Jump to content

Anti-Conservative Bias in CBC and MSM


Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, ironstone said:

That clip is similar to "apart from that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"

That was one of many riots related to Floyd. In the other link I provided, damages were estimated to be in the range of $2 billion.

 

Did you expect that to be in a clip? Really?

Damages were expected to be between $1  and $2. Not $2 billion.

 

Quote

It's not just in politics either. In the post by WestCanMan above, even the bloody weather reporters have no qualms about misleading the public.

But your sources don't.🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

I like these ones too:

AC 'describing' flooding:

ScreenShot2024-04-27at12_31_42PM.png.532ce2a3da7d1ac11003608053acb6e3.png

(Not CNN below, it's the Weather Network)

 

It is flooding, look at the buildings in the background.

 

The Youtube video is ridiculous but Florence was a Cat 4 storm that had 150 MPH peak winds, killed 54 people and did over $24 billion in damage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Aristides said:

It is flooding, look at the buildings in the background.

And it's nothing like it appears to be, based on how and where AC chose to situate himself. He's beside the road, standing in a ditch: look at the plants behind him.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

A sitting PM gave over $1.3B to media corporations, and regularly has the police go after Rebel news. They regularly get shoved and thrown on the ground, they're not allowed to get within 100M of Trudeau or they get the beats.

There was even a cop who ran into a Rebel news reporter and then pretended that the reporter assaulted him. He was caught on camera doing it all:

Those filthy God-damned pigs are a disgrace to our country. 

 

So we have some media orgs that are failing, and getting lavished with billions of dollars from our PM, and other media outlets that regularly face violence from our police. Does that look like something that happens in a free western country? 

Who knew we would arrive at the age of Liberal bully tyranny?  Woke tyranny brought to you by Pfizer in the C-19 pandemic.  Remember that nightmare?  No fascism to see here.  Accusing the fascists of being fascist is fascist. Basically don’t critique because opposition is baad. Someone might get triggered and offended. It might be necessary to pay a little visit and accuse some people of hate crimes.  See how that works?  The Online Harms Bill and other ant-free speech legislation must be fought at all costs.

And don’t kid yourself, the MSM is in full support and paid for by our tax dollars.

Edited by Zeitgeist
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Who knew we would arrive at the age of Liberal bully tyranny?  Woke tyranny brought to you by Pfizer in the C-19 pandemic.  Remember that nightmare?  No fascism to see here.  Accusing the fascists of being fascist is fascist.  Basically don’t critique because opposition is baad.  Someone might get triggered and offended.  It might be necessary to pay a little visit and accuse some people of hate crimes.  See how that works?  The Online Harms Bill and other ant-free speech legislation must be fought at all costs.

There's a video making the rounds on social media where RFK Jr unequivocally states that the NIH owns 50% of the patent on the covid jabs. 

That's a pretty strong accusation coming from a presidential candidate, and a Kennedy no less. 

It's also insanely worrisome. Fauci was the head of the NIH, he used NIH money to fund research that made a coronavirus in the Wuhan lab more transmissible among humans, then he told the world that covid came from a bat-pangolin-human combination, people got kicked off of social media for talking about the BSL4 lab right beside that wetmarket, then Fauci pimped the vax as our only hope, promised herd immunity, said that they'd be safe and effective, said that they actually were safe and effective after they were in use, told people that they didn't need to worry about covid if they were jabbed which was a lie, told people that they didn't have to worry about giving covid to grandma if they were jabbed which was a lie, then said that there was a "pandemic of the vaccinated" which was a lie, etc, etc. 

If Fauci or his NIH received a single dollar related to the sale of the covid vaccines, or if they got so much as some cotton from the inside of a bottle of Pfizer/Moderna ibuprofen, or a trip across the street where they received some free McDonald's at a 'seminar' or something, there needs to be an old-skoole investigation, with fingernails ripped out, etc. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

A sitting PM gave over $1.3B to media corporations, and regularly has the police go after Rebel news. They regularly get shoved and thrown on the ground, they're not allowed to get within 100M of Trudeau or they get the beats.

There was even a cop who ran into a Rebel news reporter and then pretended that the reporter assaulted him. He was caught on camera doing it all:

Those filthy God-damned pigs are a disgrace to our country. 

 

So we have some media orgs that are failing, and getting lavished with billions of dollars from our PM, and other media outlets that regularly face violence from our police. Does that look like something that happens in a free western country? 

As I mentioned... The National Post... Did you have a reply to that?

The Media organization that broke SNC Lavalin also.

