Most Canadians are skeptics, and CBC accidentally says so, then “edits” story

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
47
48
67
And you thought Goebbels and Pravda had a corner on propaganda and misinformation



Most Canadians are skeptics, and CBC accidentally says so, then “edits” story


Oops! CBC (the Canadian version of the BBC and ABC) have been caught out editing a story to make it more politically correct. CBC’s political bias is accidentally on display. The original message revealed a sacred truth that must not be spoken. How would most Canadians feel about being forced to pay money to change the weather if they knew most other Canadians also thought it was a waste of billions? As far as I can tell, the updated version was a complete rewrite of the first half of the article. There appear to be a lot of changes.

The unsurprising news is that 56% of Canadians are skeptics – which is very similar to all other surveys which show that 62% of Brits are 62% skeptical. As are 54% of Australians. Fully third of the US are so skeptical they think it’s a total hoax.

The survey:

Is Earth getting warmer mostly because of human activities? 56% say NO.
Amazingly 39% of Canadians said the next question that they don’t think humans are even partially responsible.

Earth is getting warmer partly or mostly because of human activities. 39% say NO.

So CBC initially wrote a headline which said this:

Climate change: Majority of Canadians don’t believe it’s caused by humans

But thou mayst never admit that skeptics are the majority lest the masses awaken. Groupthink is so influential! So the headline was rapidly changed to an ambiguous muddy wording:

Updated: Canadians divided over human role in climate change, study suggests

Those results:
Click to enlarge.

The hidden topic the public broadcasters don’t want to discuss

Everything hinges on the word “mostly” — is the climate mostly human driven and so we have to take action, or is the climate driven mostly by something else, and our action is mostly pointless? This is key to the billion dollar policy debate. What matters here is not the binary belief or disbelief in the entire spectrum known as climate change. That’s a strawman. But the BBC, CBC and ABC appear to want to keep the debate at this pointless level. As far as national action goes we need to talk about how much humans affect the climate, and whether cutting emissions is worth the pain.

The original headline was as accurate as most headlines are

It didn’t need any change to maintain normal headline standards, but it could be improved. The headline could have been changed to make it more accurate without hiding that most Canadians don’t agree with the 97% consensus of climate scientists*. Here are three minor changes that the CBC didn’t choose but would have solved any ambiguity:

Climate change: Majority of Canadians don’t believe humans control it

Climate change: Majority of Canadians think natural forces control it

Climate change: Majority of Canadians don’t believe humans are main cause



more:


Most Canadians are skeptics, and CBC accidentally says so, then “edits” story « JoNova


Hello Birdy: CBC quickly changed that headline egads ... the truth ...


Cool: Majority Of Canadians Are Climate Sceptics | The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)


This is so far beyond common sense and science any more, it's outright obvious manipulation from a state broadcaster eagerly suckling our teat. kill this fukker once and for all.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
It's not getting warmer either. CBC is full of traitors and liars. They have ruined radio. The morning CBC radio makes me puke. A genuine collection of dog screwing braindead usless eaters. What the fuk is a Shad? Who gives a fuk about pop stars? Why does the current give me the runs?
 

Murphy

Executive Branch Member
Apr 12, 2013
8,181
0
36
Ontario
I am left with three questions:

And yes, I am wondering about their method and motives.

1. While the University of Montreal conducted the survey, was it correctly done?

2. Was any individual or agency involved, directly or indirectly, with the commissioning of the survey?

3. The results of the survey are to be submitted to an unnamed scientific journal, and the results have not been evaluated by others in the field. Why has the CBC published an unproven review with the headline that Canadians are divided in their belief that climate change is at least partially caused by humans? Are they? There has been no peer review.

Finally, not a question, but some observations. This story continues to be modified. The table showing the original poll results is now gone too.

Researchers stated that urban and rural opinions differ, and approximately 5,000 Canadians were surveyed. Canada's population is over 35 million. I suppose 5000 surveys accurately reflects the beliefs of those 35 million Canadians.
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA
That is the way the Alarmists operate.

It is clear that most Canadians are skeptics but the alarmists don't want you to know that.

It has been a scam all along.
 

Murphy

Executive Branch Member
Apr 12, 2013
8,181
0
36
Ontario
I usually chuckle at responses received to inquiries/observations written to any person or organization. It's always best to follow it up with a letter - simply copy and paste to paper - and mail it to whoever deals with this sort of thing. Every individual and agency has staff to deal with your complaints or observations. Letters from politicians can be especially entertaining.

Understand that very few companies or organizations care about what you think. It's is important for them to say that they do, but behind closed doors they say that opinions are like a$$holes, everybody has one.

Finally, they will pay you lip service, knowing that you are just blowing steam, and don't care enough to pursue the matter. You submitted you email or letter. You'll go away.

With that in mind....
---

To the CBC

I am quite sure someone there understands the term 'yellow journalism'. News people consider this a pejorative, so responsible writers/editors are careful to research, write and check the veracity of any articles before publication. This is accomplished, in large measure, by verifying facts, and not including the views or opinions of unqualified persons.

Good reporting results from a simple balance of self analysis and fair, accurate treatment of the subject. No personal feelings, or the views of an employer or any outside agency are allowed to influence the writing.

Fair enough.

Today, I read this. "Canadians divided over human role in climate change, study suggests"

Who wrote this? Who authorized its release to the website? Was the story a fair and accurate reflection of the subject? Apparently not. The results of the survey are to be submitted to an unnamed scientific journal, and have not been evaluated by independent experts in the field.

You published the results of a study that has not been scrutinized by a competent authority. Until it has been scrutinized, the study is conjecture. To add insult to injury, you said as much in the article.

Finally, some observations.

This story continues to be modified. Parts were rewritten, and the table showing the original poll results is gone.

Approximately 5,000 Canadians were surveyed over a period of several years. Canada's population is over 35 million. I suppose 5000 random surveys accurately reflect the beliefs of those 35 million Canadians.

This should not have gone to print until the story was verified as true and accurate. It reads like something from Pravda, or other state controlled, news organization.

Or was this intentional? Perhaps the CBC acting on the instructions of the government.
 
Last edited:

damngrumpy

Executive Branch Member
Mar 16, 2005
9,949
21
38
kelowna bc
Doesn't matter most of us already know we are skeptics go to the coffee shop
and listen. We don't need a survey to tell us and the media doesn't want the
facts to get in the way of a good story
 

Jinentonix

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 6, 2015
11,619
6,264
113
Olympus Mons
Doesn't matter most of us already know we are skeptics go to the coffee shop
and listen. We don't need a survey to tell us and the media doesn't want the
facts to get in the way of a good story
Yep, it's called pushing the narrative. Something the leftist media excels at.


I also find amusing that state run/state funded media in other countries is considered a bad thing, but in Canada it's somehow it's an important necessity.
 

Kreskin

Doctor of Thinkology
Feb 23, 2006
21,155
149
63
I wouldn't rely too much on what people think about weather trends.