Last updated by The POOG on January 26, 2021.
Independence in MSM News Reporting
The question to consider is does the concentration of the large majority of news media in a handful of corporate owners afect the independence of news reporting? Consider these short clips. The first is 1:21 minutes long.
Also, this one at 3:24 minutes. Start at the 1:50 mark.
Bias in MSM News Reporting
Although I expect most people would agree that there is bias in the media and that they would have their favourite examples, I have seen very little legitimate studies on the topic. The one that stands out is the 2017 study by the Shorenstein Center of Media, Politics, and Public Policy at Harvard.
Comparing media reporting of various MSM sources on Trump’s first 100 days in office compared to past presidents, they found that CNN was most heavily biased against Trump at 93% of articles versus 52% for Fox.
The Bias in ‘Fact Checking’
‘Fact Checking’ is the term used by modern social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube to support suppression of dissenting opinion, particularly of a conservative nature. This is not surprising as much of their funding for fact checker groups comes from leftist money sources.
we also have bias in sources used in fact-checking such as Wikipedia which has a demonstrated left-wing bias. As a note, I rarely use Wikipedia as a reference for what I write. It may still be useful for topics that have no political overtones such as “snails in North America”. But we do have examples of false reports from ‘fact checkers’ such as this one exposed by Ben Swann:
It is a reasonable assumption that if a fact-checker is receiving financial benefit from another party (donor), they are likely to be biased in favour of the donor. They may claim as true, a position that supports the donor in some way even if the position is not valid. Alternatively, they may claim as false, a position which is true but goes against the donor’s interests.
It is valuable then to know where possible, a fact-checker’s support is coming from. Social media fact -checkers are notorious for their bias. Being able to associate funding with the CCP then is not a surprise.
James Corbett has a good discussion on ‘fact checking’:
The MSM in Canada
The minority Liberal government in its fall 2018 Financial Statement, pp. 42-43, pledged to provide $595 million in support to ‘qualifying’ media sources over 5 years. In the preamble to the details, the report lathers on platitudes such as:
A strong and independent news media is crucial to a well-functioning democracy. …
… providing them [citizens] with the information they need to make informed decisions on important issues.
strong and independent journalism serves the public good …
Canadians have a right to a wide range of independent news sources that they can trust …
Concerns have been expressed that, without government intervention, there may be a decline in the quantity and quality of journalism available, pp 42-43.
It sounds good until government intervention is introduced due to ‘concerns’. What concerns? Who raised these concerns?
The result is a program to provide an estimated $595 million in refundable and non-refundable tax credits to eligible individuals and organization. And here is the catch: it’s available to “eligible‘ parties or to “qualifying news organizations“.
In the matter of Canada’s attorney General testifying before a Parliamentary committee go to the 1:43 mark in this video
Jody Wilson-Raybould states that Prime Minister Trudeau’s chief of staff, Katie Telford, told her that “we would of course line up all kinds of people to write op eds saying that what she [Raybould] is doing is proper.” In other words, the government has influence over the media and the message that it communicates. The influence increases with the financial support.
The Eligibility Catch
To create the appearance of impartiality, the government has set up an “arms-length and independent [panel ] to define and promote core journalism standards“. This panel is formed “from the news and journalism community to define eligibility for this tax credit”.
Immediately we see two problems. The first is that the government, in choosing the panel members or a group to make such choices for them, maintains control of the process. The second is that such a panel will represent only its members and not the independent alternative media that is a growing public source of news and opinion.
Effects of the Program
FP News, which lobbied the government for the program, reported in their 2020 Q2 financial statement “that 38% of their revenue comes from the government”, according to Blacklock’s Reporter. We call this ‘bought and paid for’.
I was looking for a video clip from last year of Trudeau’s stumbling response on how his family avoids plastic. I found the CTV video with the help of the YouTube algos:
The video itself has been scrubbed from the internet at its CTV source but I found this clip at True North..
Now one might think that an MSM company would preserve such a historic piece but when the government pays your bills, this apparently is not the case.
Government Suppression of Dissenting Viewpoints
The mainstream broadcast media in Canada consists of the state-owned broadcaster, the CBC, and two private state-funded broadcasters, Global News and CTV, the latter being responsible for scrubbing the video above. In the following video Global features the Prime Minister, Dr. Theresa Tam and an interviewer.
This interview is a carefully scripted psyop. The first thing to notice is that the interviewer, right from the start and continuing throughout, uses highly prejudicial language to set up the the speaker for what the script writer wants brought out.
This is, in short, use only those sources that the government certifies as trusted. Among other sources they refer to those with “extremist agendas“, foreign actors and bots, and those with agendas “designed to undermine” and “weaken” public confidence. There’s even a reference to a threat to out democracy.
