On the Sunday, April 18th edition of The National, the teaser for an upcoming story consisted entirely of these twelve words:
At the end of the day: Rahim Jaffer, Ms. Guergis – Cocaine? Hookers?
I’m not a fan of the CBC, obviously, but that is a good one. They’ve taken the sort of blithe, craven, entitled, almost joyous unaccountability that we associate with the Liberal remora of the Adscam years and applied it to journalism, and they’ve maintained this approach even as it all slowly unravels. Anyone who got all his news from The National could be forgiven for thinking that Canada had been on the right track under the Liberals, but that our government has been plagued by a series of mini-scandals and outrages ever since the Conservatives took power. The truth – that a solid, scandal-free government has taken us through an unprecedented international financial storm and left us in the best shape of any country in the world – would be supplanted by the CBC’s hammering, partisan narrative that the Conservatives’ reign has amounted to a tireless litany of fabricated scandals, of “damning evidence” and “new and explosive allegations” and “political firestorms.”
Defenders of the CBC continue to say there’s no bias; what’s unsettling is that they always say it with a straight face. Anyone who has actually watched the National over the last fifteen years – as opposed to just talking nonstop about how unbiased it is, or saying “naw, I don’t watch it, there’s too much Liberal bias” – knows full well that if a Shawinigate were to occur tomorrow, but with Stephen Harper in Jean Chretien’s role, it would be a top-of-the-hour outrage for months, if not years. If you doubt it, ask yourself this: if the actions of a blowhard former Conservative MP, turfed years ago by his own party, who bragged about his ability to access government money in an attempt to make himself appear important, but in the end *received no money whatsoever* from the government, warrants speculative, innuendo-driven, top-of-the-hour, five-alarm, government-scandal coverage for weeks on end, how would The National even begin to cover a Conservative version of Shawinigate or Adscam? It’s hard to even imagine. They’d surely need three new channels, twenty new reporters, an eighty-trailer mobile war room, and nightly special reports – “A nation in crisis! How did we get to this point?”
Now that the Conservatives are belatedly taking on the CBC, by focusing, as a start, on the CBC’s presentation of EKOS pollster Frank Graves as a putatively unbiased, non-partisan expert on the Canadian political scene, the straight-faced crowd who defend the CBC are pretending – because that’s what it is, pretending – that the Conservatives are only unhappy with Frank Graves’ CBC appearances because he’s a partisan:
“As for Conservatives being victims of CBC bias, Teneycke has a paying gig defending the Harper world view — a task the former PMO communications director carries out with aplomb. Another former Harperite, Tom Flanagan, is also a frequent CBC guest…
It’s a purposeful misdirection of the real issue. Cabinet ministers, MPs, Prime Ministers, and PMO spokesmen – partisans all – have appeared on The National for years without anyone saying “Hey! No fair! Finance Minister Ralph Goodale is talking there on the CBC, and he’s a Liberal!” No, the real problem is that for years now the CBC has been trotting out anti-conservative partisans – including reporters and anchors – without identifying them as such. CBC defenders like Susan Riley (the source of the above quote) and Jane Taber –
“Kory Teneycke, meanwhile, who most recently served as Stephen Harper’s communications director, is paid for his appearances on CBC in which he repeats Tory talking points and touts the Conservative line…”
– must surely be aware that every single time Teyneke and Flanagan appear on the CBC they are identified at the outset by their relationships with the Conservatives, just as they know that whenever someone from the Fraser Institute makes an appearance on the CBC, or is quoted by the CBC, the words right-wing think tank are inevitably tacked on, as if to warn viewers that what they’re hearing is not the truth, but a purely partisan viewpoint.
