2011 Canadian Election Thread

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by peter12

Anyone watching the election night coverage where the CBC took about 2 hours longer than any other station to call a Conservative majority would understand that it's not all that relative.

Not to mention the extensive coverage that every party got except for the Conservatives. We all heard exactly what happened in the NDP/Liberal/Green camps, but I have no clue how the CPC won Ontario. They could barely pry themselves away from Elizabeth May to talk about a Conservative Majority.

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Originally Posted by Slava

Can you give a specific example of the CBC supposed bias? Something obvious...not just based on your opinion. I'm not saying it doesn't exist - just wondering if there are any defining incidents.

What, like taking far longer than CTV and Global in calling a Conservative majority?

[Kybosh]

I liked the Global election coverage. The only thing that irked me was NDP boy on their panel. NDP boy really liked to interrupt people and inject how much he knew about Jack Layton.

[peter12]

Does anyone want to start taking bets on how long the NDP caucus will actually be able to stay together?

I give them 3 weeks.

[Calgaryborn]

I think Harper should force CBC to hire some conservative commentators. Appoint someone like an Ombudsman who would report on the balance of the reporting within CBC and if it doesn't change then cut funding.

Another option is the government could target the funding to CBC to support the native culture stuff and possibly Canadian content entertainment and let them compete with everyone else on the rest.

[Ark2]

lol good for a laugh

The Night of 1,000 Delusions had gained momentum only a few minutes earlier, when Elizabeth May of the Green party ventured a curious interpretation of her own election to Parliament. “Today we proved that Canadians want change in politics,” she told supporters.

Is that what we proved? Because when the governing party wins a third straight election, and does so with a strengthened mandate, some of us are tempted to resort to the familiar Latin of status quo. Although to be fair to May, her party did attract 40 per cent fewer votes nationally this time—so that was change of a sort.

http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/05/06/t...000-delusions/

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Handsome B. Wonderful

What, like taking far longer than CTV and Global in calling a Conservative majority?

I don't know, but they gave good reasoning? There were a lot of seats that were within a hundred votes. They said that about fifty times it seemed.

Plus, if that is the one glaring example then I guess I would say "big deal" or "who cares". It has no impact on the election or issues. Being totally unbiased I would say that the decimation of the Bloc and rise of the NDP were bigger stories anyway...or at least more unexpected. I think that there were a lot of story lines that night (with every single party making history one way or another) so it's pretty hard to nitpick over how many times they covered each one.

[yads]

That's kind of the way I looked at it. What would be a bigger story, Flames beat the Leafs 6-1 or Montreal losing to Ottawa 25-1?

[Caged Great]

Originally Posted by Slava

I don't know, but they gave good reasoning? There were a lot of seats that were within a hundred votes. They said that about fifty times it seemed.

Plus, if that is the one glaring example then I guess I would say "big deal" or "who cares". It has no impact on the election or issues. Being totally unbiased I would say that the decimation of the Bloc and rise of the NDP were bigger stories anyway...or at least more unexpected. I think that there were a lot of story lines that night (with every single party making history one way or another) so it's pretty hard to nitpick over how many times they covered each one.

Yeah, they ran down a list of 50 or so ridings that were within 100 votes with only a handful of reporting from each, so it makes sense that they didn't call it until they were actually over regardless. IIRC they had 165 on screen by the time they called it.

[evman150]

Ripping on a network for not calling the election result in an orderly manner?

Unreal. Ironically, it's called being "conservative" in their coverage. Nobody wants a repeat of the 2000 US election.

Neo-cons will complain about anything.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by yads

That's kind of the way I looked at it. What would be a bigger story, Flames beat the Leafs 6-1 or Montreal losing to Ottawa 25-1?

Maybe on the surface but, the Conservative majority will have more of an impact on Canadians than the other mile stones.

I mainly watched it on the Sun network but, I did look over at CBC from time to time. I could sense joy for the NDP and a little shock for the demise of the Liberals. The Conservatives seemed only to be mentioned in passing from time to time. They didn't show contempt towards them; Maybe apathy or just unwilling to aknowledge them.

