You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Media Bias [Merged]
- Thread starter Cloud Cover
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 107
- Points
- 680
I would love to add Caroline Mulroney to the list (competence, and appeal to voters whose only requirement is 2nd-generation political name recognition). Unfortunately, she's now too tainted by association with Ford. :not-again:Good2Golf said:Disagree. Some past Conservative leaders who would qualify again for future leadership (MacKay and Ambrose) who are quite capable of deftly dealing with the media in a way that falls completely outside of Scheer’s capabilities.
I've argued pretty consistently about getting rid of these threads because of 'B' and 'C' ('A' I follow pretty actively). The recurring tendency here though is for 3-5 individuals to turn discussions into tranwrecks; the least informed have a tendency to be the most strident and repetitive.Humphrey Bogart said:I don't often weigh in on political threads on this site because:
A. I don't really care for politics or politicians;
B. Politics threads are full of opinion, feelings and conjecture and are usually echo chambers; and
C. It has very little to do with the profession of arms which I view as the primary purpose of this forum.
If a politics thread doesn't have a clear and obvious linkage to national security and/or the military, scrap it; there are other, better sites for those discussions.
That being said....
Good re-post; I hadn't gotten to my daily Ted reading yet.QV said:The eminent ERC says it far more eloquently then I do in my drive by posts. https://coloneltedcampbell.blog/2019/11/08/its-time-to-end-this-rubbish/
- Reaction score
- 15
- Points
- 430
https://thepostmillennial.com/why-im-leaving-the-national-post
Why I'm leaving the National Post - Barbara Kay - Montreal, QC - July 24, 2020
In a Canadian media industry that regularly lauds itself for courageous truth-telling, the goal is now to hide one’s true opinion rather than declare it.
It’s been two decades since my first byline appeared in the National Post. For a woman who already was well into middle age when her career began, the experience has been a thrill and a privilege. Perhaps more importantly, it’s been lively, energizing and fun. The National Post was conceived in 1998 as a safe haven from the stale pieties that dominated (and still dominate) the legacy Canadian media. Unfortunately, the spirit now has gone out of the place. And I’ve decided to step away from my regular column, at least for now. I’ve been noticing for a while that much of the best writing about Canada is increasingly taking place on platforms that didn’t exist until recently (and in some cases aren’t even Canadian). Numerous international writers whom I admire have decided to find new ways to reach their audience. I will now join their ranks.
There’s nothing the Canadian media loves more than stories about bitter infighting within its own ranks. And I wish I had a shocking tale of censorship or workplace bullying to supply to those media critics who trade on schadenfreude. Alas, I don’t. In fact, I continue to respect and appreciate the Post editors who’ve worked with me over the years. But the severe pressures they now experience no longer can be compartmentalized within their managerial sphere. They have spilled out into their relationship with their columnists, spoiling the weekly rites of editorial collaboration that once were one of the great joys of this job.
Thanks to the excommunication of James Bennet and (effectively) Bari Weiss from The New York Times, the vicious hounding of Margaret Wente at Massey College, and the CBC’s sadistic shaming of veteran broadcaster Wendy Mesley, the poisonous phenomenon I am describing here is by now well-known. Every editor feels like he is one Tweet away from getting mobbed and fired. And so the range of permissible opinion shrinks daily. Many columns now read as if they were stitched together from the same few dozen bromides that one is still allowed to say. In a Canadian media industry that regularly lauds itself for courageous truth-telling, the goal is now to hide one’s true opinion rather than declare it.
National Post editors Matt Gurney and Rob Roberts did their best to support me in recent months, even when my columns on charged topics were delayed or spiked. Days would pass between submission and publication, during which time the column shuffled from one editor to another for review.
As recently as today, my editor assured me that my job was not at risk. But every week seems to deliver new restrictions and anxieties. And a writer shouldn’t have to feel like she is imposing on her editor, or asking him to exert himself as a special favour, merely so she can give voice to mainstream principles that most Canadians believe. Even when my columns appear in the National Post without any kind of delay or objection, I feel a lingering worry that some stray word or phrase will cause an editor to suffer blowback. If I were a less experienced writer who needed the money or the exposure, these are concerns that I would accommodate. But I’m fortunate enough to not be in that position.
Since the early 2000s, journalists have anticipated the demise of their own industry. But we wrongly assumed that this decline would be driven exclusively by economic and technological factors. In recent months especially, it’s become clear that ideological purges have turned a gradual retreat into what now feels like a full-on rout. This is not a case of a lack of demand: The rise of popular new online sites shows that Canadians are eager for fresh voices and good reporting. Rather, legacy outlets are collapsing from within because they’ve outsourced editorial direction to a vocal internal minority that systematically weaponizes social media to destroy internal workplace hierarchies, and which presents its demands in Manichean terms. During the various iterations of political correctness that appeared since the 1990s, National Post editors fought against this trend. But as the public shaming of Rex Murphy shows, some now feel they have no choice but to throw down their weapons and sue for peace.
The last column I submitted to the National Post was a dispassionate review of Debra Soh’s new book, "The End of Gender: Debunking the Myths about Sex and Identity," which will be published next month by an imprint of Simon & Schuster. In outward respects, Soh is exactly the kind of writer whom progressives have lionized in recent years: a young woman of colour (and neuroscience PhD) who opines courageously about issues of sex and identity. Like me, she also happens to believe in concepts such as biology, sexual dimorphism, evidence-based clinical treatments, and the importance of peer-reviewed science. In a normal world, it wouldn’t matter that these concepts run afoul of ideological movements that venerate the revealed truths communicated by inwardly experienced sensations of gender.
But even many progressives (including those who signed the Harper’s “Letter on Justice and Open Debate” this month) now publicly acknowledge that these are not normal times. And if as famous and powerful a writer as J.K. Rowling can get smeared for stating that biology is a thing, it shouldn’t surprise readers to know that the submission below provided yet another occasion for Post editors to drag their feet.
We are experiencing a dark period for free thought in Canada. But extremist movements always work in cycles. And one already can hear the gears of counterrevolution grinding into motion. If my editors are amenable to it, I may choose to reappear in the pages of the Post when this movement is suitably advanced. Or not. Either way, I will find other means to get my opinions out into the world. And however I choose to do so, I’ve promised myself that the experience will be, at the very least, lively, energizing and fun.
Why I'm leaving the National Post - Barbara Kay - Montreal, QC - July 24, 2020
In a Canadian media industry that regularly lauds itself for courageous truth-telling, the goal is now to hide one’s true opinion rather than declare it.
It’s been two decades since my first byline appeared in the National Post. For a woman who already was well into middle age when her career began, the experience has been a thrill and a privilege. Perhaps more importantly, it’s been lively, energizing and fun. The National Post was conceived in 1998 as a safe haven from the stale pieties that dominated (and still dominate) the legacy Canadian media. Unfortunately, the spirit now has gone out of the place. And I’ve decided to step away from my regular column, at least for now. I’ve been noticing for a while that much of the best writing about Canada is increasingly taking place on platforms that didn’t exist until recently (and in some cases aren’t even Canadian). Numerous international writers whom I admire have decided to find new ways to reach their audience. I will now join their ranks.
There’s nothing the Canadian media loves more than stories about bitter infighting within its own ranks. And I wish I had a shocking tale of censorship or workplace bullying to supply to those media critics who trade on schadenfreude. Alas, I don’t. In fact, I continue to respect and appreciate the Post editors who’ve worked with me over the years. But the severe pressures they now experience no longer can be compartmentalized within their managerial sphere. They have spilled out into their relationship with their columnists, spoiling the weekly rites of editorial collaboration that once were one of the great joys of this job.
Thanks to the excommunication of James Bennet and (effectively) Bari Weiss from The New York Times, the vicious hounding of Margaret Wente at Massey College, and the CBC’s sadistic shaming of veteran broadcaster Wendy Mesley, the poisonous phenomenon I am describing here is by now well-known. Every editor feels like he is one Tweet away from getting mobbed and fired. And so the range of permissible opinion shrinks daily. Many columns now read as if they were stitched together from the same few dozen bromides that one is still allowed to say. In a Canadian media industry that regularly lauds itself for courageous truth-telling, the goal is now to hide one’s true opinion rather than declare it.
National Post editors Matt Gurney and Rob Roberts did their best to support me in recent months, even when my columns on charged topics were delayed or spiked. Days would pass between submission and publication, during which time the column shuffled from one editor to another for review.
As recently as today, my editor assured me that my job was not at risk. But every week seems to deliver new restrictions and anxieties. And a writer shouldn’t have to feel like she is imposing on her editor, or asking him to exert himself as a special favour, merely so she can give voice to mainstream principles that most Canadians believe. Even when my columns appear in the National Post without any kind of delay or objection, I feel a lingering worry that some stray word or phrase will cause an editor to suffer blowback. If I were a less experienced writer who needed the money or the exposure, these are concerns that I would accommodate. But I’m fortunate enough to not be in that position.
Since the early 2000s, journalists have anticipated the demise of their own industry. But we wrongly assumed that this decline would be driven exclusively by economic and technological factors. In recent months especially, it’s become clear that ideological purges have turned a gradual retreat into what now feels like a full-on rout. This is not a case of a lack of demand: The rise of popular new online sites shows that Canadians are eager for fresh voices and good reporting. Rather, legacy outlets are collapsing from within because they’ve outsourced editorial direction to a vocal internal minority that systematically weaponizes social media to destroy internal workplace hierarchies, and which presents its demands in Manichean terms. During the various iterations of political correctness that appeared since the 1990s, National Post editors fought against this trend. But as the public shaming of Rex Murphy shows, some now feel they have no choice but to throw down their weapons and sue for peace.
