Media Power/Control

[CentreHice]

The content is trite, but the example is powerful. Either everybody subscribes to the same independent "fluff/feature" service...or ownership/control of the mainstream media is close to a monopoly.

[Disgruntled70sHab]

Would be interesting to see if most of these stations are affiliates of the same network. Would explain a lot. If it is the case then we see just how little control local and regional stations have over their own programming.

A good find.

Cheers.

[CentreHice]

They no doubt are, Dis....or at least subscribe to the same fluff service.

Be interesting to see if these same stations use the same national and international hard news stories as well.

I understand it saves the owners writing fees in the long run....but there's only one perspective on the reporting. And that's where spin/control comes in.

[blny]

If you're not watching The Newsroom, you should. It's got some great characters, and is an interesting look at the behind the scenes of producing a news show - including pressure to capitulate to sponsors.

[Andrew]

Dec 17, 2013 19:50:43 GMT -5 CentreHice said:

They no doubt are, Dis....or at least subscribe to the same fluff service.

Be interesting to see if these same stations use the same national and international hard news stories as well.

I understand it saves the owners writing fees in the long run....but there's only one perspective on the reporting. And that's where spin/control comes in.

I don't think it has anything to do with saving money on writing fees. The TV industry is run on advertising dollars. That segment is a subtle reminder from network sponsors to be good consumers and go out and spend your hard earned money on things you don't need. The segment was probably followed by ads for cars, tvs, cel phones, credit cards, and Wal Mart.

Back to the topic of media consolidation, I came across this graphic a couple of months ago, which is quite interesting: static2.businessinsider.com/image/4fd9ee1e6bb3f7af5700000a/media-infographic.jpg

Related is a similar graphic depicting ownership relationships for household goods: www.policymic.com/articles/71255/10-corporations-control-almost-everything-you-buy-this-chart-shows-how

[Polarice]

I have family that have been in the News business for over 40 years, they have worked for CTV, Global and even the Weather Channel and both on many occasions have complain how the advertisers try to control the news content.

[CentreHice]

Great points, guys.

Thanks for the info!

[Cranky]

I think I wrote about this before and in this context, it's worth repeating.

A while back, there was a CBC "report" at 11pm our time on "global warming". Notice the word "report". The usual doom and gloom complete with falling ice, droughts, scenes of storm, hurricanes, tornadoes and.....midget tossing. Around 3 in the morning, I'm watch the news from Greece and guess what, the exact same version in Greek shows up on an Athens station, an hour later, same thing from a Cyprus telecast. Word for word, scene for scene. The exact same canned report.

Needless to say, I was annoyed. A little more digging and I found out that it's from the same organization and available for no cost. So basically, we get canned propaganda spread around the world because its' free and it fills 3 minutes of air time.

To me, my opinion on media ranges from garbage to senile entertainment. I do not trust a single word they say or show. On top of that, it's getting worse and worse in terms of quality, shock and bias as they compete for advertising dollars.

[CentreHice]

Do you have any non-mainstream, reliable sources for your news, HA?

If so, please pass them on!


Thanks...

[Cranky]

Dec 23, 2013 12:39:03 GMT -5 CentreHice said:

Do you have any non-mainstream, reliable sources for your news, HA?

If so, please pass them on!


Thanks...

Almost none. Closest with a bit of credibility is The Economist but then, they take the easy way out and don't question or have any article questioning something like global warming. Even documentable challenge to one story on the amount of "carbon footprint" cement has and normally ignored by the sky fallers in their nonsense claims about "carbon free" brought back a dismissal by claiming that wind turbine are "attached to the ground with rods". And where are those rods attached? To b*tt holes? So their lack of knowledge on the subject didn't cause a ripple to a canned story. For the record, medium sized wind turbine will have between 20 and 30 trucks of cement poured in order to build their foundation. Turbines in rare cases are attached to the ground with anchor bolts when they are placed on solid rock. See below for typical foundation.

Anywho....my point is that even print media that has a reputation for "reporting" will rehash or parrot canned articles. I know they can't hire experts in every field, but they certainly don't go out of their way to correct any factual errors.

The only solution is to have a military grade bs detector working all the time on whatever media one is looking at. Then come to ones own conclusion.


www.grasmerewindfarm.com.au/photos/35

[Disgruntled70sHab]

One Canadian celebrity most of us, as kids, grew up admiring was David Suzuki. Even our teachers and parents thought he was the cat's meow.

Then came Ezra Levant. Until his appearance on Australian TV, Suzuki was used to answering preprepared questions. The Auzzies didn't prepare him at all.

HA, you refered to Global Warming. Well, until the Australian scientists got to him I was under the impression that Global Warming was still a major issued. This is what was reported Suzuki for years and supported by our media, only his information is out of date ... by about 20 years.

I added this because it has to do with irresponsible media reporting. The Auzzies have it right, though. They seem to have a lot right. Why didn't our media pick up on something like this?

Edit: this is only the first of several clips to the entire show.

[CentreHice]

Thanks, Dis!

