There has been some talk of FOX News North entering the Canadian media scene. Anyone have any reliable info on this? Opinions?
Issues Pages:
FOX News North
Fri, 2010-06-11 10:59
#1
Red_and_Black
FOX News North
Fri, 2010-06-11 11:33
#2
Sat, 2010-06-12 21:08
#3
CBC, CTV and GLobal are bad enough already. Here's what you can expect with FOX:
Fox News Confuses Rwanda's Presidential Elections with the ICTR
http://www.sfbayview.com/2010/fox-news-confuses-rwanda's-presidential-election-with-the-international-criminal-tribunal-on-rwanda/
"Fox News reached new extremes of irresponsibility today by reporting that Professor Peter Erlinder is in Kigali, Rwanda to defend 'the alleged perpetrators of the 1994 Rwanda Genocide.'
Professor Erlinder is in Rwanda to defend opposition presidential candidate Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza against charges of genocide ideology a speech crime unique to Rwanda which means challenging the received history of the Rwanda Genocide,
a crime he [Erlinder] was arrested for within days after arriving in Rwanda to defend Ingabire.."
but at least Fox reported it - unlike CBC etc
Sat, 2010-06-12 21:18
#4
Fox News is losing viewers.
http://bestoftheblogs.com/Home/30482
Glen Beck's problems began when he made some racist comments about Obama, and one of the African American groups in the States started having it's members write advertisers on Beck's show about how they felt about that.
Advertisers on Beck's show currenty include mostly bumpers for Fox News and the sort of products that one might see advertised on late, late, late, late night T.V.
Sat, 2010-06-12 21:37
#5
But NDP MP Charlie Angus reacted to Quebecor’s bid with guns blazing.
“One of the problems they’re going to face is that there is actually an obligation in Canada — unlike the United States — to have some balance (in news reporting),” said Angus.
“Having Kory anywhere near the project kind of blows that obligation out of the water.”
Angus said he fears the Conservatives will bend to Quebecor’s policy demands “and in return he’ll let the Kory Tenecyke treat the service as in-house media for the Conservative machine.”
I'd advise against going all batshit about this proposal. Getting all knee jerk reactionary about it only gives the fledgling network advertising at this point, and something to sink it's teeth into.
Zebra muscles.
Zebra muscles invaded the great lakes and have caused much devastation. But not nearly as bad as what scientists first thought might happen. That's because a predatory check on their numbers did take place-- and that predator was the zebra muscle itself. In places where plankton was largely exhausted, they started feeding on their own larval young.
There's only so much right wing cash floating around, only so much audience.
So, I would think we should keep quietly quiet about this, but start planing how to influence their advertisers and the cable companies that carry them.
Tories have deep pockets, but not bottomless ones.
Sat, 2010-06-12 21:48
#6
Angus, rather than flailing his arms about in the wind, would be much more constructive directing his energies into helping to create left wing media.
Sat, 2010-06-12 21:56
#7
Angus, rather than flailing his arms about in the wind, would be much more constructive directing his energies into helping to create left wing media.
How?
Sat, 2010-06-12 22:11
#8
Outside radio and internet, I'm not sure ideologically driven media makes money. And even there, I'm not sure it makes money.
It's clear right wing media doesn't. QMI appears to make money by merging and aquiring and doing a shell game with the real numbers. And we all know that the pro capitalist business first, last and always National Post hasn't ever come close to turning a nickle profit.
They are vanity presses for rich idealogues.
But, like I say, the vain owners have deep pockets, or at least unhealthy access to credit.
I'm not sure anyone on the left is so suited.
Sat, 2010-06-12 22:12
#9
It's not just Kory Tenecyke, Mulroney's shill Luc Lavoie is also involved.
Sat, 2010-06-12 22:15
#10
These right wing outlets are not necesaarily there to make money, the National Post being a perfect example. They don't shut them down because they don't make money. It is the brainwashing aspect they cherish most, and they are willing to pay big bucks for it.
Sat, 2010-06-12 22:18
#11
responding to 500 apples' question "How?"