The last column I submitted to the National Post was a dispassionate review of Debra Soh’s new book, "The End of Gender: Debunking the Myths about Sex and Identity," which will be published next month by an imprint of Simon & Schuster. In outward respects, Soh is exactly the kind of writer whom progressives have lionized in recent years: a young woman of colour (and neuroscience PhD) who opines courageously about issues of sex and identity. Like me, she also happens to believe in concepts such as biology, sexual dimorphism, evidence-based clinical treatments, and the importance of peer-reviewed science. In a normal world, it wouldn’t matter that these concepts run afoul of ideological movements that venerate the revealed truths communicated by inwardly experienced sensations of gender.
But even many progressives (including those who signed the Harper’s “Letter on Justice and Open Debate” this month) now publicly acknowledge that these are not normal times. And if as famous and powerful a writer as J.K. Rowling can get smeared for stating that biology is a thing, it shouldn’t surprise readers to know that the submission below provided yet another occasion for Post editors to drag their feet.
We are experiencing a dark period for free thought in Canada. But extremist movements always work in cycles. And one already can hear the gears of counterrevolution grinding into motion. If my editors are amenable to it, I may choose to reappear in the pages of the Post when this movement is suitably advanced. Or not. Either way, I will find other means to get my opinions out into the world. And however I choose to do so, I’ve promised myself that the experience will be, at the very least, lively, energizing and fun.
shawn5o
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 9
- Points
- 230
Interesting article on media bias
Media Bias in Canada
Jon Tattrie
October 23, 2021
https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/media-bias-in-canada
Bias means supporting or opposing something or someone in an unfair way, regardless of the evidence. Media bias is when information spread by media or a news outlet reflects the interests and biases of ownership or individuals of that media company. Corporations may have a clear bias for one political party or issue and may influence its media outlets to reflect that bias. Individual journalists or news outlets may favour one side of an issue and reflect that bias — consciously or unconsciously — in the way they cover stories. The fact that a majority of journalists in Canada are White can also lead to biased reporting on minority groups. People can overcome unconscious bias by thinking and talking about it, and especially by listening to people from less privileged backgrounds.
Different Forms of Bias
Bias means supporting or opposing something or someone in an unfair way, regardless of the evidence. Journalists are trained to detect bias and avoid letting it creep into their stories. But there are several ways it can still influence the news they produce.
Bias by Selection or Omission
When journalists cover news events, they select or omit information as they decide what is most relevant. For example, if some people in a large crowd boo a politician, journalists can decide to characterize it as the entire audience booing her, some opponents “expressing disapproval,” or to not mention the boos at all.
Bias Through Placement
Journalists also decide how to “lead” a story — which information they should highlight first, and how they should present it. They often use an “inverted pyramid” structure to tell the story. In an inverted pyramid style, the reporter starts with a narrow focus on what she decides is the most important piece of information. She then pulls back to include more details and give a broader view of the topic.
Journalists also decide which story leads the broadcast news, and which stories go on the front page of a newspaper or the landing page of a website. Readers tend to assume these are the most important stories of the day, even if that is not stated.
Bias by Headline
With the increase in people getting news from social media, the headline has taken on an even greater role. In fact, it may be all some people read. Headlines can suggest the news is good or bad, exciting or scary, in a way the story might not do.
The drive to get people to share stories on social media has led to the rise of clickbait. Clickbait is when websites write dramatic and emotional headlines designed to pull in readers. The content of the article, however, doesn’t deliver what the headline promises.
They often follow patterns like: “Man tries to hug a lion — you won’t believe what happens next,” or “This 1980s child star is all grown up — you’ll be shocked at how she looks!” or “Only people with an IQ above 160 can solve this quiz. Can you?” Clicking the link often takes people to a site filled with advertising, and only a few more details on the story itself.
Bias by Word Choice and Tone
Subtle use of language can influence how readers interpret the news. If a reporter writes that someone “claimed” something, it puts doubts in the reader’s mind in a way that saying someone “said” something would not. In a story on a middle-aged man who stole a car as a teenager, reporters could call that person a convicted thief, a reformed man, or a person who did their time. Each word choice guides the reader toward a different conclusion about the man’s character.
When Ontario premier Doug Ford marched in the York Pride Parade in 2019, the Toronto Sun headlined the story, “Ford proudly marches with cops in York Pride parade.” The newspaper reported that “dozens of police in uniform” marched and then noted that Ford had made an “unexpected appearance.” In the fifth paragraph, it reports that Ford won’t march in Toronto Pride, “which has banned police in uniform from marching for the third year in a row.”
By using words like “proudly” and drawing attention to Ford marching with police officers, the Sun story creates a favourable impression of the premier. It also creates an unfavourable impression of Toronto Pride by noting its exclusion of police “for the third year in a row.”
Global News reported the same story under the headline “Premier Ford marches in York Region Pride parade.” Its first paragraph said, “Premier Doug Ford took part in the York Region Pride parade in Newmarket on Saturday afternoon, amid mounting criticism for stating he wouldn’t participate in the upcoming Toronto Pride parade.”
By leading with “mounting criticism” over the Toronto parade and not mentioning the police officers until much further down in the story, Global News creates an initially unfavourable impression of Ford.
