Anti-Conservative Bias in CBC and MSM

[Goddess]

On 4/27/2024 at 10:24 AM, Michael Hardner said:

That's right, I didn't know.

Did you know they also just got another boost of $$ from Trudeau, then immediately gave themselves all giant bonuses AND fired 800 people?

[BeaverFever]

On 4/28/2024 at 9:37 AM, Zeitgeist said:

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,

A columnist is still an opinion and it is certainly valid to discuss the new vulgarity in in modern politics and the Prime Minister to be stadium under “F Trudeau” flags given expletive-laden speeches.  And make no mistake about it, PP didn’t accidentally let a F word slip out or accidentally stand under a F Trudeau flag, it was all a deliberate decision to present himself to the public this way.   When Diagolon mused about raping PP’s wife,  PP complained to police and publicly called them “odious losers”. Now he’s buddy buddy with them again?
 

PP’s performance is new to Canadian politics and it is worthy of comment, period. I don’t know why you conservatives think the job of the media is only to flatter you and only mention the things you want to hear but you should get over it. 
 

Also lets get real you and the other conservatives don’t believe in reaching across the aisle. You believe the “left” should reach out to you bit you believe reaching out to the left is treason.  In the US even moderate conservative are labeled left wing communists these days and from what I can see Canada isn’t too far behind. PP in particular has built a 20+ year career out being a snarky combative politician who adds insults and name calling into nearly everything he says. You think his majority government is going to “reach across the divide”?  To whom?  
 

You think standing under F Trudeau flags and swearing about Trudeau is “reaching across the divide”?

 

what a joke. 

Edited April 29, 2024 by BeaverFever

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

You think standing under F Trudeau flags and swearing about Trudeau is “reaching across the divide”?

Well, I mostly agree with this sentence apart from the rest of the post.

But I think what's going on is: politicians (the populists) are performing in a new skin, contrary to the old performance skins such as Trudeau's.  People think they're genuine.

So there still needs to be a "real" politician that will be different from both performative main party leaders, I think.  

[Goddess]

20 hours ago, eyeball said:

Media has no more authority to force transparency and accountability than we do.

Baloney.

This is the JOB of the media - to hold authority to account.

But there is a distinct lack of truly investigative journalists in the MSM.

Alternative sources do it all the time AND they provide links and sources - not just quote nameless "experts". 

Who are these "experts"?  what are they basing their views on?

[Goddess]

18 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

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. 

There are (or have been very recently) inquiries going on into nearly all of Trudeau's scandals that MSM let wither on the vine.

I haven't seen any of this reported in the MSM, but admittedly, I haven't looked for it.

But I have been watching the inquiry proceedings on all of them and let me tell you - the Canadian public has NO IDEA what's really been going on.

When CSIS warned that Canadians are going to revolt when they find out how bad a situation we are really in - I believe it could happen.

We've been robbed blind.

And I wouldn't be the least surprised if we find out we are utterly bankrupt, when we finally get rid of Trudeau.  The corruption has been absolutely RAMPANT and Canadians don't know anything about it, unless they are looking for the information on their own - thanks to our bought & paid for media covering everything up and not reporting on any of the inquiries.

Seriously, you should watch them - it's disgusting what Trudeau and his cabinet have been getting away with.

[eyeball]

16 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Baloney.

This is the JOB of the media - to hold authority to account.

But there is a distinct lack of truly investigative journalists in the MSM.

Alternative sources do it all the time AND they provide links and sources - not just quote nameless "experts". 

Who are these "experts"?  what are they basing their views on?

$10 says you wouldn't like my idea of making politicians wear cameras. Am I right or wrong?

[Goddess]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

$10 says you wouldn't like my idea of making politicians wear cameras. Am I right or wrong?

You're wrong.

I also think they should all be drug tested.

The amount of twitching and sniffing going on at press conferences lately is starting to look really weird.