It is interesting to note that the first thing the interviewer references is what he calls the “conspiracy theory” of COVID internment camps (see the next section below). This sets the stage for discrediting sources other than what they refer to as “credible” and “trusted sources” that “tell the truth“, the implication being that any other sources are therefore liars.
Other key language you will recognize from the military propaganda program described in Narrative Control and Propaganda in Canada: ‘mis/disinformation’. The interviewer, Trudeau, and Tam use it at least 13 times. Clearly it refers to any points of view that dissents from official government narrative (propaganda).
hey exhort us to listen to “trusted experts”. They are preparing us for”eventually getting vaccinated … these are things that Canadians need to do“. She wants us to use the COVID tracking app.
They note that “there is a tremendous amount of noise and harmful misinformation about on the internet” as well as in social media (SM). Tam even appeals to us to do the governments dirty work and spread the narrative through social media. She commends the SM companies for deplatforming and using other tactics to censor dissenting voices.
She even recruits journalists: “There’s a part for journalists who are in this room to help reveal the sort of tactics and the measures that are at play“. We are instructed to use ‘fact checkers’, many of whom like Mel Woods of HuffPost Canada, are clearly biased.
This video is a well orchestrated effort to suppress dissenting points of view.
The Internment Camp Issue
Source documents can be critical to research. For example, there is a topic widely circulation that the government is setting up ‘internment camps’. This originated from Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) request for information (RFI) document, Solicitation No. – 6D112-202772/A. This is a 12 page document dated September 16, 2020. I have a copy received from MPP Randy Hillier.
The document has been scrubbed from the web but at least one site has it in part. An amended (sanitized) web version dated October 19, 2020, replaces it. This version is readily available on the web but of no interest to the discussion.
From the original, section 1.c states (emphasis added):
Public Health Agency Canada (PHAC) is currently managing 11 designated quarantine sites (DQS) in 9 cities across Canada, with capacity to lodge up to 1600 travellers. … At this time, the DQS are being used to address the COVID-19 fourteen day quarantine requirements for international travellers not having a suitable place to isolate. Over time, the use of the DQS may be temporarily discontinued until needed again by the Government of Canada or may be used for other requirements.
First, this is a request for information, not a request for tenders. It is for third parties to provide such sites, not the government.
Note that these are called “quarantine sites“, not ‘internment camps’. Right away, the government has grounds to dismiss such claims as ‘conspiracy theory’, and rightly so. Even if they may want to use them as internment camps in the future, there is no grounds for making that assumption here.
The second phrase about international travellers suggests a voluntary option in a situation where quarantine is mandated by law and the person has no personal means to enact it. There is no implication of forcible confinement.
Finally, the closing part sentence “or may be used for other requirements” is what triggered people. Likely, the idea of rounding up people guilty of dissent or civil disobedience was playing through some minds. The government may in fact wish they could do so and may even be planning such in some dark agency. However, this is in itself, innocuous.
Certain other requirements could be reasonable and demonstrative of prudent fiscal management and emergency preparedness. For example, certain northern aboriginal communities have to be evacuated periodically due to wildfire or springtime flooding. Loss of water supply due to contamination might be another. The Fort McMurray fire would have been a good candidate for such use.
So get a grip people. Be carefully critical and use your heads, not your emotions. It puts you on the same class as ‘them’.
- Newspaper that lobbied government now gets 38% of revenue from taxpayers. True North Wire, September 3, 2020.
- Fall Economic Statement 2018. Department of Finance Canada.
- Thomas E. Patterson. News Coverage of Donald Trump’s First 100 Days. Shorenstein Center, Harvard, May 18, 2017.
- George Soros Is Funding Facebook’s “Third-Party Fact Checking” Organization Targeting “Fake News”. Zero Hedge, December 16, 2016.
- Victor Davis Hanson. The Unapologetic Bias of the American Left. American Greatness, October 18, 2020.
- Shuichi Tezuka and Linda A. Ashtear. The left-wing bias of Wikipedia. The Critic, 22 October, 2020.
- REQUEST FOR INFORMATION [RFI} REGARDING SERVICE PROVIDER(S) FOR FEDERAL QUARANTINE/ISOLATION SITES FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA. PWGSC, 2020-09-16.
- Derek Knauss. Service Provider(s) for Federal Quarantine / Isolation sites. Prepare for change, October 30, 2020.
- VEEERRRRY Interesting….”Request for Information regarding Service Provider(s) for Federal Quarantine/Isolation sites for The Government of Canada. Greencrow As the Crow Flies… October 6, 2020.
- Petr Svab. Facebook Fact-Checker Funded by Chinese Money Through TikTok. The Epoch Times, December 10, 2020.