One way is to get connected to, and involved in, media co-ops which The Dominion Newspaper has been encouraging across the country. Another is to spread the word about rabble.ca, The Dominion, Activist Magazine and other left media in Canada (plus all the sites in the US) among the disaffected neighbours, friends, fellow-workers, who are not supporters of the left but may be looking for ways to channel their discontent and to develop their analysis.
So I think the question is useful.
Sat, 2010-06-12 22:49
#12
I think the conventional media is just a money pit. It's funny, who was it that first demanded that network news become profitable instead of loss leaders? Roone Artledge over at ABC all those years ago? Somebody wiki that. Anyway, it's ironic, because the end result is unprofitable media, and something else.
Media that few, if any, believe. People used to believe Walter Cronkite, and he was a perfect vehicle for brainwashing. No, the waters are muddied, and I'm willing to call that a victory.
Our role in this is analogous to a guerilla war. We have limited resources and we need to expend them efficiently. We need to hit them where they are weak, not where they are strong.
In media, we need to be small, stay small, but concentrate on getting the facts right all the time. Small sources need to become the record.
Sat, 2010-06-12 23:11
#13
Hey, I think it's great.
I mean, just look at the raw numbers in the Fox story. What's that in terms of market share? Less than a million people watching O'Rielly, and I bet the demographic is over 50. With set brand preferences.
I don't know what John Stewart is pulling in over at the Daily show, in terms of raw numbers, but even if it's half what O'Rielly's getting, it's a young audience, upwardly mobile audience, a hip and peer group influential audience, whose brand preferences are not set in stone.
Where would you like to put your advertising dollar, say if you owned Old Spice?
So, Rupert Murdock will keep using the Simpsons and other programs to bail out the News network to get his poison across to a small audience. Better he sinks his money there than somewhere else where it might be more productive to his cause.
Sat, 2010-06-12 23:22
#14
Whenever I see stories about this move I keep asking myself - haven't any of them ever watched CTV Newsnet?
Sat, 2010-06-12 23:33
#15
And, let's put it in some context.
We've been watching these media conglomerates take over various levels of media for some time now. "Synergy" they call it. And from a business standpoint it's just not working. Instead of recognizing this, the business and their creditors and investors shuffle the deck a bit to try to create more "synergy".
Billions and Billions into the money pit.
There's only so many advertisers out there with finite cash to spend. So, the more they try to stop the bleeding, the more questionable business practices at the top will continue. Meanwhile, internal bean counters cut this reporter, that staff person down at the local synergisitc newspaper or T.V. station, and pretty soon you have unreadable newspapers and unwatchable T.V.
I stopped reading the Free Press, not because of it's right wing opinion pieces etc. But because the comics got lame-- and required a magnifying glass to read. And reporters I was familiar with got fired or left.
....and one saturday I sat down with my morning 45 gallon cup o joe and carton of smokes to read the sacred saturday edition and all I did was turn the page, turn the page, turn the page.
There was nothing in it. Not even anything to piss me off.
And T.V. news is the same. Bumper after bumper. Teaser after teaser. They know when they've got an interesting story, but they won't tell you when that story is coming up. Always "next" but it's never next. You have to sit through three stupid filler stories, and twenty more bumpers and ten more teasers before they get to the story and you find out it's all sizzle and no steak.
And all this money spent, and the Republicans in the States couldn't shift public opinon on a President who got blow jobs in the Oval office. In fact core wacko right wing support in the States and in Canada is, if anything, dropping. Harper still chases that illusive fiscal conservative social liberal demographic, that with all the power of the CBC, CTV QMI and Conrad's Folly at the National Post doing it's best.
So, yeah, Kory.
Knock yourself out.
Sat, 2010-06-12 23:42
#16
Mulroney is on the board of Quebecor, last I heard. This is a vengeful Lyin' Brian at work. :)
Sat, 2010-06-12 23:56
#17
And all he touches turns to crap.
