others here haven't is that you feel powerless against the mainstream thought in Canada, and can see a pile of work in front of whoever tries to set the mandate of media acceptability. Well, you can fight city hall.

Stating the CBC represents mainstream thought in Canadians is simply wrong. It is a uniquely Toronto based perspective that has permeated to other satellite urban centres across the country. It is also a betrayal in trust to manifestly promote those views without providing equal opportunity to a large contingent of the population who is diametrically opposed to those views.

As long as the CBC feeds from the public trough, it is it's duty and obligation to strike a balance that is fully representative of all Canadians.

[Riverwind]

Stating the CBC represents mainstream thought in Canadians is simply wrong. It is a uniquely Toronto based perspective that has permeated to other satellite urban centres across the country.

The majority of Canadians live in urban centers.

[geoffrey]

Stating the CBC represents mainstream thought in Canadians is simply wrong. It is a uniquely Toronto based perspective that has permeated to other satellite urban centres across the country.

The majority of Canadians live in urban centers.

Calgary's urban centre is so different from Toronto's, you would probably think its another country.

Just because we all live in cities, doesn't mean we all live in Toronto-eske cities.

[shoop]

Pretty sad attempt at distracting from the truth of wellandboy's argument.

Nice move ignoring the comments about betrayal of trust.

The CBC, as a public broadcaster, should give some airtime to the views that the top management disagrees with.

That the CBC commissioned a study to prove it was fair in its coverage of the election was telling enough.

That it ignored a finding that it was more favourable to the Liberals and the NDP than the CTV and more critical of the CPC than CTV. Is also quite telling. (Page 3 of the same link - bottom right of the page.)

Stating the CBC represents mainstream thought in Canadians is simply wrong. It is a uniquely Toronto based perspective that has permeated to other satellite urban centres across the country.

The majority of Canadians live in urban centers.

[Riverwind]

Calgary's urban centre is so different from Toronto's, you would probably think its another country.

Calgary is the urban center that is an exception.

Pretty sad attempt at distracting from the truth of wellandboy's argument.

I agree there are two solitudes in the country: urban and rural. I also agree that the CBC tends to target the urban audiance more than it targets the rural audience. However, my point is extremely valid: a majority of Canadians live in these urban centers.

That it ignored a finding that it was more favourable to the Liberals and the NDP than the CTV and more critical of the CPC than CTV. Is also quite telling. (Page 3 of the same link - bottom right of the page.)

You are splitting hairs. The negative/positive coverage ratios for CTV and CBC are more or less identical for all 4 parties - certainly within any margin of error that would have to go along with any such study.

[wellandboy]

Stating the CBC represents mainstream thought in Canadians is simply wrong. It is a uniquely Toronto based perspective that has permeated to other satellite urban centres across the country.

The majority of Canadians live in urban centers.

Perhaps I should have been more specific. I was referring to Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal as the large urban centres. There are distinct differences in the secondary urban centres such as Calgary , Edmonton, Winnipeg, Halifax etc.. as there is in Niagara region where I live with a population of just under 1/2 million. That difference was directly reflected in the election results , with high re-election of Liberal candidates in those three centres.

Just a quick comment on CBC's coverage in Shoop's link. Coverage of the Conservative Party and Stephen Harper was at first glance surprisingly high by CBC. When you consider Harper's strategic daily roll out of policy throughout the campaign, the numbers are not so convincing, given the relative silence of the Liberals throughout December.

The fact that CBC felt the need to have a report written in an attempt to demonsrate how fair their election coverage was, smacks of epic CYA (that's cover 'yer ass in smaller cities and rural Canada). The worst part is they use our money to try to convince us they're not screwing us. Come on CBC at least kiss me first.

[Riverwind]

The fact that CBC felt the need to have a report written in an attempt to demonstrate how fair their election coverage was, smacks of epic CYA (that's cover 'yer ass in smaller cities and rural Canada).

So you are saying 'don't bother me with facts cause I have already made up my mind'. This does not surprise me.

The CBC has an incredibly difficult job because everyone presumes that their peculiar point of view must be represented in every program all of the time. This is an impossible task that is made difficult by human nature: people notice occasional problems and automatically assume that the problem occurs all of the time.

The CBC report demonstrates that complaints of systematic bias on the part of CBC are grossly exaggerated and likely a result of selective memory syndrome on the part of the complainers.

[shoop]

Uhhh, the values of urban Canada aren't necessarily the values of MTV (Montreal - Toronto - Vancouver).

The CBC has shown itself to be completely out of tune with the values of people residing in urban centres like Quebec City, Calgary, Winnipeg, Edmonton....

I agree there are two solitudes in the country: urban and rural. I also agree that the CBC tends to target the urban audiance more than it targets the rural audience. However, my point is extremely valid: a majority of Canadians live in these urban centers.