SunTV is slanted further to the right than Fox News.....but Levant (even though I could do without the sarcasm and name-calling) has the essence of the Suzuki-Global Warming correct, IMO.

I remember Suzuki appearing on the John Oakley AM640 morning show a few years ago. Oakley presented lots of data to refute Suzuki's platform....and Suzuki was so flabbergasted, he walked off the show.

Hey, either you have the facts to back up your claims, or you don't.

Like Al Gore, Suzuki has made boatloads of money as "spokesman" for this subject. No wonder he doesn't want to be challenged.

[Disgruntled70sHab]

Dec 23, 2013 20:34:45 GMT -5 CentreHice said:

Thanks, Dis!

SunTV is slanted further to the right than Fox News.....but Levant (even though I could do without the sarcasm and name-calling) has the essence of the Suzuki-Global Warming correct, IMO.

I remember Suzuki appearing on the John Oakley AM640 morning show a few years ago. Oakley presented lots of data to refute Suzuki's platform....and Suzuki was so flabbergasted, he walked off the show.

Hey, either you have the facts to back up your claims, or you don't.

Like Al Gore, Suzuki has made boatloads of money as "spokesman" for this subject. No wonder he doesn't want to be challenged.

Hey, I was saying before that I grew up admiring and respecting Suzuki, as one of our country's best scientists. Which other scientists did we, as kids, even know of?

CH, if you watch the remaining clips it gets better. We find out that Suzuki has several multi-million-dollar homes. He even co-owns an island that some oil company co-owns with him.

You're right about Levant. I find he uses sarcasm in his humour to maybe show people that neo-cons aren't so bad. But, for me it's the whole right wing circus. Don't get me wrong, I need to hear the right wing opinions every so often. I sometimes agree with those opinions, too. But, if I listen to them for too long, they become like Levant is when he starts rambling ... a windbag.

I was disappointed in learning how out of touch Suzuki is. He used to be an educational icon to generations of Canadians and probably still is to many. After Levant exposed him, though, I find him an embarrasment to the country. By not challenging his findings, CBC basically enabled him.

Cheers.

[CentreHice]

Dec 23, 2013 22:09:17 GMT -5 Disgruntled70sHab said:

CH, if you watch the remaining clips it gets better. We find out that Suzuki has several multi-million-dollar homes. He even co-owns an island that some oil company co-owns with him.

Yes, I watched 3 parts and couldn't find more. But I missed the bit about he and an oil company co-owning an island. $30-40 grand for a speaking engagement. I doubt it suffers much. He has a religious aura about him. His believers will always believe...and say that opposing science is lying for corporate greed.

Online, I've also found several supposedly true first-hand encounters which proved Suzuki to be quite rude, especially to those who disagree with him.

Dec 23, 2013 22:09:17 GMT -5 Disgruntled70sHab said:

I was disappointed in learning how out of touch Suzuki is. He used to be an educational icon to generations of Canadians and probably still is to many. After Levant exposed him, though, I find him an embarrasment to the country. By not challenging his findings, CBC basically enabled him.

Same way, kind of, that CBC enabled Cherry to have carte blanche throughout his career. Fact-checking is out the window on both fronts. It's TV....show business. You get ratings, you stay on. Cash in on your fame. And both men have done that by stretching, manipulating and distorting the facts. Online, I've also found several supposedly true reports of first-hand encounters with Suzuki. Rude, arrogant, dismissive when challenged. And we know that's how Cherry reacts.

All of this info makes me wonder if Suzuki hasn't become a "Stephen Colbert" in reverse.

[seventeen]

Dec 23, 2013 0:08:07 GMT -5 Cranky said:

I think I wrote about this before and in this context, it's worth repeating.

A while back, there was a CBC "report" at 11pm our time on "global warming". Notice the word "report". The usual doom and gloom complete with falling ice, droughts, scenes of storm, hurricanes, tornadoes and.....midget tossing.

I'm not discounting your premise, but it's pretty hard to ignore that global warming is happening when you see ice shelfs falling off Antartica and read about the reduced ice levels in the Arctic etc. There's less ice in Greenland, glaciers are noticably smaller and so on. I'm not attributing any specific cause to it, but the globe has warmed and cooled over the eons. It's how we got ice ages. It's not something new, though it could be uncomfortable for some current life forms.

[Cranky]

Actually, none of it is true in context of "man made".

The seas are naturally rising over the last few thousand years, but now it's because of.....man made global warming.

There are less hurricanes then a couple of decades past despite claims that we were going to be inundated with them, but now, every one of them has media magical intensity of "never seen before" because of....man made global warming.

The theory that increased carbon causes greenhouse effect is shattered. We now have the highest ppm ever and the temperature has flatlined.

wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/hocker_fig1.png

There was never any definitive proof that carbon was post or precursor to temperature. Yet it became the rallying point of the entire "carbon cause runaway greenhouse warming". In fact, given that the majority of CO2 is trapped in the oceans, warming ocean will release more CO2 into the atmosphere.

