eye95
Well-known member
No doubt, he or someone else will. The example will be trite, but exaggerated.
You will see the rough equivalent of "A hit me with a baseball bat. But B picked his nose in my presence. They are both equally evil!"
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Are you paying for al Jazeera?
- Thread starter eye95
- Start date
No doubt, he or someone else will. The example will be trite, but exaggerated.
You will see the rough equivalent of "A hit me with a baseball bat. But B picked his nose in my presence. They are both equally evil!"
when the government decides what is news that's the best way.........
KBCraig
Regular Member
I believe subtle propaganda is the most dangerous.
Simply not covering some topics, or not covering them with any depth, out of self-censorship in order to retain access, is even worse.
EMNofSeattle
Regular Member
When the big corporations and international billionaires decide what's news it's even better.....
you are right. its better to have private groups than socialist governments put out the news.
EMNofSeattle
Regular Member
No it's not. First off CBC is not an agency of the Canadian Government. Second off, our media is among the worst in the developed world. It's all based on sensation over substance reporting
eye95
Well-known member
Really? Because when I lived in Denmark, the newspapers over there were all on a par with the National Enquirer. Nothing up to even the level of the NY Daily News or the NY Post.
And England has tons of over the top muckraking rags, as well. I think a lot of the "the US sucks other countries are better) crowd give way more benefit of the doubt and credibility to countries NOT the US but that are equally bad or worse than us in any given area.
With that being said, I think AJ is a good media source.
I don;'t know if CBC is an "agency" of the canadian govt. but according to Wikpedia, CBC is a "crown corporation" which means IT is an organ of the government, unlike our private networks
They also say "In practice, most Crown corporations operate at arm's length from the government (the Queen-in-Council), with direct government control only being exerted over the corporation's budget and the appointment of its chairperson and directors through Orders-in-Council."
I don't know to what extent CBC operates this way, but that is tangential to the FACT that is a crown corporation and thus it's a government broadcast
Right? Or is wikipedia wrong?
Here is what is said about CBC's management
As a crown corporation, the CBC operates at arm’s length (autonomously) from the government in its day-to-day business. The corporation is governed by the Broadcasting Act of 1991, under a Board of Directors and is directly responsible to Parliament through the Department of Canadian Heritage. General management of the organization is in the hands of a president, who is appointed by the Governor General of Canada in Council, on the advice of the prime minister.
So, the general management of the CBC is in the hands of a person WHO IS APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR GENERAL OF CANADA IN COUNCIL ON THE ADVICE OF THE PRIME MINISTER!!!]
So, sorry . Previous poster (emn iirc) is simply wrong about the cbc
I also disagree that it's better to have govt. putting out news vs. the private sector.
Media should be a watchdog OF govt, not a division of it.
The main problem with US media imo is too much ownership of many media outlets by too few corporations (clear channel, you hear me?)
Sure, a tv channel owned by a private company may be biased towards that company, but there are tons of companies. There's only ONE govt. And only govt. enforces by the barrel of a gun.
Last edited:
EMNofSeattle
Regular Member
To the contrare, if you ever get close to the border try listening to CBC, it's a welcome relief from American private media. I don't really like NPR that much, but CBC I really like, they provide world news the American news media often ignores. hell even the CBC story on Canadian gun owners was much more fair then you'll find in any national media here about US gun owners...
CBC is like NPR and BBC. people think of it as "government media" and it's not really. I don't consider stuff like that to be "government broadcasts" since the Government does not exercise day to day control or censorship over content. It's not in anyway comparable to Pravda where the Soviets controlled the media. the crown in canada (the governor general) selects the people who lead the business side of the operation and the legislative branch gives some funding. part of the problem with broadcasting in Canada is that many private radio stations would rather buy american content for a fraction of the cost and loop that. whereas the CBC has a federal mandate to be "uniquely canadian". they also have to run programming in both languages in Canada.
true it's a corporation chartered by the crown, but I see very little evidence that the government is directly involved in setting programming. Like I'm saying, for world news outside of the US I think CBC is the best source most americans can access for international news and world events. Besides Canada isn't my government anyway so it might as well be a private news source far as I'm concerned
besides I genuinely enjoy listening to radio news across the border because like I said, it's good to have a different perspective and I think that the CBC is much fairer news source then many american sources.
Last edited: