What are we to do when our MEDIA picks favourites? What are we, as a society, to do when journalists are part of the right-wing propaganda machine? #cdnmedia
What are we to do when Canadian journalists repeat conservative talking points as facts, without verification? When they use tentative terms, like "claims" or "alleges" when reporting government statements, and absolutes like "says" and "stated" when reporting CPC statements?
What are we to do when #cdnmedia look to junk "think-tanks" like the Fraser Institute and the Canadian Taxpayer's Federation to paint a picture of reality? What are we to do when our fourth estate has been bought and controlled by those who are not interested in our public good?
Where are the journalists with integrity? Where are the journalists with professional commitment? Where are the journalists with the guts to fact-check the conservatives? Where are the journalists who are working for the public good?
Why is even the CBC, our public broadcaster, acting as a CPC cheerleader, even though the new leader promises to put them all out of work? What has happened to journalism in Canada? What can we do about it?
It's no coincidence that any invading army or dictatorial regime takes control of the media early on. If you control the news - what is reported and how it is reported - you can change the way people see their society. You can create scapegoats. You can justify the unthinkable.
Many may say I am over-reacting. But this has been going on a long time. Canadians are getting used to hearing the news conservatives want them to hear. Panels of pro-conservative pundits are normalized now. We get more opinion than news, and that's been normalized too.
1. Is it true? 2. Is it verifiable? (i.e. not the word of an anonymous source) 3. Is publishing it in the interest of the public good?
These are the tests every single piece of news reporting should have to pass. #cdnmedia
Think critically when you hear or read the news. Question the way things are worded. Is the reporter conveying trust in what is being said, or incredulity? Is there fact-checking? Are there multiple reputable sources? Is what is being reported important or meant to stir the pot?
Is the language used in reporting slanted in favour of or against the person or party being reported about? i.e. "Scandal-ridden government" is pejorative. It makes assumptions and leads the reader. Does the reporting seem factual and unbiased?
Is the reporting full of heuristic cues to evoke positive or negative emotions in the reader/viewer? Adjectives can change the tone of a sentence dramatically, and affect the recipients' perceptions. Be wary of reporting that contains words that celebrate or vilify.
Does it rely on a single-source so-called "expert" organization, like the Fraser Institute? Does it offer clarity as to the "expert's" qualifications/loyalties/funding?
Offering "the other side" is a ruse in many cases. There can be one side that is factual and another that is opinion. It is important to differentiate. Offering a contradictory opinion is not only often not useful, it can be harmful.
If you have a doctor talking about vaccines and an anti-vaxxer contradicting them, that is not good journalism. The other side does not always deserve the airtime because they are just wrong. And the fourth estate is not acting in the public good by giving a podium to just anyone
We need to be on our guard. Our #cdnmedia has abandoned us. There are some great reporters out there, but the media infrastructure is controlled by those who do not have the public good at heart. This is a real and present danger to our Canadian way of life. We are not USA north.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This is a "When did you stop beating your wife?" question. The person asking bases the premise of the question on the fact they have been reporting on a rumour all week. Really? So you report something based on speculation, then ask questions as though your speculation 1/
First, this rumour is not, apparently, based on any evidence because no evidence has been presented. Robert Fife's "unnamed sources" have been horribly wrong before. Remember Maher Arar?
So, how does this reporting fit into the principles of Journalistic
2/
Ethics? Let's have a look.
1. It must be true.
Hmmmm. Is it true? What assurances, other than the Globe & Mail has been saying it all week, do we have that there is any substance to this at all?
2. It must be verifiable.
OK, so what proof is there that any of this is real?
3/
I have been listening to @Justin_Ling 's podcast "The Village" again. I listened to the first season when it was new and only just now rediscovered it. It's all dreadful and shocking. The third season goes into what happened in Montreal to the LGBTQ2+ community, while the
1/
first two seasons focus on Toronto. The lack of enthusiasm in investigating murders by the Toronto police is disgraceful. The harassment of queer folks in both Toronto and Montreal by police is disgraceful. The violence towards a group of people for just being themselves is
2/
appalling. Gay bashing is a terrible hate crime, but when the police do it? They should all have been fired, but there were no consequences. So much to make you think in this podcast series. Everyone who feels they don't know much about the LGBTQ2+ community, or who complains
3/
I see a lot of people say they are not into politics. They don't want to hear about politics, or talk about politics. They say it as though that makes them more pure then the people who do speak about politics. Like they are above all that. Certainly, for a 1/ #cdnpoli
long time, people avoided speaking about politicis as a matter of politeness. That prohibition on talking about politics (or religion, or income) was always presented as a way to avoid conflict, but in fact, it is a way for the wealthy to prevent people from organizing,
2/
from questioning authority, and from rebelling against injustice and corruption.
These days, a lack of political awareness is actively encouraged by the far right, for precisely the same reasons. People who don't listen to the news, or read the news, or talk about the
3/
Chris Selley recently published a piece in the National Post excoriating Poilievre's critics. Some of those mentioned were professors and media personalities. Fair enough. But he also had a go at a regular citizen for expressing her political views. Is that what MSM is doing
now? I wonder if we will next see "journalists" like Chris publishing naughty lists, hit lists if you will, of people who hold unacceptable (to the CPC) views.Throwing their names out there so any off the rails CPC supporter who is itching for an active way to show his
devotion to Poilievre has a list of targets? The rest of the article is also trash. Why is Selley writing this lengthy defense of the Leader of the Official Opposition? Does he not know that the CPC has communications people and press secretaries and so on to defend the leader
@angryablib @TheBreakdownAB People in Alberta don't care. As long as it's conservatives doing it, they don't care. Kenney fired the Elections Commissioner that was investigating his leadership election. No one cared. The party was also being investigated by the RCMP. No one cared. They have changed laws to
@angryablib @TheBreakdownAB retroactively get themselves off the hook about things, and also to allow themselves to accept large gifts from lobbyists. No one cares. They want to arrest homeless people and force them into rehab, (which seems like a clever way to funnel public money to their friends who have
@angryablib @TheBreakdownAB suddenly got into the rehab business and no one cares. They created a "War Room" that they fed millions of dollars of OUR money into every year and we can't see where that money goes and no one cares. They were giving billions by the feds for Covid relief and they "misplaced" the
I just feel the need to say, Conservatives go on & on & on about freedom. Yet their campaign team employ persuasion methodology that can affect what you think. Shouldn't freedom to not have your thoughts messed with, without your knowledge, be the #1 freedom?
#cdnpoli
Because, yes, they are doing things to try to influence what you think. And their techniques take many forms. From getting people to broadcast specific messages to their friend groups and encouraging re-broadcast, to buying and disseminating poll results designed to make you
change the way you think about a subject. To repeating simple, sing-songy slogans over and over and over until they get stuck in your head. To spreading lies and disinformation backed up by "credible" MSM who never fact-check and just repeat the talking points as though they