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

Media Bias [Merged]

Cloud Cover

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
26
Points
430
As everyone who visits this site is by now well aware, monumental changes are about to beset the Canadian Forces. So far, only the print media has carried this story, with perhaps the exception of Canwest media [not sure about them - too Toronto centric for me to watch!!!]
The CBC in particular seems noticably quiet on the so called peacekeeping brigade and deletion critical weapons platform in the Navy, Airforce and the Army.

Here are a few questions for discussion:

Would you agree that during the election the CBC mischaracterized the Conservative military program, making it an issue before the Liberals capitalized and further misrepresented the issue? 

Does the broadcast media, [particularly the CBC],  harbour an anti-military bias, or simply favour the generally accepted university academic point of view that Canadian military efforts should be soft-power peace keeping, therefore warfigthing skills and equipment are unnecessary? [Somalia affair commentators may wish to weigh in heavily here ... remember the article "CBC points the gun, Minister pulls the trigger"?]

Does the media really understand what is required to defend Canadian interests, the real force and equipment requirements for peacekeeping, and has media influence over politicians impacted detrimentally the future safety of Canadian soldiers. Alternatively, does the media deliberately disregard or dismiss critical facts when reporting on the CF, and is this dangerous for the nation and its service members?

Has the media dangerously shifted the focus of Canadian political-military discourse and decision making to optics over substance? If so, why and what is the objective?

Has the media put the nation and its citizens at risk through poor/inaccurate reporting or bias/agenda setting? Should/can they be held to account or held jointly liable for their actions if service members are killed or injured? l
...

The CBC focus seems a little biased on my part, but I call's 'em as I see 'em. Incidentally, isn't the head of the CBC a politcal appointment at the discretion of a minister, just like the CDS? Following party lines perhaps?

"A" System .. shoot!!!   

Cheers!!!     
 

Cloud Cover

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
26
Points
430
Nice tightly worded post. Concise and to the point. I have seen the CBC Watch site before ..thx for putting it in this thread.

Cheers ...   
 

I_am_John_Galt

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
;D"The most valuable of all talents is that of never using two words when one will do."   ~Thomas Jefferson


Regards ...  
 

Slim

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I can't remember what year it was when I actually trusted anything other than a traffic report by the media.

I have spoken (written) at length on this subject, but since its been brought up again I'll say a few things.

Firstly the media exist solely to sell things. be it newspapers, TV spots or whatever media happens to be the in thing for the day. They couldn't care less what they're writing, so long as people are buying their words...

Don't believe me. Go and sit down in front of the TV, or pick up a newspaper and start to read. After a bit you will begin to notice the not-so-subtle things they say in order to inflame us...rather than impartially informing. Which is what they claim to do. You'll notice too that they slip in little things at the end of a story to stir things up, guaranteeing you'll be back the next day to read the conclusion of what ever the story is.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Render&inifile=futuretense.ini&c=Page&cid=968332188492&pubid=968163964505
http://www.canoe.com/NewsStand/TorontoSun/home.html

I have included links to the big three papers in Toronto. Read a story that all three carry and start looking for differences. Depending on the papers you're reading they could be quite small...Or huge. Also look at they way they say things
 

Trinity

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I'm not a huge conservative fan.. but even I think they got screwed here...


7 minute video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDw5a0_iFBk&eurl=
 

Koenigsegg

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
"Pravda telling lies."    -  I like that one!

Never have liked TV news...sometimes it is so obvious that they are editting things to suit their agenda too.  Just like Michael Moore, what a knob.
 

MdB

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Ah, my bubble is already so deflated, what I'm gonna do now!? :-X
 

The_Falcon

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Not surprising, looking at who made the piece.  Next time anyone comes on here and says there is no bias in the news media (particularly at the communist broadcasting corporation), I think this well go a long way in showing that there is bias, and quite strong bias.  In a perfect world, the tories will win a majority and then promptly sell off the CBC to FOX NEWS ;D
 

Thompson_JM

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Since Fox news is obviously swarming with journalistic integrity.....  :blotto:

Its hard to get mad at one media outlet when theyre all to blame!  though I'll agree that this is no suprise....
 

GAP

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
0
Points
360
Received this afternoon

Dear

I write to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which I have shared with
Jonathan Whitten, Executive Producer of The National, along with the
request that your concerns be addressed.

Yours truly,

Vince Carlin
CBC Ombudsman

What I said when I sent link clip to Ombudsman

>>> "Gord" <.net> 8/8/06 11:32:46 AM >>>
Take a look at this clip and you tell me if this accurate reporting.

 

GAP

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
0
Points
360
I do not think anything earthshattering is going to happen, but at least they know people know about the farce
 

Rice0031

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
The part that really bugs me the most about journalists taking people's words out of context is that many people, (dare I say the majority?),  take it as 100% fact because the journalist works for some large news network.

Not everything you read or see on TV reflects a situation or someone's comments or opinions very well. And I don't like that. I like to see non-biased information.

But we don't live in a perfect world :(
 

GAP

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
0
Points
360
this is what I sent, and they initially sent back

GAP said:
Received this afternoon

Dear

I write to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which I have shared with
Jonathan Whitten, Executive Producer of The National, along with the
request that your concerns be addressed.

