Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[zamler]

^^ exactly what I'm talking about. This thread is poison and should be shut down.

[Firebot]

I call it as I see it. if people are angry that they are getting labeled as such, maybe they should stop apologizing for the Liberals and being so partisan in their arguments.

https://thesaurus.plus/related/apologist/partisan

[GGG]

Has twitter added all of the qualified Journalist Organizations to their list of companies that are government funded?

Essentially all legacy print media and a lot of new digital media all receives government money.

So should the Globe and Mail and National post be listed as government funded on Twitter?

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by zamler

I'm so checked out of the culture wars, dip my toe back in now I know why I left. CBC is pausing their activity on Twitter because of a true statement under their name? PP crowing about......well I don't know what he is saying to be honest.

Everyone on Twitter is arguing about absolutely NOTHING of value. Mindless vitriol trying to score a gotcha, not unlike this thread.

That's why I never really got on with the platform in the first place and have been actively reducing the time I spend on the social media I do view/use. It's a complete waste of time and energy.

That said, you know as well as anyone else here that the point of that label from Musk is the underlying implication that a source is influenced by said government-funding, and PP's implication is that the CBC is a propaganda arm of the Federal Liberal government now that Twitter has put such a label on it. One is disingenuous, one is just firing up a base comprised of knee-jerk reactionary morons.

[direwolf]

Good grief, this CBC stuff might be the dumbest thing I’ve seen yet from Pierre and the conservatives. Like embarrassing, Marjorie Taylor Green-level stupidity.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

exactly so the same can be said for anyone or any organization that is getting paid by another group, probably unlikely to deviate from the government's message. I don't think this is very earth shattering.

I’m pretty confident that most employers wouldn’t agree with my a number of my views(and I’m reasonably confident that is something we can both agree on for a change ) but that doesn’t mean that I would change those views.

Weren't they? I don't really remember much angst or issue when they were in power with the CBC. Most of the claims of bias etc. seem to be more recent from what I recall.

Harper’s governments didn’t seem to be big fans of the cbc from my recollection.

Anyway, it's a dumb argument regardless, my point is that yes they are paid by the government, everyone knows it, there is bias, and that is a natural and normal function of who pays them. If the cons were in power, there would still be bias to the government. It's bias to the government because the government pays them, I don't so much believe it is a political thing. Claiming they're independent is weird and obviously untrue. They mean "impartial" which is more opinion and subject to debate (and I'd argue, not true either, but that's opinion). Twitter is just stating a fact, it's government funded. That's true. Who cares?

I’m honestly not overly concerned about how twitter is labelling the CBC but I think the position that a lot of people have in trying to label the CBC as biased to the point of bringing their credibility into question is overblown and not rooted in much more than their own personal political leanings. When the CBC starts reporting facts inaccurately I’ll change my tune but right now I don’t see them as more biased than the majority of private media companies, regardless of which way those companies lean politically. The politicians who try and make it a divisive issue are in my opinion just playing “hey look over here not at the real issues”

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Firebot

I call it as I see it. if people are angry that they are getting labeled as such, maybe they should stop apologizing for the Liberals and being so partisan in their arguments.

https://thesaurus.plus/related/apologist/partisan

We're not even talking about the Liberals nor is this conversation about a Liberal issue and you still found a way to label people Liberal Apologists.

Impressive stuff. Keep fighting whatever you've convinced yourself the good fight is.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Firebot

I call it as I see it.

Lots of people do that, even people who are wrong when they do. So there’s that.

[timun]

Originally Posted by Matata

CBC is less "gov't funded" and much more "liberal funded". Conservatives with Harper were toying with the idea of dissolving the CBC, Trudeau fires cannons filled with hundreds of millions of dollars at the CBC if someone whispers 'election' within earshot.

I don't think anyone at the CBC has any doubt about where their bread is buttered and who they want in office. The incestuous relationship between Liberals and CBC has been a huge driver in enacting their policies: Liberals make proposition --> CBC provides affirmation --> Liberals make policy based on CBCs affirmation.

Originally Posted by Cappy

I'm not going to pretend that i wrote this, but i don't think one can accuse the liberals as having significant funding differences over the years to justify the hyperbole:

https://frpc.net/wp-content/uploads/...4-February.pdf

Nor does it completely reveal Harper's disdain for the broadcaster in comparison to other Liberal governments at the time (funding wise)

Just so we're all clear:



Adjusted for inflation, CBC funding hasn't come anywhere near what it was before 1996, and on average it's still steadily going down. Funding in inflation-adjusted dollars reached a nadir under Harper's majority government, but it's still not much higher than it was. In fact, adjusted for inflation, last year's government appropriation to the CBC was lower than any other year with Trudeau's Liberals in government.

The Chrétien government's cuts in the late '90s went far deeper than Harper's did, and have caused the CBC far more damage.

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

It's probably why cons hate them. They expect CBC to be a propaganda wing when they're in power but CBC doesn't bite.

Sounds like it's functioning just fine.

Bingo.

Conservatives hate the CBC precisely because they have independent editorial control and aren't just a mouthpiece for the government of the day. Nor can they simply be bought off like privately owned media. They'd have you believe this simple logical fallacy:

Conservative propaganda ≠ reality
Conservative propaganda ≠ Liberal propaganda
∴ reality = Liberal propaganda

Frankly it's at the heart of the use of "mainstream media" as a conservative shibboleth, and it's right out of Joseph Goebbels's playbook; read up about the "Lügenpresse"...

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

I’m honestly not overly concerned about how twitter is labelling the CBC but I think the position that a lot of people have in trying to label the CBC as biased to the point of bringing their credibility into question is overblown and not rooted in much more than their own personal political leanings.

