Figleaf Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 He is just more representative of the Toronto silver-spoon socialist view of hick prairie folk. How many 'Toronto silver-spoon socialists' did you interview to develop that opinion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricki Bobbi Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 How many 'Toronto silver-spoon socialists' did you interview to develop that opinion? Lived in Toronto for 2 1/2 years. Met dozens of people who fit the stereotype and had the condescending attitutde towards westerners. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catchme Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 Seems like there is a lot of statements being given as facts or examples, and when links are asked for none are being given, or being told look it up yourself. But yet some are being asked back for more proof , even when they have gone to great lengths to support their statements and well beyond what those asking have done with their own. The CBC did do producton for LMoTP, who it was done in partnership with I cannot find. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikedavid00 Posted January 4, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 You are trying to show that CBC is pushing a political agenda. And for that you have to actually read what they write. You can't just take random samples and then proclaim that you have proven your point. After reading the whole articles, do you still think the CTV article is more positive toward Harper and his party than the CBC article? It's common knowledge that the CBC promotes it's Liberal agenda. That is why they are not taken as a credible news organization throughout the world. Same reason why the Toronto Star is non-credible. The minimum wage has been raised by 25 cents in Ontario. This all stemmed from a Toronto Star front page who used their news paper as a tool for a political agenda. My fiances father in Montreal called the CBC a 'leftist organization'. For kicks, let's check out the CBC website and see some subtle brain washing and social programming they have going today shall we? Todays CBC website front page: "Harper to shuffle cabinet Prime Minister Stephen Harper will shuffle his cabinet Thursday, with embattled Environment Minister Rona Ambrose expected to be moved to another ministry." *notice the strong wording which depicts our Environment minister, who essentially has done nother wrong, in a negative light. Also, there is a tone of 'Evile Ruler Harper is out to battle women'. "Federal politicians contaminated with chemicals, group says" *Lol.. here we go. The Federal gov't (read Harper) is toxic! and so is ambrose! The CBC helping spread the word and campaign for Stephan Dion's election issue. Funny though, Canadians don't find the environment an important issue whether through polling or just common street polls in Toronto. "Elections '07 "Canada readies for vote-a-palooza" *Really? I didn't know there was going to be an election in 2007. The people don't want an election, our gov't in power doesn't want an election. Could it be... my GOd.. could it be.. the... CBC WANTS AN ELECTION? Mideast dispatch Nahlah Ayed Saddam video spotlights Iraq's problems "The way Saddam was treated before he died will probably reinforce the view among Sunnis that the new government is waging a sectarian war against them." *Too easy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricki Bobbi Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 Seems like there is a lot of statements being given as facts or examples, and when links are asked for none are being given, or being told look it up yourself.But yet some are being asked back for more proof , even when they have gone to great lengths to support their statements and well beyond what those asking have done with their own. The CBC did do producton for LMoTP, who it was done in partnership with I cannot find. Good post. Do you have a rough guess as to what an episode would cost to produce? I heard something about $100k for a single episode of a Canadian produced sitcom. I don't have anything to *prove* that but I believe it is approximately correct. Just a guess though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikedavid00 Posted January 4, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 So let's see... both articles use "embattled" to describe Ambrose. So no bias either way there. Lol.. that's so hallarious. I just spent 15 min composing another post of the same nature! Lol! GUYS, ISN'T THIS PROOF POSITIVE THAT THE CBC HAS AN AGENDA?? Man.. it's just something eveyrone knows though.. it shouldn't be up for debate. Little Mosque on the Prarie is helping promote the CBC agenda. It was Chirstmas day and all the CBC did was run stories on Islam and Haj (which got complaints by the way). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricki Bobbi Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 Wow. So for that category of people - those who go to the trouble of typing in the CBC and CTV website addresses, but for some reason do not actually read anything once they get there - there may be an extremely small perception of bias?But we're not arguing about that category of people, are we? You are trying to show that CBC is pushing a political agenda. And for that you have to actually read what they write. You can't just take random samples and then proclaim that you have proven your point. After reading the whole articles, do you still think the CTV article is more positive toward Harper and his party than the CBC article? It is a standard of journalism that you write in a funnell. The most important part of the story, *as judged by the editor*, goes into the lead. That is the point the editor wants to stress. This is a journalistic standard because they further down a story a piece of information is the less likely somebody is to read it. Be it newspaper, magazine or the internet. In this case the CBC editor wanted to stress that Rona Ambrose was embattled. In this case the CTV editor wanted to stress that the shuffle was much-anticipated. The CBC editor chose to stress a part of the story that was more negative than the CTV editor chose. Ergo the CBC prefers to present more negative stories about the Conservatives than does the CTV. Do explain what wouldn't be a random sample. You even admitted there was some bias to my argument. If I can find five more examples would that be enough to prove a pattern? Ten? 20? 50? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikedavid00 Posted January 4, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 Seems like there is a lot of statements being given as facts or examples, and when links are asked for none are being given, or being told look it up yourself. Here's what muslim had to say about show. THis proves there is a common agenda: --- Posted by: Aaliyah | January 02, 2007 at 02:42 PM I am a muslim who lives in Canada. I have been living in Canada since I was 2. I still am a faith following muslim and I am very interested in the show.... If this t.v. show can show viewers that, we as muslims, also have a sense of humour, then I think it did its job. Also, if the show changes one persons mind about muslims (i.e. bad to good) then I think it was a success. ----- Posted by: faiza osman | December 26, 2006 at 09:06 PM From what I've seen from the previews, the show isn't making fun of Muslims..it's making fun of those ignorant people out there who have outragous stereotypes towards Islam since 9/11. Looks like it could be a funny show. ------ Here's what a brown person from a forum had to say about the show: "this sounds really stupid, and i’m brown, i have no interest about muslims in living out west, there are tons of immigrants all over canada today, if they made this 15 years ago it may have been funny…but probably not even…. now it’s trying to ride what is currently popular (Indian culture)…next year it will be something else…with some other culture! By the way most brown people aren’t Muslim and don’t live the muslim way of life so surprise surprise once again a steroetypical TV show that has it all wrong!!! Why does all Canadian television suck. please stop production! " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bk59 Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 Do explain what wouldn't be a random sample. You even admitted there was some bias to my argument. If I can find five more examples would that be enough to prove a pattern? Ten? 20? 50? What's random is your cutoff point. Why stop at the first paragraph? Why not the fourth? In that case CTV has two negative comments about Ambrose versus CBC's one negative comment. How many examples should there be? I think I'll just use your answer when asked for a number... and that is to just say I'm not going to do that (post #103). To put it simply, I'm going to assume that you don't have the time to compile a statistically meaningful number of examples over a significant period of time. And I certainly don't have the time to check them. I already disagree with you on the one you provided since the article by CTV is clearly more negative in tone than the CBC one. (Again, this is relative... I don't think either article is particularly negative.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricki Bobbi Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 What's random is your cutoff point. Why stop at the first paragraph? Why not the fourth? In that case CTV has two negative comments about Ambrose versus CBC's one negative comment. I just took what was posted on the main page of each site. i.e. what people would be able to read if they didn't click on the link. Plus this explanation. It is a standard of journalism that you write in a funnel. The most important part of the story, *as judged by the editor*, goes into the lead. That is the point the editor wants to stress. This is a journalistic standard because they further down a story a piece of information is the less likely somebody is to read it. Be it newspaper, magazine or the Internet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 I'm not really spending too much time on the merits of the show or not. I haven't seen it but then I never watched any other half hour comedy in the last few years. It costs just under $500,000 for a comedy in Canada per episode. It costs just over $1 million for an hour of drama. No Canadian programming makes money or generates the revenue to earn that back. Not one single TV series in Canada, private or public. http://www.wgc.ca/magazine/articles/summer06/cbcdrama.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricki Bobbi Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 I'm not really spending too much on the merits of the show or not. I haven't seen it but then I never watched any other half hour comedy in the last few years.It costs just under $500,000 for a comedy in Canada per episode. It costs just over $1 million for an hour of drama. No Canadian programming makes money or generates the revenue to earn that back. Not one single TV series in Canada, private or public. http://www.wgc.ca/magazine/articles/summer06/cbcdrama.html Wow 1/2 a million for a half hour show. Unfreakin believe able. Ball park out of that 1/2 million per episode for LMotP how much would the CBC be kicking in? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figleaf Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 How many 'Toronto silver-spoon socialists' did you interview to develop that opinion? Lived in Toronto for 2 1/2 years. Met dozens of people who fit the stereotype and had the condescending attitutde towards westerners. "Dozens", eh? Did you know about 4 million people live in the Toronto area? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerrySeinfeld Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 How many 'Toronto silver-spoon socialists' did you interview to develop that opinion? Lived in Toronto for 2 1/2 years. Met dozens of people who fit the stereotype and had the condescending attitutde towards westerners. "Dozens", eh? Did you know about 4 million people live in the Toronto area? In reality lots of Torontonians do sterotype the Rest Of Canada. But I think more to the point, Torontonians don't really frame most conversations in terms of the ROC, they frame it inn terms of Toronto. In other word's they're too busy worrying about what everyone thinks of THEM to look outside. Who do you think coined the "ROC" idea? Someone from Calgary? bwaaahahahahahaha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 Government subsidies in fields that do not satisfy the basic needs of society (health care, education, defence, roads, etc...) should only be provided when the market will not do so. More question begging: if a viable Canadian television production industry is not a basic social need, why should the government subsidize it? I answered your questions, so how about it. If maybe was just a ruse ... power to you. Clearly, you didn't, since your argument was fallacious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricki Bobbi Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 Clearly, you didn't, since your argument was fallacious. So you are just here to start a fight. Good for you sir. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 So you are just here to start a fight. Good for you sir. No, I'm trying to get a straight, logical answer to a simple question, something you seem utterly incapable of providing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figleaf Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 In reality lots of Torontonians do sterotype the Rest Of Canada. But I think more to the point, Torontonians don't really frame most conversations in terms of the ROC, they frame it inn terms of Toronto.In other word's they're too busy worrying about what everyone thinks of THEM to look outside. Who do you think coined the "ROC" idea? Someone from Calgary? bwaaahahahahahaha As a person who moved to Toronto after attaining adulthood, I'd like to inform you all that you're profoundly mistaken if you think Torontonians pay much attention to what people in other parts of the country think of them. Generally, Torontonians know that people hold a prejudice against them, and they don't really care. And BTW, 'ROC' is not about Toronto, it distinguished Quebec from "the rest of Canada". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 Still waiting... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkman Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 Government subsidies in fields that do not satisfy the basic needs of society (health care, education, defence, roads, etc...) should only be provided when the market will not do so. More question begging: if a viable Canadian television production industry is not a basic social need, why should the government subsidize it? I noticed you would like a reponse to your query. You make assumptions that others do not. You speak of a viable Canadian production company, the CBC. Something that is viable can support itself and be profitable. The CBC can do neither without the government handouts. This is partly because on many parts of their schedules, they do not even attempt to meet the demands in the marketplace. In the guise of championing Canadian Culture, they promote leftwing dogma. This new show could well be more of the same. The government should not subsidize it period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catchme Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 Here is a quickie five minute content analysis of the CBC and CTV Web sites. Both have links to stories about the potential cabinet shuffle. Look at the lead, i.e. the first sentence of the story. Which is more negative to the Government?A widely-anticipated cabinet shuffle in Ottawa could happen as early as tomorrow, with as many as five portfolios and 10 politicians affected vs. Prime Minister Stephen Harper will shuffle his cabinet Thursday, with embattled Environment Minister Rona Ambrose expected to be moved to another ministry. Look at the adjectives used in both leads. Clearly embattled is more negative than widely-anticipated. Guess which one is from the CBC web site... Yes, I know it is only one case, but this is an example you can engage. I would say you got it from the CTV website, I was listening this am to CTV and heard the announcer use the words "embattled" Ambrose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricki Bobbi Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 I would say you got it from the CTV website, I was listening this am to CTV and heard the announcer use the words "embattled" Ambrose. Uh wrong. But nice try. They have probably both changed their Web sites since my original post. The Internet is a fleeting creature... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bk59 Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 I would say you got it from the CTV website, I was listening this am to CTV and heard the announcer use the words "embattled" Ambrose. Uh wrong. But nice try. They have probably both changed their Web sites since my original post. The Internet is a fleeting creature... Actually Catchme is right. And wrong. Both websites described Ambrose as embattled in the two articles that you were comparing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einar the Dagger Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 The true purpose of this issue is not to examine the differences between CBC and CTV and the way they discribe the news. The question is, what advantage is the CBC gaining in choosing to pilot an ethnic and possibly highly rasist show. The obvious answer is that the CBC is attempting to expand its viewing market beyond primarily news viewing. It has piloted many shows and repeatedly altered its program order in an attempt to gain a lasting viewer market. Now the CBC is attempting to gain an entrance into the ethnic viewing community by piloting a show which appears to be attractive towards muslim people (making them seem superior, dealing with muslim issues ect.) Once the show airs the CBC will be able to determine if it met these objectives successfuly. Einar the Dagger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stignasty Posted January 4, 2007 Report Share Posted January 4, 2007 Now the CBC is attempting to gain an entrance into the ethnic viewing community by piloting a show which appears to be attractive towards muslim people (making them seem superior, dealing with muslim issues ect.) Once the show airs the CBC will be able to determine if it met these objectives successfuly. While it may appear to be many things to many different people, until it airs and we can see what it's like we don't have any real idea what messages and character portrayals in the show are. Implying that the CBC has a deeper more sinister objective, based on this conjecture is silly at best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.