Meanwhile, the Toronto Star’s headline said Ford’s appearance took organizers “by surprise.” In the second paragraph, it quotes organizers saying, “[We were] not aware Mr. Ford was attending or marching.” This creates the impression that they may not have approved of his participation.
When Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Party won Canada’s 2015 federal election, the Toronto Star lead read: “Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. That title, which seemed improbable a mere 11 weeks ago, is now set to become a reality after the Liberals’ historic, come-from-behind election result.” The National Post lead read: “The Liberal Party steamrolled to a stunning political comeback Monday night, forming a new, majority government and creating Canada’s first family dynasty.”
Both leads focus on the comeback angle. However, the Star called it “historic,” which creates a positive impression. The Post instead called it a “family dynasty,” alluding to his father, former prime minister Pierre Trudeau. This could create the impression that his father’s legacy had an important role in Justin Trudeau’s victory.
Bias by Image
Photo editors pick an image to go with a story. They can choose one that makes the person look dignified, or angry, which influences how people read the story. Some stories about US president Donald Trump facing an impeachment inquiry ran photos of Trump yelling with his mouth wide open. Others selected photos of him looking stoic. The first image suggests he responded with anger and little self-control. The other suggests he reacted calmly.
Political parties can also use, or even alter, photos in a way to spread a certain message. In 2019, federal Green Party leader Elizabeth May’s team published a photo of her campaigning. May held a reusable coffee cup with the Green Party logo and drank from a metal straw. However, she later admitted the metal straw and reusable cup were added to the photo digitally. The changes better fit her image of an environmentally conscious politician.
Unpacking Privilege
Privilege refers to rights or advantage that are granted only to a particular group of people. It can also refer more generally to advantages that come from being part of a dominant group in society. Becoming aware of these advantages and their impact on others allows a privileged person to more clearly see the disadvantages that can come from being outside the dominant group.
Privilege can lead to unconscious bias. This means the person holds attitudes or ideas about another group but might only see those beliefs as facts. People can have unconscious biases based on age, gender, culture, language, ethnicity — basically any marker that might divide someone into a different group. When privileged members of society hold unconscious biases against members of a minority or underprivileged group, that can create systemic barriers for the underprivileged group.
Bias in Canadian Journalism
People, including journalists, can also be politically biased against certain views. For decades, many newspapers openly leaned left or right (e.g., the left-leaning Globe and the right-leaning Empire newspapers). Today, people are more likely to find openly biased reporting on left-leaning websites such as HuffPost or Salon, or the right- left-centre bias. However, that tends to be largely offset by factual reporting that includes multiple perspectives.
In Canadian journalism, the fact that a majority of journalists are White can lead to biased reporting on minority groups. People can overcome unconscious bias by thinking and talking about it, and especially by listening to people from less privileged backgrounds. People consuming the news can pay extra attention to how certain groups are typically represented by the media and by noticing who is under-represented or misrepresented.
Media Ownership and Convergence
In privately owned media, the interests and biases of the ownership can create bias in the news outlet. Corporations often own different kinds of media (e.g., news websites, radio stations, television networks). That can narrow the range of opinion in the public forum. A dramatic example of this in the United States came in March 2018. Dozens of news anchors from multiple television stations across the country all recited the same speech warning against the dangers of “biased and false news.” Local FOX, ABC and CBS outlets delivered a seemingly independent editorial message about the “troubling trend of irresponsible, one-sided news stories plaguing our country.”
All the stations in question were owned by the Sinclair Broadcast Group. It has close ties to President Donald Trump. The little-known company owns 191 television stations, which all run under different names. Most viewers would have no idea their local anchor was reading a script reflecting a corporation’s right-wing perspective. Trump himself has tweeted that Sinclair is “far superior” to CNN or NBC.
Media Ownership in Canada
Canada has not seen that level of widespread media ownership. However, it does have big corporations that own multiple news outlets. (See also Media Convergence.)
The Torstar Corporation owns the Toronto Star and operates more than 80 newspapers across Canada, including the StarMetro chain of free daily newspapers. The Postmedia Network Canada Corporation owns the National Post newspaper.
It also owns daily newspapers in Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, Saskatchewan and British Columbia. The corporation, which owns 140 outlets in print and online, is 98-per-cent owned by US hedge funds.
In Atlantic Canada, the Irving Group is well-known for its gas stations and home oil delivery. In New Brunswick, through Brunswick News, it owns every major daily newspaper, most of the French and English weeklies, and some private radio stations. In 2019, Brunswick News fired its award-winning political cartoonist Michael de Adder — a move he said came in response to an unflattering cartoon he drew about Donald Trump. Using the Twitter account of one of its newspapers, Brunswick News called that “false information” and said that cancelling de Adder’s contract was not related to the Trump cartoon.
It is unlikely that bias can be completely removed from media-owning corporations or individual journalists. But a public that is media literate can better detect and object to those biases. Journalists who are aware of their own biases and issues around privilege can monitor their own reporting to ensure it relies on facts and balances multiple sides of issues.