Sun, 2010-06-13 09:08
#18
Interesting story in last Thursday's Globe about the acquisition iof CanWest's paper remnant by Golden Tree, a hedge fund manager that has invested in several "troubled media outlets." When CanWest bonds plunged, GoldenTree bought, along with some of CanWest's bank debt "for a fraction of its face value." The bonds "will be converted into an equity ownership stake.
"Despite the perils facing oldo-fashioned newspapers, GoldenTree is betting that an improving economy and a greater focus on digital media" will bring profits.
Bet it's going to muscle in on the right, like those zebra mussels managed on rocky bottoms. Unfortunately, given the need for local information at the municipal level, they won't necessarily go all cannabalistic.
Sun, 2010-06-13 10:01
#19
Angus was on CBC radio a while back talking about the copyright legislation being passed. He strongly suggested that there are looming digital changes coming. IE, no more free media, or at least it's going to be more difficult to access free media.
I think that could alter the current landscape. Imagine if rabble writers couldn't link to articles by the MSM, or if they or rabble had to pay a fee to do so. The pendulum will eventually swing back to "conventional" media, and "trusted" brands - the ones protected by gov agencies like the CRTC which apparently exists to bend laws to favour big media, which hates gov interference until the competition rules are needed to quash upstarts. We've lost control of broadcasting. News is mandatory but to a broadcaster it's a nuisance.
Right wing media may have a set and stagnant business model, but the left\progressives haven't a clue how to run a media business (or a business period; business\commerce being a bad word) to start with and there are even fewer advertisers\sponsors availible.
Fox News North will probably exist later than sooner and it will have a chunk of the market. The problem, in Canada, is that we have no intelligent counter-voice. When Rick Mercer is counted as our version of Bill Maher\Stewart\Colbert, then there's trouble. The current progressive media is so stuffy and serious that FoxNN will quickly gain a foothold because it'll be able to capitalize on this boring lefty egghead trend.
Talking head TV doesn't cost much to produce... unless it's a CBC show. There are always meat puppets availible to toss up on the screen. The real work of journalism and creating media doesn't cost that much either, but it doesn't exist in Canada outside of some specific exceptions, and most of those are on the net and live on tenuous means.
Sun, 2010-06-13 11:34
#20
The absolute last thing this country needs
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/06/10/f-vp-newman.html
"The first time I met Kory Tenecyke, he told me that Canada needed a Fox News Channel of its own. I impolitely told him what he could do with the idea and we didn't speak again for four years..
In 2008, Tenecyke became Prime Minister Stephen Harper's director of communications..."
Sun, 2010-06-13 12:09
#21
Canada needs a Huff Post North.
Huff's key is that it is current updating every few minutes so people access it several times a day.
Sun, 2010-06-13 12:13
#22
Angus, rather than flailing his arms about in the wind, would be much more constructive directing his energies into helping to create left wing media.
How?
You clearly know nothing of Charlie Angus, because he is by FAR one of the hardest working MPs. He doesn't just "flail his arms about". We need him cloned a million times over.
Sun, 2010-06-13 12:19
#23
Charlie's infallible, just like the Pope.
Sun, 2010-06-13 12:23
#24
Catchfire
Canada needs a Huff Post North.
Why? We already have Ben Mulroney.
The closest thing to HuffPo is probably the less-sensationalistic (but not by much) The Mark. It's happily liberal democrat left-of-centre and updated frequently. What Canada needs is more rabble, obv [/corporate shilling] Here's a thread on The Mark Unionist started a while back.
Sun, 2010-06-13 12:24
#25
Right. Witty come back. Really. Just brilliant. Tell me, do you do anything other than "flail about on babble". Anything comparable to what Charlie does? Even remotely? Do you travel all over Ontario raising money for schools and drinking water on reserves? Do you travel all over Ontario fighting for EI and worker's rights? Do you put your money where your mouth is? Given you clear pro-Tory bent I'm guessing that is a resounding NO.
Were you being sarcastic? Let me know and I'll retract my comments.
Mon, 2010-06-14 14:57
#26
Sandy47
Hey!! Me too.