I’m sure they’re also fully aware that, in stark contrast, those who promote the Lib/prog viewpoint are described as merely “experts” or “human rights lawyers” or “environmentalists” or an “analysts” or “U of T (X)ists.” When, during the CBC’s “war crimes!” spree, Michael Ignatieff’s Harvard friend Amir Attaran – a highly partisan Liberal who, not two weeks before his appearance on CBC described Stephen Harper as a “dangerous ideologue” – was used by the CBC as the centerpiece for a top of the hour attack on the Conservatives – an attack that was all allegation and no fact – the CBC introduced him to the country as merely “a law professor who’s been digging deep into the Afghan file” – a description that’s true only in the sense that it would be true to say that “Attila the Hun, who enjoys horseback riding, travel and barbecuing, is an avid collector of Sofian knick-knacks…”
It’s doubtful that even one CBC defender in this country honestly believes that the CBC would ever use a close buddy of Stephen Harper, without identifying him as such, as the centerpiece of a factless, innuendo-driven attack on the Liberals, and yet when the CBC uses anti-conservatives like Graves or Attaran in such a manner the CBC’s defenders put on sunglasses, turn the other way, and whistle, all while claiming the moral high ground. That cheek, that unconscionable, unfathomable, entitled arrogance, will be the CBC’s downfall. You’d think that the CBC workers who value the institution and who appreciate the network’s historic role place in this country would have at least some sense of the enormous damage being caused to the institution by the minority of connected, entitled, unaccountable, shortsighted, arrogant OPG types, but apparently they don’t.
Too bad for the CBC, because the issue of The National’s fraudulent, in-your-face, partisan journalism is not going away. The increasing anger over the sheer extent of the bias of the CBC’s political coverage isn’t driven by conservatives’ animosity to Liberals but by the arrogant unaccountability of the producers and reporters at the CBC’s news division, who continue to insult, on a daily basis, the millions of non-Liberal Canadian taxpayers who pay their salaries.
Read Norman Spectors latest column defending the 15 YEAR obsession of Harvey Cashore,and yet another book re Mulroney/Schreiber. That’s a 15 year tax-payer funded odyssey,by the cbc,to try and smear an ex-PM.I’d like to know,just how much money went into this…and how much time and energy went into covering Adscam,where all that money went?
I find that odd, too, Sammy in a pointed and ongoing way. Here’s an ex-PM (Mulroney), and a (relatively) small sum of money exchanged after he left office, yet we get endless documentaries to this day on the evil of it all.
Whereas the gooning of Francois Beaudoin is…
(*crickets chirping*…)
Still waiting for those CBC documentaries on Adscam, too, with special effects, sonorous voiceovers, and dramatic music…
I guess at the end of the day $300,000 of non-taxpayer money is a far bigger sum of money than $40m or more of taxpayer money. Funny, that.
“The Battle of Medak Pocket”
“Prime Minister Stephen Harper will spend most of next week travelling through Europe, visiting Belgium, the Netherlands, Croatia and Germany.”
(op cit*)
Why is PM Harper to visit Croatia?
Because of this:
“TURNING POINTS OF HISTORY”
The Battle of Medak Pocket tells the compelling story of a stand off in September 1993 between the heavily armed Croat troops and the men of the Second Battalion of the Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry.
Their bravery and determination saved the mission, forcing the Serbs to lay down their arms, pushing the Croats out of the area, and earning the men of the Princess Patricia’s 2nd Battalion a rare UN unit citation.
The events at Medak Pocket helped crystallize an ongoing debate in the world community over the effectiveness of the original UN tradition of “peace keeping” and the need to replace it with a more effective but dangerous doctrine of “peace making.””
http://www.history.ca/ontv/titledetails.aspx?titleid=101238
*(op cit):
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Harper+tour+four+European+capitals/2971847/story.html
Sssshhhhh ……
MSM/CBC uses the cliche, “damning indictment”, as an eye/ear catcher.
Example: XLiberal blasts Tories with a “… …….”.
A damning indictment of the MSM/CBC here: Case closed. …-
“Christie Blatchford
From screams to whimpers; the story the press prefers”
“Allegations that fuelled shooting match replaced in some arenas with Celine’s new swimming pool to almost nothing at all”
“The same week that House of Commons Speaker Peter Milliken made his historic ruling that Parliament has the right to see all the documents about Afghan detainees, the very man whose sensational allegations fuelled the whole shooting match was being delivered a thumping.
How amusing, except it isn’t.
Richard Colvin is the diplomat whose testimony at a special committee last fall – chiefly, that torture of the Afghan prisoners Canadian soldiers handed over to their fellow Afghans was “standard operating procedure” and that he had warned senior military officials about it to no avail – was given war-sized treatment in the press.