Antarctica has as much ice as ever. Ice sheets falling is annual affair, part and parcel of seasonal and mid length ocean cycles. But now, it's "proof" of global warming and vanished ice sheets.

www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/09/23/antarctic-sea-ice-hit-35-year-record-high-saturday/

Polar bear are thriving.

polarbearscience.com/2013/07/15/global-population-of-polar-bears-has-increased-by-2650-5700-since-2001/

There is also a reason that the goal post has changed from "global warming" to "climate change" to "climate disruption". Every time the claims and hyperbole prove false, then new and more oblique language is used. Now we reached a point of "climate disruption" which is difficult to quantify but perfect in claiming any and every abnormal weather event as proof. Better yet, it fits perfectly with the puddle deep questioning and attention deficit disorder of the media.

As if abnormal events never happened before. Imagine what they would of done with the dustbowl of the thirties.

wattsupwiththat.com/2012/04/10/proof-that-climate-disruption-is-found-all-the-way-back-to-pre-industrial-times/

There is a reason why Suzuki and Gore don't want to meet anyone who asks the hard questions or presents facts.

But...there is a $ilver lining...for my pocket$.....

s29.postimg.org/yojo7zrh2/solar.jpg

And a LOT of BIGGER pockets then mine are making a killing. Unle$$ you are in the indu$try, you $imply don't hear about anything but.....the sky is falling.

[franko]

Dec 24, 2013 7:10:50 GMT -5 Cranky said:

Actually, none of it is true in context of "man made".

that's the thing. climate change? no denying -- the climate is changing. but that's noting new; it's been changing since creation [however you may define that]. man made? that's where the disagreement comes in. disagree that it's man made and you are a climate change denier. agree and you are a saint and inducted into the faithful of the Church of Suzuki-Gore.

Gore . . . who jets here and there and owns McMansions but buys carbon offsets [from his own company]. just a little hypocritical . . . kind of like Michael Moore complaining about "the rich" from his palace.

[Cranky]

Dec 24, 2013 8:33:59 GMT -5 franko said:

Dec 24, 2013 7:10:50 GMT -5 Cranky said:

Actually, none of it is true in context of "man made".

that's the thing. climate change? no denying -- the climate is changing. but that's noting new; it's been changing since creation [however you may define that]. man made? that's where the disagreement comes in. disagree that it's man made and you are a climate change denier. agree and you are a saint and inducted into the faithful of the Church of Suzuki-Gore.

Gore . . . who jets here and there and owns McMansions but buys carbon offsets [from his own company]. just a little hypocritical . . . kind of like Michael Moore complaining about "the rich" from his palace.

Or you can do the reverse. Profit from it and still call it out.

But then, I'm no saint.......

[Cranky]

Dec 23, 2013 20:07:29 GMT -5 Disgruntled70sHab said:

One Canadian celebrity most of us, as kids, grew up admiring was David Suzuki. Even our teachers and parents thought he was the cat's meow.

Then came Ezra Levant. Until his appearance on Australian TV, Suzuki was used to answering preprepared questions. The Auzzies didn't prepare him at all.

HA, you refered to Global Warming. Well, until the Australian scientists got to him I was under the impression that Global Warming was still a major issued. This is what was reported Suzuki for years and supported by our media, only his information is out of date ... by about 20 years.

I added this because it has to do with irresponsible media reporting. The Auzzies have it right, though. They seem to have a lot right. Why didn't our media pick up on something like this?

Edit: this is only the first of several clips to the entire show.

I saw that series and it was embarrassing. Suzuki couldn't even make arguments that a moderately informed believer could make in his sleep. Worse still, he was torn apart on the GM foods.

Suzuki fits the very definition of religious "priest". All belief, no proof necessary, don't bother me with the facts.

Embarrassing fool.

[Disgruntled70sHab]

Dec 24, 2013 0:44:06 GMT -5 CentreHice said:

Yes, I watched 3 parts and couldn't find more. But I missed the bit about he and an oil company co-owning an island. $30-40 grand for a speaking engagement. I doubt it suffers much. He has a religious aura about him. His believers will always believe...and say that opposing science is lying for corporate greed.

Same way, kind of, that CBC enabled Cherry to have carte blanche throughout his career. Fact-checking is out the window on both fronts. It's TV....show business. You get ratings, you stay on. Cash in on your fame. And both men have done that by stretching, manipulating and distorting the facts. Online, I've also found several supposedly true reports of first-hand encounters with Suzuki. Rude, arrogant, dismissive when challenged. And we know that's how Cherry reacts.

All of this info makes me wonder if Suzuki hasn't become a "Stephen Colbert" in reverse.

Here's a clip in a follow up episode by Levant. FF to the 14-minute mark for the island referal, but the whole clip is worthwhile. It shows how CBC not only enabled Suzuki, but actually became subservient to him (FF to 15:30 minutes for this one). Levant and his crew actually intercept him at a prearranged press conference and Suzuki retreats into his ride and reviews his notes. You really don't want to miss this one. Suzuki is a fraud. Watch and hear how much he charged per table at the premier of his movie. Great from beginning to end, but only when you have time. It's a tad under 55 minutes and you'll understand just how dysfunctional a network CBC is.