No Canadian Fox News

[Pisces]

Apparently it's illegal to lie on a Canadian news broadcast:

Canada 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.

Just another reason to emigrate—as if Lake Louise, Sunshine Village, and Panorama weren't reasons enough.


Took this from Dan Savage's blog. Interesting that Canada prohibits lying in the news. We should take notes.

[sasha031]

1. so does the UK

although they have their share of trash print media, owned by murdoch.

[PBS Poll-435]

2. Then what do you call Sky News?

It is nearly just as bad.

[sasha031]

3. I haven't watched Sky News

maybe times have changed sense I've been there

[PBS Poll-435]

4. Seen it at the airport a few times

It is Fox with an accent.

[mwooldri]

21. Sky's nowhere *near* as bad as Fox.

Starters Sky News is aimed at the UK audience, and although it was first to the 24/7 news party BBC News is pounding them with audience share and how long the average viewer watches Auntie Beeb vs Sky News. (my source www.barb.co.uk - UK's equiv. of Nielsen Ratings).

Secondly, Sky News is broadcast terrestrially as well as by satellite and has to abide by the stricter domestic regulations than that imposed by satellite only broadcasters.

Thirdly, there "is" a content regulator, OFCOM. The Ofcom Broadcasting Code states: "News, in whatever form, must be reported with due accuracy and presented with due impartiality."

That said, Sky News does have a conservative reputation. However I trust the BBC much more than Sky News any day of the week, simply because since the Hutton Inquiry (IMO a "coverup") the BBC is less likely to broadcast anything that cannot be verified independently and double checks its facts. Sky News is a more of a "seat of its pants" operation.

[RC]

5. Regulators Reject Proposal That Would Bring Fox-Style News to Canada

"Harper's attempts to make lying legal on Canadian television is a stark admission that right wing political ideology can only dominate national debate through dishonest propaganda."

"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."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-f-kennedy-jr/fox-news-will-not-be-moving-into-canada-after-all_b_829473.html

[marmar]

6. Stephen Harper is such a wannabe dictator.

nt

[stevedeshazer]

7. I don't know about Canadian TV, but Canadian radio sure is a lot better.

When driving in or near Canada, I'm always struck at how much more diversity of news you get with the CBC networks and even the local coverages.

All you get here is Rush Limblob or Sean Hannity. Maybe NPR if you're lucky. Then the crappy formula stations on FM where in some alternate universe, Spiral Staircase is still worth listening to but Hank Williams isn't.

[Shagbark Hickory]

8. Actually there was supposed to be a new RW news channel in canada...

... launching this year. Modeled after fox.
I forget the name of it but last I checked it was not on the air yet.

[snagglepuss]

19. It's been waiting to get this approval thru. That the regulators didn't

agree to changes that would have allowed radio and TV to knowingly mislead the public is absolutely FANTASTIC. Now those a**holes can't mimic FOX. This is a really big victory.


The proposed changes caught everyone by surprise. -

snip

Michael Geist, a University of Ottawa law professor specializing in communications issues, finds it ironic that the CRTC wants to limit the scope of the prohibition on false or misleading news in Canada just as debate is raging over the impact of venomous, often grossly distorted, political discourse on the U.S. airwaves.

snip

With a new right-leaning all-news network, Sun TV News, about to launch in March, Geist noted there's concern in some quarters that Canada is about to import the more aggressive, American approach to political coverage. He suggested the CRTC's proposed regulatory change will only magnify those concerns.

snip

The CRTC quietly posted notice of the proposed change, which is slated to go into effect on Sept. 1, on its website last week. The agency is accepting comments from the public until Feb. 9.


http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/922697--crtc ...

[Shagbark Hickory]

25. I don't agree with prohibiting RW opinion from the airwaves.

Distorting the news... I'm not sure how I feel about that.
We have laws about libel here. People have to tread pretty lightly as it is. Except of course when it comes to public officials.

It depends on what they consider a lie.
Is Glen Beck saying that Obama has a socialist agenda a lie by canadian standards?
Isn't that kind of an interference with free speech?

I can understand keeping offensive hate speech from the airwaves. This has some pretty serious consequences. But political opinion, which is what fox mostly is, save the 7 oclock hour should be allowed. My main gripe is that in the US, it is political commentary and promotional stories (e.g. oscars, charlie sheen, and the latest medicine) with very little news content.

If something could be done such as keeping the word "news" out of "Sun TV" then maybe that's the answer. Keeping them off the air altogether... unless they are spewing hate speech... I don't agree with that.

News should be neutral and completely unbiased. To me that means; no opinion shows, no roundtables or back and forth between guests, no strategests either from the right or left. Give people the straight story and let them make up their own minds. Yes it's the kind of news channel that'll put you right to sleep. The CBC is pretty good at this already. Only government control of a news outlet, does raise a suspicion of bias.

[randr]

9. You would think this could be put forward by democrats

How could the repugs vote against a bill that makes it illegal to lie on the news?

[bergie321]

10. How?

"Democrats are trying to take away our first amendment rights"
"Democrats are trying to censor us"
"This is all part of Obama's plan to turn us into a socialist state"
"Government takeover of the airwaves"

Get the point? The corporate propaganda controls the airwaves and therefor the message.

[stevedeshazer]

11. You're right.

Dammit.

:)

[NuttyFluffers]

13. if i control what you see & hear, i control what you know. if i control what you know, i control YOU

yup, yup. media messaging is supreme power.

there's more wisdom to the sloganeering "Kill your TV" than just getting the 'noise' out of the way. entertainment is fine, but being selective and critical about what you take in is vital.

[sarcasmo]

12. Lucky.

[pacalo]

14. Wonderful!

[roamer65]

15. Sounds like we need a law similar to Canada's.

..with harsh penalties.

[Matariki]

16. It's pretty telling that Harper wants to repeal the law that doesn't allow lying on broadcast news.

And very telling that the US no longer has a law like that.

That would be a worthy effort, to get a law passed like that. So many politicians would be up shit's creek and Fox would go out of business.

[Matariki]

17. I wish we had a similar law. The strategy of "just lie" and see what sticks is getting old.

[Yavin4]

18. First, They Have National Health Care

Now, they don't even have Fox News!!!!

Yet, they won't let us in? After we took in Celine Dion?


What's up with that Canada?

[upi402]

22. Yeah but we have their Pam Anderson n/t

[applegrove]

20. Oh that is good news.

[Lyric]

23. Is anyone else wondering what the hell the political argument in FAVOR of this bill was?!

How on earth does a politician, who needs to maintain popularity in order to keep his job, take the public position of being pro-lying?

Sure, there are probably philosophical arguments--that you believe in absolute freedom of speech, even when it hurts, etc. But that kind of lofty, disconnected thinking isn't going to save you from average people who don't give a crap about philosophy--they only know that they heard you make in argument in favor of lying. That's not the kind of PR mistake that a typical politician would make. So I have to wonder, how exactly did Harper make this argument without destroying his own career in the process?

:wtf:

[Tsiyu]

24. A lie used to be a terrible thing

As kids, most of us were taught that lying was wrong. It was considered a selfish, immoral behavior and was met with stern rebuke and often a punishment of some sort.

Of course, every single human who can speak and reason will lie from time to time for personal reasons. But to have a media steeped in lies tells us how low the Right Wing has sunk.

Republicans and Teabaggers have taught an entire generation that lying is a highly lucrative business. Those on FOX News who are parents probably don't punish their own kids for lying. Instead, they no doubt teach them how to be even better liars.


Sad

[Enthusiast]

26. Eventually

the powerful fascists in this nation will break the resistance of the Canadians. There is no substitute for cubic dollars.