Did you respond to my point about the CBC writing about SNC Lavalin less than a month before the 2019 election?

And, yes, I acknowledge bias.  And yes I have problems with government funding for media but not exaggerated statements on it.

Is there anything new to be said here?  Do you want to comment on those points?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

There's a video making the rounds on social media where RFK Jr unequivocally states that the NIH owns 50% of the patent on the covid jabs. 

That's a pretty strong accusation coming from a presidential candidate, and a Kennedy no less. 

It's also insanely worrisome. Fauci was the head of the NIH, he used NIH money to fund research that made a coronavirus in the Wuhan lab more transmissible among humans, then he told the world that covid came from a bat-pangolin-human combination, people got kicked off of social media for talking about the BSL4 lab right beside that wetmarket, then Fauci pimped the vax as our only hope, promised herd immunity, said that they'd be safe and effective, said that they actually were safe and effective after they were in use, told people that they didn't need to worry about covid if they were jabbed which was a lie, told people that they didn't have to worry about giving covid to grandma if they were jabbed which was a lie, then said that there was a "pandemic of the vaccinated" which was a lie, etc, etc. 

If Fauci or his NIH received a single dollar related to the sale of the covid vaccines, or if they got so much as some cotton from the inside of a bottle of Pfizer/Moderna ibuprofen, or a trip across the street where they received some free McDonald's at a 'seminar' or something, there needs to be an old-skoole investigation, with fingernails ripped out, etc. 

So RFK knows exactly what’s going on.  The problem is that he’s Cassandra.  His credibility has been totally undermined by the MSM.  He astutely noted that the vaccines are always created at the same time as the virus.  All arrows point to a planned release. Nevertheless, don’t look too hard because there are consequences, it seems.

The other problem with Kennedy is that he really could cause Biden to get re-elected.  He’s a big environmental guy but it’s hard to know how he’d handle climate change.  Trump seems to think he’d be a green fascist.  I can see it. Maybe, hard to say.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

As I mentioned... The National Post... Did you have a reply to that?

The Media organization that broke SNC Lavalin also.

Did you respond to my point about the CBC writing about SNC Lavalin less than a month before the 2019 election?

And, yes, I acknowledge bias.  And yes I have problems with government funding for media but not exaggerated statements on it.

Is there anything new to be said here?  Do you want to comment on those points?

You clearly never read my old post. Why would I answer all that again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

So RFK knows exactly what’s going on.  The problem is that he’s Cassandra.  His credibility has been totally undermined by the MSM.  

That's what they do to anyone who tells the truth. All the knives come out.

If you go back to the beginning of covid, Dems and Libs were barely talking about it, and everything that they were saying and doing was wrong.

They called Trump a racist for blocking flights from covid in late Jan 2020, on about Feb 9 DeBlasio told NYers to "ride the subway and go to restaurants like normal", Pelosi had her hugathon on Feb 23rd which was the most non-social-distanced event imaginable, Trudeau was giving away our PPE to China and saying "I don't think covid will affect Canadians very seriously", leftists in general were saying "don't wear masks" and the whole leftist world was relatively calm on the topic of covid. Their messages were wrong, disjointed, and mostly apathetic.

Then Dr Didier Raoult theorized that maybe HCQ would help fight covid and it was like someone kicked a hornet's nest at the alt-left MSM central. He was ridiculed by everyone in the world with a keyboard and an IQ under 90. The MSM had a field day with him. He was nothing but a quack, and that was that. The Lancet and The NEJoM put out a hasty study that was considered the Holy Grail of medical studies, proclaiming HCQ actually made matters worse, and when the notion of HCQ was firmly erased from everyone's consciousness, the study was retracted.

I dunno what Raoult's standing is in the medical community these days, but he was persona non grata for the first half of 2020. 

And I'll say it again, TNI was there at the heart of it, co-ordinating their massive disinformation campaign, just like they did with the 2020 election. 

Edited by WestCanMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

You clearly never read my old post. Why would I answer all that again?

Yes, but I wasn't satisfied that we tied it back to the original point.  Media organizations are indeed failing, I'm glad you see that.  The future without them is something we should talk about, if we're going to let American monopolies and holding companies own news in Canada.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/25/2024 at 11:31 AM, Zeitgeist said:

It’s so painfully obvious that the CBC, Toronto Star, CTV and most mainstream media are cheerleading for Trudeau.  The government-funded MSM is not a free press and is clearly fear-mongering, painting the Conservatives as extremist, this time because Poilievre shook hands with some anti-carbon tax protesters.  The Liberal shills will no doubt continue their propaganda on the CBC’s At Issue panel and in opinion pieces dressed as news all the way up to the election.