Yours truly,

Vince Carlin
CBC Ombudsman

What I said when I sent link clip to Ombudsman

>>> "Gord" <.net> 8/8/06 11:32:46 AM >>>
Take a look at this clip and you tell me if this accurate reporting.

I received this today as their explanation....pathetic


Thank you for your email to CBC regarding a report aired on The
National. Jonathan Whitten, executive producer of The National asked me
to forward the following to you:


Thank you for your e-mail of August 8th addressed to Vince Carlin, CBC
Ombudsman. As you know, Mr. Carlin asked me to reply.

You wrote to draw our attention to a report on the August 4 editions of
THE NATIONAL that you feel is inaccurate and misleading.  Specifically,
you wrote that by juxtaposing a comment by a protestor with what you
feel is an unrelated statement made by Prime Minister Stephen Harper in
a news conference, the report misrepresented the Prime Minister's views,
and made him appear insensitive.

The report on THE NATIONAL Friday night concerned the Prime Minister's
reaction to questions he was facing about the Middle East. The report
began with protestors outside the Conservative caucus meeting in
Cornwall, one of whom was seen saying that both sides killing innocent
children is wrong and has to stop.

The Prime Minister, meeting behind closed doors, did not hear her
message (although, as we reported, she was invited to meet with the
Minister of Foreign Affairs), but reporters did ask him about civilian
deaths in a news conference held after the caucus meeting. He did not
reply to the question directly, but he told reporters - including the
CBC's Christina Lawand - that his policy on the Middle East remained the
same and would not change because of public opinion surveys or protests.
He said that Canadians are not neutral on terrorism and that he would
not call for a cease-fire until the right conditions were in place. And,
he said, when properly understood, his views represent the views of most
Canadians. Ms. Lawand clearly stated those views in her report.

She also included a statement from the news conference - the one to
which you referred - where the Prime Minister said he is "not
preoccupied in any way with reaction within individual communities."

This statement was in response to a reporter who asked specifically how
he felt about what seemed to be growing support in the Jewish community
for his government and ended his question by asking whether he was
concerned about the negative response among some in the Arab
community.    Mr. Harper replied that he agreed the Middle East conflict
had a pretty strong resonance in some cultural communities, but that the
government "can't take positions based on polls, we can't take decisions
based on reactions within certain domestic communities."

In the bulk of his answer, however, he explained that the issues were
far larger than the concerns of some communities. These are "serious
international issues, he said, "there are not only many lives at stake,
there are a lot of long term strategic interests of this country and of
the world.." He talked about two major elements of the Canadian policy,
about terrorist groups, both in Canada and abroad. He talked about
humanitarian concerns, including evacuation and re-construction as being
among the "focuses of our activity."

Then he returned to where he had started his answer and repeated: "I'm
not concerned or preoccupied in any way with reaction within individual
communities. I think that reaction is very predictable."  That was the
clip included in the report following the protestor. It is logical to
conclude here that the reaction he is "not concerned" with, is the kind
of reaction personified by the protestor seen at the beginning of the
report.  Mr. Harper was talking about predictable reactions in general
of which the protestor was a specific example.  Some have argued that he
was talking about polling within the Arab and Jewish communities, and
while that's possible, he was also discussing, in addition to polling,
"reactions within certain domestic communities."  Far from being
unrelated, as you suggest, the two are directly related.

Later in the news conference, the Prime Minister was specifically asked
about the protestors outside the meeting.  While he did say that it is
important to listen to members of the various communities (as we
reported, his Ministers met with two of the protestors) he also said
"they can't guide all of our decisions at the same time."  Far from
being contradictory to his response to the earlier question, this was
restating the government position that we faithfully reported throughout
the piece.

I do, however, agree with your concern about the structure of the
report. The construction of the piece did make it appear the Prime
Minister was responding directly to the woman protester, and that was
not the case.  We should have taken the time to make it clear that the
Prime Minister was responding to a general question, and not a specific
question about the woman's concerns, and I regret that.  While this does
not constitute a misrepresentation of Mr. Harper's position, or the
position of his Government, the program could have, and should have,
taken the time to be clear about what prompted the response.

It is also my responsibility to inform you that if you are not satisfied
with this response, you may wish to submit the matter for review by the
CBC Ombudsman, Mr. Vince Carlin. The Office of the Ombudsman, an
independent and impartial body reporting directly to the President, is
responsible for evaluating program compliance with the CBC's
journalistic policies. Mr. Carlin may be reached by mail at the address
shown below, or by fax at (416) 205-2825, or by e-mail at
ombudsman@cbc.ca

Yours sincerely,

Jonathan Whitten
Executive Producer
THE NATIONAL

Box 500, Station "A",
Toronto, Ontario
M5W 1E6


I hope this information is helpful to you, and thank you again for
writing.


Sincerely,

Jamie Richards
Communications Officer
CBC Audience Relations

My Reply

I ask you about the accuracy in the reporting in the report and after an explanation of the clip (which I DID understand by the way) you concede that there could be another impression? There was only one impression being touted here, and if this is what you call reporting, I would suggest you and the reporter send your resumes to one of the rags that are always telling us "Aliens kidnapped Me!!"

The slant of the clip was on purpose, and does CBC a disservice. Keep your personal politics out of the news, if that is what the case is. If is a corporate attitude, then I, as a supporting taxpayer, am telling you to stop it. You are a News Service, Not a Political Policy Advocate.
 
Top