[eyeball]

3 minutes ago, Goddess said:

You're wrong.

Well then I guess your sense that I support the governments efforts to keep everything secret is wrong.

Or maybe you think all the years I've been talking about greater transparency and accountability is a ruse of some sort - a big lie.  Why would you think that?

[CdnFox]

34 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Baloney.

This is the JOB of the media - to hold authority to account.

But there is a distinct lack of truly investigative journalists in the MSM.

 

Well.... one thing that we have to keep in the back of our minds is that the REAL job of the media is to sell content and ad spots.  That's what they really do for a living, they get people to buy their paper/mag/tv channel and then they sell advertising to businesses who want to talk to those people.

If they feel that the best way to do that is to hold the authorities to account... then they'll try that. If there's another easier or cheaper way to get people to consume their product and view the ads then they'll go with that.

Media has the ability to change opinions and to force the gov't to account and to expose secrets to the light of day, and if that's profitable to do, they will.  If.

 

[CdnFox]

19 minutes ago, Goddess said:

You're wrong.

You can't resolve the issues we face with that kind of nonsense.  There's a million ways around it

But more imortantly accountability means nothing if the public isn't prepared to do anyting about it.

I've raised this many times with Eyeball - he just gets angry and can't answer - but what is the point of MOAR accountability if the voters just let the gov't off the hook with the accountability we DO have? IF Eyeball and his friends are going to keep supporting the left and the libs even after that - what good is more going to do?

We knew justin broke the law and took bribes 6 months after he started - he admitted it, the ethics people ruled it was a breech of the law, the RCMP even were considering  charges but felt the prime minister might be able to allow himself to break the law.

And yet he got voted back in.  Then snc and still got voted back in. Then WE and all of that and still got voted back in.

The problem really isn't the press or the lack of body cams.  The problem is the voters.  If the voters trashed the gov't party every time there was a hint of corruption then pretty soon parties would be very very carefull about doing anything like that just to stay in power. 

[Goddess]

9 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Well then I guess your sense that I support the governments efforts to keep everything secret is wrong.

Or maybe you think all the years I've been talking about greater transparency and accountability is a ruse of some sort - a big lie.  Why would you think that?

I don't think that.

It just doesn't jive with your habit of believing every single thing you read or hear on MSM.

What you say and what you practice seem to be different.

[Goddess]

10 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Media has the ability to change opinions and to force the gov't to account and to expose secrets to the light of day, and if that's profitable to do, they will.  If.

True dat.

But when they're taking a billion $ from the gov't - they're not going to bite the hand that feeds them.  And when they see how the gov't treat journalists who DO hold them to account, again - they won't be going there.

7 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

You can't resolve the issues we face with that kind of nonsense.  There's a million ways around it

But more imortantly accountability means nothing if the public isn't prepared to do anyting about it.

I've raised this many times with Eyeball - he just gets angry and can't answer - but what is the point of MOAR accountability if the voters just let the gov't off the hook with the accountability we DO have? IF Eyeball and his friends are going to keep supporting the left and the libs even after that - what good is more going to do?

We knew justin broke the law and took bribes 6 months after he started - he admitted it, the ethics people ruled it was a breech of the law, the RCMP even were considering  charges but felt the prime minister might be able to allow himself to break the law.

And yet he got voted back in.  Then snc and still got voted back in. Then WE and all of that and still got voted back in.

The problem really isn't the press or the lack of body cams.  The problem is the voters.  If the voters trashed the gov't party every time there was a hint of corruption then pretty soon parties would be very very carefull about doing anything like that just to stay in power. 

Careful.

You sound exactly like that Diagolon guy 😉

[CdnFox]

53 minutes ago, Goddess said:

True dat.

But when they're taking a billion $ from the gov't - they're not going to bite the hand that feeds them.  And when they see how the gov't treat journalists who DO hold them to account, again - they won't be going there

Precisely.  It becomes a very effective leash.  "if you as an industry don't behave decently then we might cut that funding, and if specific parties don't play ball we might rough your people up a little." 