His allegations were front-page news across the country, led to stern editorials in several major newspapers a day later, and added gasoline to the fire already simmering about alleged Canadian complicity in torture and government stonewalling of efforts to view uncensored documents on the subject.
But when Gavin Buchan, the former political director and senior official on the ground in Kandahar (but for two months, when Mr. Colvin replaced him) for most of 2006 and part of 2007, and Major General (Retired) Tim Grant, the commander of the Canadian military effort in Afghanistan during the same approximate time period, came to testify before the committee on Wednesday, their evidence collectively a profound rebuttal of Mr. Colvin’s claims, the media coverage was a whisper.”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/from-screams-to-whimpers-the-story-the-press-prefers/article1553225/
The CBC is a left wing propaganda spew loyally serving its Lieberal and NDP masters at taxpayers expense. Not that much different from other parasitic lefty PR firms and service providers like big shot law firms working at the behest of the federal civil service no matter what party is in power. The fact that CTV has co-opted the former CBC audience and left CBC with no reason to continue wasting taxpayers dollars would suggest it is time to “downsize” it big time.
Gotta be disheartening for the Libranos, Leger polling has the Conservatives 11 points ahead. Must have asked different people different questions to get such a swing from Frankie Boy’s tally.
The media is the enemy in this country, the enemy of honest and fair reporting to the people. They are the enemy of good governance when they play politics with biased reporting.
Bravo, well-said, EBD.
I’ve been on the CBC’s case for over 30 years, as their bias and partisanship are, surely, a wonder to behold.
As you so succinctly point out, it’s not just their Lib/prog partisanship that’s so outrageous, it’s that they merrily roll along, they and their defenders, insisting that there is NO partisanship or bias.
Check out Vince Carlin, the CBC ombudsman’s — or as lookout has called him, the CBC ombudstoadie’s — cv: He was a CBC employee before moving over to Ryerson’s journalism department and then was INVITED back to the CBC to investigate and resolve the public’s complaints against his old-now-new-again employer who, of course, pays him handsomely. Isn’t this an obvious conflict of interest? His appointment is so blatant you can drive a MACK truck through it. Carlin’s being the CBC ombudsman would be laughable if it didn’t stink so much. HOW can a former employee become an organization’s ombudsman and retain even a shred of credibility? Mr. Carlin does, however, have his lines down pat: the CBC, in the meantime, upholds its high journalistic integrity and standards, blah, blah, blah — even in the face of barefaced left-lib-prog reporting.
The CBC’s myopic arrogance is utterly breathtaking, especially as it’s not on their dime but all Canadians’, a critical mass of which support the Conservatives and Prime Minister Harper.
Retributive justice, the fact that their viewership is tanking dramatically. If they were a private organization, they’d have to scale way back or close down. Please G*d, it’s just a matter of time before the billion dollars they receive from the taxpayers of Canada are scaled way back or stopped altogether.
I deeply resent having to pay for lies, lies, and more damned lies. When Canadians can’t rely on their “national,” taxpayer-funded broadcaster to report facts, it’s time to pull the plug.
If one considers that the CBC and much of Canadian journalism is not about news, i.e., factual reporting nor is it about objective analysis but is instead a propaganda system for one partisan perspective – then, how does one deal with this?
One tactic is by a one-to-one attack. Between equals or same types of armies so to speak. Conrad Black tried to do this by establishing another MSM, the National Post, whose major focus in the beginning was against Chretien and his corruption. That attack failed for Chretien controlled so many other media as well as the bureaucracy and the govt and Chretien set up his revenge: to jail Black.
But the grassroots, via blogs, via the internet, has enormous power. That has to be the method. A relentless, fact-driven and objective analysis of the CBC and other media.
“The media is the enemy in this country….”
The CBC certainly is, because they think that the values of Liberal supporters in a particular, narrow corridor in Central Canada are an analog of the values of *Canadians*. They really and genuinely do, and they’re idiots for it.
The great irony of it all, of course, is that they think everyone else has parochial views.
one of the best analyses ever, of this multi- billion dollar boondoggle of leftist, entitlist, incestuous bunch of has-beens – they put a pretty face on it, but it is still BS from top to bottom
defund the CBC now !
