I would agree. Good thing they don't think your morals are political.
Nah, I don't put as much stock in the media, as you do.
Hey, whatever happened to...
Prosecuting Freedon of Speech
- Thread starter CDNBear
- Start date
Hey, whatever happened to...
Every time I hear that argument from you.....
I'm reminded of this...............:lol:
Bill Clinton It Depends on what the meaning of the word is is - YouTube
Convoluted mumbo jumbo...........or double talk.
What is bias? Left or Right?
Clause 5 – News
It shall be the responsibility of broadcasters to ensure that news shall be represented with accuracy and without bias. Broadcasters shall satisfy themselves that the arrangements made for obtaining news ensure this result. They shall also ensure that news broadcasts are not editorial.
News shall not be selected for the purpose of furthering or hindering either side of any controversial public issue, nor shall it be formulated on the basis of the beliefs, opinions or desires of management, the editor or others engaged in its preparation or delivery. The fundamental purpose of news dissemination in a democracy is to enable people to know what is happening, and to understand events so that they may form their own conclusions.
Nothing in the foregoing shall be understood as preventing broadcasters from analyzing and elucidating news so long as such analysis or comment is clearly labeled as such and kept distinct from regular news presentations. Broadcasters are also entitled to provide editorial opinion, which shall be clearly labeled as such and kept entirely distinct from regular broadcasts of news or analysis.
Broadcasters shall refer to the Code of Ethics of the Radio and Television News Directors of Canada ("RTNDA") for more detailed provisions regarding broadcast journalism in general and to the CAB Violence Code for guidance with respect to the depiction of violence, graphic reporting of delicate subject matter or the use of explicit language in news and public affairs programming on television.
Did Sun used bias in calling people lefties who chose to morally oppose their methodology?
Clause 5 – News
It shall be the responsibility of broadcasters to ensure that news shall be represented with accuracy and without bias. Broadcasters shall satisfy themselves that the arrangements made for obtaining news ensure this result. They shall also ensure that news broadcasts are not editorial.
News shall not be selected for the purpose of furthering or hindering either side of any controversial public issue, nor shall it be formulated on the basis of the beliefs, opinions or desires of management, the editor or others engaged in its preparation or delivery. The fundamental purpose of news dissemination in a democracy is to enable people to know what is happening, and to understand events so that they may form their own conclusions.
Nothing in the foregoing shall be understood as preventing broadcasters from analyzing and elucidating news so long as such analysis or comment is clearly labeled as such and kept distinct from regular news presentations. Broadcasters are also entitled to provide editorial opinion, which shall be clearly labeled as such and kept entirely distinct from regular broadcasts of news or analysis.
Broadcasters shall refer to the Code of Ethics of the Radio and Television News Directors of Canada ("RTNDA") for more detailed provisions regarding broadcast journalism in general and to the CAB Violence Code for guidance with respect to the depiction of violence, graphic reporting of delicate subject matter or the use of explicit language in news and public affairs programming on television.
Did Sun used bias in calling people lefties who chose to morally oppose their methodology?
You do understand the difference between Op/Ed and news right?
Well that answers that question. Nope.
Explains a lot.
Is this in your orginal posting?
Krista Erickson's interview/attack of Margie Gillis, Canadian dance icon, on the pubic funding she's received over her 39-year career. The only positive is the grace with which Ms. Gillis handled this shameful attack.
We can respond by filing a complaint with the the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC | Complaint Form) using the following information: Sun News; Canada Live with Krista Erickson; June 1, 2011; 4:15PM. When detailing your concerns, be sure to mention Sun News' clear violation of Clause 5 of the CAB Code of Ethics (CBSC | Codes - CAB Code of Ethics).
Should I have posted Clause 6?
Krista Erickson's interview/attack of Margie Gillis, Canadian dance icon, on the pubic funding she's received over her 39-year career. The only positive is the grace with which Ms. Gillis handled this shameful attack.
