• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

All things Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

Bruce Monkhouse

Army.ca Myth
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
514
Points
1,040
None of them give a rats ass about journalism, just whatever makes you click the headline link...
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
375
Points
860
Maybe I read that or interpreted his statement slightly differently...

The way I read it is that they are doing a better job of 'actual journalism' than 'completely biased media'. I didn't read it as him saying it wasn't biased, just not as biased as a lot of American mainstream media. (And sadly, Canadian also, among others.)



Regardless, I think we all agree - the mainstream media wit large is extremely biased, so blatantly so that they don't even attempt to appear impartial anymore. Whether it is CNN on one side or Fox on the other, or CBC, CTV, etc etc - a majority of mainstream media sources are biased, do mislead the public, and don't seem to attempt to be impartial anymore.

Personally, I don't know how what the mainstream media does it even legal, to be honest. I understand there is a freedom of speech in most developed countries, and any attempt to persuade that one way or the other is fraught with moral, philosophical, and legal concerns. But I do feel like there has to be a better, more honest way than what is currently being done - regardless of which mainstream media source is in question.


Take for example the CBC and CTV news coverage of the RCMP taking down a drunk, combative man last year in Ft. McMurray, who just so happened to be First Nations. (His race is completely irrelevant - if I was behaving that way towards a police officer, I would have every expectation they would take me down hard, and rightfully so.)

Both CBC and CTV ran with the narrative that this man was beaten by an RCMP officer simply due to his race, and his only crime was an expired license plate. This man then went on to host a press release, going on about how he was a victim of racism and how 'it just needs to stop.'

Fast forward to The Edmonton Journal, who released the entire incident via dashcam - unedited, and unnarrated, on Youtube. The raw footage released by The Edmonton Journal shows a completely different situation than what was narrated to the general public by both CBC and CTV, despite all of the news agencies having access to the same footage. CBC and CTV decided to only show the public approximately 4 seconds (I'm not making that up) of a 10 minute long video.


So when I ask, just casually and openly, how is that legal? This is just one example of how a company manipulated information, and purposefully broadcast that information/narrative to the general public, to convince them of a situation that didn't happen, in order to fuel public outrage.

Biased? Yes.
Legal? Shouldn't be. (But where do we draw the line? How do we create a system in which the public can start to trust the media again?)
 

mariomike

Army.ca Legend
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
260
Points
1,130
Maybe I read that or interpreted his statement slightly differently...

The way I read it is that they are doing a better job of 'actual journalism' than 'completely biased media'. I didn't read it as him saying it wasn't biased, just not as biased as a lot of American mainstream media. (And sadly, Canadian also, among others.)



Regardless, I think we all agree - the mainstream media wit large is extremely biased, so blatantly so that they don't even attempt to appear impartial anymore. Whether it is CNN on one side or Fox on the other, or CBC, CTV, etc etc - a majority of mainstream media sources are biased, do mislead the public, and don't seem to attempt to be impartial anymore.

Personally, I don't know how what the mainstream media does it even legal, to be honest. I understand there is a freedom of speech in most developed countries, and any attempt to persuade that one way or the other is fraught with moral, philosophical, and legal concerns. But I do feel like there has to be a better, more honest way than what is currently being done - regardless of which mainstream media source is in question.


Take for example the CBC and CTV news coverage of the RCMP taking down a drunk, combative man last year in Ft. McMurray, who just so happened to be First Nations. (His race is completely irrelevant - if I was behaving that way towards a police officer, I would have every expectation they would take me down hard, and rightfully so.)

Both CBC and CTV ran with the narrative that this man was beaten by an RCMP officer simply due to his race, and his only crime was an expired license plate. This man then went on to host a press release, going on about how he was a victim of racism and how 'it just needs to stop.'

Fast forward to The Edmonton Journal, who released the entire incident via dashcam - unedited, and unnarrated, on Youtube. The raw footage released by The Edmonton Journal shows a completely different situation than what was narrated to the general public by both CBC and CTV, despite all of the news agencies having access to the same footage. CBC and CTV decided to only show the public approximately 4 seconds (I'm not making that up) of a 10 minute long video.


So when I ask, just casually and openly, how is that legal? This is just one example of how a company manipulated information, and purposefully broadcast that information/narrative to the general public, to convince them of a situation that didn't happen, in order to fuel public outrage.

Biased? Yes.
Legal? Shouldn't be. (But where do we draw the line? How do we create a system in which the public can start to trust the media again?)
Media bias is always a popular topic of conversation. Even has its own 70-page mega-thread.

 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
375
Points
860
Media bias is always a popular topic of conversation. Even has its own 70-page mega-thread.
Seen.

Sorry, wasn't attempting to derail the thread. Was just trying to spritz some water on the hotspot in the thread above me 🕊️
 

PMedMoe

Army.ca Legend
Donor
Reaction score
328
Points
880
Maybe I read that or interpreted his statement slightly differently...

The way I read it is that they are doing a better job of 'actual journalism' than 'completely biased media'. I didn't read it as him saying it wasn't biased, just not as biased as a lot of American mainstream media. (And sadly, Canadian also, among others.)