Of course this is true. Time and time again, just looking at the way conversations go here, the same people accuse the CBC of the same things, are corrected or shown evidence of why their perception is unfounded the same number of times, and come back just the same the next time to spout more nonsense about the CBC.

Expressive hatred or distrust of the CBC is more crucial / foundational to the average "conservative" identity these days than any sense of economic conservatism. Even if CBC was defunded, they'd just want the money funneled into corporate welfare. It's a circus and an enjoyable one at that. CBC bad! Anger!

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

We're not even talking about the Liberals nor is this conversation about a Liberal issue and you still found a way to label people Liberal Apologists.

Impressive stuff. Keep fighting whatever you've convinced yourself the good fight is.

Based on this thread Liberal apologism and CBC apologism generally tend to be the same. These topics already spiral down whataboutism and apologism each time. Either that or try to discredit the poster with opposing views as senile.

What's your thoughts on the Musk / CBC / Poilievre things? You certainly are not talking about it, so why not start?

All you have been doing is making these types of posts, with zero political insight or even attempt at it.

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

You OK? When you’re on the same wavelength as guys like Yoho, 2Stoned, and Azure it’s probably a good time to check in.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by GGG

Has twitter added all of the qualified Journalist Organizations to their list of companies that are government funded?

Essentially all legacy print media and a lot of new digital media all receives government money.

So should the Globe and Mail and National post be listed as government funded on Twitter?

WITCH! WITCH!!!! GGG is clearly a witch everyone!!!! Just look at what he wrote!!!!

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

The politicians who try and make it a divisive issue are in my opinion just playing “hey look over here not at the real issues”

Trust me, I absolutely hate what Poilievre is doing right now in terms of his politics. So does Harper. I cringed at his tweets.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Firebot

What's your thoughts on the Musk / CBC / Poilievre things? You certainly are not talking about it, so why not start?

All you have been doing is making these types of posts, with zero political insight or even attempt at it.

A chance to quote my own posts? Yes PLEASE!

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

They use the “state-affiliated” label for that, not “government funded.”

Of course, we already know that labels and verification have both repeatedly been decided based on the subjective whims of Twitter’s owner, so it’s not like Twitter’s attachment of any of these things actually means anything.

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Personally, I like the idea that the party that has included "defund the CBC" in their platform for years is only just now learning that the CBC is officially government-funded, a fact they learned from Twitter.

Honestly, how could Canadians not have faith in the CPC to right the ship? They're so intelligent and aware of publicly available information, and would definitely never engage in propaganda to make people believe something that isn't true... would they?

Can I continue with my irreverent little comedy show now? Do you need to call me a Liberal apologist to feel better?

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by direwolf

Good grief, this CBC stuff might be the dumbest thing I’ve seen yet from Pierre and the conservatives. Like embarrassing, Marjorie Taylor Green-level stupidity.

It's been a pretty pathetic showing. PP sees Musk applied the label to some US media organizations in an attempt to de-value their legitimacy so he can somehow salvage the smoldering crater of $44 billion, through his "citizen journalist" initiatives. So PP wants to get in on the game, because this is, like, his ####ing game, man. He then tweets at Musk like a sniveling 5 year old who saw his neighbour get a rocket popsicle, and really wants one too. Musk, being a well known Trudeau hater sees this as an opportunity to boost the rep of someone who also thinks crypto will change the world while solving world hunger, curing cancer, and washing their pants for them, obliges.

Queue legion of CBC loathing media, frothing at the mouth to tweet about how the left got owned on this, followed by the usual gang of CBC haters right here on CP to remind us just how little they understand about, well, everything.

[Firebot]

Maybe I am senile, I somehow completely forgot your post (even though I recall reading it).

[neo45]

The CBC is throwing an embarrassing little tantrum IMO

If what you do is so important for Canadians, why would you leave a platform that many of us use because you don’t like a size 3 font label beneath your name that accurately describes what you are?

[neo45]

Originally Posted by Firebot

They recognized that usage of the CBC logo could be seen as potentially damaging. Basically fair use doesn't give the CPC or any other party a carte blanche on what it can do as it could be damaging if misused.

It wasn't in this case, as such was dismissed. It was indeed a frivolous lawsuit that even people within the CBC itself were unsure of going through with it.

Even if the lawsuit had merit the fact that other political parties had done the same thing WITHOUT getting sued by CBC suggests a bias.

Bonehead decision by CBC to sue over that. Most people I know bring that up as the first example during any discussion about their merits as a broadcaster. They have no one to blame but themselves if they lost credibility for suing a political party during an election.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Firebot

Maybe I am senile, I somehow completely forgot your post (even though I recall reading it).

No hard feelings. You gave me an excuse to go back and enjoy my own posts again. A rare gift.

Originally Posted by neo45

The CBC is throwing an embarrassing little tantrum IMO

If what you do is so important for Canadians, why would you leave a platform that many of us use because you don’t like a size 3 font label beneath your name that accurately describes what you are?

They explained yesterday:

https://twitter.com/user/status/1647775988162469894

So, there are a few good answers to your question:

One, is that the way Twitter defines "government funded media" does not accurately describe what they are.

Two, is that a very small portion of people who get value from CBC do so exclusively through Twitter.

Three, probably because the people criticizing them for it are the people who are describing what the CBC is doing as "an embarrassing little temper tantrum" instead of directing their criticism to the actual embarrassments in this situation: Twitter/Musk and CPC/Pierre, and therefore their opinion is a bit questionable.

[Wormius]

I have seen the twitter comments to CBC stories they post. 10% are people who want to nitpick a grammar error, 35% are “why are you reporting on this and not that”, 50% are just “defund the cbc”, and 5% engage civilly about the article actually posted. I am sure life will go on. Not sure what people will find to whine about next.