I’ve been watching this media feeding frenzy on the cocaine soaked, hooker dallying Jaffer. You know in over a week of CBC tattling about this guy’s excesses and serving him up as the media antichrist de jour, not once did they mention that Jaffer got NO government patronage for all his back slapping. Now for me that would seem to be the point, or end, of the whole affair but not if you want to lie about it with innuendo.
There are three closely related professions – pornography, pimping and TV journalism.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/02/03/afghanistan-committee.html
Like with Amir Attaran, CBC omits Errol Mendes’ background as a former advisor to Liberal PM Paul Martin, referring to him generically as a “constitutional law professor”. So there’s truth in EBD’s post.
BTW, anyone notice that Mansbridge never anchors the Friday edition of The National? Has he built a 4-day work week into his contract? Every weekend is a long weekend for Peter. I guess membership has its privileges.
EBD said;
“I guess at the end of the day $300,000 of non-taxpayer money is a far bigger sum of money than $40m or more of taxpayer money. Funny, that.”
That’s their ‘drug of choice’, taxpayers money and Canadians are the enabling fools.
Once a socialist tax sucker, always a socialist tax sucker.
To steal a phrase from I can’t remember who, “I would rather be governed by the above posters in this country, than any Harvard professor”. Why is it almost any poster {not T}on this board and many others have more common sense than the whole lieberal ndpee’rs MSM combined? It is because we all work for a living, mostly have children, and are concerned for their future. We did not go into our lines of work only for the wage and Pension, that is what a lot of polititions are ther for only. The CBC and what passes for MSM in this country have all been educated, if possible, by the same twisted schools Rhyerson etc to think left, someone owes me, keep a pot boiling, instead of letting a good competent man like Harper just get on with running the country. If anyone thinks there is no agendas, just look at the proclivities of a lot of these so called reporters and behind the scenes people of the CBC and CTV Glob and Wail, see if any of these scums have children of families, their only family is in the Toronto bathhouses.
The fraudulent Toronto media gave up on being “bias” long ago.
They’ve now morphed into being full frontal, bald faced liars. They’re doing what they’ve always done and that is following in the goosesteps of the fraudulent American media.
They are the “Pravda” of our times. They are pure poison to our society and culture.
Here is what bugs me about the CBC:
They make a statement such as: the world is round BUT Stephen Harper and the Concervatives are ….
It just pisses me off every night.
Thank God for the internet.
At the end of the day: Jean Chretien, Yvon Duhaime, Arm Twisting phone calls from the PM’s office – $615,000 BDC “loan”? 164,000 HRC grant?
We are still waiting for that story from our famously “balanced” national media.
CBC Radio2, car, listening to classical music, then news, traffic too intense to risk going for the dial … [and oh migwawd that ominous news jingle, eh? … fills me with shuddering dread everytime, warning me there’s an outrage a comin’].
Brief coverage of the UK election debate. Brown sez to Cameron something to the effect: “you’re arguing for tax reductions for the rich while supporting the reductions in the child tax credit for the poor”.
Cameron sez, “you’re entitled to your opinion, but not to make up your own facts”.
I’m waiting for Cameron’s fact-correcting counter-argument … waiting … waiting …
Nope.
Barbara Budd late of As It Happens, was sacked by the CBC. Posters at the CBC are blaming PMSH. I don’t know why they sacked her. I found her the current best on Radio One. If it was money maybe they should have passed on the wine list on one of the exec. communions.
Take a look at Peter Mansbridge and Neil Macdonald’s understanding of basic human biology, to wit, a woman can’t be 5 months pregnant AND the mother of a 4 1/2 month old baby.
Er, not unless her mother is a prominent Republican running for the Whitehouse.
Their excuse for running the story is that new information came to light later, but in fact many newspapers reported the rumour was impossible two days before the CBC ran it on the National.
Mansbridge introduced the piece by gravely intoning that maybe the McCain campaign hadn’t done enough research before choosing Palin.
Gee Peter, how long would you have to pore over a grade 6 biology text book to figure out that if Bristol was 5 months pregnant today the chances are pretty slim that she is the real mother of a 4 1/2 month old baby?
He and Macdonald are either the two most inept journalists on the planet or the most unethical.
Contrast the CBC’s gleeful smears of Sarah Palin with their reluctance to touch the John Edwards ‘I’m banging my mistress while my wife dies of cancer’ story.