Just so you know, Sky News Australia is completely biased: Sky News Australia - Media Bias/Fact Check

I agree that many news outlets are biased, which is why it makes sense to read from several different sites. It's also good to keep in mind which ones are factual as well. I use this chart (found here).

Ad_Fontes_Media_Bias_Chart.jpg
 

RangerRay

Sr. Member
Reaction score
128
Points
480
In my opinion, there’s a world of difference between biased and factual (e.g. National Post, CBC) and biased and “make-shit-up” (e.g. HuffPost, Gateway Pundit, Post Millennial).
 

Messerschmitt

Member
Reaction score
16
Points
180
Anyone else thinks the doctors are not pushing the lockdown agenda for their own interest? I always thought that was the case, but the info never came out, and I was called a conspiracy theorist. Well, here's it is now.

I see that you left Fox off that list.

:ROFLMAO:
Fox news astoundingly had more factual coverage on the election than CNN. They have gained my respect for that. Meanwhile even CBC was biased during the election vs just reporting on the actual results.
 

Remius

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
566
Points
860
Anyone else thinks the doctors are not pushing the lockdown agenda for their own interest? I always thought that was the case, but the info never came out, and I was called a conspiracy theorist. Well, here's it is now.


Fox news astoundingly had more factual coverage on the election than CNN. They have gained my respect for that. Meanwhile even CBC was biased during the election vs just reporting on the actual results.
Criticizing the CBC and using a link to the CBC to support a weird argument all in the same post. Gold.
 

Bruce Monkhouse

Army.ca Myth
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
514
Points
1,040
Anyone else thinks the doctors are not pushing the lockdown agenda for their own interest? I always thought that was the case, but the info never came out, and I was called a conspiracy theorist.
My GF's Sister works as a dietician in a Hamilton, Ontario hospital. Just that, a dietician, no medical , yet she started working 2 weeks ago in an ICU as they are incredibly short on staff that aren't burnt out. She hates it, I repeat, SHE HATES IT, has seen a man and a women both in thier 40's die. She's a traveller and couldn't wait to go on a trip as soon as the lockdown is over. No more....

If you doubt thier reasons go volunteer, scrub up, and get in there yourself. See if you still think anyone is doing this for an agenda.
 

Messerschmitt

Member
Reaction score
16
Points
180
My GF's Sister works as a dietician in a Hamilton, Ontario hospital. Just that, a dietician, no medical , yet she started working 2 weeks ago in an ICU as they are incredibly short on staff that aren't burnt out. She hates it, I repeat, SHE HATES IT, has seen a man and a women both in thier 40's die. She's a traveller and couldn't wait to go on a trip as soon as the lockdown is over. No more....

If you doubt thier reasons go volunteer, scrub up, and get in there yourself. See if you still think anyone is doing this for an agenda.
Was she paid $350/$450 an HOUR for it?

And I DEFINITELY would get there, scrub up and anything else I'd need to do including wiping shit and cleaning puke bags (or whatever it's generally gross in a hospital) for $350/450 and hour. That's my entire's month salary in 24hrs!

Except doctors don't do that! It's the care aides that get paid $25/hr.
 

mariomike

Army.ca Legend
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
260
Points
1,130
Was she paid $350/$450 an HOUR for it?

And I DEFINITELY would get there, scrub up and anything else I'd need to do including wiping shit and cleaning puke bags (or whatever it's generally gross in a hospital) for $350/450 and hour. That's my entire's month salary in 24hrs!
My ex is Director of Quality, Performance, Professional Practice and Chief Nursing Executive at a major downtown hospital. I follow the Sunshine List. She isn't making that.

As far as money goes, SARS was financially the best time of my career. Would I want to go through it again with Sars-Cov-2? No way! :)
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
2,224
Points
1,060
Anyone else thinks the doctors are not pushing the lockdown agenda for their own interest? I always thought that was the case, but the info never came out, and I was called a conspiracy theorist. Well, here's it is now.


Fox news astoundingly had more factual coverage on the election than CNN. They have gained my respect for that. Meanwhile even CBC was biased during the election vs just reporting on the actual results.

Based on how uncomfortable Theresa Tam looks on TV every day... no. No I don't.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
469
Points
880
If you ask medical professionals for advice, you're going to get advice situated to favour the best medical outcomes. Advice really needs to come from multi-disciplined people, or people with experience weighing factors across disciplines. Economists seem to be about the best choice.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
469
Points
880
Pandemic response is at the intersection of medicine, politics, and daily life; probably some more, but those are the three which weigh most heavily upon us.
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
915
Points
940
...
Fox news astoundingly had more factual coverage on the election than CNN. They have gained my respect for that. Meanwhile even CBC was biased during the election vs just reporting on the actual results.
:ROFLMAO: Oh that's a good one! CBC biased - sure I'll buy that. Fox and factual coverage - I'll give you that Fox News division isn't too bad but most of their programing and website is their opinion crap which is so far out there in LaLaLand that it far outweighs any respect that the News division may earn.

🍻
 
Top