Anti-Conservative Bias in CBC and MSM

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

I agree with you about what constitutes bias.  My beef is simply with the word cheerleading 

 

I guess it would depend on your definition of cheer leading but i think you're splitting a hair there.

[CdnFox]

42 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

That's their editorial stance, as I mentioned. 

No, it is not.

As per the examples i gave, the 'russian' and 'american' funding for the convoy was reported as a news article, not 'editorial' in all the left leaning papers.  Cbc's story on the fake email was reported as fact, no editorial at all.

So to be clear  we are NOT discussing editorials here. We are discussing newspaper stories.

Here's an example of what i mentioned earlier: the GG was caught doing something inappropriate with her office, and she DID do it there's no doubt or dispute there, but the story isn't that she did something bad  it's  "CONSERVATIVES ACCUSE"

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/conservatives-accuse-minister-of-politicizing-governor-general-s-office-over-online-harms-1.6851016

This is an old and well known trick.

This has nothing to do with editorials. This is the news reports they publish.

[Michael Hardner]

40 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Remove funding for all media and let's see who survives.

Well, news has always been a loss leader so... you can see what is happening with it now.  Nobody really wants it - and I know "nobody" is overstating it.  My point is that a major building block of rational policy since the early 20th century, a bridge between government and the public will be lost.  The last time we were in that state we didn't have universal suffrage I would guess.

[blackbird]

The CBC's Rosie Barton weekly politics panel on the Thursday evening news had a five minute run against Pierre Poilievre for him stopping to shake hands with a group of anti-carbon tax encamped protesters.  They claimed he should not have stopped because some of them are associated with extreme groups.  The CBC is watching absolutely every little thing PP does and making a mountain out of a molehill.  He decided on the spur of the moment as he was passing by to stop and shake their hands because they were in support of the axe the tax campaign.  But CBC makes it into a major political gaff.  They are desperate to attack PP because he is 20% ahead in the polls.

Edited April 26, 2024 by blackbird

[Nationalist]

32 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Well, news has always been a loss leader so... you can see what is happening with it now.  Nobody really wants it - and I know "nobody" is overstating it.  My point is that a major building block of rational policy since the early 20th century, a bridge between government and the public will be lost.  The last time we were in that state we didn't have universal suffrage I would guess.

Too bad so sad?

[Goddess]

46 minutes ago, blackbird said:

The CBC's Rosie Barton weekly politics panel on the Thursday evening news had a five minute run against Pierre Poilievre for him stopping to shake hands with a group of anti-carbon tax encamped protesters.  They claimed he should not have stopped because some of them are associated with extreme groups.  The CBC is watching absolutely every little thing PP does and making a mountain out of a molehill.  He decided on the spur of the moment as he was passing by to stop and shake their hands because they were in support of the axe the tax campaign.  But CBC makes it into a major political gaff.  They are desperate to attack PP because he is 20% ahead in the polls.

"DISHEVELED MAN LUMBERS THROUGH DOORWAY WITH SCRIBBLES ON IT"

OMG!  National scandal!

Everybody panic!

Few people even know what that symbol is, apart from what the media says.

 

[Michael Hardner]

36 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Too bad so sad?

Are you saying that we don't need "news" ?  It's an interesting point, if so.  I'm not sure how I would approach that position.  I'd have to think on that.

[Zeitgeist]

49 minutes ago, blackbird said:

The CBC's Rosie Barton weekly politics panel on the Thursday evening news had a five minute run against Pierre Poilievre for him stopping to shake hands with a group of anti-carbon tax encamped protesters.  They claimed he should not have stopped because some of them are associated with extreme groups.  The CBC is watching absolutely every little thing PP does and making a mountain out of a molehill.  He decided on the spur of the moment as he was passing by to stop and shake their hands because they were in support of the axe the tax campaign.  But CBC makes it into a major political gaff.  They are desperate to attack PP because he is 20% ahead in the polls.

