Harper says national media are biased against him

[elevennevele]

Re: RE: Harper says national

Perhaps what the real issue here is that smart journalists need to figure out how to get the story. Obviously they will hit a brick road going to the PM...but surely there are other avenues they can go down?

This isn't the point. Events occur on a daily basis, some events might be serious enough to warrant the Prime Minister to present himself immediately to the press. If only some journalist can ask questions (ones on the “list” handpicked by the PM) everyone who catches the news of the day will only hear a controlled message.

People in our society might only have time for the controlled message on their local news slot which keeps the news quite brief. It’s no coincidence that Harper says he’ll avoid national media and turn to local news to get the message out. People have got to stop underestimating him.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2006/03/29/1511116-cp.html

News is an ongoing daily occurrence. You can’t expect the media outlets (especially local ones) to counteract every PM press conference with side discussions through pundits. It’s ridiculous, and only becomes confusing to the public which could be what Harper wants. Basically he creates two tiers of news media, and Harper will try to convince everyone that one of those tiers are bias.

Keeping lists on journalist is a system that becomes relative to McCarthyism. It’s a form of blacklisting people because of what you suspect they believe politically.

What is to stop the government there? Maybe they will make lists on Canadians as to what they believe their political lean is. In the USA they began to award government contracts to pro-republican companies.

It’s all a methodology in the direction of fascism. Keeping lists on journalists is a neo form of McCarthyism.

 

[Semperfi_dani]

RE: Harper says national

The only thing that was sad about the "walk-out" of journalists the other day was that Harper was going to speak about a VERY serious topic (Darfur), and that got overlooked for this event.

That to me was sad... surely with a topic of that importance, there could have been a wait till the next time to do that.

So instead of covering the story, they became the story, and once again, third world issues are chucked to the side.

 

[Vicious]

Re: RE: Harper says national

[

This isn't the point. Events occur on a daily basis, some events might be serious enough to warrant the Prime Minister to present himself immediately to the press. If only some journalist can ask questions (ones on the “list” handpicked by the PM) everyone who catches the news of the day will only hear a controlled message.

People in our society might only have time for the controlled message on their local news slot which keeps the news quite brief. It’s no coincidence that Harper says he’ll avoid national media and turn to local news to get the message out. People have got to stop underestimating him.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2006/03/29/1511116-cp.html

News is an ongoing daily occurrence. You can’t expect the media outlets (especially local ones) to counteract every PM press conference with side discussions through pundits. It’s ridiculous, and only becomes confusing to the public which could be what Harper wants. Basically he creates two tiers of news media, and Harper will try to convince everyone that one of those tiers are bias.

Keeping lists on journalist is a system that becomes relative to McCarthyism. It’s a form of blacklisting people because of what you suspect they believe politically.

What is to stop the government there? Maybe they will make lists on Canadians as to what they believe their political lean is. In the USA they began to award government contracts to pro-republican companies.

It’s all a methodology in the direction of fascism. Keeping lists on journalists is a neo form of McCarthyism.

I'm really of two minds on this issue. Freedom of the press is an important thing and is worth defending but in alot of ways the press gallery has made their bed by being the propaganda arm of the Liberals for so long, the should be made to lie in it for at least a couple nights.

Do they treat Bono this way? When there is one of these serious daily events do they bang on Bono's door and demand he answer questions for an hour? No because he isn't an elected official. but if Bono comes to town asking for Aid money for the third world all of a sudden he's a knowledgeable person on the issue and gets a free ride? Where's the hard edge questions then? Part time journalists maybe.

 

[BitWhys]

Re: RE: Harper says national

The only thing that was sad about the "walk-out" of journalists the other day was that Harper was going to speak about a VERY serious topic (Darfur), and that got overlooked for this event.

That to me was sad... surely with a topic of that importance, there could have been a wait till the next time to do that.

So instead of covering the story, they became the story, and once again, third world issues are chucked to the side.

they covered the story.

 

[Jay]

Then there isn't a problem....

 

[BitWhys]

not for the press corp there isn't, no. they can adjust.

 

[Jay]

Former environment minister Stephane Dion said the Conservatives' decision to redirect the money is legal but morally wrong: "They are playing with the future of our children."

:lol:

 

[BitWhys]

there you have it. in marketing that's called "positioning".

 

[elevennevele]

Re: RE: Harper says national

Do they treat Bono this way? When there is one of these serious daily events do they bang on Bono's door and demand he answer questions for an hour? No because he isn't an elected official. but if Bono comes to town asking for Aid money for the third world all of a sudden he's a knowledgeable person on the issue and gets a free ride? Where's the hard edge questions then? Part time journalists maybe.

Bono criticized the Liberal government for not doing enough on world issues which the media covered as such.

The so called, ‘Liberal Media’ took Paul Martin to task in the last election questioning him all throughout his campaign. Harper was partially inaccessible, and already controlling media presentations. Remember the Quebec reporter who got really angry when one of Harper’s security put his hands on her?

We had a glimpse of things to come then, but we were all asleep to it. And this all occurred via a ‘Liberal Media’ during an election.

The concept that Harper is threatened by a “Liberal Media” is bogus and his methods of dealing with the media are like McCarthyism. Creating a label of “Liberal Media”; making lists on journalists, is simply an attempt to demonize any opposition.

If a reporter from a Communist Newspaper for instance, wanted to ask Harper a question during a press conference, it should make no difference. Harper should be able to answer any questions on the strength of his leadership and platform regardless of the reporter's walk of life.

 

[Jay]

Re: Government's Relationship with the Media

I don't like it either. Martin did the exact same thing during election time once the liberals started falling in the polls.