Media Bias in Canada
Jon Tattrie
October 23, 2021
https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/media-bias-in-canada
Bias means supporting or opposing something or someone in an unfair way, regardless of the evidence. Media bias is when information spread by media or a news outlet reflects the interests and biases of ownership or individuals of that media company. Corporations may have a clear bias for one political party or issue and may influence its media outlets to reflect that bias. Individual journalists or news outlets may favour one side of an issue and reflect that bias — consciously or unconsciously — in the way they cover stories. The fact that a majority of journalists in Canada are White can also lead to biased reporting on minority groups. People can overcome unconscious bias by thinking and talking about it, and especially by listening to people from less privileged backgrounds.
Different Forms of Bias
Bias means supporting or opposing something or someone in an unfair way, regardless of the evidence. Journalists are trained to detect bias and avoid letting it creep into their stories. But there are several ways it can still influence the news they produce.
Bias by Selection or Omission
When journalists cover news events, they select or omit information as they decide what is most relevant. For example, if some people in a large crowd boo a politician, journalists can decide to characterize it as the entire audience booing her, some opponents “expressing disapproval,” or to not mention the boos at all.
Bias Through Placement
Journalists also decide how to “lead” a story — which information they should highlight first, and how they should present it. They often use an “inverted pyramid” structure to tell the story. In an inverted pyramid style, the reporter starts with a narrow focus on what she decides is the most important piece of information. She then pulls back to include more details and give a broader view of the topic.
Journalists also decide which story leads the broadcast news, and which stories go on the front page of a newspaper or the landing page of a website. Readers tend to assume these are the most important stories of the day, even if that is not stated.
Bias by Headline
With the increase in people getting news from social media, the headline has taken on an even greater role. In fact, it may be all some people read. Headlines can suggest the news is good or bad, exciting or scary, in a way the story might not do.
The drive to get people to share stories on social media has led to the rise of clickbait. Clickbait is when websites write dramatic and emotional headlines designed to pull in readers. The content of the article, however, doesn’t deliver what the headline promises.
They often follow patterns like: “Man tries to hug a lion — you won’t believe what happens next,” or “This 1980s child star is all grown up — you’ll be shocked at how she looks!” or “Only people with an IQ above 160 can solve this quiz. Can you?” Clicking the link often takes people to a site filled with advertising, and only a few more details on the story itself.
Bias by Word Choice and Tone
Subtle use of language can influence how readers interpret the news. If a reporter writes that someone “claimed” something, it puts doubts in the reader’s mind in a way that saying someone “said” something would not. In a story on a middle-aged man who stole a car as a teenager, reporters could call that person a convicted thief, a reformed man, or a person who did their time. Each word choice guides the reader toward a different conclusion about the man’s character.
When Ontario premier Doug Ford marched in the York Pride Parade in 2019, the Toronto Sun headlined the story, “Ford proudly marches with cops in York Pride parade.” The newspaper reported that “dozens of police in uniform” marched and then noted that Ford had made an “unexpected appearance.” In the fifth paragraph, it reports that Ford won’t march in Toronto Pride, “which has banned police in uniform from marching for the third year in a row.”
By using words like “proudly” and drawing attention to Ford marching with police officers, the Sun story creates a favourable impression of the premier. It also creates an unfavourable impression of Toronto Pride by noting its exclusion of police “for the third year in a row.”
Global News reported the same story under the headline “Premier Ford marches in York Region Pride parade.” Its first paragraph said, “Premier Doug Ford took part in the York Region Pride parade in Newmarket on Saturday afternoon, amid mounting criticism for stating he wouldn’t participate in the upcoming Toronto Pride parade.”
By leading with “mounting criticism” over the Toronto parade and not mentioning the police officers until much further down in the story, Global News creates an initially unfavourable impression of Ford.
Meanwhile, the Toronto Star’s headline said Ford’s appearance took organizers “by surprise.” In the second paragraph, it quotes organizers saying, “[We were] not aware Mr. Ford was attending or marching.” This creates the impression that they may not have approved of his participation.
When Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Party won Canada’s 2015 federal election, the Toronto Star lead read: “Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. That title, which seemed improbable a mere 11 weeks ago, is now set to become a reality after the Liberals’ historic, come-from-behind election result.” The National Post lead read: “The Liberal Party steamrolled to a stunning political comeback Monday night, forming a new, majority government and creating Canada’s first family dynasty.”
Both leads focus on the comeback angle. However, the Star called it “historic,” which creates a positive impression. The Post instead called it a “family dynasty,” alluding to his father, former prime minister Pierre Trudeau. This could create the impression that his father’s legacy had an important role in Justin Trudeau’s victory.
Bias by Image
Photo editors pick an image to go with a story. They can choose one that makes the person look dignified, or angry, which influences how people read the story. Some stories about US president Donald Trump facing an impeachment inquiry ran photos of Trump yelling with his mouth wide open. Others selected photos of him looking stoic. The first image suggests he responded with anger and little self-control. The other suggests he reacted calmly.
