Canadians really might be smarter. . .or more honest!

Openmind

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2011
Messages
4,111
Location
Currently Belgium
At least, the Canadian media and Canadian public KNOW a lie when they hear one. . .and they are committed to keep media lies OUT of Canada. . .
Especially Fox News!

"As America's middle class battles for its survival on the Wisconsin barricades - against various Koch Oil surrogates and the corporate toadies at Fox News - fans of enlightenment, democracy and justice can take comfort from a significant victory north of the Wisconsin border. Fox News will not be moving into Canada after all! The reason: Canadian regulators announced last week they would reject efforts by Canada's right-wing Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, to repeal a law that forbids lying on broadcast news.

Canada's Radio Act requires that "a licenser may not broadcast ... any false or misleading news." The provision has kept Fox News and right-wing talk radio out of Canada and helped make Canada a model for liberal democracy and freedom. As a result of that law, Canadians enjoy high quality news coverage, including the kind of foreign affairs and investigative journalism that flourished in this country before Ronald Reagan abolished the "Fairness Doctrine" in 1987. Political dialogue in Canada is marked by civility, modesty, honesty, collegiality, and idealism that have pretty much disappeared on the US airwaves. When Stephen Harper moved to abolish the anti-lying provision of the Radio Act, Canadians rose up to oppose him fearing that their tradition of honest non-partisan news would be replaced by the toxic, overtly partisan, biased and dishonest news coverage familiar to American citizens who listen to Fox News and talk radio. Harper's proposal was timed to facilitate the launch of a new right-wing network, "Sun TV News" which Canadians call "Fox News North."

Harper, often referred to as "George W. Bush's Mini Me," is known for having mounted a Bush-like war on government scientists, data collectors, transparency, and enlightenment in general. He is a wizard of all the familiar tools of demagoguery; false patriotism, bigotry, fear, selfishness and belligerent religiosity.

Harper's attempts to make lying legal on Canadian television are a stark admission that right-wing political ideology can only dominate national debate through dishonest propaganda. Since corporate profit-taking is not an attractive vessel for populism, a political party or broadcast network that makes itself the tool of corporate and financial elites must lie to make its agenda popular with the public. In the Unites States, Fox News and talk radio, the sock puppets of billionaires and corporate robber barons, have become the masters of propaganda and distortion on the public airwaves. Fox News' notoriously biased and dishonest coverage of the Wisconsin's protests is a prime example of the brand of news coverage Canada has smartly avoided."

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/276-74/5123-fox...
 
Werbung:
Hurray for censorship !!

Perhaps if our friends in the great white north where smarter they could decide for themselves what is fact and what is fiction ?

Maybe Limbaugh will set up Radio Free Canada transmitters on the border !

(Settle down Open, just kidding about the transmitters.)

(Not the censorship part. But Canada is honest in it's limitations on free spssch and freedom of the press.)
 
Hurray for censorship !!

Perhaps if our friends in the great white north where smarter they could decide for themselves what is fact and what is fiction ?

Maybe Limbaugh will set up Radio Free Canada transmitters on the border !

(Settle down Open, just kidding about the transmitters.)

(Not the censorship part. But Canada is honest in it's limitations on free spssch and freedom of the press.)


They are perfectly fine with "free speech," it is "free lies" that they frown upon!

They're smart!
 
As usual the Progressives have to spin stories... Kind of like the Republicans wanting to pass a bill that forbids government money being used to fund abortion and Pelosi coming out and saying that, if successful, doctors will be forced to let women die on the floor. Same kind of thing is going on here:

Sun News Network

The channel launched on April 18, 2011 under a Category B licence granted by the CRTC in November 2010, after the network aborted a highly publicized attempt for a Category A license that would have given it mandatory access on digital cable and satellite providers across Canada.

Sun News is currently available on a handful of cable and satellite systems across Canada, with Quebecor currently seeking to expand distribution.
Despite the Progressive claims, SNN is already broadcasting in Canada...

SNN was trying to get their broadcast license upgraded from category B to a category A ranking, because an A license gives a station mandatory billing on cable and satellite broadcasts around Canada, that is what was voted down.

Why was it voted down? I'm glad you asked... Category A Broadcasters who wish to call themselves a "News" outlet are not allowed to have commentators or opinion of any kind on their station. This means MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, HLN, and all the rest of the mainstream American media outlets would also be unable to get a category A license for the fact that every single one has some kind of commentary or political opinion show as part of their programming.

In short, the decision to turn down SNN's bid for a category A licesnse has nothing to do with "lies", it has everything to do with allowing opinions and commentary on a station that also broadcasts news.

myth-busted.jpg


I may as well continue debunking these Progressive lies... No FOX news in Canada, right? Wrong....