But you guys were all up in arms the same way you are now when Martin did it right?

 

[BitWhys]

just for the record I'm not "up in arms" about it at all. its his funeral.

 

[Jay]

Oh...Ok then, next Liberal, same question.

I wouldn't worry about Harper, the polls show he is doing just fine.

As long as he can keep his people's hands out of the cookie jar and give not give cookies to his own party at the expense of the Federation, I think he will be just fine.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

People believe what they want, the facts don't matter. Conservative leaders always seem to believe the national media are hostile to them and favour the liberal and left portions of the political spectrum. Forgotten the Sponsorship Scandal already, have we? Looked to me like the national media were hammering the Liberals pretty hard on that one, and it seems to have been a large factor in the election results. John Turner might have something to say about media bias too.

Most newspapers in the last federal election endorsed Harper, except for the always faithfully Liberal Toronto Star. If I may paraphrase Jeffrey Simpson's column from this morning's Globe & Mail:

AM radio is mostly right wing except for CBC. CBC television leans left; CTV, Global, and other private broadcasters lean right. Most CanWest newspapers are conservative, the National Post extremely so. Sun newspapers are hard right. Maclean's magazine has taken a hard turn to the right recently. The Globe & Mail itself tries to straddle the middle in its news coverage, and has columnists that cover the full spectrum.

But that isn't likely to convince anyone. It's true there are some media outlets that don't favour the Conservatives, but at the moment there are more that do.

 

[Jay]

What was the MSM supposed to do ignore the single biggest scam going on at the moment? They are already being labeled as "liberal media" that wouldn't help them any. Right?

 

[Jay]

I'm glad to see the Globe and Mail comming around to see the CBC is a lefty news source. That almost makes my day.

 

[Vicious]

Re: RE: Harper says national

Bono criticized the Liberal government for not doing enough on world issues which the media covered as such.

So I guess I wasn't clear. Bono criticizes a government for their position and the media cover it without asking Bono any questions. This is an example of the media not doing their job. Who does Bono represent, what country's people elected him, what in his background makes his opinion or criticism any more valid than mine and therefore newsworthy? If Ted Nugent, Ozzy Osbourne or Tommy Lee were to propose some foreign policy for Canada would the media take their word as truth? Or is it because the media agree with Bono's position that they don't challenge it?

The so called, ‘Liberal Media’ took Paul Martin to task in the last election questioning him all throughout his campaign. Harper was partially inaccessible, and already controlling media presentations. Remember the Quebec reporter who got really angry when one of Harper’s security put his hands on her?

The media changed tunes when they realized the Liberals were in serious trouble. I'm not sure if it was the Dingwall entitlements, the Liberal campaign ad that didn't run (soldiers on the streets of our cities) or if it was as late as the Goodale announcement leak non-event. But somewhere in that couple of months the media realized it wasn't gonna be same-old same-old on the Hill.

We had a glimpse of things to come then, but we were all asleep to it. And this all occurred via a ‘Liberal Media’ during an election.

The lefty nightmare of a police-state. You don't mind the government stepping into every facet of your life but beware the day security personnel touch someone. Did you ask the Shawinigan -strangler for his opinion?

The concept that Harper is threatened by a “Liberal Media” is bogus and his methods of dealing with the media are like McCarthyism. Creating a label of “Liberal Media”; making lists on journalists, is simply an attempt to demonize any opposition.

Threatened? I'd say frustrated. Are you now or have you ever been a journalist?

If a reporter from a Communist Newspaper for instance, wanted to ask Harper a question during a press conference, it should make no difference. Harper should be able to answer any questions on the strength of his leadership and platform regardless of the reporter's walk of life.

I don't agree. Any politician or public figure should have the right to keep his/her mouth shut. There are various degrees of this. On one hand you can answer a question that wasn't asked but on the same topic. On the other hand you say 'No Comment' or nothing at all. As well the media has full rights to report a non answer, a run away or a spin. What the media does though is look for a sound bite. You can answer 17 questions elegantly and with the utmost political correctness. But if on the 18th you let some frustration show or misstep in your answer, you can be damned sure the public will never see or hear those first 17 answers.

 

[Colpy]

Actually, Ted Nugent did comment on Canada's gun laws, and encouraged American hunters to stay away from Canada, and was absolutely VILLIFIED in the Canadian media.

 

[#juan]

The single biggest scam Jay,

is still sitting there , in the form of the national debt. That debt far outweighs any nonsense the Liberals got up to. I know you like to imply that Trudeau somehow forced Mulroney to have a fifty billion dollar deficit every year he was in office but any Canadian would have rather paid higher taxes than have that debt.

 

[Vicious]

Forgotten the Sponsorship Scandal already, have we? Looked to me like the national media were hammering the Liberals pretty hard on that one, and it seems to have been a large factor in the election results.

You may have forgotten how happy the media were with Paul Martin's promise to get to the bottom of it. And how willing they were to go along with waiting for the final Gomery report before an election call. They were far from howling for blood. By the fall of 2005 and before the liberals were brought down the sponsorship scandal was all but old news in the media's eyes. The initial report exonerated Martin remember? That all changed with the next scandal and the next and the next.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Re: RE: Harper says national media are biased against him

What was the MSM supposed to do ignore the single biggest scam going on at the moment? They are already being labeled as "liberal media" that wouldn't help them any. Right?

I dunno. Could you be a little clearer? I don't understand your pronoun references. Who's the "they" being labelled as liberal media? MSM? What's MSM? What does the "them" in your second sentence refer to?