There aren’t even extremist groups associated with that protest.  That Diagon Alley (intended misspell) organization isn’t even extremist.  The government and its servile press are simply playing the game of painting Conservatives as scary and “alt right”.  Meanwhile our Conservatives make half the US Democratic Party look like the National Front.  What absurdity.  The CBC, CTV, TorStar, et al are so patently biased they might as well call themselves the Liberal Communications Department.  

[Moonbox]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

So to be clear  we are NOT discussing editorials here. We are discussing newspaper stories.

The editorial stance of a news outlet is not just its "editorials".  It's the ideological "stance" of the newspaper - how they frame the news they report, or how much they pay attention and promote certain topics and ideas.   What they choose to report (or omit) is also part of that stance. 

Edited April 26, 2024 by Moonbox

[Goddess]

Just now, Zeitgeist said:

There aren’t even extremist groups associated with that protest.  That Diagon Alley (intended misspell) organization isn’t even extremist.  The government and its servile press are simply playing the game of painting Conservatives as scary and “alt right”.  Meanwhile our Conservatives make half the US Democratic Party look like the National Front.  What absurdity.  The CBC, CTV, TorStar, et al are so patently biased they might as well call themselves the Liberal Communications Department.  

The extremist group "Diagolon" was a couple of internet podcasters (mostly ex- military vets) who noticed that a map  of the US dividing partisan states created a perfect diagonal across the US.  They started a meme - the fictional country of Diagolon with it's leader - a cocaine-addicted mountain goat, named Phillip.  They used the meme to mock elites, billionaires and corrupt politicians.

When the convoy was going on - Trudeau needed an active "terrorist group" to declare a national emergency and Diagolon was presented to the public as the evil far-right extremist group that was trying to overthrow the Canadian government.

The guy that started it has basically been persecuted by CSIS since then, but has won 4 (maybe 5? I can't remember) lawsuits brought against him by the government (paid for by taxpayers).  There's one case left that the gov't is dragging on.

The process is the punishment.

[Nationalist]

14 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Are you saying that we don't need "news" ?  It's an interesting point, if so.  I'm not sure how I would approach that position.  I'd have to think on that.

News will always be available. Funding from our money through taxation or not.

[herbie]

20 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Well it IS liberal biased to the same degree that University graduates vote leftish from what I have seen.

It is only liberal biased if you see anything left of fascist as liberal, have become so Americanized you think the Democrats are liberal. As I said, 20 years of propaganda demanding a march to the right will do that to some.
By people that don't realize the "mainstream" has become The Internet that carries far more right wing content, and are unable to distinguish news from opinion. Reality is that most Canadian media endorses conservative views and endorses Tory opinions. The bulk of even the CBC criticism is because they don't, they clearly point out what is editorial opinion and report news as news.

[Zeitgeist]

24 minutes ago, Goddess said:

The extremist group "Diagolon" was a couple of internet podcasters (mostly ex- military vets) who noticed that a map  of the US dividing partisan states created a perfect diagonal across the US.  They started a meme - the fictional country of Diagolon with it's leader - a cocaine-addicted mountain goat, named Phillip.  They used the meme to mock elites, billionaires and corrupt politicians.

When the convoy was going on - Trudeau needed an active "terrorist group" to declare a national emergency and Diagolon was presented to the public as the evil far-right extremist group that was trying to overthrow the Canadian government.

The guy that started it has basically been persecuted by CSIS since then, but has won 4 (maybe 5? I can't remember) lawsuits brought against him by the government (paid for by taxpayers).  There's one case left that the gov't is dragging on.

The process is the punishment.

It’s Kafkaesque actually.  Fake threats used to justify anti-free speech policies that are presented as solutions to fake crises. Orwell brought to you by Pfizer.  

Edited April 26, 2024 by Zeitgeist

[Goddess]

1 minute ago, Zeitgeist said:

It’s Kafkaesque actually.  Fake threats used to justify anti-free speech policies that are presented as solutions to fake crises.

It is.

I think it's the reason the MSM is dying.

