SJ, for that example to be analogous, you would then have to have the left agree that the left is "useless", based on their/our propensity either for violence or to incite violent provocation from the right, and should be got rid of.
Conservatives Move to End All CBC Funding
Fri, 2010-12-17 11:20
#102
Fri, 2010-12-17 14:42
#103
Followed by a great interview with John Trudell. Catch it?
Fri, 2010-12-17 15:40
#104
John Trudell? You don't get much more boot-licking conservative lackey than that. Sorry I missed it.
(half of that was serious. Guess which half)
But I forgot..... useless CBC actually has podcasts, unlike this:
Fri, 2010-12-17 15:47
#105
Harper puts out feelers to stop funding the CBC - and some babblers start listing how bad the CBC is (as if this is some kind of revelation to anyone left of Genghis Khan). Predator, meet prey.Similar I suppose to when the mainstream media establishment informs us of how bad the troublesome left has become, after being led to a few broken windows by an equally shocked mainstream left. Where do these good for nothings get off with disturbing things in such a manner.
No, SJ, not similar - opposite.
The right wants to abolish public broadcasting - or subvert it if it can't destroy it. We (the left) want to save public broadcasting, then improve it (you can't improve what is destroyed).
The right desperately needs the arsonists and window-smashers to sabotage our movement. When they can't get them for free, they recruit and pay them. The left, on the other hand, wants to suppress them and turf their sorry asses out of our way.
You are usually far better at dreaming up analogies than this.
Fri, 2010-12-17 18:43
#106
I heard a good discussion on the character of Canada's class system on the Pollyanna Tremonti-free The Current this morning. John Ralston "Widsom Keeper" Saul even participated.
Fri, 2010-12-17 21:31
#107
The left, on the other hand, wants to suppress them and turf their sorry asses out of our way.
It's difficult to know what to make of this argument. If your depiction of the contemporary left is heading in some direction as to require everyone to make way, where exactly would that be?
Fri, 2010-12-17 22:46
#108
Clearly not convoluted enough for you to easily track, jack.
Sat, 2010-12-18 08:35
#109
Clearly not convoluted enough for you to easily track, jack.
Perhaps I'll just have to apply the same dry heave suppression technique that appears to ease the approach to some of the material you present here George.
Sat, 2010-12-18 08:57
#110
RevolutionPlease
Dudes! Y'all have me confused. Plain language please.
Sat, 2010-12-18 09:22
#111
That's the plea, RP.
Sat, 2010-12-18 09:27
#112
Boom Boom
I almost never watch The National in its entirety any longer, because Mansbridge is boring. On the other hand, I've watched Power and Politics since it started, and while Evan Solomon/Rosemary Barton are nowhere close to the competence of Don Newman/Susan Bonner, they are better now than when the show started. They now often take a confrontational approach to all MPs in the House, including the government's, and especially the Cabinet ones. Solomon had two good interviews this week with Iggy and Layton (separately).
Sat, 2010-12-18 10:42
#113
The left, on the other hand, wants to suppress them and turf their sorry asses out of our way.It's difficult to know what to make of this argument. If your depiction of the contemporary left is heading in some direction as to require everyone to make way, where exactly would that be?
Pardon? Was there something unclear about ridding our movement of police agents, paid and unpaid? I'll let you in on a secret. When we're on the picket line, and some "supporter" starts heaving rocks at the office or plant windows, we don't wait for the pigs to show up. Capisce?
Sat, 2010-12-18 10:48
#114
When we're on the picket line, and some "supporter" starts heaving rocks at the office or plant windows, we don't wait for the pigs to show up.
That's the spirit!
Sat, 2010-12-18 10:53
#115
Likewise when we decide - together - to "illegally" occupy the plant.
Likewise when we catch someone working during our strike.
We make those decisions together. Anyone who steps out of line hears from us.
Kind of like a society. Libertarians need not apply.
Sat, 2010-12-18 12:36
#116
alan smithee
I've shown this chart before:
It's pretty sad when Global turns out to be the most fair and balanced of the 3 networks.
A publicly funded network SHOULD be fair and balanced but according to the chart,the CBC is the most UNFAIR and UNBALANCED of the 3 networks.
If CBC brass was smart,they'd reply to the Reform Party's desire of shutting them down by becoming unfair and unbalanced to the Harper agenda.
And when I say unfair and unbalanced I mean telling the populous the TRUTH.
*sigh* But that ain't gonna happen.
Sat, 2010-12-18 12:38
#117
I've shown this chart before:
The Conservatives, representative of just 36% of voters in the last election, recieve 74% of speaking time at the CBC - significantly more than any private network allots. The representatives of 64% of voters share a mere 26% of the time available to directly address the public.
Without the context of the actual stories, and the total percentage of time WRT all other news, those stats don't mean anything. If I invite a minister on to rake him or her over the coals, it is not the same as a puff piece.
