Political debate is about polarization, about conforming those already leaning to one side to an idea presented by the side they already lean toward, and if careful attention and focus is placed on the debate itself, one quickly sees it is frivolous, though it's, for the most part, based in truth, because the relevant truth is rarely ever discussed. For example, the corporate tax cuts: Liberals say the cuts will equal 6 billion in tax losses whereas the Conservatives say the cuts will create corporate investment and job creation and produce more spending that can be taxed and losses will not be so severe.
In truth, both sides present plausible positions, but how plausible is each? That is what the debate should be about, but it is instead focused on one side being right and the other wrong minus the theme of plausibility.
The debate should be about speculation, for how much money would be lost or gained in taxes due to corporate tax cuts is speculative. And instead of discussing real data and reasons for their position or historical instances in which either party’s speculative analysts were correct and thereby give credence to their argument, the two parties meaninglessly argue over opinion of speculation without clearly discussing speculation, and, as a result, the majority of Canadians don't even truly understand what the argument is about and will ultimately end up blindly siding with the party they lean toward.
And opinion programming, the sort of programming that is unapologetic about its clear and obvious bias to one side of the political spectrum, is to help the people understand issues in this sort of an atmosphere?
This is why I don't believe opinion programming should be able to be housed by a 24-hour news station, because opinion-based shows have no obligation to present fact or non-misleading content, and yet they are associated with a station that is categorized as a news channel. I don't have any problem with the programming itself, but I disagree with it being on a news station.
[FONT="]Source on truth of corporate tax cuts debate: Crazy or dumb? Do the math. - Inside Politics[/FONT]
In truth, both sides present plausible positions, but how plausible is each? That is what the debate should be about, but it is instead focused on one side being right and the other wrong minus the theme of plausibility.
The debate should be about speculation, for how much money would be lost or gained in taxes due to corporate tax cuts is speculative. And instead of discussing real data and reasons for their position or historical instances in which either party’s speculative analysts were correct and thereby give credence to their argument, the two parties meaninglessly argue over opinion of speculation without clearly discussing speculation, and, as a result, the majority of Canadians don't even truly understand what the argument is about and will ultimately end up blindly siding with the party they lean toward.
And opinion programming, the sort of programming that is unapologetic about its clear and obvious bias to one side of the political spectrum, is to help the people understand issues in this sort of an atmosphere?
This is why I don't believe opinion programming should be able to be housed by a 24-hour news station, because opinion-based shows have no obligation to present fact or non-misleading content, and yet they are associated with a station that is categorized as a news channel. I don't have any problem with the programming itself, but I disagree with it being on a news station.
[FONT="]Source on truth of corporate tax cuts debate: Crazy or dumb? Do the math. - Inside Politics[/FONT]