We can respond by filing a complaint with the the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC | Complaint Form) using the following information: Sun News; Canada Live with Krista Erickson; June 1, 2011; 4:15PM. When detailing your concerns, be sure to mention Sun News' clear violation of Clause 5 of the CAB Code of Ethics (CBSC | Codes - CAB Code of Ethics).
Should I have posted Clause 6?
Yep, but I didn't right it. That was in the info box under Gillis' call to attack SunTV on YouTube. That would be their mistake and yours. Not mine or SunTV's.
Why? Did Erickson lie? Mislead?
If you want the CBSC to start applying 6 as tight as you are trying to imply. There are going to be some pretty annoyed broadcasters in Canada, real soon.
You should read the comments section to get a better picture as to how the code is applied.
No I'm just asking if you want clause 6 posted since you figured op/eds aren't part of clause 5 which is the clause you posted as under debate.
It has nothing to do with what I figure. There is a world of difference between Op/Ed and news. Which is likely why there is a clause 5 that deals with news, and a clause 6 that mentions opinion.
I posted an excerpt from Gillies and company's attack campaign on SunTV. Unless you can find a quote where I specifically mention clause 5, you're blowing smoke, yet again.
If you want to latch onto their mistake, to steer away from your other erroneous commentary, feel free. I don't mind playing with you.
So what exactly does the source of her funding and left/right issue have to do with all of this anyway? She's a leftie because she dances? Does that make church choirs that take a social buck for a road trip or a new organ lefties too? Should church choir who want to go on leftie road trip get ****ed over because Sun thinks it's leftie?
Not as far as I know.
Why do you ask?
Or is this another diversion from the string because you got served again?
So what did ever happen to...
No I didn't. That's just you trying to switch it up because you're losing again.
Quote: Originally Posted by petros
BTW...you did make this a left/right issue.
You sure?
I think the left and right have become to sensitive about almost everything. The fact is the media
abandoned news a long time ago, they also abandoned editorial comment. What we have now is
two sides engaging in entertainment of the lowest order. Right wing fanatics like Rush and a few
others who wouldn't recognize a fact if they saw one. In contrast there is this wimpy left that feels
you cannot make a hard hitting interview seem hard hitting. All the words and meanings have to be
crafted in such a way that it doesn't impact the person you are interviewing.
It reminds me of when they destroyed hockey. Wayne was the best hockey player in the world, ya
right. Wayne was best because he had protection from the big mean defenseman and the league
that wanted to protect gate receipts. Bobby Orr and Gordie How didn't need protection.
Today a news cast or an interview is not informative at all, its leading to a predetermined conclusion
with all the right worlds and intellectual comments structured in such a way debate is no longer
informative or offensive, or factual for that matter.
On the right its constructed to be rude, loud and for the most part half fact and half fiction blended to
lead the reader away from those nasty liberals or leftists.
In my humble opinion I see this as the problem.
There are about 5 to 6 percent of loonies on the left and the right. The rest of us are on a line I call
the middle right and middle left, depending on our views. Instead of conducting a hard hitting factual
debate with winners and losers on either side on a given day, we as citizens of the world continue to
beat the drum of the loser loonies and play their game of insult and counter insult, keeping our
distance from the truth no matter what side its on.
I believe we have to get back to debating issues on their Merritt, and sometimes that can be offensive
too, but hell, that is part of life. I find that most people become offended in an argument only at the
moment they realize they have lost the argument. Until then they are prepared to dish it out with
offensive views of their own. The problem is not free speech, it is not persecution, it is not even the
ethics of the day. No the real problem is we are so thin skinned and self centered we feel we have to
be protected from everything and everyone, we should all be heard equally no matter how ridiculous
some arguments and beliefs are and that is just not realistic.
Its time we raised our level of passion, using actual facts for a change, then put on our chain mail and
go at it. Who knows if we did that ethics, respect, understanding, and informative interviews and TV
programs just might start to appear again.