More people are seeing the lies and propaganda and are turning to other news sources.  The rise of independent bloggers and substacks is one such source.  I follow a lot of different substacks and I find the topics much better researched, mush less partisan and include more linked proofs.

[Zeitgeist]

19 minutes ago, Goddess said:

It is.

I think it's the reason the MSM is dying.

More people are seeing the lies and propaganda and are turning to other news sources.  The rise of independent bloggers and substacks is one such source.  I follow a lot of different substacks and I find the topics much better researched, mush less partisan and include more linked proofs.

I agree.  If legacy media can’t draw subscribers it should go the way of the dodo bird.  

[Goddess]

24 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

It’s Kafkaesque actually.  Fake threats used to justify anti-free speech policies that are presented as solutions to fake crises. Orwell brought to you by Pfizer.  

And paid off media used to dupe the public.

But it's still a democracy 😉

[Legato]

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

The CBC's Rosie Barton weekly politics panel on the Thursday evening news had a five minute run against Pierre Poilievre for him stopping to shake hands with a group of anti-carbon tax encamped protesters.  They claimed he should not have stopped because some of them are associated with extreme groups.  The CBC is watching absolutely every little thing PP does and making a mountain out of a molehill.  He decided on the spur of the moment as he was passing by to stop and shake their hands because they were in support of the axe the tax campaign.  But CBC makes it into a major political gaff.  They are desperate to attack PP because he is 20% ahead in the polls.

Yes, I watched that, despicable.

[Legato]

43 minutes ago, herbie said:

It is only liberal biased if you see anything left of fascist as liberal, have become so Americanized you think the Democrats are liberal. As I said, 20 years of propaganda demanding a march to the right will do that to some.
By people that don't realize the "mainstream" has become The Internet that carries far more right wing content, and are unable to distinguish news from opinion. Reality is that most Canadian media endorses conservative views and endorses Tory opinions. The bulk of even the CBC criticism is because they don't, they clearly point out what is editorial opinion and report news as news.

That blurb was so far off target, the range was shut down for safety reasons.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Moonbox said:

The editorial stance of a news outlet is not just its "editorials".  It's the ideological "stance" of the newspaper - how they frame the news they report, or how much they pay attention and promote certain topics and ideas.   What they choose to report (or omit) is also part of that stance. 

So.... in other words the paper or news outlet is bias. They hire reporters that fit with their bias and control the news to suit their bias  or biased agenda.

I would agree with that.

[herbie]

29 minutes ago, Legato said:

That blurb was so far off target, the range was shut down for safety reasons.

You're actually unable to perceive that the very idea of what is conservative has moved much farther right than it was over the last few decades.
Eager to fully adopt the Big Tent us or them, black or white mentality.

[Goddess]

2 hours ago, Goddess said:

fictional country of Diagolon with it's leader - a cocaine-addicted mountain goat, named Phillip.

I think the whole Diagolon fiasco is part of the reason why there is such a rift between Trudeau and CSIS.

I watched Trudeau at a press conference the other day, again claiming it's a far-right extremist terrorist group and imagined CSIS agents rolling their eyes.

I'm sure when they have meetings with their counterparts in other countries and Interpol, other agents ask them "Hey, CSIS, how's that investigation into the time-traveling, cocaine-snorting mountain goat named Phillip going?"

** agents all snicker **

[Legato]

47 minutes ago, herbie said:

You're actually unable to perceive that the very idea of what is conservative has moved much farther right than it was over the last few decades.
Eager to fully adopt the Big Tent us or them, black or white mentality.

What utter BS. It's the left which have moved further left and skewed the balance point.

[Michael Hardner]

2 hours ago, herbie said:

It is only liberal biased if you see anything left of fascist as liberal, have become so Americanized you think the Democrats are liberal. As I said, 20 years of propaganda demanding a march to the right will do that to some.
By people that don't realize the "mainstream" has become The Internet that carries far more right wing content, and are unable to distinguish news from opinion. Reality is that most Canadian media endorses conservative views and endorses Tory opinions. The bulk of even the CBC criticism is because they don't, they clearly point out what is editorial opinion and report news as news.

