[OnTheIce]

Curtman wrote:

OnTheIce wrote:

Like when the CBC lied about Toronto's Mayor Rob Ford and things he said during a 911 call?

http://www.torontosun.com/2011/10/27/ma ... cbc-ambush

Even after Toronto's Police Chief and the Chief of the OPP listed to the calls and confirmed he never said that, the CBC hasn't issued an apology.

Apology?

Rob Ford wrote:

"I did use the "f-word" at some point as I expressed my frustration with the situation," said Ford. "After being attacked in my driveway, I hope I can be excused for saying the f-word."

He called 911 because Mary Walsh showed up with a camera crew. It's a comedy sketch that wrote itself. Why apologize when he wrote the punchline?

Try reading the article.

[dedBuNNy]

Attacked - ambushed - Mary Walsh.

[bootlegga]

saturn_656 wrote:

Quote:

If sun can have boogie nights on for the movie of the week then the French CBC can have thier version of sex in the city.

The CBC will come under greater scrutiny and criticism than a private network like Sun because it is a money losing operation with a billion dollar a year black hole filled with cash from the government trough.

Frankly I don't feel we are getting our money's worth, but that's just me.

Isn't it a shocker that this issue suddenly appeared? I'm certain it has nothing to do with deflecting criticism from Sun Media offering to "fake the oath" last week...this is mis-direction and nothing else.

[OnTheIce]

bootlegga wrote:

saturn_656 wrote:

Quote:

If sun can have boogie nights on for the movie of the week then the French CBC can have thier version of sex in the city.

The CBC will come under greater scrutiny and criticism than a private network like Sun because it is a money losing operation with a billion dollar a year black hole filled with cash from the government trough.

Frankly I don't feel we are getting our money's worth, but that's just me.

Isn't it a shocker that this issue suddenly appeared? I'm certain it has nothing to do with deflecting criticism from Sun Media offering to "fake the oath" last week...this is mis-direction and nothing else.

SNN has been on the CBC like a cheap suit for a while. This attack isn't something new from SNN towards the CBC so it's more of their MO rather than an attempt to deflect.

[FieryVulpine]

Indeed, someone has not been watching SNN for the past few months.

[saturn_656]

bootlegga wrote:

saturn_656 wrote:

Quote:

If sun can have boogie nights on for the movie of the week then the French CBC can have thier version of sex in the city.

The CBC will come under greater scrutiny and criticism than a private network like Sun because it is a money losing operation with a billion dollar a year black hole filled with cash from the government trough.

Frankly I don't feel we are getting our money's worth, but that's just me.

Isn't it a shocker that this issue suddenly appeared? I'm certain it has nothing to do with deflecting criticism from Sun Media offering to "fake the oath" last week...this is mis-direction and nothing else.

I've held my particular opinion on the CBC before SNN existed. I don't even watch SNN to boot.

Their little feud has nothing to do with my feeling that the CBC should, at a bare minimum, recover its operating costs so it isn't another leech sucking at the taxpayer teat.

The taxpayer spends twice as much on the CBC than we do on the Canadian Space Agency. Our priorities are not right.

[bootlegga]

OnTheIce wrote:

Isn't it a shocker that this issue suddenly appeared? I'm certain it has nothing to do with deflecting criticism from Sun Media offering to "fake the oath" last week...this is mis-direction and nothing else.

SNN has been on the CBC like a cheap suit for a while. This attack isn't something new from SNN towards the CBC so it's more of their MO rather than an attempt to deflect.[/quote]

I agree, but like I said, the timing is incredibly suspicious.

[bootlegga]

FieryVulpine wrote:

Indeed, someone has not been watching SNN for the past few months.

In fairness, I stopped watching last fall (even then I only watched online), as both the bias and content were terrible. I'm not interested in watching extremists on either side of the political spectrum - which is why I don't watch CBC editorials or programs with a bias of their own.

[OnTheIce]

bootlegga wrote:

FieryVulpine wrote:

Indeed, someone has not been watching SNN for the past few months.

In fairness, I stopped watching last fall (even then I only watched online), as both the bias and content were terrible. I'm not interested in watching extremists on either side of the political spectrum - which is why I don't watch CBC editorials or programs with a bias of their own.

I've never watched a show on SNN, I don't think they have a lot of credibility and way too right wing for their own good.

It's funny when the CBC is more centrist compared to the SNN in terms of political reporting.

[Dragon-Dancer]

CBC news is fairly even handed, even their political reporting usually has panels of guests from all sides. Some of their guests do tend to be more articulate than others.

[2Cdo]

Dragon-Dancer wrote:

CBC news is fairly even handed, even their political reporting usually has panels of guests from all sides. Some of their guests do tend to be more articulate than others.

Oh, you were serious.

[FieryVulpine]

bootlegga wrote:

In fairness, I stopped watching last fall (even then I only watched online), as both the bias and content were terrible. I'm not interested in watching extremists on either side of the political spectrum - which is why I don't watch CBC editorials or programs with a bias of their own.

I dunno. Seeing David Menzies dress up like a member of the Village People in drag had me...

[BeaverFever]

Let's recap the issue shall we?

Along with 20 other private sector partners The CBC invested in a foreign channel as a revenue-generating activity [read: to generate revenue that the taxpayer does not have to provide]. The channel shows, among other things, late-night programming that the CBC's adversary deems to be "soft core" porn (which by definition, means something that anyone who actually watches porn wouldn't even waste their time on}.

Did I miss anything?

[Gunnair]

BeaverFever wrote:

Let's recap the issue shall we?

Along with 20 other private sector partners The CBC invested in a foreign channel as a revenue-generating activity [read: to generate revenue that the taxpayer does not have to provide]. The channel shows, among other things, late-night programming that the CBC's adversary deems to be "soft core" porn (which by definition, means something that anyone who actually watches porn wouldn't even waste their time on}.

Did I miss anything?

Nope... except for self righteous ire of the prudes.

[Benn]

Alta_redneck wrote:

What's this, someone's opinion posted as a news story? hmmmm

Yes, shocking, where are the moderators to remove this drivel and horrific opinion only non news article! But seriously, they shut down other "opinion" articles and let this one go on for 7 pages.

I'll hold onto this link next time they pull an op-ed piece I post from the net.