I stopped reading the Free Press [...] because the comics got lame-- and required a magnifying glass to read.
With the comics not worth the effort, two bucks a week just for the Saturday crosswords became a bridge too far...
Mon, 2010-06-14 18:36
#27
Y'know, I know that sounds shallow, but a newspaper is more than just the op ed page. And I think it said, symbolically, what the paper thought of itself and it's readership.
I mean, also in that time the Freeps ran a great expose on the practice of "ear candling", worthy of any report you'd see in publications like "The Sceptical Inquirer." Then a year later, they ran a feature extolling the virtures of "ear candling" a perfectly vapid, credulous take.
I mean, you can only insult people so many times.
Sometimes I'll look in on the ol' Freeps on line from time to time. It's not like it's all crap. But look at the coverage of the Tori Stafford murder in Woodstock. The Freeps was trying to convict someone who had nothing whatsoever to do with the murder while the investigation was going on.
Now there's a media blackout on one of the trials. I wonder why? Instead, the Freeps ran a story about what a psychic felt about the whole thing.
Jesusmaryanjoseph.
And, this isn't just the Freeps. It's pretty much standard fare from one outlet to another, one medium to another. Like I said, the field is muddied.
That's why I don't share Farmpunk's gloom and doom about people returning to a few news outlets for news, no matter what control they exert.
Fewer and fewer people are listening.
Tue, 2010-06-15 01:13
#28
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/krista-eric...
Sorry firefox is not being co-operative with babble.
Blond, attractive and dating a politician who is a few years her senior — Calgary Conservative MP Lee Richardson — Ms. Erickson has been a controversial figure on Parliament Hill.
Krista Erickson
Speculation was rampant last week that she would join the ranks of this right-wing television venture, which is being put together by former Harper communications director Kory Teneycke and Quebecor.
I don't know what being blond has to do with being attractive or how either impact on her journo skills. But I seem to recall how she was a liberla shill when and being moved from federal to regional TV because of malroney-schrieber thing when she allegedly passed questions to a liberal MP.
Ambitious yes, anything for power maybe, liberal NO. But it was her that cons pointed to as one of the reason the CBC is so leftwing. Do tell us again.
Some quotes fomr readers:
Just beautiful, and just like I thought. This so-called new right wing, conservative network will be filled with clowns from the CBC, CTV, the mainstream media types that have been feeding us a daily dose of spin for decades. What we would really like in this country is a station that dealt with facts, and the truth for a change. Not this daily dose of slim, sleaze, and partisan spin that have been getting for decades from the media in Canada. We have been tuning out this nonsense, thank god for the internet. If you are serious about doing something different, fresh, new then you will bring in new voices, new people who are not part of this clique now in Ottawa, this cliques that has been connected to the CTV, or CBC. We want original thinking, outside the box thinkers, people willing to expose the sleaze, the corruption, and the fraud going on in big government. We want fiscally conservative thinkers who want to downsize government, who are sick of Quebec and their demands, people who know our real BNA history…You can do this right but you need to bring in new people who get what’s really wrong in the media today, who know how corrupt our governments really are, who will expose the truth, not the daily dose of spin we now get.
And this one from CUintheHague
Yes, the media in this country is definitely a cesspool of left-wing dupes. Here's the list:
Pamela Wallin - Previously, an anchor at CBC AND CTV. NOW, a Conservative senator appointed by Stephen Harper.
Peter Kent - Previously, an anchor at Global News. NOW, a junior Conservative minister Stephen Harper.
Mike Duffy - Previously, a "journalist" at CTV. NOW, a Conservative senator appointed by Stephen Harper.
Krista Erickson - Currently, a CBC television journalist. In the future, a Conservative party shill on Fox News north.
David Akin - Previously, a pundit with CBC and CTV. Curently, a parliamentary reporter with CanWest. In the future, a Conservative party shill on Fox News north.
This doesn't even include the late CBC anchor, Barbara Frum, who was a rabid support of the PC party and whose son, David Frum (a contributor to the National Post), was George W. Bush's speechwriter and invented the moronic term, "axis of evil".