That doesn't mean that the media won't report ANYTHING but it does mean they'll soften gov't stories a bit, and when the gov't people call they'll pick up the phone and if they get asked to spin something one way or another or ask a question in a specific manner to set the gov't up for a softball answer. "  Sir, are you demanding people take the jab simply because you believe in following the science, or because you don't like unnecessary deaths?"

 

53 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Careful.

You sound exactly like that Diagolon guy 😉

LOL!!  And just like that i'm a radical

Edited April 29, 2024 by CdnFox

[Goddess]

@CdnFox

That Justin Transition - by Douglas Farrow (substack.com)

Quote

 

Shame and embarrassment, are a sure sign of disorder and an invitation to get sorted out. The other option, of course, is to become shameless, like our prime minister. Permit me to paraphrase the latter:

• Foreign interference in a federal election? Nothing to see here. The CCP was only helping out, in neighbourly fashion, our own Natural Governing Party.
• Secret treaties with the World Economic Forum? The future is global, friend. You should be glad that your post-national government already lives in the future.
• Super-secret treaties with big pharma? Just sign that NDA and you can have a peek. Welcome to the world of public-private partnerships.
• Illegal data collection and dishonest data suppression during the pandemic? Relax; everyone does it. Besides, when we've finished Sinicizing the place it won't be illegal, at least not for those with party connections.
• Emergencies Act abuse? Come on! What are the police for, if not to keep the party in power? Anyway, like big pharma, they needed the practice. When you're making a Justin transition there's bound to be turbulence. Gotta keep the boys in shape.

The behaviour of this man, and of his party, is not merely irresponsible. It is criminal in character and treasonous in kind. It makes a mockery of Canada's fundamental law and openly repudiates the principles on which the country was built. It regards the nation-state as such, the country itself, as an anachronism. The Justin Transition is not a transition from nasty fossil fuels to beautiful green energy. (Ask the Chinese about that.) It's a transition from democracy to oligarchy.

Yes, the prime minister is shameless. But so are we. We put him into power. We've been keeping him in power. It's not a few yuan here, a little strong-arming there, and a couple of rented busses that have kept him in power. It's not even the hopelessly compromised NDP. It's the urban voter in Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal. The urban voter has kept him in power.

 

 

[WestCanMan]

2 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

A columnist is still an opinion and it is certainly valid to discuss the new vulgarity in in modern politics and the Prime Minister to be stadium under “F Trudeau” flags given expletive-laden speeches.  

The MSM completely dodged the topic of Trudeau calling the unvaxed "racists and misogynists" and then asking if they should even be "tolerated". I didn't even find out about it until several months later (he did it in French).

Why do they have to chime in on this?

Our own PM was hate-mongering millions of Canadians, that's far worse that politicians digging at each other. Politicians always do that. Very rarely do politicians call millions of Canadians names, and ask if they should even be tolerated.

Quote

PP’s performance is new to Canadian politics and it is worthy of comment, period.

Wrong. Trudeau calling millions of Canadians "racists and misogynists" was MUCH worse, and the gutless piece of filth still hasn't apologized. 

Quote

You think standing under F Trudeau flags and swearing about Trudeau is “reaching across the divide”?

There's no "reaching across the divide" required on my part. Anyone still in Trudeau's camp can go straight to hell and I'll cheer. 

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

It just doesn't jive with your habit of believing every single thing you read or hear on MSM.

You're like CdnFox. You have to lie to yourselves about what people you don't  agree with are motivated by.

It's just so unfortunate that more people can't bring themselves to realize the only polarization that really matters in our society is the one between the governed and the government. 

I'm with the governed. Who's side are you on?

[Goddess]

2 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I'm with the governed.

Ya, I know.

2 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Who's side are you on?