Jerema says it well:

”To any normal observer, Poilievre was endorsing the protesters’ stance on the carbon tax, a fact the Star’s Raj barely acknowledged, before she issued dire warnings about some nebulous far right threat that she stretches all logic to pin on the opposition leader.

‘There is no doubt people are tired of the Liberal government,” she concedes. But then, Raj goes on to claim that people being tired of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, “doesn’t mean Canadians want to vote for a man who courts support from groups that spew hate.’”

National Post

1) An opinion piece is not evidence of media bias

2) The same very same news outlets publish opinion pieces criticizing Trudeau pretty much every single day

3) Pierre Poillievre himself once complained about Diagolon after its leader suggested during a podcast that they should rape his wife. It’s fair to ask why PP decided to hook up with these folks in a diagolon -marked trailer and make deliberate a show of swearing and vulgarity. If he wants to hang out with vulgar extremists he deserves to be judged accordingly   He’s trying to have it both ways. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
42 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

1) An opinion piece is not evidence of media bias

2) The same very same news outlets publish opinion pieces criticizing Trudeau pretty much every single day

3) Pierre Poillievre himself once complained about Diagolon after its leader suggested during a podcast that they should rape his wife. It’s fair to ask why PP decided to hook up with these folks in a diagolon -marked trailer and make deliberate a show of swearing and vulgarity. If he wants to hang out with vulgar extremists he deserves to be judged accordingly   He’s trying to have it both ways. 

Raj is a columnist.  The editorializing of that newspaper is heavily politicized. Don’t conflate the stupid comments of individuals with unproven claims of white supremacy or extremism.  The MSM undermines its credibility when it so clearly elides over facts and makes bombastic unproven claims and assumptions.  Moreover it’s irresponsible because most readers take these established “respected” journalists at their word.  The Toronto Star, Globe and Mail, and other major media outlets shape public opinion in significant ways.

Poilievre reveals himself as someone who isn’t afraid to talk to common people, some of whose opinions he probably doesn’t like or support.  That’s the whole point.

What disgusted so many Canadians about Trudeau during the Freedom Convoy was his blanket judgements of millions of Canadians and his failure to empathize with anyone outside of his class or political affiliation.  It reveals his elitism and arrogance.

I don’t think much of Diagolon, though they don’t seem especially extremist or dangerous.  I do know that if you want to reduce extremism and division, you should reach out to people on the other side of the political divide and seek to understand why they think as they do.  Rather than attempt that, Trudeau hid and brought in the Emergencies Act.  It’s the blindness of Raj and her many like-minded colleagues to these opinions and facts that turns many people away from MSM and legacy media, because it appears to be enabling entitlement and poor governance,

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Yes, but I wasn't satisfied that we tied it back to the original point.  Media organizations are indeed failing, I'm glad you see that.  The future without them is something we should talk about, if we're going to let American monopolies and holding companies own news in Canada.

They're failing because no one trusts them. No one trusts them because they're liars. Their lying got them $1.4 billion of our tax dollars. Their business model would be a failure in a functioning democracy, but it's fairly lucrative here, and that's if they don't get any big pharma money. I don't know why they wouldn't have gotten any money from big pharma.

My circle of FB friends, along with some of the posters here, is far more reliable than any media outlet on TV in this country. Why would I ditch sources I trust now in favour of known liars?

Of course you'll laugh at that, because derision is the quickest defence and lends the impression of intellectual superiority and social standing, but I've been watching the MSM make complete jokes of themselves over the past ten years now, while I've been finding truth on the internet and Fox.

Sean Hannity was predicting a lot of things that actually happened back when CNN and CBC were pimping collusion bombshells. While the entire leftard media was slandering and the FBI were committing crimes, Sean Hannity was predicting it all with metronome consistency.

I'm sure that you were surprised when you found out that a member of the FBI was convicted of lying to the FISA court, I was just as shocked when Hannity accused the FBI of doing that stuff. That was a monumental accusation at the time, a possible career-ender and lawsuit magnet, but Hannity is sitting pretty and the FBI had to go hat-in-hand to the FISA court with a list of 40 improvements to ensure a greater level of credibility in the future. 

When was the last time that CBC was that right abut anything?