Yes, there is a bias in Canada's media and it is in favour of the Conservative Party. You can be sure that when the Cons are accusing anybody of being involved in any nefarious goings-on that they are involved in that despicable activity themselves.
Interesting. Maybe we should all point these inconsistancy out a little louder.
Tue, 2010-06-15 06:48
#29
I'm not being doom and gloom.
In a media environment where money is needed to create news and journalism there's bound to be trouble competing for eyeballs and ears and brains when "new media" is in competition with a publically funded organization that won't even release it's own internal documents on costs, which is so bureaucratically stagnant that there isn't even a reporter on the ground covering Hamilton-Kitchener\Waterloo-Guelph, plus a bunch of low cost broadcast news outlets which regularly play reports created in the US on "local" news programs.... there's trouble. And a space slotted for Fox NN.
It's about ad dollars and revenue, not news.
Yes, T-P, Patrick Maloney of the Freeps was especially dogged in his investigation of Tara McDonald. It was disturbing to watch.
Here's another take:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/silver-powers/the-devils-ne...
Tue, 2010-06-15 08:33
#30
Oh well, there's a whole series of books "...for dummies". I suppose a news network for dummies was inevitable. Not that there's a shortage of them.
Tue, 2010-06-15 23:04
#31
My Cat Knows Better
I don't listen to right wing talk radio, especially when driving, it makes me crazy. I don't suppose I will watch their crap on the television either. I am at an age where I feel the need to control my blood pressure.
As for the plan to have programming designed around right wing political commentary in the evening time slot, I believe "Dirty Harry" summed that up with, "Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one..."
Wed, 2010-06-16 06:30
#32
I think this is the kind of reactionary lefty\progressive attitude that will fuel Fox NN. What should happen is the best and sharpest and fastest clip speaking progressives should welcome the chance to go on the network and prove themselves capable.
That's what the right\cons do regularly.
Wed, 2010-06-16 08:53
#33
But wouldn't they have to bend the truth in their effort to entertain? Make statements that are not clearly/necessarily based on fact? I mean, if Fox appeals to Tea Partiers - and we understand their limited attention span - must the MSM here adapt and leave folks like My Cat with no place to turn for survival? :) Surely our cynical blogger, Silver, advisor to capital, should not be a template for opinion.
Wed, 2010-06-16 09:24
#34
Not really sure who you're addressing, GV.
I read somewhere that the Micheal Coren show outdraws The National, and Strombo (no big surprise there), and probably some other big name, big hitter type shows. And it's as simple as shit to put a talk show like that together. And, you know, Coren lets people talk, be brings on opposing people and they discuss things somewhat rationally.
Haha, now that's based on about four total viewings of the Coren show. Still, the current lefty\progressive media seems stuck in a rut where nothing is getting done and there's little discussion or room for dissenting opinion. They'd rather blanket dump on anyone who isn't toeing some extremely abstract line, while the right media lets people have their say before the smug shake of the head happens.
And, hey, look at what the so called Tea Party has done to the political landscape in the US. In a very short period of time that very diverse group has upset the status quo in a way the left can only dream of doing. Cable TV and Fox News and right wing radio can only explain so much regarding that big shift.
Wed, 2010-06-16 09:45
#35
Monbiot makes the same argument about Tea Partyers in his last posting, Fp. Perhaps you could link it for us? Unfortunately, I don't believe the CBC is listening, and Gaia knows what else is going to rank in reader/watcher/listener numbers. Any thoughts on how to bring it off?
Wed, 2010-06-16 09:58
#36
Link to Monbiot or the numbers? I'll try and dig it up... could in fact be a myth.
Pull off a show that people might watch or that'll be good journalism.... The two don't always intersect, in my experience.
However, since you asked.