I want the gov't to leave me the F alone.

[CdnFox]

6 minutes ago, eyeball said:

You're like CdnFox. You have to lie to yourselves about what people you don't  agree with are motivated by.

LOL - do you realize you've spent all day today trying desperately to include me in conversations with other people?  Did i break you again? And your motivations are pretty transparent, and if they're not you're free to clarify them at any time.

But when you call for more transparency but cannot explain why you didn't act to punish justin for the crimes he did commit which we know about (Which you tried to pretend were harper's fault or didn't happen), then your credibility goes in the gutter
 

Quote

 

It's just so unfortunate that more people can't bring themselves to realize the only polarization that really matters in our society is the one between the governed and the government. 

I'm with the governed. Who's side are you on?

 

Sure. There's no such thing as people in this country - they can't exercise power by ... oh i don't know... electing people they like to power instead of based on their ability to virtue signal or their sock pattern?

You vote for big gov't, you support big gov't, you get told that the woke programs big gov't is selling you are not good but you support them anyway - and then you complain about big gov't .

Yeash.

[Michael Hardner]

10 minutes ago, eyeball said:

You're like CdnFox. You have to lie to yourselves about what people you don't  agree with are motivated by.

Like... some people on here can't conceive of good faith differences of opinion, so it MUST be their opposition wants to take over or make money or molest children etc...

[Goddess]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

Like... some people on here can't conceive of good faith differences of opinion, so it MUST be their opposition wants to take over or make money or molest children etc...

Oh, get lost.

He says he's FOR transparency and accountability, but also fully supports the current scandal-riddled gov't and hangs on every word they say.

That was the extent of our difference.

[CdnFox]

30 minutes ago, Goddess said:

@CdnFox

That Justin Transition - by Douglas Farrow (substack.com)

 

Yup.  At the end of the day in a democracy the people must be the circuit breaker, (with the GG as the safeguard for the process.)

If the people are not prepared to severely punish a political party for corruption, then it becomes  a race to the bottom. Once there is no consequence to corruption then it never stops and both sides will start doing it pretty soon - because why not.

Eyeball would pretend that sure - we didn't do anything when justin was caught being corrupt before but MAYBE SOMEHOW if we know in the future it'll be different?  

It'll be different when voters don't tolerate that crap.  For the liberal supporters tho it practically seems like a prerequisite.

 

7 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Like... some people on here can't conceive of good faith differences of opinion, so it MUST be their opposition wants to take over or make money or molest children etc...

You're the last person who should be saying that.

[Michael Hardner]

5 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

You're the last person who should be saying that.

🤣 what 

[Goddess]

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

It'll be different when voters don't tolerate that crap.  For the liberal supporters tho it practically seems like a prerequisite.

I have an acquaintance from another forum that I interact with on a few different platforms - really great guy. 

BUT - he's a huge Lib supporter, no matter what.

I asked him one time if there was anything, any scandal, any wrongdoing, any criminality that Trudeau could do that would make him stop voting Lib and he basically told me......NO.  He's always voted Lib and will continue to do so, no matter what.

[Michael Hardner]

4 minutes ago, Goddess said:

He's always voted Lib and will continue to do so, no matter what.

Yeah I just had a conversation with nationalist or maybe WestCan on something... And they said they could never be convinced. A lot of people are like that. 

It also explains why  parties don't even bother reaching out anymore.  They just double down on getting their existing people out to vote

[Goddess]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

Yeah I just had a conversation with nationalist or maybe WestCan on something... And they said they could never be convinced. A lot of people are like that. 

It also explains why  parties don't even bother reaching out anymore.  They just double down on getting their existing people out to vote

Ya, I know there's ones like that on both sides.

I don't understand it - I've always voted for whichever party has the policies I think Canada needs at that moment in time.  But I am a jaded voter - I think they're all the same, really. 

The last couple years, I've become much more active at writing my MP's and MLA's.