Jonathon Kay has more:
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2008/09/03/jonathan-kay-the-cbc-s-appalling-smear-on-sarah-palin.aspx
When accused of bias, CBC supporters always point to the inclusive panels, where Tom Flanagan and Kory Teneycke appear. Except they are not on every day. Yesterday Solomon’s show featured 3 panelists along with the ultra partisan Rosemary Barton, none of them objective to conservative viewpoint.
The spectacle of Van Dussen and Barton openly jeering and laughing at the PMSH was disgusting to see. These CBC hacks do not even try to appear objective.
Appeasers also might mention the CBC employs Don Cherry, but he is confined to hockey broadcasts.
Speedy, you mean Parpara Pudd?
Great piece, EBD !!
Excellent essay, EBD.
I especially appreciated your comment about the RIGHT WING THINK TANK Fraser Institute!
Right wing = Hitlerite/Nazi/Fascist.
A phrase NEVER uttered on the CBC “news”: Left wing think tank.
I’ve had responses from Carlin when I’ve made complaints. Essentially he just says “you’re too unsophisticated to understand what she meant. Case closed.”
It’s personal, because the only government that would possibly cut the CBC budget is a conservative one. They aren’t merely idealogues, they are defending their entitlements.
“That cheek, that unconscionable, unfathomable, entitled arrogance, will be the CBC’s downfall.”
Let’s hope so. CBC employees are also very well compensated,I’d like to know how Peter Mansbrisge’s salary compares to the other newsreaders at private stations.
When Mansbridge interviewed Harper a few months ago, the distaste on his face was so obvious,it was like he was interviewing a child molester or multiple murderer,not the Prime Minister of Canada.
CBC is an exclusive club,all paid for by us. I am a “Friend” of Canadian broadcasting, and every time I E-mail the PM, I request a mass firing of upper level management,to be replaced by someone who has a sense of the financial bottom line.
If anyone here has the time, I urge you to join “Friends of Canadian Broadcasting”,and make your opinions known to the government through them.
huh. Turns out the cdn equivalent of MotherCorp is a whore and all of her children are illegitimate. Who knew?
I am still awaiting a reply from the ombudsman to a letter I wrote a month ago. I asked, why is it that Scott Reid,Susan Smith,and John Duffy appear on their “P and P” show without their backgrounds as former Liberal communication directors being mentioned. I also wrote a letter regarding their coverage of ‘wafergate’ and did receive a reply,but they did not answer the most important question ,which was, did anyone from the CBC contact the reporters that wrote the original story. I suspect that the reporters were contacted immediately,but their story did not complement the CBC spin ,so it was ignored.
You wont be seeing this on CBC but given the fact that the Enquirer was a year ahead of the rest of the media (who actively ignored/buried the story) with the john Edwards affair and all the seedy details that made Edwards such a scumbag, I would give this a fair chunk of credibility.
I am so sick of useful idiots spouting that Fabian nonsense about unprecedented financial disaster. When the “solution” turns out to be more government, you will have only yourselves to blame.
Somebody should make a rally. Pick a day and show up at your local cbc to protest.
Let’s not forget that Ms. Riley, source of the “nothing to see here” quote was herself one of the CBC’s cosy Ottawa crowd until she left Mother Corp to work for then cabinet minister Scott Brison. So she’s objective. Uh huh.
Thank you, EBD, for the excellent post. I feel sick to my stomach when I see the ridiculous innuendo and slander against conservatives on the CBC. Frank Graves finally admitted what is going on and the CBC is standing by him; the CBC is fighting a culture war. Like Liberals, they will say anything (and do almost anything) that gives them power. How far are they willing to go?
I feel queasy because I have to pay for the CBC garbage, not because the are left-wing. If it was a private broadcaster who put their own bottom-line in jeopardy to spout ridiculous nonsense, I would have no complaint.
Rick
You may also have noticed that one of the lines of CBC attack on the Harper government’s maternal health initiative was that Canada’s refusal directly to fund abortion in the developing world somehow put us at odds with the other members of the G-8 *particularly the United States*. Does anyone recall the default complaint of the CBC about the Conservatives up to January 2009? It certainly wasn’t a concern that the Tories were out of step with the American leadership.
