[shelphs]

The Canadian Sun News TV channel has been dubbed Fox News North and when it debuts on January 1, 2011, it will duplicate the Fox News 24-hour news channel format of news/opinion programming, which is a type of programming that has never been done before in Canada.

Stations that are labeled "24-hour news channels" should not have news/opinion programming in which a host is featured and his/her political opinions are not only known but celebrated and continually presented and constantly defended by the host and guests.

Hosts associated with news programming need to be moderators for fair and balanced programming to exist. The pseudo-news featured on Fox by its opinion personalities is so far removed from being informative and factual that its format label - "all-news channel" - is a ridiculous and unfunny joke.

The news/opinion format that includes opinion personalities in place of moderators is destructive to democracy in how it panders to ratings above all else. Though it would be nice to have highly entertaining and lively news, it is not a necessity; rather, relevant, unambiguous facts, and informative opinions are far more valuable than the bickering of polarized and, usually, uninformed people.

I support Sun TV News if it does not reflect the above negative attributes that accompany news/opinion programming, but how likely is it that the new news network will put meaningful and unambiguous reporting ahead of ratings and entertainment?



Is the comparison of Sun News TV with Fox News fair? In the sense that Sun News has yet to broadcast anything, no, it is not, but Sun News' origins does draw into question the content it will put forth along with the format itself of the new station.

[sandorski]

If it's merely a copy of FN, it will be a waste of space. If it attempts Journalistic integrity and takes the purpose of the Press seriously, it will be ok. We don't need a Propaganda network.

[Canadian_Mind]

As crazy as it may seem to you, this is probably a good thing. While it is extremist, it will provide 24/7 views from a different perspective of the same issues we are fed by places such as the CBC, and new issues important to those on the right that those on the left don't care about.

Besides, like the pinkos who only watch the left wing media, this will only be watched by the right, so very few opinions will likely change.

[KorbenDeck]

Well for starters it hasn't even ran any stories yet. People calling SunTV propaganda before it even airs is kinda like people saying that the unborn child of a former SS solider after WWII was going to be a Nazi.

What is worst for Canadian democracy is people trying to stop sun news and discredit the station simply because they afraid of what it may have to say. It hasn't even been on the air and people are crying bloody murder about something SunTV hasn't even done yet.

[Beej]

I don't see a problem with people watching the news in the flavor of their choice. Generally people who watch Fox news or are interested in a "Fox news north" aren't really part of the undecided crowd. People's opinions seem to form the content of news channels rather than the new channels forming their opinions. I have a bigger problem with bias in a public news channel than a private one.

[shelphs]

I have not stated that Sun News is a propaganda machine b/c, as you've pointed out, it has not yet broadcast anything. Its origins does concern me and how closely connected it is to Fox News, though, and I am very concerned with the prospect of a Canadian Fox News.

I am merely suggesting Sun TV may be similar to Fox News as a result of its origins, and if it is, that would be a bad thing.

I never agreed with not licensing the station b/c that wouldn't be just in a democracy, but I did disagree with it getting a category 1 license.

[EyeBrock]

Nobody has seen it yet but it's quite obvious that its a very, very bad thing. Maybe even Don Cherry will be on it. Our way of life is threatened.

[RUEZ]

How can freedom be bad for democracy?

[shelphs]

Beej wrote:

I don't see a problem with people watching the news in the flavor of their choice. Generally people who watch Fox news or are interested in a "Fox news north" aren't really part of the undecided crowd. People's opinions seem to form the content of news channels rather than the new channels forming their opinions. I have a bigger problem with bias in a public news channel than a private one.

You raise a good point on the expectation of different forms of news broadcasters - private and public - but that is only relevant as long as a private news outlet remains in the market.

[EyeBrock]

What about the bloody CBC? Cuba north.......

[shelphs]

To be clear, I believe false and purposefully deceptive and/or ambiguous reporting on news stations is damaging to democracy in how it confuses issues and facts and people.

An example would be Fox News' reporting on Obama's health care law and the number of people that were resultantly worried about it and why.

[EyeBrock]

Who watches Fox news? Not me.

[SprCForr]

Quote:

... how likely is it that the new news network will put meaningful and unambiguous reporting ahead of ratings and entertainment?

About as likely as any existing network. Meaningful and unambigous reporting doesn't exist in network news.


BTW, I think the "meaningful and unambigous" words you've used in your IP are intended to skew your poll to a predetermined result.

[Lemmy]

Giving Fox News types a mass-media opportunity to show what fools they are is good for democracy. Is the first show going to be "Prime Time with Rahim Jaffer"?

[EyeBrock]

That would be a laugh! Good old Rahim. How about Deb Grey doing a bit on Harleys or Mike Harris doing the education round-up?