FOX News in Canada

In 2003, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) rejected a Canadian Cable Telecommunications Association (CCTA) application to bring Fox News to Canada because Fox News U.S. and Global Television were planning to create Fox News Canada, a combination of U.S. and Canadian news. However in 2004, after a Fox U.S. executive said there were no plans to create the combined channel, the CRTC approved an application to bring Fox News to Canada.

Fox News Channel is currently offered by Access Communications, Bell TV, Cogeco, Eastlink, Manitoba Telecom Services, Rogers, SaskTel, Shaw Cable, Shaw Direct and Telus TV. A notable exception is Vidéotron, Canada's third largest cable company, which has not added Fox News Channel to its lineup
.​

picture.php
 
As usual the Progressives have to spin stories... Kind of like the Republicans wanting to pass a bill that forbids government money being used to fund abortion and Pelosi coming out and saying that, if successful, doctors will be forced to let women die on the floor. Same kind of thing is going on here:

Sun News Network

The channel launched on April 18, 2011 under a Category B licence granted by the CRTC in November 2010, after the network aborted a highly publicized attempt for a Category A license that would have given it mandatory access on digital cable and satellite providers across Canada.

Sun News is currently available on a handful of cable and satellite systems across Canada, with Quebecor currently seeking to expand distribution.
Despite the Progressive claims, SNN is already broadcasting in Canada...

SNN was trying to get their broadcast license upgraded from category B to a category A ranking, because an A license gives a station mandatory billing on cable and satellite broadcasts around Canada, that is what was voted down.

Why was it voted down? I'm glad you asked... Category A Broadcasters who wish to call themselves a "News" outlet are not allowed to have commentators or opinion of any kind on their station. This means MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, HLN, and all the rest of the mainstream American media outlets would also be unable to get a category A license for the fact that every single one has some kind of commentary or political opinion show as part of their programming.

In short, the decision to turn down SNN's bid for a category A licesnse has nothing to do with "lies", it has everything to do with allowing opinions and commentary on a station that also broadcasts news.

myth-busted.jpg


I may as well continue debunking these Progressive lies... No FOX news in Canada, right? Wrong....

FOX News in Canada

In 2003, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) rejected a Canadian Cable Telecommunications Association (CCTA) application to bring Fox News to Canada because Fox News U.S. and Global Television were planning to create Fox News Canada, a combination of U.S. and Canadian news. However in 2004, after a Fox U.S. executive said there were no plans to create the combined channel, the CRTC approved an application to bring Fox News to Canada.

Fox News Channel is currently offered by Access Communications, Bell TV, Cogeco, Eastlink, Manitoba Telecom Services, Rogers, SaskTel, Shaw Cable, Shaw Direct and Telus TV. A notable exception is Vidéotron, Canada's third largest cable company, which has not added Fox News Channel to its lineup
.​

picture.php


And I guess that is YOUR opinion! ;):)
Doesn't make it true. . .but you have a right to it!
 
They are perfectly fine with "free speech," it is "free lies" that they frown upon!

They're smart!


Actually no they are not, I assumed you knew this but should have known better.
In 1955, the importation of American The Atom Spy Hoax was deemed seditious as it questioned the Canadian government's handling of the Igor Gouzenko affair.[1]


One of the most famous ongoing censorship controversies in Canada has been the dispute between Canada Customs and GLBT retail bookstores such as Little Sister's in Vancouver and Glad Day in Toronto. Through the 1980s and into the 1990s, Canada Customs frequently stopped material being shipped to the two stores on the grounds of "obscenity" Both stores frequently had to resort to the legal system to challenge the confiscation of their property.


In 2000, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Canada Customs did not have the authority to make its own judgments about the permissibility of material being shipped to the stores but was permitted to confiscate only material that had specifically been ruled by the courts to constitute an offence under the Criminal Code of Canada.


Canadians can be disciplined by their employers for writing letters to newspapers. Christine St-Pierre, a television reporter covering federal politics for Radio-Canada, was suspended in September 2006 for writing a letter in support of Canadian troops in Afghanistan.[11] Similarly, the courts have upheld professional sanctions against teachers and school counsellors for writing letters to newspapers that are found to be discriminatory, limiting their freedom of expression and religion on the basis of maintaining "a school system that is free from bias, prejudice and intolerance."[12] (See related articles, Chris Kempling and Status of religious freedom in Canada).

But as I alluded, they have been honest in legislating their censorship.

Canada

See also: Censorship in Canada
The constitutional provision that guarantees Freedom of expression in Canada is section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: ... (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication Due to section 1 of the Charter, the so-called limitation clause, Canada's freedom of expression is not absolute and can be limited under certain situations. Section 1 of the Charter states:
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. (emphasis added) This section is double-edged. First it implies that a limitation on freedom of speech prescribed in law can be permitted if it can be justified as being a reasonable limit in a free and democratic society. Conversely, it implies that a restriction can be invalidated if it cannot be shown to be a reasonable limit in a free and democratic society.