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Originally Posted by Slava

I don't know, but they gave good reasoning? There were a lot of seats that were within a hundred votes. They said that about fifty times it seemed.

Plus, if that is the one glaring example then I guess I would say "big deal" or "who cares". It has no impact on the election or issues. Being totally unbiased I would say that the decimation of the Bloc and rise of the NDP were bigger stories anyway...or at least more unexpected. I think that there were a lot of story lines that night (with every single party making history one way or another) so it's pretty hard to nitpick over how many times they covered each one.

The other channels were getting fed the exact same numbers, and were confident enough to call it. I'll even give CBC credit for being the first to predict a majority based on the numbers coming in (as far as I could tell flipping channels). However, though CBC had predicted it, they stalled on calling it until long after Global and CTV.

That's not one glaring example though, it's just another sign of the systematic bias underlying the CBC. You might as well pretend they're not biased towards the Maple Leafs while you're at it.

[FlamesAddiction]

When the Liberals had majorities under Chretien, did they call it before other networks? Links anyone?

[Bownesian]

Some of the bias accusations were valid ten and more years ago when the Reform and the Alliance party were probably not treated fairly by the CBC. I think a lot of the accusations in recent years may be due to expectation bias and actually giving all the parties a fair shake. If there are 3 national parties (even though the greens are a rump party) and one regional party to the left of the conservatives, they are naturally going to take more than the lion's share of the coverage.

As a conservative, I think their national TV news coverage is pretty fair, at least at a host level. Peter Mansbridge and Evan Solomon are pretty decent moderators and present the facts well. I like the job that Kady O'Mally and Rosemary Barton do, even though I'm pretty sure their outlook is leftward of my own. Extending that, I really doubt that individually the hosts and reporters are anywhere near 1/3 conservative and thus representative of the Canadian population at a whole. Of that group, only Kevin O'Leary is the only one I know for sure is Conservative, but I really don't care as long as they present an interesting news show.

CBC radio is another animal altogether. There are some hosts that do not disguise their bias well, Michael Enright being one of them. For a sample, see:
http://www.cbc.ca/thesundayedition/essays/

If you listen to Cross-Country Checkup and went by callers alone you'd think that 80% of the country was Liberal or NDP (same could be said of their message boards), but I would guess from Rex Murphy's writings that he has become more conservative over the last decade.

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

When the Liberals had majorities under Chretien, did they call it before other networks? Links anyone?

That's a tough one to judge from a Calgary perspective. The moment election coverage began for us back then it would basically be "Welcome Western Canada, it's a Liberal majority."

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Slava

Can you give a specific example of the CBC supposed bias? Something obvious...not just based on your opinion. I'm not saying it doesn't exist - just wondering if there are any defining incidents.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cana...1/votecompass/

[Weiser Wonder]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cana...1/votecompass/

So your opinion of the Vote Compass is proof that CBC is biased? Pretty shotty evidence if you ask me.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Handsome B. Wonderful

That's a tough one to judge from a Calgary perspective. The moment election coverage began for us back then it would basically be "Welcome Western Canada, it's a Liberal majority."

Or in the case of Mulroney, PC majority.

It has nothing to do with the CBC though. Personally, I think calling a majority before it is 100% conclusive is not responible reporting.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Weiser Wonder

So your opinion of the Vote Compass is proof that CBC is biased? Pretty shotty evidence if you ask me.

I think enough arguments have been made to show the compass is biased. That said, I was mostly posting tongue in cheek, as Slava and I mildly debated that point already.

But for another good example, Jim Hughson calling Canuck games.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Ark2

It's really not relative at all. They are certainly biased towards the left and it's been that way for years. It's not the end of the world though. I don't think cutting their funding is necessary.

I do. But not because of their political leanings. I actually think they do a great job with news and such, and really enjoy watching HNIC.

But, the rest of their programming sucks, and they're just a burden for the taxpayer. These days we should be all about cutting stuff that we don't need to pay for, and we certainly don't need government funded TV.

Someone on the private side could easily supply exactly what CBC offers, and probably better.

So I say cut the funding and spend the billion on education.