Political parties can also use, or even alter, photos in a way to spread a certain message. In 2019, federal Green Party leader Elizabeth May’s team published a photo of her campaigning. May held a reusable coffee cup with the Green Party logo and drank from a metal straw. However, she later admitted the metal straw and reusable cup were added to the photo digitally. The changes better fit her image of an environmentally conscious politician.
Unpacking Privilege
Privilege refers to rights or advantage that are granted only to a particular group of people. It can also refer more generally to advantages that come from being part of a dominant group in society. Becoming aware of these advantages and their impact on others allows a privileged person to more clearly see the disadvantages that can come from being outside the dominant group.
Privilege can lead to unconscious bias. This means the person holds attitudes or ideas about another group but might only see those beliefs as facts. People can have unconscious biases based on age, gender, culture, language, ethnicity — basically any marker that might divide someone into a different group. When privileged members of society hold unconscious biases against members of a minority or underprivileged group, that can create systemic barriers for the underprivileged group.
Bias in Canadian Journalism
People, including journalists, can also be politically biased against certain views. For decades, many newspapers openly leaned left or right (e.g., the left-leaning Globe and the right-leaning Empire newspapers). Today, people are more likely to find openly biased reporting on left-leaning websites such as HuffPost or Salon, or the right- left-centre bias. However, that tends to be largely offset by factual reporting that includes multiple perspectives.
In Canadian journalism, the fact that a majority of journalists are White can lead to biased reporting on minority groups. People can overcome unconscious bias by thinking and talking about it, and especially by listening to people from less privileged backgrounds. People consuming the news can pay extra attention to how certain groups are typically represented by the media and by noticing who is under-represented or misrepresented.
Media Ownership and Convergence
In privately owned media, the interests and biases of the ownership can create bias in the news outlet. Corporations often own different kinds of media (e.g., news websites, radio stations, television networks). That can narrow the range of opinion in the public forum. A dramatic example of this in the United States came in March 2018. Dozens of news anchors from multiple television stations across the country all recited the same speech warning against the dangers of “biased and false news.” Local FOX, ABC and CBS outlets delivered a seemingly independent editorial message about the “troubling trend of irresponsible, one-sided news stories plaguing our country.”
All the stations in question were owned by the Sinclair Broadcast Group. It has close ties to President Donald Trump. The little-known company owns 191 television stations, which all run under different names. Most viewers would have no idea their local anchor was reading a script reflecting a corporation’s right-wing perspective. Trump himself has tweeted that Sinclair is “far superior” to CNN or NBC.
Media Ownership in Canada
Canada has not seen that level of widespread media ownership. However, it does have big corporations that own multiple news outlets. (See also Media Convergence.)
The Torstar Corporation owns the Toronto Star and operates more than 80 newspapers across Canada, including the StarMetro chain of free daily newspapers. The Postmedia Network Canada Corporation owns the National Post newspaper.
It also owns daily newspapers in Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, Saskatchewan and British Columbia. The corporation, which owns 140 outlets in print and online, is 98-per-cent owned by US hedge funds.
In Atlantic Canada, the Irving Group is well-known for its gas stations and home oil delivery. In New Brunswick, through Brunswick News, it owns every major daily newspaper, most of the French and English weeklies, and some private radio stations. In 2019, Brunswick News fired its award-winning political cartoonist Michael de Adder — a move he said came in response to an unflattering cartoon he drew about Donald Trump. Using the Twitter account of one of its newspapers, Brunswick News called that “false information” and said that cancelling de Adder’s contract was not related to the Trump cartoon.
It is unlikely that bias can be completely removed from media-owning corporations or individual journalists. But a public that is media literate can better detect and object to those biases. Journalists who are aware of their own biases and issues around privilege can monitor their own reporting to ensure it relies on facts and balances multiple sides of issues.
shawn5o
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 9
- Points
- 230
Rifleman62 said:For the Cdn viewers of CNN:
https://www.kusi.com/cnn-requests-kusi-for-local-view-on-the-border-declines-our-reporter-after-finding-out-wall-works/
CNN requests KUSI (SAN DIEGO) for local view on the border, declines our reporter after finding out wall works - 10 Jan 19 (Videos at Link)
SAN DIEGO (KUSI) – Thursday morning, CNN called the KUSI Newsroom asking if one of our reporters could give them a local view of the debate surrounding the border wall and government shutdown. KUSI offered our own Dan Plante, who has reported dozens of times on the border, including one story from 2016 that was retweeted by former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, and posted on DrudgeReport.com. The Border Fence Tour is below.
We believe CNN declined a report from KUSI because we informed them that most Border Patrol Agents we have spoken to told us the barrier does in fact work. We have continuously been told by Border Patrol Agents that the barrier along the Southern border helps prevent illegal entries, drugs, and weapons from entering the United States, and the numbers prove it.
@KUSINews
· Jan 10, 2021
Thursday morning, @CNN called the KUSI Newsroom asking if a reporter could give them a local view of the debate surrounding the border wall and government shutdown. After we informed them about our past reports, they declined to hear from us.
CNN PR replied to our tweet with the following statement, “We called several local stations to book someone for a show. We didn’t end up booking any of them. That happens many times every single day. We did, however, book a reporter from KUSI for a story on immigration and the border wall in November. This is a non story.”
If one looks at the CNN tweet about this, it ends with "This is a non-story hashtag(#)factsfirst emoticon of an apple"
I find CNN to be deceptive and misleading
shawn5o
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 9
- Points
- 230
I'm not sure if this article belongs here. An interesting article but it is extremely biased (merde)
How an overload of riot porn is driving conflict in the streets
Weak organization forced right-wing agitators to rely on video and social media. Now they have a machine to spread a narrative of lawless rioting.
Joan Donovan
September 3, 2021
https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/09/03/1007931/riot-porn-right-wing-vigilante-propaganda-social-media/
When Kyle Rittenhouse shot and murdered protesters in Kenosha, Wisconsin, it wasn’t just the act of a lone vigilante; it was a direct consequence of white militia groups’ organizing on social media.
Since June, right-wing media makers have recorded and circulated videos of violent altercations at protests in cities including New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, and Portland, Oregon. Fed into a media ecosystem with an established bias toward highlighting violence and rioting, the videos have mobilized white militia and vigilante groups to take up arms against Black Lives Matter and “antifa” protesters. This feedback circuit has created a self-fulfilling cycle where white vigilantes feel justified in menacing and physically attacking racial justice protesters—and inspire others to do the same.
…
As a scholar of social movements and media studies, I see an alarming split between the types of content consumed by right-wing reactionaries and left-wing social justice advocates. Given the way media accounts shape public perceptions about protest and define who has recourse to the “legitimate use of violence,” the kinds of content shared within these hyperpartisan media systems play a powerful yet often invisible role in mobilizing white vigilante groups. If social-media companies do not act swiftly to stop calls for violence against protesters, the situation can only get worse.
The rise of riot porn
Since the George Floyd protests, conservative media outlets including Fox News (particularly Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity), One America News, Glenn Beck’s BlazeTV, and right-wing YouTubers have been covering Black Lives Matter and other left-wing protests daily, specifically highlighting instances of violence, fighting, and property damage. This coverage has come to dominate the right-wing narrative in a new way, flipping the script to suggest that Black protesters—demonstrating because they fear police violence—are themselves a threat to white people.
…
According to analysis I conducted using MediaCloud, a research tool from MIT and Harvard, right-wing media outlets wrote five to six times more articles about Seattle’s “Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone” than did center or left media. What has been a minor storyline among left-wing audiences has been dramatically overemphasized by right-wing media because these protests provided plenty of visceral content for online content creators. In one case, Fox News manipulated photos to make protesters appear more ominous and threatening, while other right-wing outlets falsely reported that the occupying protesters were extorting local businesses.
LINK
How an overload of riot porn is driving conflict in the streets
Weak organization forced right-wing agitators to rely on video and social media. Now they have a machine to spread a narrative of lawless rioting.
Joan Donovan
September 3, 2021
https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/09/03/1007931/riot-porn-right-wing-vigilante-propaganda-social-media/
When Kyle Rittenhouse shot and murdered protesters in Kenosha, Wisconsin, it wasn’t just the act of a lone vigilante; it was a direct consequence of white militia groups’ organizing on social media.
Since June, right-wing media makers have recorded and circulated videos of violent altercations at protests in cities including New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, and Portland, Oregon. Fed into a media ecosystem with an established bias toward highlighting violence and rioting, the videos have mobilized white militia and vigilante groups to take up arms against Black Lives Matter and “antifa” protesters. This feedback circuit has created a self-fulfilling cycle where white vigilantes feel justified in menacing and physically attacking racial justice protesters—and inspire others to do the same.
…
As a scholar of social movements and media studies, I see an alarming split between the types of content consumed by right-wing reactionaries and left-wing social justice advocates. Given the way media accounts shape public perceptions about protest and define who has recourse to the “legitimate use of violence,” the kinds of content shared within these hyperpartisan media systems play a powerful yet often invisible role in mobilizing white vigilante groups. If social-media companies do not act swiftly to stop calls for violence against protesters, the situation can only get worse.
The rise of riot porn
Since the George Floyd protests, conservative media outlets including Fox News (particularly Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity), One America News, Glenn Beck’s BlazeTV, and right-wing YouTubers have been covering Black Lives Matter and other left-wing protests daily, specifically highlighting instances of violence, fighting, and property damage. This coverage has come to dominate the right-wing narrative in a new way, flipping the script to suggest that Black protesters—demonstrating because they fear police violence—are themselves a threat to white people.
…
According to analysis I conducted using MediaCloud, a research tool from MIT and Harvard, right-wing media outlets wrote five to six times more articles about Seattle’s “Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone” than did center or left media. What has been a minor storyline among left-wing audiences has been dramatically overemphasized by right-wing media because these protests provided plenty of visceral content for online content creators. In one case, Fox News manipulated photos to make protesters appear more ominous and threatening, while other right-wing outlets falsely reported that the occupying protesters were extorting local businesses.