During demonstrations in Halifax against the G-8 maternal health initiative recently, the CBC interviewed sympathetically one activist who argued passionately that unless abortion were included in the initiative, it could create a large number of orphans. This is the sort of remark that could only come from a university graduate.
‘The media is the enemy in this country’ Liz J – I am hopeful that Canadians are beginning to understand this fact.
I get all my Canadian news right here at sda and over at Jack’s newswatch (one east, one west – fair and balanced); I also watch CPAC (not just QP). For world and American news I watch Fox News and follow the links here at SDA or from Drudge, Ezra’s Blog, Mark Steyn’s blog etc. I am a much happier, less angry person than I was when I listened to any Canadian MSM (including the NP and McCleans) telling me blatant fiction with a Marxist spin.
The lefto outfits/people have a common trait – they think that they are better specimens than all other people. They are the ‘group’ that import illegal nannies, gardeners, cooks, maids etc and lavish in a lifestyle that would make a southern planter from the 1800’s blush because they take no moral responsibility for ‘their’ people. If ‘their worker’ gets sick they just put them out in the street to fend for themselves yet they make Conservatives play defense when the latter make a case for LEGAL immigration and fending for yourself if you plan to move here. Why do refugees and landed immigrants get more gument money to live than pensioners who were born here? The newbys have never paid a dime to CP or taxes or worked to build infrastructure, they never were forced to pay into medi(o)cure care – yet the immigrants get all the ‘freebies’ as soon as their toes touch Canadian soil and they also get PAID for putting their toes on Canadian soil. Illegal imported souls do not get anything but scraps from the table of the ‘elitist’ who keeps them indentured and silent with the treat of deportation hanging over their heads. I, Ruby springs to mind.
Elitists (Progressives) view any person who would see ‘flaws’ in this arrangement of free labour to benefit themselves and their ilk as threats to the lifestye that they ‘feel’ entitled to embrace. These people masquerade as ‘loving, caring tolerant’ souls to cover-up the truth; the truth that they consider themselves ‘better’ specimens than the ‘people’ they indenture. The ‘entitled’ give no nation self determination or credit for the ability to sort out their own difficulties without interference and pay outs from our industrious citizens (which they trot out as ‘guilt’ aimed at people who have more than they can eat).
Note how these slimers in the ‘tolerant’ left have raked Mr. Jaffer over the coals – why? they consider Mr. Jaffer an upstart who has leap frogged over his ‘determined’ station. Where were these self righteous media and the Troika (Liberanos, Blocheads, Dippers) when Cocaine was found on ex PM Paul Martin’s steamships, when Castro murdered million plus Cuban citizens, why to they broadcast the ‘glory’ of holidays in Cuba? Why don’t they care that the Cuban people are state slaves and by spending money in Cuba they are keeping the slaves with the chains firmly shackling their bodies and souls? Why? Because these msm/progressive types believe that the people in Cuba are not capable of living a human life, the life of a free citizen with the same entitlements to wealth and freedom that they themselves consider entitlements. Also the elitist- progressive is a very tight fisted specimen who demands cheap domestic labour at home and they like cheap luxurious vacation spots – as long as Cuba has state slaves they will have cheap products for tourists.
The media panders to the ilk that sprung them. Liz J. has written the truth in one sentence.
Excellent article EBD.
Yes EBD, thanks for the excellent essay. My only question, and the question that I have been asking for years, is why does the CBC do ANYTHING with politics. Does this not amount to a huge conflict of interest to have a network funded by the taxpayer through the government get involved of the covering of politics?
Excellent piece, regrettably it will not show in any of the major news networks and the CBC will not only continue with their unregistered campaign contributions to the Liberals, they will become emboldened by the lack of public outcry. They think they’re entitled to be as biased as they are, they’re on a mission.
I really don’t know what to do. They are seeming to get worse and worse, without any consequences. Nothing drives me around the bend like an arrogant lefty.
EBD, nice going. Any bets as to how long it takes a Harper majority to jettison the CBC?
You hit the nail on the head, Phantom: “Any bets as to how long it takes a Harper majority to jettison the CBC?”
That’s EXACTLY why they’re out to get him and have been ever since he, first, became a serious contender for PM and, then — horror of horrors! — became PM.
They don’t want his government to investigate their pals in the LPC who are involved in real scandals and they’re terrified of being shut down: no more progressive propaganda, no more high life.