For less than ten grand a media org could purchase some used TV gear, some old Sony betacams, a bunch of mic cables, and mics, and some assorted boxes and whatnots to link the gear together, find a friendly restaurant or venue somewhere in, yes, the GTA, and have a weekly talk show that's uploaded to youtube. Three cameras would do it. They can sit there static, or have volunteer operators. Someone, or a group could produce the show: ie line up guests, brief the host, and then talk. There's likely a simple way to have call-in questions posed to guests, too. Then of course there's twitter, email, etc.
It would have to regular and there'd have to be attention to details like audio quality, white balance, the small techie details that make things look and sound professional.
Costs could be reduced by going with lower end gear, like Panny DVX100s. Those could then be farmed out to interested people who want to chase stories and documentaries and shit like that when the cameras weren't in use for the show.
It's not rocket science, however it is work.
The thing I've noticed in my limited media experience is that the right wingers and cons are always ready to talk, be quoted, while the progressives and lefties tend to be shy and afraid, suspicious.
Wed, 2010-06-16 10:13
#37
Here's Monbiot's lead three paras, Fp:
By George Monbiot. Published in the Guardian 14th June 2010
"In the Netherlands a movement based on paranoia and the fleecing of the poor looks set to join the government. In the United States one of the biggest exercises in false consciousness the world has ever seen - people gathering in their millions to lobby unwittingly for a smaller share of the nation's wealth - has become the playmaker in Republican primaries. The radical right is seizing its chance. But where is the radical left?
Both the Freedom Party in the Netherlands and the Tea Party in the US base their political programmes on misinformation and denial. But as political forces they are devastatingly effective. The contrast to the leftwing meetings I've attended over the past two years couldn't be starker. They are cerebral, cogent, realistic - and little of substance has emerged from them.
The rightwing movements thrive on their contradictions, the leftwing movements drown in them. Tea Party members who proclaim their rugged individualism will follow a bucket on a broomstick if it has the right label, and engage in the herd behaviour they claim to deplore. The left, by contrast, talks of collective action but indulges instead in possessive individualism. Instead of coming together to fight common causes, leftwing meetings today consist of dozens of people promoting their own ideas, and proposing that everyone else should adopt them."
Wed, 2010-06-30 17:01
#38
'Two Quebecor papers bow out of press council'
Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Quebecor+papers+press+council/3220669/story.html#ixzz0sN941yTS
'Two Quebecor Inc. newspapers, Le Journal de Montréal and Le Journal de Québec, have bowed out of the Quebec Press Council. The two newspapers, published by Sun Media corporation, cited a lack of vision and a desire to limit freedom of the press on the part of the council. A letter drafted by Charles Michaud, vice-president of Sun Media corporation, addressed to the council, says numerous efforts to convince the council to change its ways have failed. Michaud also said the council's dealings with complaints from readers was also a factor. The Quebec Press Council is a private organization whose stated goals are the protection of freedom of the press and quality reporting. Its scope applies to all journalism done in Quebec but membership is voluntary.'
Wed, 2010-06-30 17:16
#39
Sven
I watch no television news. But, for people who do (and that's most people), I think the more information options the better, whether it's Fox News or Al-Jazeera.
Wed, 2010-06-30 17:25
#40
I watch no television news. But, for people who do (and that's most people), I think the more information options the better, whether it's Fox News or Al-Jazeera.
Yours is a handy window on to the mind of America, Sven. Whenever I wonder how folks down there could become so snowed by the propagandists of the right, I just have to turn to one of your posts for understanding.
Wed, 2010-06-30 18:20
#41
I don't mind an extreme right wing media outlet to enter the space as long a left wing outlet be allowed in as well. I'm all for free media for all and let the people decide.
Wed, 2010-06-30 19:13
#42
Someone has to pay for the type of journalism that's needed to help the public figure shit out, or explain what's going on in a manner that is relevant to more than the %5 at either end of the spectrum.
I don't think it's so much about a left wing outlet being "allowed" c-turtle. It's more that the left hasn't figured out to to operate in a break-even manner in the media business... because it is a business. The right, more or less, has accomplished this for many reasons.
Wed, 2010-06-30 19:23
#43
Sven
Yours is a handy window on to the mind of America, Sven.
