Canadian Politics

Re: Canadian Politics

by jamie » Sat Mar 18, 2017 10:24 pm

Dawg...you have it backwards again. These new style goof Canadian politicians are saying "thank-you" to the buffoon. Buffoon is then supposed to say "you're welcome". But those words are not in his vocabulary.
All-Star
 
Posts: 1290
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:34 pm

Re: Canadian Politics

by PTBO Dave » Sun Mar 19, 2017 10:53 am

TravelPat1 wrote:Well not surprisingly all the copycats are from the right wing parties in Canada.

The one exception - Brad Duguid of the Ontario Liberals - immediately apologized for his 'fake news' reference.

In defending MaRS' success this morning, I used the wrong term - apologies to our professional media who do a fantastic job every day.


I think it's a good thing to call out media as fake when it prints lies or uses bias and double standards, and there's plenty of fake media by that definition with both left- and right-leaning biases, be it CBC and CNN or The Rebel and Fox.

It is, however, problematic and unproductive to use 'fake news' (and similarly, 'alternative facts') as a catch-all deflective to shrug off inconvenient truths.

Duguid might be smart to call out the fake news and then kiss up to the "professional media" to keep them on his side. It's definitely better to have media bias on your side.

How do we get consumers of media to read critically for bias and not merely be dismissive of the stories and sources they don't like?
What all men speak well of, look critically into; what all men condemn, examine first before you decide.
-Confucius

When people are fanatically dedicated to political or religious faiths or any other kind of dogmas or goals, it's always because these dogmas or goals are in doubt. -Robert M. Pirsig
User avatar
All-Star
 
Posts: 1488
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 6:17 am

Re: Canadian Politics

by jamie » Sun Mar 19, 2017 11:24 am

Out of curiosity can anyone specifically link or quote a concrete example of CBC fake news?

CNN and Fox are easy.
All-Star
 
Posts: 1290
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:34 pm

Re: Canadian Politics

by PTBO Dave » Sun Mar 19, 2017 4:50 pm

jamie wrote:Out of curiosity can anyone specifically link or quote a concrete example of CBC fake news?

CNN and Fox are easy.


Any CBC story that refers to Trump banning travel from "Muslim-majority" countries (and there is no shortage of them) is an example of fake news. That's not to say it's factually incorrect, but the facts they choose to represent as news are biased, with the intent in this case being to create fear and division around Islamophobia.

They could just as accurately report the ban as affecting "right-hand majority" countries. Of course, that would be absurd since every country is a right-hand majority country. In a similar way, there are many Muslim-majority countries not covered by Trump's travel ban.

They could also choose to report the ban as affecting countries that were targeted for travel restrictions by Homeland Security under Obama because of a "growing threat from foreign terrorist fighters." That would explain why many other Muslim-majority countries were not targeted by the travel ban. However, CBC chooses instead to stick with the loaded "Muslim-majority" narrative instead.
What all men speak well of, look critically into; what all men condemn, examine first before you decide.
-Confucius

When people are fanatically dedicated to political or religious faiths or any other kind of dogmas or goals, it's always because these dogmas or goals are in doubt. -Robert M. Pirsig
User avatar
All-Star
 
Posts: 1488
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 6:17 am

Re: Canadian Politics

by argonaut11xx » Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:24 pm

The CBC is very slick with the way they disguise their left wing bias.

In fact many of the "sheep" in Canada are sucked in, and believe the garbage that spews from this far left propaganda machine.

Rosie Barton, former NDP hack, just watch her and if you don't see the bias, then your drinking justines kool-aid
BUILD THAT WALL...between TORONTO & HAMILTON...then MAKE HAMILTON PAY FOR IT
User avatar
Starter
 
Posts: 163
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 7:32 am

Re: Canadian Politics

by Aerial » Sun Mar 19, 2017 9:07 pm

CBC employees rely on well heeled taxpayer money to keep their jobs. Of course they are leftists for the most part, I would be too if I was a CBC employee.
We should expect to receive from our healthcare system evidence-based basic best practices from our healthcare providers. But we should demand much more in our individual care - Anon
User avatar
All-Star
 
Posts: 2719
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2015 12:22 pm
Location: Hamilton, ON

Re: Canadian Politics

by TravelPat1 » Mon Mar 20, 2017 7:56 am

PTBO Dave wrote:
jamie wrote:Out of curiosity can anyone specifically link or quote a concrete example of CBC fake news?

CNN and Fox are easy.