Thus, the hysteria.
CBC’s Focus Again Group gave this 3 thumbs down.
…-
“You won’t find this at AP or Reuters.”
“The Gulf oil rig explosion – on the scene photos”
“Regular WUWT commenter Jimmy Haigh, a geologist by trade, sends along a PDF that is a compilation of on the scene photos taken right after the explosion and in the following two days. I’ve converted it to web format. These were taken by people on the scene during the rescue and firefighting operation. There’s also a narrative, done by a person “in the know”. You won’t find this at AP or Reuters.”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/01/the-gulf-oil-rig-explosion-on-the-scene-photos/#comments
batb, they wouldn’t be shut down if the Canadian government no longer funded them to the tune of a billion dollars a year. That is a meme we should nip in the bud.
The receive advertising revenue just like any other broadcaster. They have a huge amount of already-paid-for infrastructure. The CBC would be on its own like any other business.
What they do with their business after that is up to them. If they are providing a product that the advertisers want to pay for, then they will continue operating. If they keep going as they are now, then will see a reflection of that in their revenues and either fix the problem or not. It would be up to them – just like the rest of us in our own businesses.
Nice work EBD!
The CBC is almost unwatchable. I say almost unwatchable, because the obvious daily one-sided partisan drama does provide snapshots of liberalism in its modern expression; bereft of ideas – counterfeit of opposing views.
The CBC acts as a barometer of sorts, placed inside a cozy, climate controlled room with no windows or outside view of the world. The measurements taken are always predictable, always room temperature, with little regard given to other valid atmospheric conditions. ie: political thought and concerns that exist outside that controlled, largely unchallanged enviroment. Indoor temperature readings have little value to citizens working outside, traveling from A to B, or say predicting the weekend weather forcast.
Disclosing political background and affliations of ALL commentators should be a rudimentary feature of any trusted news network – an obviously foreign concept in the halls of the CBC. Regular contributors from Daily Kos and the Huffington post are introduced simply as “Obama supporters”. Mark Steyn however is introduced as a “Controversial rightwing writer” just short of an actual health warning. Omission is by far the most abundant commodity in pravda’s representation of the “news” and shows the easily perceived structural weakness of the modern left.
Playbook as follows: NDP, Green party are slightly left of center, LPC centrist with an occasional splash to the right, Harper Tories are a hillbilly’s heartbeat away from rightwing fascism. Thats the default positon – untrue and unproven as it is. The cbc softens the hard edges of the radical left and completely misinforms and misrepresents ideas from the right. The deception by design is a weakness AND IT IS SHOWING! and therefore has some limited value.
For all the glaring Inequity, the theater of leftist ideology, as expressed by the unprofessional cbc, does provide some utility for conservatives.
Other than that, I’d say dismantle pravda and sell off the parts.
‘okely-dokely’ back to lurking.
Notice how the CBC selectively labels the gov’t based on the type of story that’s being reported on. When it’s reporting good news stories involving the current gov’t, which for the CBC is few and far between, it goes out of its way to AVOID labelling it with the PM’s name or party brand, choosing instead generic descriptors such as “Canada (as in the Canadian gov’t)”, “Ottawa”, or sometimes simply “the federal gov’t”, so as to make sure Canadians don’t associate “Harper” or “Conservative” with the good news that’s being reported to them, primarily as it relates to funding and infrastructure announcements. But when it’s reporting on bad news involving the gov’t, then the labelling begins of course, doesn’t it. To wit:
BAD NEWS CONTROVERSY NARRATIVE…
“The Conservative government has shut down Parliament for two months, until after the Vancouver Winter Olympics.”
GOOD NEWS FUNDING ANNOUNCEMENT…
“Canada offers Michigan $550M loan for bridge”
BAD NEWS CONTROVERSY NARRATIVE…
“The Conservative government is defending its nomination of a Quebec judge who used to be a lawyer for members of the Hells Angels.”
GOOD NEWS FUNDING ANNOUNCEMENT…
“Ottawa matching Canadians’ Haiti donations” […] “The federal government is earmarking up to $50 million to match Canadians’ donations…”
BAD NEWS CONTROVERSY NARRATIVE…
“Tories alerted to Afghan secret police legal ‘risk'” […] “The Conservative government was warned last summer that working with the Afghan secret police would lead to allegations Canada condoned abuse and that Canadians could face legal liability for complicity in torture.”
