Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Oh, well if Cliff posted it, then absolutely. It must be unbiased and true. Cut it!

Private companies aren't covering the diverse range of issues with a Canadian perspective like the CBC does. Do they even send reporters overseas anymore?

And remember, once it's gone, it's gone. We aren't getting it back. Just because you don't value it, doesn't mean it doesn't have value. I'd argue most of the people who hate the CBC in these threads(and probably Canada in general) would be a lot better off watching it, because their knowledge and media literacy gets repeatedly corrected. Our democracy is stronger with truth from the media, and the CBC is an ally in that, not an enemy.

Is the CBC perfect? No, of course not, but what is? Take the good, and don't worry so much about the rest. Because I can assure you, politicians are pissing your tax dollars away on a lot less worthy initiatives.

I’ll wager I watch/listen to CBC more than most of the people who thanked Yamer’s post praising it. As I said, more Canadians support the idea of the CBC than can be bothered to actually watch or listen to its newscasts. And my sense is a lot of people who do defend the CBC today only take that stance because outspoken Canadian conservatives hate it. Just another front on the culture wars.

I don’t want the CBC de-funded. I just think it’s sad how much it has declined in the last 15 years, and how far it has drifted from its mandate of reflecting Canada to Canadians in favour of advocacy journalism of an obvious ideological bent - a stance that I believe has contributed to its relentlessly declining audience.

At some point, the CBC has to be judged on how many Canadians actually engage with it, not how many airily support the idea of the CBC. And the decision-makers at the corporation need to bear some responsibility for declining engagement and not fob off all blame on their detractors.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Meanwhile, there have now been countless instances of the National Post being caught essentially lying its ass off to create a narrative, and yet the same posters (who also coincidentally think the CBC has a bias problem) continue to post articles from them as if they're an unbiased source.

The CBC and National Post are both biased. However, one is a publicly-funded news organization with a mandate to reflect Canada to Canadians, and the other is a private news organization looking to maximize shareholder value.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The CBC and National Post are both biased. However, one is a publicly-funded news organization with a mandate to reflect Canada to Canadians, and the other is a private news organization looking to maximize shareholder value.

I don't believe you watch that much CBC news. I PVR the National and watch it daily and it's fine. false outrage.

[Fuzz]

The ol' false equivalency. Good stuff.

[Cappy]

Conservatives in the UK think the BBC is biased.

Have you ever read the BBC?

All these claims are just to stir up their base.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Cappy

Conservatives in the UK think the BBC is biased.

Have you ever read the BBC?

All these claims are just to stir up their base.

The UK public thinks the BBC is pretty even-handed.

In Yougov’s biannual public opinion tracker, about 20% agree that the BBC tends to favour Labour and/or the left. But the other 80% disagree, including about 20% who say exactly the opposite – that it generally favours the Conservatives and/or the right. The majority (about 60%) fall somewhere in between, either explicitly saying it is generally neutral or responding “don’t know’ – hardly compatible with the idea that it is palpably left-wing.

These percentages have been steady over time and are similar in other independent surveys. But in the latest Yougov one (May 2023), the proportion saying the BBC favours the Conservatives and/or the right has actually increased, marginally, to 25%, while the proportion saying it has a left-wing bias remains at 20%.

Compare that to Canada, where there’s a clear partisan split in trust in the CBC.

Maybe Canadian conservatives are just far better than their British counterparts at riling up the public with false narratives. But I don’t know why that would be the case.

[rubecube]

nm

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The CBC and National Post are both biased. However, one is a publicly-funded news organization with a mandate to reflect Canada to Canadians, and the other is a private news organization looking to maximize shareholder value.

I think the NP's motives are a bit more nefarious than just maximizing shareholder value, but let's suppose that is the sole motivation. Doesn't that just exemplify why we need a public news agency? If private news organizations are consistently sacrificing journalistic integrity to satisfy shareholders, and the entire media landscape becomes privatized, what does that mean for journalism in this country?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I think the NP's motives are a bit more nefarious than just maximizing shareholder value, but let's suppose that is the sole motivation. Doesn't that just exemplify why we need a public news agency? If private news organizations are consistently sacrificing journalistic integrity to satisfy shareholders, and the entire media landscape becomes privatized, what does that mean for journalism in this country?

The same as it means for Journalism in every other country without a national broadcaster?

Its just like one shouldnt need a God or someone constantly looking over their shoulder to prevent murder, rape and other crime, one shouldnt necessarily need the Government looking over their shoulders to provide journalism or report news.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Locke

The same as it means for Journalism in every other country without a national broadcaster?

Its just like one shouldnt need a God or someone constantly looking over their shoulder to prevent murder, rape and other crime, one shouldnt necessarily need the Government looking over their shoulders to provide journalism or report news.

I can’t think of a worse, more nonsensical analogy for this than what you just provided.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Locke

The same as it means for Journalism in every other country without a national broadcaster?

How's that working out in the U.S.?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I can’t think of a worse, more nonsensical analogy for this than what you just provided.