The MSM was always bad, MH, and I put up with it for whatever reason, but the blind push of covid jabs on young people and children came through our MSM, and there's no coming back from that. The false accusations of overt racism and destructive behaviour of the Freedom Convoy came from the MSM, and there's no coming back from that. The MSM protected Justin Trudeau after he engaged in hate mongering, and after all of his scandals, and there's no coming back from that. . 

The MSM didn't just lose their integrity, they gave it a Viking funeral and got boatloads of taxpayer dollars in return. I don't care what happens to them, and I definitely don't want to give them any more taxpayer money just to get some more lies back. I might just as well go out and buy a bridge.

Edited by WestCanMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The MSM has failed to distance itself from the levers of power and be a free press because it courts official circles for the “inside scoop” (which is often political spin) and funding.  MSM essentially became an extension of government communications departments throughout the pandemic, doxing any real criticism of pandemic measures and causes.

We should all be worried about the pervasiveness of propaganda and we should all be worried about expansions of the definition of hate speech and the various committees set up to discern what is hateful and dangerous.  Basically these are all expansions of the role of the state in the everyday lives of citizens. The space for critical thinking is being removed.  The tolerance for opposing viewpoints and opposition is shrinking in the name, once again, of public safety.  No thanks.  I’d rather think and speak freely than be kept “safe” by people who pretend to know better than private citizens what is best for them.

Edited by Zeitgeist
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

1. They're failing because no one trusts them.

2. My circle of FB friends, along with some of the posters here, is far more reliable than any media outlet on TV in this country. Why would I ditch sources I trust now in favour of known liars?

3. while I've been finding truth on the internet and Fox.

4. I'm sure that you were surprised when you found out that a member of the FBI was convicted of lying to the FISA court, 

 Not sure what standard says that the MSM was "always bad".  I do think that undermining trust in media is a key strategy in propaganda wars.  Getting Canada to abandon its own media in favour of American or other sources would be a win there.

1. I would say it's more likely that people are not consuming traditional news in general.  There's far more competition for attention, and news has devolved into identity fighting and outrage segments.  You can follow the trend since CNN introduced CROSSFIRE in 1982.

2. Your friends and posters here aren't doing primary research though.  So they're not sources.  I assume that you mean you agree with their opinions, analysis... As such, they're also not experts and have to rely on primary research for analysis sometimes.

3. Fox is MSM.  They're going to decline as all the rest will.  They're not just getting viewership from the rest.

4. I don't know about this story.  Not sure what it has to do with media.

As I mentioned, I might not have the time to respond so I recommend that you trim your posts.

Lastly, I did respectfully respond to this point of yours and spent time researching it...

"The SNC scandal happened during the 2019 election year, but there was no talk of it on CBC within the final months leading up to the election."

It seems like exaggeration, is it? We need to resolve this before we open up any new points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

They're failing because no one trusts them. No one trusts them because they're liars.

No they don't trust them because they're the messengers passing on the lies they've been given by politicians.  Media has no more authority to force transparency and accountability than we do.

When all you have is shit to work with, shit is what we'll be getting as well.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, eyeball said:

When all you have is shit to work with, shit is what we'll be getting as well.

Well they used to have more teeth.  They are part of an evolving game that's subject to the same forces of economics, social trends and Zeitgeist... everything.

The thing that's different about this business though, is it's the central nervous system for our democracy 

Imagine if there was a collective interest in thinking about how it should work, and some ideas about reforming it in the age of social media. 

That would be something. 

...

The other thing that I want to point out is that the far left were the ones complaining about mainstream media before Fox, MSNBC, Al Jazeera, Vice, and RT news started pointing out that the media they're competing with is fake...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. I would say it's more likely that people are not consuming traditional news in general.  There's far more competition for attention, and news has devolved into identity fighting and outrage segments.  You can follow the trend since CNN introduced CROSSFIRE in 1982.

I don't know many adults who don't pay attention to what's happening, and I don't know many people who trust the CBC or CNN.

Quote

2. Your friends and posters here aren't doing primary research though.  So they're not sources.  I assume that you mean you agree with their opinions, analysis... As such, they're also not experts and have to rely on primary research for analysis sometimes.

They're not primary sources at all, no, but if you have 700 FB friends and something happens, someone will always find useful info about it somewhere. 

That doesn't mean that I run around telling everyone it's true, it's just something to file away as a possibility, or not. 

The point is that you'll see thing that you'd never see on CBC,

Quote

3. Fox is MSM.  They're going to decline as all the rest will.  They're not just getting viewership from the rest.

They're in a different class from the rest. Even Dems watch Fox News. In some population demos, they have the highest viewership among Dems.