You are showing appalling ignorance *AND* that you have no clue what you are talking about. Margin of error applies to polling. The results I pointed to were not an opinion poll. Margin of error doesn't come into play here.

That the CBC skewed to the left on all three of the parties in Parliament that ran candidates throughout the country is telling.

Margin of error...

You are splitting hairs. The negative/positive coverage ratios for CTV and CBC are more or less identical for all 4 parties - certainly within any margin of error that would have to go along with any such study.

[Riverwind]

You are showing appalling ignorance *AND* that you have no clue what you are talking about. Margin of error applies to polling. The results I pointed to were not an opinion poll. Margin of error doesn't come into play here.

I suggest that you are the one that does not understand how to interpret numbers in reports. Any calculation has a margin or error - it does not make a difference whether you are asking for someone's opinion or measuring the number of volts coming out of the wall. A report on the number of 'positive' stories will definitely have a margin of error because the definition of a positive story will often depend on who hears it.

You will be frequently misinformed if you read reports without asking yourself - 'what variables affect the accuracy of these numbers?' or 'what is the margin or error for these measurements?'

[shoop]

You will always be misinformed if you don't read the report and instead try and brush off a clear trend that emerges from it by misusing terms like "margin of error". Or how this trend is ignored when it doesn't confirm the result the organization paying for the report wants.

All this report really does is allow the silver-spoon socialists who support the CBC to feel confident that they are behaving *fairly* to the plebes who don't support their social views while paying to fund the CBC (Noblesse oblige my arse). *AND* waste more taxpayer money while doing it.

Oh yeah, for the answers to your question.

Question 1 - read page 21 of the report.

Question 2 - read an actual definition of the term margin of error

You will be frequently misinformed if you read reports without asking yourself - 'what variables affect the accuracy of these numbers?' or 'what is the margin or error for these measurements?'

[wellandboy]

The fact that CBC felt the need to have a report written in an attempt to demonstrate how fair their election coverage was, smacks of epic CYA (that's cover 'yer ass in smaller cities and rural Canada).

So you are saying 'don't bother me with facts cause I have already made up my mind'. This does not surprise me.

The CBC has an incredibly difficult job because everyone presumes that their peculiar point of view must be represented in every program all of the time. This is an impossible task that is made difficult by human nature: people notice occasional problems and automatically assume that the problem occurs all of the time.

The CBC report demonstrates that complaints of systematic bias on the part of CBC are grossly exaggerated and likely a result of selective memory syndrome on the part of the complainers.

Where you get "don't bother me with the facts cause I have already made up my mind" from what I stated is more obfuscation. 1st why does CBC commission a study to comment on their bias?, because there is a bias. Secondly, how about the commission of a blind comparative study that would actually be fair. The consultant otherwise skews the numbers in CBC's favour. CBC would never allow that sort of scrutiny, no way no how. CYA you bet.

As for the "selective memory syndrome on the part of the complainers"comment, what about the mindless acceptance of all things CBC as the Holy Grail of news reporting and Canadian broadcasting? The more I go through this exercise and read the arguments for saving the CBC, I am coming to the conclusion the entire organization should be gutted. What are arguments so far to save CBC:

1.Well ratings and quality per se don't matter er ah because it's CBC.

2.Advertisers bad, so maybe give them more money (see above).

3.I don't want to pay for it, I want everybody else to pay for it.

4.Choice? What's that?

5.We keep it just the way it is because in some nebulous way, CBC stands as a bastion of Canadianism, protecting us from very bad American cultural imperialism and Canadian corporations.

6.CBC is like a street light. (not in any allegorical sense that I can surmise from that argument)

7.Lastly, it's not biased because it fits very nicely with our particular bias, which is correct after all. The rest of us, poor misguided souls can go sod off. Unless of course upon achieving a new level of enlightenment, that will allow us to accept and defend CBC unreservedly.

[Black Dog]

I'm only gonna say this once. I like the CBC largely because of its slant. And I don't particularily mind my tax dollars going to a cause I support. I have an issue with the T.O-centric nature of the beast (I never want to see another Leafs game again), but it's worth every penny of my $60 per year that goes to the CBC to watch people like Burnsy foam at the mouth.

That may not be particularily principled position, but screw it: I'm smart enough to recognize and acknowledge my own biases.

[geoffrey]

I'm only gonna say this once. I like the CBC largely because of its slant. And I don't particularily mind my tax dollars going to a cause I support. I have an issue with the T.O-centric nature of the beast (I never want to see another Leafs game again), but it's worth every penny of my $60 per year that goes to the CBC to watch people like Burnsy foam at the mouth.

That may not be particularily principled position, but screw it: I'm smart enough to recognize and acknowledge my own biases.

The bias isn't what bothers me. I wouldn't mind more left TV in Canada. I watch the CBC more than CTV at least, though Global carries better entertainment programing and Global National is a far superior product.

I just can't support any media that has its finances controlled by the state. It's a very dangerous ideal.