Defenders of the CBC will dismiss this type of selective labelling as sheer coincidence but without any explanation as to why it occurs with such consistency. They would also likely say, “What’s the difference? Canadians know Harper is the current PM and that our nation’s gov’t is conservative” But it can’t be dismissed that easily. There’s a conditioning effect that begins to occur over time: If the uninformed and/or undecided electorate hears “Harper gov’t” and “Conservative gov’t” enough in reference to the negative stories, they begin to make a Pavlovian-like link in their minds and become less and less surprised when they hear that he and the gov’t are embroiled in some sort of scandal or controversy (almost expecting the gov’t to be in trouble at the newscast’s outset), in spite of things so-often torked up by the CBC and in most cases, completely manufactured. And they eventually develop an aversion to those terms, eventually believing that in order for the alleged bad news surrounding the gov’t to disappear from their daily lives, “Harper” and “Conservative” must first disappear. This is especially important considering how tight polling numbers are (most of them) and the fact that a number of ridings are expected to be tight and will in all likelihood determine who does and doesn’t form the gov’t after the next election. If the CBC was even remotely serious about taking even baby steps to avoid being viewed as a Liberal shill, they would stop with such blatantly unfair reporting practices — both in
http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2009/12/30/parliament-prorogation-harper.html#ixzz0mhzFZ0JK
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/windsor/story/2010/04/29/wdr-bridge-canada-border-money-100429.html
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2010/04/29/mtl-hells-judge.html#ixzz0mhzcJNjF
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/01/14/haiti-canada-aid.html
http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/04/06/afghan-detainee-transfers.html#ixzz0miPPI1p0
CBC thinks it’s untouchable, and for the most part they are right however; we the people can do great damage to CBC by boycotting their sponsors, their advertisers and such. We the people can take down CBC using shaming, shunning and boycotting them. It’s ratings are already in the toilet, how about we join forces to flush that leftwing media medium down the loo?
Great work EBD ! The CBC is a cesspool of morally and ethically corrupt Liturds, Separaturds @ P’er activists, sympathizers and whores. Personally, I can only take so much of their constant attacks, propaganda, and drive by smears of the elected Government. Nauseating to say the least, but mostly infuriating. I think the thing I hate the most about the CBC and the MSM in general is that they know their bias, and willfully deceitful, and yet they unconscionablely deny this fact. It’s like their all sociopathic liars, without the ability of reason. They truely are dangerous, sychophantic agents of the Trudeaupian nightmare, and as Liz J posted,” the enemy of Canadians”. Larry (the Liberal) Martin wrote in the Glob@ Plop that if you think like a Liberal, and apologize for the Liberals and write glowing tributes about former liberals, and give advice to the Liberals on the taxpayer dime, and walk like a Liberal, and talk like a Liberal, and shit like a Liberal, it doesn’t necessarily mean you’re a Liberal. Perhaps that’s the kind of deranged gibberish that gets one hired at the CBC in the first place.
Jon (5:53), on a related note, this is from a CBC report on a gas attack in Afghanistan that targeted 13 school girls:
“Provincial officials in that province say they think this is a deliberate attack – or, these are deliberate attacks – by somebody who wants to scare girls into staying away from school. Now, the Taliban has denied having any responsibility for these incidents. It of course did outlaw education for women when it held the government in the country, but of course there are many conservative groups here who also think that females shouldn’t be educated.”
Wouldn’t it be far more accurate and more correct to say that those men who targeted girls’ schools in Afghaistan are Islamists, or maybe Islamic fundamentalists?
Bartinsky @ 9:43 a.m.
Well said!!
As the Liberal Beast thrashes about in it’s final death throes, we should expect the goebbellian CBC to launch even more attacks on the Conservative government. Do not be surprised if the CBC devotes massive resources to investigative reporting in a desperate attempt to discredit the Conservative government and PM Harper. (Notice that the CBC announcers never call him “PM” Harper?!).
Come the next election, the CBC sensing it’s demise, will brazenly attack the Conservative party in a last ditch effort to save their sorry arses. Just watch …