I'd almost swear that the women on The View are trying to kill ABC's credibility entirely with the things that they say. Ditto for Joy Reid on MSNBC, she's just a vile racist pig and it's hard to believe she's still got a show. 

CNN finally got around to firing Cuomo, etc, but they did a lot of damage before they left. 

CNN let him air footage of his "coming out of covid quarantine" moment, but he was caught on video getting into an altercation with a jogger just a few days earlier. He wasn't coming out of quarantine at all and millions of people knew it. It was bizarre.

Quote

4. I don't know about this story.  Not sure what it has to do with media.

The fact that you don't know that

  1. the FBI were caught lying to the FISA court,
  2. Kevin Clinesmith was convicted of falsifying evidence and providing it to the FISA court
  3. the FBI was told to make a list of protocols that they would put in place to ensure that their agents would act with integrity in the future...

 is a massive indictment of the MSM that you're defending. That info was wide out in the open, they just thought that people shouldn't know about it. 

How many stories have come up in the past twenty years that were more significant than "An FBI agent was convicted for falsifying evidence in an investigation into the president?

Isn't that something that Americans should know about? Isn't that something that we should know about? If Obama was president and the FBI did that, don't you think you'd know?

Quote

Lastly, I did respectfully respond to this point of yours and spent time researching it...

"The SNC scandal happened during the 2019 election year, but there was no talk of it on CBC within the final months leading up to the election."

It seems like exaggeration, is it? We need to resolve this before we open up any new points.

The story that you're referencing came out in March 2019, all they did was edit it a month before the election.

  1. That doesn't mean that it went to the front of their home page
  2. it doesn't mean that they said anything about it during their primetime news hour
  3. for all we know it could have been an edit that the PMO asked or even told them to make. 

Maybe they had info in the original article about SNC's crimes in Canada and they edited that out at Trudeau's request. Do you have access to the original article? 

CBC basically let all of Trudeau's scandals die on the vine. They gave them the exact minimum amount of coverage possible, then they let him have the final word and dropped the stories for good. 

Honestly the last thing I ever saw about the WE scandal on CBC was Trudeau saying "I merely should have recused myself from the decision to use WE." That's it. https://globalnews.ca/video/7171014/trudeau-says-he-deeply-regrets-involving-his-mother-in-ongoing-controversy-with-we-charity

Can you find video of Trudeau acknowledging that his mom made $250K + expenses from WE? A quarter of a million, plus expenses...

Can you find a video where a reporter said how much Margaret made from WE and then Justin Trudeau responded that he now knows how much she made there?

He basically put his own spin on it, and the story went away quite conveniently. There's a lot more to the WE scandal, I just won't bore you with the details because I know you have more important things to talk about here than the width and breadth of Trudeau's scandals. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/26/2024 at 7:11 PM, Aristides said:

Not when it is whatever you want it to be.

Ahhh, you're one of those "there is no truth, we can't know the truth, so why bother trying to find out the truth" people.

 

Quote

Assuming alternate news sources are unbiased is very naive.

But MSM is unbiased???  OMG

🤣

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Ahhh, you're one of those "there is no truth, we can't know the truth, so why bother trying to find out the truth" people.

 

But MSM is unbiased???  OMG

🤣

I never said that. At least they put their name to articles and can be held responsible when they outright lie as Fox just found out.

Fact check your sources regardless of who they are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/27/2024 at 10:09 AM, Aristides said:

I'm not saying MSM doesn't have biases but so does everyone.

No, not everyone has biases.  

Quote

There is a difference between bias and outright lies.

Agreed.

And CBC outright lies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/27/2024 at 8:36 AM, Michael Hardner said:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-wilson-raybould-attorney-general-snc-lavalin-1.5014271

Here's an article on their website that was last updated less than a month before the election. I'll await your response.

uhh - mike, that article is from february 2019.  The election was held on October 21 2019.  That is close to a year later. An 'update' can be a typo change.  they didn't repost or reprint the article.

My guess is his response is going to be a fair bit of laughter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/27/2024 at 1:10 PM, WestCanMan said:

Isn't it a bit disconcerting that Trudeau has a habit of giving media outlets vast sums of money right before and after elections? And that he's so adamant that the gov't should have a lead role in internet censorship? 

Meh, what's the worst that could come of all that, hey?

They are OK with it when Trudeau does it.

What they need to do - is imagine that same power in the hands of a politician they DON'T like.

No politician should fund and control the media.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,770
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Akalupenn
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...