Any CBC story that refers to Trump banning travel from "Muslim-majority" countries (and there is no shortage of them) is an example of fake news. That's not to say it's factually incorrect, but the facts they choose to represent as news are biased, with the intent in this case being to create fear and division around Islamophobia.

They could just as accurately report the ban as affecting "right-hand majority" countries. Of course, that would be absurd since every country is a right-hand majority country.


But were there 6-7 countries that accounted for about 80% of all 'right handed' refugees and immigrants coming into the USA and Trump had spent his entire campaign proclaiming he would block right handers from entering - and those ended up being the six or seven countries the ban is applied to - I think it is actually very fair to draw a direct co-relation - just as some of the judges who have blocked the plan have argued in their rulings on the legality of the ban.

In the words of the Hawaiian judge..

Watson’s ruling concluded there was “significant and unrebutted evidence of religious animus” behind the travel ban, including the president’s own campaign comments regarding Muslims.
All-Star
 
Posts: 2805
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 7:07 pm

Re: Canadian Politics

by Aerial » Mon Mar 20, 2017 8:57 am

I think a lesson can be learned from how a systematic review is done in medicine with what is known as inclusion/exclusion criteria which results in what published studies will be reviewed in the specific systematic review. For instance you can have inclusion criteria indicating only English language published studies published in the past 20 years that were double blinded randomized controlled trials with at least a 100 patient accrual and comparing 2 specific interventions. Of course they don't do this high level evidence in mainstream media but the idea is the media and the specific writer will concentrate on certain information or "facts" surrounding the topic of the article and downplay or not even mention information or "facts" that very well could or should be mentioned as the topic of the article if this information doesn't jive with the message the author is trying to convey. And make no mistake, authors and editors of mainstream media are trying to convey certain messages I would say with 100 percent of the articles that are published in their publication. The syntax and phrasing and wording are worked over by good editors to make sure their message is being delivered in however overt or covert way they wish.

And in medicine, it has been known to occur that certain results of trials are omitted from final publication because some of this data would soften the effects of the intervention that the authors are trying to promote as beneficial. Yes, that does happen but very, very few people ever know of that including the editors of the journal and sometimes the reviewers. Negative results are not not very impactful for publication when you're trying to show a positive effect for Intervention A for Disease A because of your hypothesis to conduct the study in the first place.
We should expect to receive from our healthcare system evidence-based basic best practices from our healthcare providers. But we should demand much more in our individual care - Anon
User avatar
All-Star
 
Posts: 2719
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2015 12:22 pm
Location: Hamilton, ON

Re: Canadian Politics

by jamie » Mon Mar 20, 2017 10:07 am

Dave...re: CBC.

I listen to CBC a lot and I do not hear them classify travel bans as a "Muslim ban". What I have heard on CBC is that they refer to it as a "travel ban".
All-Star
 
Posts: 1290
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:34 pm

Re: Canadian Politics

by PTBO Dave » Mon Mar 20, 2017 10:45 am

jamie wrote:Dave...re: CBC.

I listen to CBC a lot and I do not hear them classify travel bans as a "Muslim ban". What I have heard on CBC is that they refer to it as a "travel ban".


That's good and it seems to be the way with many news outlets over the past 6 weeks or so. Once it was pretty clearly not a Muslim ban, they (not necessarily CBC, whom I'm not sure about, but other outlets for sure) stopped using that term and switched to the factual but misleading "Muslim-majority" phrase.
What all men speak well of, look critically into; what all men condemn, examine first before you decide.
-Confucius

When people are fanatically dedicated to political or religious faiths or any other kind of dogmas or goals, it's always because these dogmas or goals are in doubt. -Robert M. Pirsig
User avatar
All-Star
 
Posts: 1488
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 6:17 am

Re: Canadian Politics

by PTBO Dave » Mon Mar 20, 2017 10:53 am

TravelPat1 wrote:
PTBO Dave wrote:
jamie wrote:Out of curiosity can anyone specifically link or quote a concrete example of CBC fake news?

CNN and Fox are easy.


Any CBC story that refers to Trump banning travel from "Muslim-majority" countries (and there is no shortage of them) is an example of fake news. That's not to say it's factually incorrect, but the facts they choose to represent as news are biased, with the intent in this case being to create fear and division around Islamophobia.

They could just as accurately report the ban as affecting "right-hand majority" countries. Of course, that would be absurd since every country is a right-hand majority country.


But were there 6-7 countries that accounted for about 80% of all 'right handed' refugees and immigrants coming into the USA and Trump had spent his entire campaign proclaiming he would block right handers from entering - and those ended up being the six or seven countries the ban is applied to - I think it is actually very fair to draw a direct co-relation - just as some of the judges who have blocked the plan have argued in their rulings on the legality of the ban.