Based on my viewing of the news, I would say CBC is far more critical (and I mean critical generally, not supporting the government, and not giving the opposition a break either).
Let's remember who owns the other networks, after all.
Sat, 2010-12-18 12:38
#118
Lard Tunderin Jeezus
I've shown this chart before:
The Conservatives, representative of just 36% of voters in the last election, recieve 74% of speaking time at the CBC - significantly more than any private network allots. The representatives of 64% of voters share a mere 26% of the time available to directly address the public.
Which is to say that at this point the institution is rotten to its foundation. The Liberals compromised it and neglected it, and Conservatives have essentially destroyed it already. It is now a taxpayer-subsidized propaganda machine for the corporatist right; one that makes Soviet-era Pravda look like a model of journalistic integrity.
The CBC does not need to be saved as much as it needs to be demolished and rebuilt.
Sat, 2010-12-18 12:56
#119
@ alan smithee
Global is NOT more balanced. read my comment above
Remember that some of the worst slanting of news is in the form of what is left out and does not make it on the air.
(edit)
Going by this narrow measure the most fair political coverage is from the weather network, because they give all parties equal time - zero.
Do we have a source and background on this graph, by the way?
Sat, 2010-12-18 12:59
#120
Lard Tunderin Jeezus
I'd suggest you read the CBC's own bias report (it's 'the source').
They seem to take particular pride in being no different in any statistically meaningful way. They are at best a fully integrated part of the mainstream corporate media today.
Sat, 2010-12-18 13:39
#121
@ LTJ
Before we get onto that lttle side-step, I'd like to see the source of your chart, please.
Sat, 2010-12-18 13:45
#122
Lard Tunderin Jeezus
There's no side-step involved. As I said, it's the source.
Sat, 2010-12-18 15:33
#123
@ LTJ
Actually no, you didn't say it was the source of the graph, nor did you provide a link nor an actual study name, so you can keep the condescending attitude.
And while we are at it, why didn't you post the second graph in the study, which says that within CBC's coverage there was more which was critical than supportive of the government.
Again, without looking at the actual stories it is hard to tell what criteria they used, but that says to me that CBC ran more stories critical of the government than the private networks, even though this report, for whatever reason, claims they were about the same.
As a matter of fact, why didn;t you just cite the whole study, rather than try to cherry pick the information that you are pretending supports your position?
Are you afraid we might interpret the study differently than you do?
Sat, 2010-12-18 16:39
#124
Simplistic graphs do not show the tone or reality of that time-- if it was fawning or not and they represent superficial realities of the influence of government on the public institution it owns.
I am disturbed by some things that have been said here. Important distinctions must be made. For starters between programming/content and structure.
A government of the day can temporarily damage programming and content -- poison it with appointments, and scare enough people into a pro-government position out of fear for their jobs and their institution replacing some where needed with those who are directly friendly to the government. All that is superficial. Like mud on the windows of a building.
But it is the institution that is the long term investment -- the building. It is the institution that carries the long term promise and potential that a public broadcaster has. I should not have to explain those here. If you undo the institution, it might be impossible to rebuild given the economic context we are in -- the dream of tearing down and rebuilding may come from anger but it is not practical. The most difficult things to rebuild about the CBC are its most progressive features, the best of it. The parts that could be fixed are its most negative. This is what one could expect anyway since the easiest things to break are the superficial that so many here are focused on.
The greatest damage to the organization is not the Don Cherry crap. It is the atrophying of the reach of the organization, parts that will take major investment to rebuild. What is left now is the seed to rebuild, if you destroy that no rebuilding will happen.
The CBC is more than a current reality it is also an idea and a structure upon which you can rebuild. It is worth fighting for and there is no need to defend the problems mentioned here to do so.
That said, an honest comparison between the programming on the CBC and what is available privately should be instructive. The TV arm is definitely damaged as is much of the rest of it but to lessor degrees. Programs like the Current do not get created by the private sector.
The CBC also is a source for information that others pursue. The loss to what exists privately on the left if the CBC were to go is not being calculated. There is much to be gained by having an institution without a direct private agenda.
The Cons have very good reasons to want to throw mud on the windows of the organization in the hope that people will tear down the whole building for them. Abetting hem in this is the height of ignorance I have to add.
Sat, 2010-12-18 18:43
#125
Nicely put, Sean.
We have to think beyond the short-term damage that the Harperites are inflicting on our public broadcaster, support the CBC, and push to improve it once this temporary political climate is over.
Remember that R.B. Bennett's Conservatives created the CBC in the middle of the Depression. If that can happen, we should always retain the hope that the CBC will recover and enable non-corporate Canadian voices to be heard on our airwaves (which we lease out to private broadcasters anyway).
Pages
- « first
- ‹ previous
- 1
- 2
- 3