On some issues, you may be correct, GV. But on this issue? Not so much. First of all, I'm somewhat unusual in that I don't watch any television news. But, more pertinently, I suspect that a large percentage of Americans are not even familiar with with Al-Jazeera and, of those who are, I suspect that most wouldn't be all that keen to have Al-Jazeera beamed into the country. I, on the other hand, think that more information, from across the political spectrum, is better than less information.
Thu, 2010-07-01 01:15
#44
Would that be the Quebecor that has lost three recent decisions by the Press Council and who uses scab labour at Le Journal de Montreal since they locked out their union? The same Quebecor whose TVA plagerized a report by one of their locked out workers, who was writing for the worker website Rue Frontenac (http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/05/23/rue-frontenac-plagiarism/)?
Thu, 2010-07-01 06:31
#45
That's the one, 1W. And Lyin' Brian sits on the board with his old buddies. Sven does not care about such matters as truth in reportage, or confusion between editorial and news columns. Freedom is the thing. The CONSTITUTION must be upheld, you know. :) I think Brecht and Weill's Threepenny Opera got the place just right.
Thu, 2010-07-01 07:35
#46
I don't think it's so much about a left wing outlet being "allowed" c-turtle. It's more that the left hasn't figured out to to operate in a break-even manner in the media business... because it is a business.
Al-Jazeera is not allowed even on a subscription basis. Yes it's not exactly left wing but it offers a wider spectrum of opinions from our current range of centre-right to far right spectrum.
We used to have a centre-left in papers like the Toronto Star but that management was outsted and now we don't have anybody representing the centre-left let alone the actual left.
Thu, 2010-07-01 08:43
#47
Sven
Sven does not care about such matters as truth in reportage, or confusion between editorial and news columns. Freedom is the thing. The CONSTITUTION must be upheld, you know. :)
Should the government be determining what is "truth"?
Thu, 2010-07-01 08:46
#48
Sven
We used to have a centre-left in papers like the Toronto Star but that management was outsted and now we don't have anybody representing the centre-left let alone the actual left.
Maybe not media in the form of dead trees. But, reading left-wing news and opinion is merely a click away.
Thu, 2010-07-01 10:50
#49
Sven does not care about such matters as truth in reportage, or confusion between editorial and news columns. Freedom is the thing. The CONSTITUTION must be upheld, you know. :)
Should the government be determining what is "truth"?
The answer is obviously no. Freedom is more important than whether you agree with a particular news outlet. And if we're looking for confusion between editorial and news columns, that is not specific to "right wing" news. Just try to read the Toronto Star on a typical day - the pro-Liberal bias is so heavy you can cut it with a knife. Look at the free pass they've been giving McGuinty on G20 policing - if they could have pinned that on Harper they'd have been on him like piranhas - and they're still trying.
Thu, 2010-07-01 10:59
#50
I bet Al-Jaz is being held up to placate the other news agencies for monetary and monopoly reasons, much less so than political angles.
Thu, 2010-07-01 11:23
#51
Sven does not care about such matters as truth in reportage, or confusion between editorial and news columns. Freedom is the thing. The CONSTITUTION must be upheld, you know. :)
Should the government be determining what is "truth"?
The answer is obviously no. Freedom is more important than whether you agree with a particular news outlet. And if we're looking for confusion between editorial and news columns, that is not specific to "right wing" news. Just try to read the Toronto Star on a typical day - the pro-Liberal bias is so heavy you can cut it with a knife. Look at the free pass they've been giving McGuinty on G20 policing - if they could have pinned that on Harper they'd have been on him like piranhas - and they're still trying.
Comparing the Toronto Star's bias with the corrupted product of Fox and even the one-sided National Post is entertaining. Sven does not watch it so he misses the racism of Fox and the radio show hosts that keep the rednecks happy throughout Appalachia. Of course "guv'mint" should not shut them down, but they should be vulnerable to civil action in the courts. But try and get even that past judge whatsisname on the supreme court (lemme see if I can find the fascist bastard on google)....yes...Antonin Scalia.