LINK
Jarnhamar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 293
- Points
- 880
[quote author=shawn5o]
The rise of riot porn
Since the George Floyd protests, conservative media outlets including Fox News (particularly Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity), One America News, Glenn Beck’s BlazeTV, and right-wing YouTubers have been covering Black Lives Matter and other left-wing protests daily, specifically highlighting instances of violence, fighting, and property damage. This coverage has come to dominate the right-wing narrative in a new way, flipping the script to suggest that Black protesters—demonstrating because they fear police violence—are themselves a threat to white people.
[/quote]
More of a threat to everyone, including themselves.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbVS-UGHiEc
The rise of riot porn
Since the George Floyd protests, conservative media outlets including Fox News (particularly Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity), One America News, Glenn Beck’s BlazeTV, and right-wing YouTubers have been covering Black Lives Matter and other left-wing protests daily, specifically highlighting instances of violence, fighting, and property damage. This coverage has come to dominate the right-wing narrative in a new way, flipping the script to suggest that Black protesters—demonstrating because they fear police violence—are themselves a threat to white people.
[/quote]
More of a threat to everyone, including themselves.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbVS-UGHiEc
- Reaction score
- 112
- Points
- 780
Jarnhamar said:More of a threat to everyone, including themselves.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbVS-UGHiEc
Why did I think of Boots Randolph when I saw that?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zcq_xLi2NGo
Weinie
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 374
- Points
- 980
shawn5o said:I'm not sure if this article belongs here. An interesting article but it is extremely biased (merde)
How an overload of riot porn is driving conflict in the streets
Weak organization forced right-wing agitators to rely on video and social media. Now they have a machine to spread a narrative of lawless rioting.
Joan Donovan
September 3, 2021
https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/09/03/1007931/riot-porn-right-wing-vigilante-propaganda-social-media/
When Kyle Rittenhouse shot and murdered protesters in Kenosha, Wisconsin, it wasn%u2019t just the act of a lone vigilante; it was a direct consequence of white militia groups%u2019 organizing on social media.
Since June, right-wing media makers have recorded and circulated videos of violent altercations at protests in cities including New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, and Portland, Oregon. Fed into a media ecosystem with an established bias toward highlighting violence and rioting, the videos have mobilized white militia and vigilante groups to take up arms against Black Lives Matter and %u201Cantifa%u201D protesters. This feedback circuit has created a self-fulfilling cycle where white vigilantes feel justified in menacing and physically attacking racial justice protesters%u2014and inspire others to do the same.
%u2026
As a scholar of social movements and media studies, I see an alarming split between the types of content consumed by right-wing reactionaries and left-wing social justice advocates. Given the way media accounts shape public perceptions about protest and define who has recourse to the %u201Clegitimate use of violence,%u201D the kinds of content shared within these hyperpartisan media systems play a powerful yet often invisible role in mobilizing white vigilante groups. If social-media companies do not act swiftly to stop calls for violence against protesters, the situation can only get worse.
The rise of riot porn
Since the George Floyd protests, conservative media outlets including Fox News (particularly Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity), One America News, Glenn Beck%u2019s BlazeTV, and right-wing YouTubers have been covering Black Lives Matter and other left-wing protests daily, specifically highlighting instances of violence, fighting, and property damage. This coverage has come to dominate the right-wing narrative in a new way, flipping the script to suggest that Black protesters%u2014demonstrating because they fear police violence%u2014are themselves a threat to white people.
%u2026
According to analysis I conducted using MediaCloud, a research tool from MIT and Harvard, right-wing media outlets wrote five to six times more articles about Seattle%u2019s %u201CCapitol Hill Autonomous Zone%u201D than did center or left media. What has been a minor storyline among left-wing audiences has been dramatically overemphasized by right-wing media because these protests provided plenty of visceral content for online content creators. In one case, Fox News manipulated photos to make protesters appear more ominous and threatening, while other right-wing outlets falsely reported that the occupying protesters were extorting local businesses.
LINK
Or maybe they are just 5 or 6 times more concerned about an apparent breakdown in civil society; conservatives being more........conservative
shawn5o
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 9
- Points
- 230
Jarnhamar said:More of a threat to everyone, including themselves.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbVS-UGHiEc
Thanks Jarnhamar
I like schadenfreude :nod:
- Reaction score
- 322
- Points
- 980
shawn5o said:Thanks Jarnhamar
I like schadenfreude :nod:
This video has a better angle on the event: https://youtu.be/5Awb89q_9rg
:nod:
Jarnhamar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 293
- Points
- 880
Good2Golf said:
This video has been removed for violating YouTube's policy on violent or graphic content.
Damn
Similar threads
- Replies
- 1
- Views
- 2K
- Replies
- 6
- Views
- 3K
- Replies
- 0
- Views
- 2K