No reason to be concerned. Private industry is notorious for acting altruistically and in the best interests of a public they aren't accountable to.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by rubecube

How's that working out in the U.S.?

Cool. Cherrypick one. And you call people out for strawmen regularly. And frankly, PBS documentaries are amongst the best around.

Hows it working everywhere else?

Not every country has a National broadcaster. And I believe in the value of a National Broadcasting service. I just think that the CBC sucks.

Its expensive and their deliverable product is largely garbage. I'm not saying its politically biased or anything else. Its just of overall, generally poor quality.

If I watched anything on CBC its the Fifth Estate, and even that pales in comparison to its competitors.

How many episodes of 'Run the 'Burbs' have you watched? 'Son of a Critch?'

'Family Feud Canada' I'll grant you that thats probably a real winner. I cant say for certain because I've never watched it.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I can’t think of a worse, more nonsensical analogy for this than what you just provided.

PepsiFree, Fuzz and rubecube. Perfect trifecta.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Locke

Cool. Cherrypick one. And you call people out for strawmen regularly. And frankly, PBS documentaries are amongst the best around.

Hows it working everywhere else?

Not every country has a National broadcaster. And I believe in the value of a National Broadcasting service. I just think that the CBC sucks.

Its expensive and their deliverable product is largely garbage. I'm not saying its politically biased or anything else. Its just of overall, generally poor quality.

If I watched anything on CBC its the Fifth Estate, and even that pales in comparison to its competitors.

How many episodes of 'Run the 'Burbs' have you watched? 'Son of a Critch?'

'Family Feud Canada' I'll grant you that thats probably a real winner. I cant say for certain because I've never watched it.

Sure, but a lot do:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ers_by_country


What do you base it on when you say it is "expensive"? It's a tiny fraction of our budget. And "garbage" is subjective, CBC has lots of stuff I think is well done.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by rubecube

How's that working out in the U.S.?

I think PBS News Hour is well regarded? NPR?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PBS_NewsHour

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Locke

Cool. Cherrypick one. And you call people out for strawmen regularly.

Your statement implied that there's no need for publicly-funded journalism because private news agencies should be able to regulate themselves. I provided an example of a country that has a largely privatized news industry and the resulting outcomes.

If I misinterpreted your position, please elaborate. Otherwise I fail to see how what I posted was a strawman.

And frankly, PBS documentaries are amongst the best around.

I think PBS is great for the most part. Unfortunately, due to being pretty underfunded, they don't have a footpring resembling other public broadcasters in the world

Hows it working everywhere else?

You tell me. You must have an example of a country with no publicly-funded journalism that does not have issues with journalistic integrity since you made the claim that we shouldn't need government to protect that.

Not every country has a National broadcaster

As far as I can tell, most developed nations in the world have a public broadcaster. Some places have multiple public broadcasters.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ers_by_country

And I believe in the value of a National Broadcasting service. I just think that the CBC sucks.

Its expensive and their deliverable product is largely garbage. I'm not saying its politically biased or anything else. Its just of overall, generally poor quality.

How many episodes of 'Run the 'Burbs' have you watched? 'Son of a Critch?'

'Family Feud Canada' I'll grant you that thats probably a real winner. I cant say for certain because I've never watched it.

I don't care about the original programming, but from everything I've read, they make a tonne of money through syndication of said programming. Fiscal 2021-22 indicates they generated $651.4M of revenue (34.4% of their total revenue) from their programming. PBS would kill for those kinds of numbers.

[Wormius]

Why is PBS being used as a comparison?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I think the NP's motives are a bit more nefarious than just maximizing shareholder value, but let's suppose that is the sole motivation. Doesn't that just exemplify why we need a public news agency? If private news organizations are consistently sacrificing journalistic integrity to satisfy shareholders, and the entire media landscape becomes privatized, what does that mean for journalism in this country?

We need a public broadcaster to present an alternative to the private model of picking an audience and telling that audience what they want to hear. That’s not the CBC today. It’s closer to becoming a Canadian Guardian.

If the CBC were as balanced in its editorial stance as the BBC, it would be as widely supported as the BBC. But it’s not.

A few year ago I heard an immigrant from the UK call in to CBC. He was a sociology professor and lifelong BBC listener. He expressed his disappointment in his first few months listening to the CBC in Canada, saying many of the stories he heard were laughably one-sided. He didn’t feel he was getting the full picture. The host weakly dismissed this criticism, saying the CBC has always been accused of being too liberal.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

We need a public broadcaster to present an alternative to the private model of picking an audience and telling that audience what they want to hear. That’s not the CBC today. It’s closer to becoming a Canadian Guardian.

If the CBC were as balanced in its editorial stance as the BBC, it would be as widely supported as the BBC. But it’s not.

Bold, bold statement. I highly doubt any amount of "balance", let alone tipping the scales far right would garner any more support at all. The hatred for the CBC runs deep and irrationally on the right. If they collect more than a dollar of public funds, they are going to be a target.