In the words of the Hawaiian judge..

Watson’s ruling concluded there was “significant and unrebutted evidence of religious animus” behind the travel ban, including the president’s own campaign comments regarding Muslims.


I don't think this alleged animus holds up to scrutiny nor justifies the biased reporting.

If Trump were truly motivated by religious animus against Muslims, then logically, he would include all "Muslim-majority" countries in his executive order. That's not the case. Instead, he included the countries targeted by the Obama administration as being dangerous. But if the CBC believes Trump's ban is motivated by this supposed animus, then they should report that directly.

And if targeting those Muslim-majority countries is an act of religious animus, then the Obama administration, who targeted them originally, should be held to the same standard as Trump. Did CBC do that, reporting Obama's travel measures as targeting "Muslim-majority" countries, or did they apply a double standard and conveniently leave that detail out?
What all men speak well of, look critically into; what all men condemn, examine first before you decide.
-Confucius

When people are fanatically dedicated to political or religious faiths or any other kind of dogmas or goals, it's always because these dogmas or goals are in doubt. -Robert M. Pirsig
User avatar
All-Star
 
Posts: 1488
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 6:17 am

Re: Canadian Politics

by jamie » Mon Mar 20, 2017 10:58 am

But Dave...when asked specifically about CBC you said CBC was wrong in its news reporting about travel bans.

Then you stated later your not sure about CBC, perhaps implying that you don't listen to them.

So why reply to a CBC question if you don't listen to them?
All-Star
 
Posts: 1290
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:34 pm

Re: Canadian Politics

by PTBO Dave » Mon Mar 20, 2017 11:13 am

jamie wrote:But Dave...when asked specifically about CBC you said CBC was wrong in its news reporting about travel bans.

Then you stated later your not sure about CBC, perhaps implying that you don't listen to them.

So why reply to a CBC question if you don't listen to them?


To clarify, I don't listen to the CBC or any other radio for that matter. I do, however, read the CBC. And I do know that they report Trump's executive order as targeting "Muslim-majority" countries, which, as I've explained in posts above, I do not consider objective, balanced journalism.

What I'm not sure about in relation to your post was whether or not CBC had switched it's reporting on that executive order from referring to it as a Muslim ban to a travel ban.
What all men speak well of, look critically into; what all men condemn, examine first before you decide.
-Confucius

When people are fanatically dedicated to political or religious faiths or any other kind of dogmas or goals, it's always because these dogmas or goals are in doubt. -Robert M. Pirsig
User avatar
All-Star
 
Posts: 1488
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 6:17 am

Re: Canadian Politics

by Aerial » Mon Mar 20, 2017 4:58 pm

Very interesting. It's the details and motivations of the media we aren't sure about with how they communicate news. And perhaps at times they might just be lazy, well the more crappy editors, not realizing exactly what hidden messages they might be sending. But I think most editors of major media outlets are very savvy and know, for the most part, exactly what they are trying to say or what they want to say to make people believe what is "actually" the situation. :roll: :?

So is Donald Trump a total Muslim racist or isn't he? Please someone tell me because I don't have a clue to be honest. My guess is no but I do think he has information from his advisors to believe that a high percentage of potential problematic would-be terrorists are originating from the countries specified in this "travel" ban or whatever is the best term for it. Maybe that is stupidity, again no clue.
We should expect to receive from our healthcare system evidence-based basic best practices from our healthcare providers. But we should demand much more in our individual care - Anon
User avatar
All-Star
 
Posts: 2719
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2015 12:22 pm
Location: Hamilton, ON

Re: Canadian Politics

by PTBO Dave » Fri Mar 24, 2017 3:31 pm

I was surprised to see such low approval ratings for Canadian premiers. We're not a very satisfied lot, are we?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/wall-faces-boos-cfl-1.4039919

Image

Are these numbers fairly normal regarding premiers? Do we have a particularly bad crop of them at the moment?
Are we becoming more cynical and dissatisfied in general?

Image
What all men speak well of, look critically into; what all men condemn, examine first before you decide.
-Confucius

When people are fanatically dedicated to political or religious faiths or any other kind of dogmas or goals, it's always because these dogmas or goals are in doubt. -Robert M. Pirsig
User avatar
All-Star
 
Posts: 1488
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 6:17 am

PreviousNext

Users browsing this forum: argonaut11xx and 5 guests