On the political left there is a bunch of wimpy people who feel persecuted to the point of a complex,
they are also the only ones who can use bully tactics to silence their critics and if those critics take
issue, they are cultural criminals that need the fist of the law in their face.
On the right, we have people like Rush, and Sarah Palin who demean all left of center ideas as being
communist or of the devil with too many ignorant people applauding, while at the same time completely
devoid of the knowledge of the truth. These people abuse the principles of democratic free speech,
and complain when someone calls them on it and they are every bit as loony as those on the left.
I think we need hard hitting factual debate with some civility thrown in for good measure..
end of rant.
abandoned news a long time ago, they also abandoned editorial comment. What we have now is
two sides engaging in entertainment of the lowest order. Right wing fanatics like Rush and a few
others who wouldn't recognize a fact if they saw one. In contrast there is this wimpy left that feels
you cannot make a hard hitting interview seem hard hitting. All the words and meanings have to be
crafted in such a way that it doesn't impact the person you are interviewing.
It reminds me of when they destroyed hockey. Wayne was the best hockey player in the world, ya
right. Wayne was best because he had protection from the big mean defenseman and the league
that wanted to protect gate receipts. Bobby Orr and Gordie How didn't need protection.
Today a news cast or an interview is not informative at all, its leading to a predetermined conclusion
with all the right worlds and intellectual comments structured in such a way debate is no longer
informative or offensive, or factual for that matter.
On the right its constructed to be rude, loud and for the most part half fact and half fiction blended to
lead the reader away from those nasty liberals or leftists.
In my humble opinion I see this as the problem.
There are about 5 to 6 percent of loonies on the left and the right. The rest of us are on a line I call
the middle right and middle left, depending on our views. Instead of conducting a hard hitting factual
debate with winners and losers on either side on a given day, we as citizens of the world continue to
beat the drum of the loser loonies and play their game of insult and counter insult, keeping our
distance from the truth no matter what side its on.
I believe we have to get back to debating issues on their Merritt, and sometimes that can be offensive
too, but hell, that is part of life. I find that most people become offended in an argument only at the
moment they realize they have lost the argument. Until then they are prepared to dish it out with
offensive views of their own. The problem is not free speech, it is not persecution, it is not even the
ethics of the day. No the real problem is we are so thin skinned and self centered we feel we have to
be protected from everything and everyone, we should all be heard equally no matter how ridiculous
some arguments and beliefs are and that is just not realistic.
Its time we raised our level of passion, using actual facts for a change, then put on our chain mail and
go at it. Who knows if we did that ethics, respect, understanding, and informative interviews and TV
programs just might start to appear again.
On the political left there is a bunch of wimpy people who feel persecuted to the point of a complex,
they are also the only ones who can use bully tactics to silence their critics and if those critics take
issue, they are cultural criminals that need the fist of the law in their face.
On the right, we have people like Rush, and Sarah Palin who demean all left of center ideas as being
communist or of the devil with too many ignorant people applauding, while at the same time completely
devoid of the knowledge of the truth. These people abuse the principles of democratic free speech,
and complain when someone calls them on it and they are every bit as loony as those on the left.
I think we need hard hitting factual debate with some civility thrown in for good measure..
end of rant.
Not you words?
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBear
Very interesting.
You have to love the loony left.
When will they learn, freedom of speech isn't just for them.
Both Lilley and Levant, offer compelling opinions.
Wow!
Well? WTF does left/right have to do with Ms Gillis' opinions on how she was treated?
Visually speaking, it's like a weird thaumatrope.Interesting to see two avatars head to head like this
Yep, my words. But I didn't make this a right left argument, Gillis and the idiots supporting her did. With you now running with it like it was my lead, because you can't admit the meaningless of this...
But feel free to keep trying.
BTW: This is why you have no credibility and I fully suspect that if Colpy wins the bet, you'll renege.