I mean they ARE liberal.  They're not 'left wing' but they're liberal.

We need to come up with a framework that perhaps separates the classical terms from the current context.

liberal = believes in freedom of expression and enterprise
Right Wing = long term belief in business rights, individual rights, law and order, nationalism
Left Wing = belief in unions, social contract, collective rights
Marxist = an adherent of Karl Marx's philsophies
Fascist = an adherent of strong police state totalitarianism

Now need terms to explain today's drifting ideologies and stay away from MAGA, Chud, Globalist, Woke ...

Populist seems to fit.  But I can't think of any more

[Zeitgeist]

52 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I mean they ARE liberal.  They're not 'left wing' but they're liberal.

We need to come up with a framework that perhaps separates the classical terms from the current context.

liberal = believes in freedom of expression and enterprise
Right Wing = long term belief in business rights, individual rights, law and order, nationalism
Left Wing = belief in unions, social contract, collective rights
Marxist = an adherent of Karl Marx's philsophies
Fascist = an adherent of strong police state totalitarianism

Now need terms to explain today's drifting ideologies and stay away from MAGA, Chud, Globalist, Woke ...

Populist seems to fit.  But I can't think of any more

Good attempt but not the whole story. Fascism is also a partnership between big business and government, which is what we see with companies that follow international and national ideological programs like the UN’s ESG (Environment, Social, and Government) criteria and Sustainable Development Goals.  The problem is that many of these policies have huge negative impacts on average workers and families.

Think about the impact on Dutch and German farmers of EU agricultural restrictions or carbon and fuel taxes on farmers, truckers, small businesses, consumers, and resource workers.  Think about the impacts of the LGBTQ2S+ lobby on religious rights, families, women’s rights, and parental rights in a climate of negative birth rates.  Think of the Marxist capture of our universities and libraries or the DEI capture of our hiring and admissions policies.  All of these forces are dominating our civilization.  Even if you’re a libertarian and not a social conservative, you have to see the ideological push in our workplaces and institutions.  Much of this simply appeared in our training without our consent.

How do you define that top-down push?  It’s not really about left versus right either, because all political parties have succumbed to the push, the traditional left wing parties more than the right.  Calling it out doesn’t make someone “alt right” or even “populist”.  I get that you don’t like the word “woke”, but for many people that’s the easiest way to label it.

Edited April 26, 2024 by Zeitgeist

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

1. Good attempt but not the whole story. Fascism is also a partnership between big business and government, which is what we see with companies that follow international and national ideological programs like the UN’s ESG (Environment, Social, and Government) criteria and Sustainable Development Goals.  The problem is that many of these policies have huge negative impacts on average workers and families.

Think about the impact on Dutch and German farmers of EU agricultural restrictions or carbon and fuel taxes on farmers, truckers, small businesses, consumers, and resource workers.  Think about the impacts of the LGBTQ2S+ lobby on religious rights, families, women’s rights, and parental rights in a climate of negative birth rates.  Think of the Marxist capture of our universities and libraries or the DEI capture of our hiring and admissions policies.  All of these forces are dominating our civilization.  Even if you’re a libertarian and not a social conservative, you have to see the ideological push in our workplaces and institutions.  Much of this simply appeared in our training without our consent.

How do you define that top-down push?  It’s not really about left versus right either, because all political parties have succumbed to the push, the traditional left wing parties more than the right.  Calling it out doesn’t make someone “alt right” or even “populist”.  I get that you don’t like the word “woke”, but for many people that’s the easiest way to label it.

1. True enough. I left that out on purpose. Nothing to do with with the context that you mentioned which doesn't apply anyway because corporate alignment isn't even the key part.

The rest of your post is about climate policy... Which is a tangent. I would say climate policy has a good level of support which is why democracys are acting on it. 

But it's a drift in the best case...