Despite these protections, Canada has had a string of high-profile court cases in which writers have been prosecuted for their writings, in both magazines and web postings.
In February 2006, Calgary Muslim leader Syed Soharwardy filed a human rights complaint against Western Standard publisher Ezra Levant. Levant was compelled to appear before the Alberta Human Rights Commission to discuss his intention in publishing the cartoons. Levant posted a video of the hearing on YouTube. Levant questioned the competence of the Commission to take up the issue, and challenged it to convict him, "and sentences me to the apology", stating that he would then take "this junk into the real courts, where eight hundred years of common law" would come to his aid.[71]
In 2007, a complaint was filed with the Ontario Human Rights Commission related to an article "The Future Belongs to Islam,"[41] written by Mark Steyn, published in Maclean's magazine. The complainants alleged that the article and Maclean's refusal to provide space for a rebuttal violated their human rights. The complainants also claimed that the article was one of twenty-two (22) Maclean's articles, many written by Steyn, about Muslims.[42] Further complaints were filed with the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal.[72]
Steyn was eventually acquitted.
A Montreal neo-Nazi has been given a six-month prison sentence for wilfully promoting hatred toward blacks and Jews on his website. Calling Jean-Sebastien Presseault's opinions "vile" and "nauseating," Quebec Court Judge Martin Vauclair sent the heavily tattooed man back to jail. The 24 tattoos, including several Ku Klux Klan and Nazi symbols covering the defendant's torso, figure prominently in Vauclair's decision to give jail time, as opposed to a sentence to be served in the community, as the defence had hoped for. "The violence he inflicted on his own body to leave almost-indelible marks of his convictions testify as to his unresolved frustrations but also to his deep-seated racist and hateful beliefs," Vauclair said.
In the landmark Supreme Court of Canada case R. v. Zundel (1992), the court struck down a provision in the Criminal Code of Canada that prohibited publication of false information or news, stating that it violated section 2(b) of the Charter.


Under section 318 of the Criminal Code of Canada, it is illegal to promote genocide. Under section 319, it is illegal to publicly incite hatred against people based on their colour, race, religion, ethnic origin, and sexual orientation, except where the statements made are true or are made in good faith. The prohibition against inciting hatred based on sexual orientation was added to the section in 2004 with the passage of Bill C-250.
Other laws that protect freedom of speech in Canada, and did so, to a limited extent, before the Charter was enacted in 1982, include the Implied Bill of Rights and the Canadian Bill of Rights.
 
As usual the Progressives have to spin stories... Kind of like the Republicans wanting to pass a bill that forbids government money being used to fund abortion and Pelosi coming out and saying that, if successful, doctors will be forced to let women die on the floor. Same kind of thing is going on here:

Sun News Network

The channel launched on April 18, 2011 under a Category B licence granted by the CRTC in November 2010, after the network aborted a highly publicized attempt for a Category A license that would have given it mandatory access on digital cable and satellite providers across Canada.

Sun News is currently available on a handful of cable and satellite systems across Canada, with Quebecor currently seeking to expand distribution.
Despite the Progressive claims, SNN is already broadcasting in Canada...

SNN was trying to get their broadcast license upgraded from category B to a category A ranking, because an A license gives a station mandatory billing on cable and satellite broadcasts around Canada, that is what was voted down.

Why was it voted down? I'm glad you asked... Category A Broadcasters who wish to call themselves a "News" outlet are not allowed to have commentators or opinion of any kind on their station. This means MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, HLN, and all the rest of the mainstream American media outlets would also be unable to get a category A license for the fact that every single one has some kind of commentary or political opinion show as part of their programming.

In short, the decision to turn down SNN's bid for a category A licesnse has nothing to do with "lies", it has everything to do with allowing opinions and commentary on a station that also broadcasts news.

myth-busted.jpg


I may as well continue debunking these Progressive lies... No FOX news in Canada, right? Wrong....

FOX News in Canada

In 2003, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) rejected a Canadian Cable Telecommunications Association (CCTA) application to bring Fox News to Canada because Fox News U.S. and Global Television were planning to create Fox News Canada, a combination of U.S. and Canadian news. However in 2004, after a Fox U.S. executive said there were no plans to create the combined channel, the CRTC approved an application to bring Fox News to Canada.

Fox News Channel is currently offered by Access Communications, Bell TV, Cogeco, Eastlink, Manitoba Telecom Services, Rogers, SaskTel, Shaw Cable, Shaw Direct and Telus TV. A notable exception is Vidéotron, Canada's third largest cable company, which has not added Fox News Channel to its lineup
.​

picture.php

It is amazing what lefties chose to believe. Even when shown the facts they continue to cling to lies that fit their ideology. Is it any wonder left wing dictators throughout history take power when some many dupes are walking around?

No doubt they believe what Pelosi said about Rs wanting women to die. They can be so easily duped.
 
Werbung:
Back
Top