Ahh the CBC (the Communist Broadcasting Channel)is the worst news channel in Canada.
All I want for Christmas is the dismantling of the CBC.
In the past month the state broadcaster has provided two glaring examples of why it cannot be trusted to report the news fairly, of how it uses the $1.1 billion extracted from taxpayers each year to fund its operations to promote its own narrow, left-of-centre agenda.
Of course, there are little examples of the corporation's bias every day: the way it looks for the most reasonable spokespersons to represent the liberal-left side of an issue and for inarticulate amateurs to represent the right-of-centre side. The adjectives -- controversial, contentious, right-wing -- it uses to describe conservatives versus the ones -- progressive, dedicated, moderate -- its uses to describe the left.
Most of the time Mother Corp's bias simmers just beneath the surface -- a sneer here from the host, a scoffing tone there from a reporter.
In a recent report CBC did on the influence of Christians in the U.S. government, all of the reporters and analysts who set up the segment and who commented on it subsequently were clearly hostile to people of faith with right-of-centre views. They framed the discussion in a way in which it was impossible for viewers to disagree with their slant and still appear sensible: Do you agree or disagree with the way conservative Christians are attempting to break down the separation between church and state?
This is what reporters and politicians sometimes call the "Do you still beat your wife?" question. There is no way a person who disagrees with the questioner can answer and still appear reasonable.
But how come the report included only conservative Christians seeking to instil traditional values in public affairs? How come there were no examples of social-justice preachers and priests who use their positions of influence to push for more welfare, or carbon emissions curbs, same-sex marriage or withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan?
Oh, that's right, because when faithful people share the same worldviews as CBC reporters and producers, they're merely being sensible and judicious. They are not dangerous fundamentalists hell-bent on destroying our way of life. So it never even occurs to the people devising the alarmist stories CBC runs to cover the threat from the left as well as the right.
Still, these are merely the daily drip-by-drip cases of CBC subjectivity masquerading as even-handed journalism.
The two recent examples that have completely blown the corporation's veneer of objectivity are much, much worse.
Last month, CBC pulled a documentary just hours before it was to air because China's communist government objected to the way the film unflattering portrayed its treatment of the spiritual movement Falun Gong.
Beyond the Red Wall repeated claims -- well documented by several sources -- that Beijing arbitrarily imprisons, tortures and uses Falun Gong members for slave labour.
The CBC claimed it had not withdrawn the documentary due to pressure from the Chinese government, although several CBC sources admitted the rescheduling came only after the Chinese embassy in Ottawa telephoned the corporation and asked that the piece be witRating 2eld.
Instead, it pulled the film less than five hours before it was to be shown because it wanted to do "due diligence" to ensure "it's a solid piece of work that will stand up to intense scrutiny."
This was just so much disingenuous spin, though.
The corporation had had the finished product in its hands for eight months. Its lawyers, fact-checkers and executive producers had given it the green light. Indeed, it had aired already on the French equivalent of Newsworld and once on the English all-news channel in the middle of the night.
It's hard to escape the conclusion that the CBC was permitting the Chinese politburo to dictate what it would and would not show. We know Beijing has already barred some journalists from the 2008 Olympics.
Perhaps the CBC cratered on the Falun Gong documentary because it feared losing the rights to broadcast the Summer Games. Whatever its motives, the incident did irreparable damage to the corporation's reputation.
Then last week we learned at least one CBC reporter was writing questions for Liberal MPs to ask of former prime minister Brian Mulroney when he appeared before the House of Commons's ethics committee. One CBC spokesman claimed the reporter had not written the questions, but rather had merely dictated them over the phone, but the difference is meaningless.
Here was evidence of our publicly funded broadcaster seeking to be a player in a national scandal. Not content to report the news, Mother Corp set out to make some.
The MPs on the committee were not embarrassing Mulroney enough, so the CBC decided to feed them questions designed to make him look even worse. And who knows, perhaps the answers may damage even the current Conservative government whose very presence in office clearly irritates the broadcaster.
Most Canadians no longer put their faith in the CBC; that's why so few of us watch it anymore. But we shouldn't have to fund its biased, agenda-driven coverage, either.
I say GET RID OF THE CBC!!!!
