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
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
And yet another poll measuring something irrelevant. Canada is not "broken". Depite what Poilievre and the CPC and the news media want you to think. For example, 1/ #cdnpoli
The Canada Election Act of 2000 regulates the technical disclosures required by polling firms during elections. However, in non-writ polling, authenticity, ethics, and honesty are self-regulated. Poll results are often used to try to push public opinion. For example, 1/ #cdnpoli
we are probably familiar with ads that say things like "82% of dentists recommend using X toothpaste." That is bringing the weight of expert opinion to bear on consumer choices. But it is also true that if you tell people that 78% of their fellow citizens think a thing, they
2/
are likely to feel that maybe they should think that too. People don't like to be outsiders. Most people tend to prefer to fit in and go with the flow. So a very simple strategy for changing or directing what people think about something is to tell them that most people
3/
When conservatives cut taxes, when Harper and the CPC cut taxes, they did 2 things. They cut corporate taxes on sucessful profitable companies. And they created tax credits that only people who made enough money could use. For example, the child sport tax credit. If you
#cdnpoli
can't afford to put your kid in sports, no tax cut for you! Because clearly the family that needs tax cuts is the one that has 3 kids in hockey, right? Of course the people with 3 kids in hockey will say "yeah, that credit helped", but would they have had to pull their kids out
of sports without it? Probably not. Tax credits for people who are doing pretty ok is not helping regular or vulnerable Canadians. Harper had tax credits for snowmobilers for goodness sake. Anything to lure in voters, segment by segment. Now it sounds like Poilievre has no plan,