All I want for Christmas is the dismantling of the CBC.
In the past month the state broadcaster has provided two glaring examples of why it cannot be trusted to report the news fairly, of how it uses the $1.1 billion extracted from taxpayers each year to fund its operations to promote its own narrow, left-of-centre agenda.
Of course, there are little examples of the corporation's bias every day: the way it looks for the most reasonable spokespersons to represent the liberal-left side of an issue and for inarticulate amateurs to represent the right-of-centre side. The adjectives -- controversial, contentious, right-wing -- it uses to describe conservatives versus the ones -- progressive, dedicated, moderate -- its uses to describe the left.
Most of the time Mother Corp's bias simmers just beneath the surface -- a sneer here from the host, a scoffing tone there from a reporter.
In a recent report CBC did on the influence of Christians in the U.S. government, all of the reporters and analysts who set up the segment and who commented on it subsequently were clearly hostile to people of faith with right-of-centre views. They framed the discussion in a way in which it was impossible for viewers to disagree with their slant and still appear sensible: Do you agree or disagree with the way conservative Christians are attempting to break down the separation between church and state?
This is what reporters and politicians sometimes call the "Do you still beat your wife?" question. There is no way a person who disagrees with the questioner can answer and still appear reasonable.
But how come the report included only conservative Christians seeking to instil traditional values in public affairs? How come there were no examples of social-justice preachers and priests who use their positions of influence to push for more welfare, or carbon emissions curbs, same-sex marriage or withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan?
Oh, that's right, because when faithful people share the same worldviews as CBC reporters and producers, they're merely being sensible and judicious. They are not dangerous fundamentalists hell-bent on destroying our way of life. So it never even occurs to the people devising the alarmist stories CBC runs to cover the threat from the left as well as the right.
Still, these are merely the daily drip-by-drip cases of CBC subjectivity masquerading as even-handed journalism.
The two recent examples that have completely blown the corporation's veneer of objectivity are much, much worse.
Last month, CBC pulled a documentary just hours before it was to air because China's communist government objected to the way the film unflattering portrayed its treatment of the spiritual movement Falun Gong.
Beyond the Red Wall repeated claims -- well documented by several sources -- that Beijing arbitrarily imprisons, tortures and uses Falun Gong members for slave labour.
The CBC claimed it had not withdrawn the documentary due to pressure from the Chinese government, although several CBC sources admitted the rescheduling came only after the Chinese embassy in Ottawa telephoned the corporation and asked that the piece be witRating 2eld.
Instead, it pulled the film less than five hours before it was to be shown because it wanted to do "due diligence" to ensure "it's a solid piece of work that will stand up to intense scrutiny."
This was just so much disingenuous spin, though.
The corporation had had the finished product in its hands for eight months. Its lawyers, fact-checkers and executive producers had given it the green light. Indeed, it had aired already on the French equivalent of Newsworld and once on the English all-news channel in the middle of the night.
It's hard to escape the conclusion that the CBC was permitting the Chinese politburo to dictate what it would and would not show. We know Beijing has already barred some journalists from the 2008 Olympics.
Perhaps the CBC cratered on the Falun Gong documentary because it feared losing the rights to broadcast the Summer Games. Whatever its motives, the incident did irreparable damage to the corporation's reputation.
Then last week we learned at least one CBC reporter was writing questions for Liberal MPs to ask of former prime minister Brian Mulroney when he appeared before the House of Commons's ethics committee. One CBC spokesman claimed the reporter had not written the questions, but rather had merely dictated them over the phone, but the difference is meaningless.
Here was evidence of our publicly funded broadcaster seeking to be a player in a national scandal. Not content to report the news, Mother Corp set out to make some.
The MPs on the committee were not embarrassing Mulroney enough, so the CBC decided to feed them questions designed to make him look even worse. And who knows, perhaps the answers may damage even the current Conservative government whose very presence in office clearly irritates the broadcaster.
Most Canadians no longer put their faith in the CBC; that's why so few of us watch it anymore. But we shouldn't have to fund its biased, agenda-driven coverage, either.
I say GET RID OF THE CBC!!!!
(c) CanWest MediaWorks Publications Inc.
Maybe because the French speaking are more important than the English speaking.
