Election 2015

[Brandon Blue&Gold]

 

The majority of those papers that are backing the Cons are owned by one company, Postmedia Network, which owns all the Sun papers and generally promotes right of centre views if I'm not mistaken. You could consider all those Postmedia papers as one entity really. So is it really a surprise that the chart posted is going to be primarily Con blue? About as surprising if Fox News backs the Republican candidate and MSNBC backs the Democratic nominee down south.

I'm more surprised by the Wpg Free Press backing the Cons. Or the Globe and Mail with their backing of the Cons, but not Harper.

I'd say you could count all the regional suns together as one national entity. I would argue common ownership is not a good enough reason to consider that national sun entity the same as the post though.

 

Every entity owned by Rupert Murdoch's NewsCorp seems to toe the company line.  So it's not unprecedented for a national entity to fall in line with their owners, maybe not as extreme as NewsCorp.  Much like CBC will fall in line with whomever will maintain their funding and secure their future, which the Cons haven't over the years.  Hence CBC's bias.  Much like politicians many media outlets will act in their own self interests as they do their jobs.

[Mr Dee]

This line sums it up for me..

"The current government has lost its moral authority to govern.‎"

A lawyer who worked in Stephen Harper's PMO‎ and broke with the Conservatives over the Nigel Wright affair months ago announced Sunday he has abandoned the Tories in the polling booth and has cast his vote "for change" this time.

"As a lifelong conservative I never thought that would happen. But after what I've personally seen and experienced, there was no other choice," Ben Perrin, a former legal advisor in the PMO, said in a statement sent to media on the eve of Election Day.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harper-has-lost-the-moral-authority-to-govern-says-former-pmo-lawyer/article26864767/?click=sf_globefb

[Fraser]

The majority of those papers that are backing the Cons are owned by one company, Postmedia Network, which owns all the Sun papers and generally promotes right of centre views if I'm not mistaken. You could consider all those Postmedia papers as one entity really. So is it really a surprise that the chart posted is going to be primarily Con blue? About as surprising if Fox News backs the Republican candidate and MSNBC backs the Democratic nominee down south.

I'm more surprised by the Wpg Free Press backing the Cons. Or the Globe and Mail with their backing of the Cons, but not Harper.

I'd say you could count all the regional suns together as one national entity. I would argue common ownership is not a good enough reason to consider that national sun entity the same as the post though.

Every entity owned by Rupert Murdoch's NewsCorp seems to toe the company line. So it's not unprecedented for a national entity to fall in line with their owners, maybe not as extreme as NewsCorp. Much like CBC will fall in line with whomever will maintain their funding and secure their future, which the Cons haven't over the years. Hence CBC's bias. Much like politicians many media outlets will act in their own self interests as they do their jobs.

Yes. I get why they do it. Common ownership doesn't mean that Canadians aren't getting biased news from 5 different sources just because they are owned by the same person though.

[Brandon Blue&Gold]

 

 

 

The majority of those papers that are backing the Cons are owned by one company, Postmedia Network, which owns all the Sun papers and generally promotes right of centre views if I'm not mistaken. You could consider all those Postmedia papers as one entity really. So is it really a surprise that the chart posted is going to be primarily Con blue? About as surprising if Fox News backs the Republican candidate and MSNBC backs the Democratic nominee down south.

I'm more surprised by the Wpg Free Press backing the Cons. Or the Globe and Mail with their backing of the Cons, but not Harper.

I'd say you could count all the regional suns together as one national entity. I would argue common ownership is not a good enough reason to consider that national sun entity the same as the post though.

Every entity owned by Rupert Murdoch's NewsCorp seems to toe the company line. So it's not unprecedented for a national entity to fall in line with their owners, maybe not as extreme as NewsCorp. Much like CBC will fall in line with whomever will maintain their funding and secure their future, which the Cons haven't over the years. Hence CBC's bias. Much like politicians many media outlets will act in their own self interests as they do their jobs.

Yes. I get why they do it. Common ownership doesn't mean that Canadians aren't getting biased news from 5 different sources just because they are owned by the same person though.

 

I guess I should have clarified the point I was trying to make since I didn't state it in my previous posts.  When that chart was posted with all the papers and which party they were endorsing, some posters (yourself included) used that to show that the general media bias appeared to be towards the Cons and not to the left like some have stated.  I'm pointing out that the chart isn't as impressive as it appears since many of the papers are owned by one company and are going to promote the same general viewpoint regardless if it's the Winnipeg Sun or National Post or Calgary Sun etc.  These individual papers will typically take their editorial leanings from the head office regardless where they are located.  Wasn't that the general opinion of all the Sun media entities, written,online and TV, that they all lean right no matter the story or situation?  Certainly how I've seen it for many years.

 

That's all I'm pointing out.  That the chart isn't all that impressive for attempting to show a nationwide media Conservative bias. 

[Brandon Blue&Gold]

 

 

 

The majority of those papers that are backing the Cons are owned by one company, Postmedia Network, which owns all the Sun papers and generally promotes right of centre views if I'm not mistaken. You could consider all those Postmedia papers as one entity really. So is it really a surprise that the chart posted is going to be primarily Con blue? About as surprising if Fox News backs the Republican candidate and MSNBC backs the Democratic nominee down south.

I'm more surprised by the Wpg Free Press backing the Cons. Or the Globe and Mail with their backing of the Cons, but not Harper.

I'd say you could count all the regional suns together as one national entity. I would argue common ownership is not a good enough reason to consider that national sun entity the same as the post though.

Every entity owned by Rupert Murdoch's NewsCorp seems to toe the company line. So it's not unprecedented for a national entity to fall in line with their owners, maybe not as extreme as NewsCorp. Much like CBC will fall in line with whomever will maintain their funding and secure their future, which the Cons haven't over the years. Hence CBC's bias. Much like politicians many media outlets will act in their own self interests as they do their jobs.

Yes. I get why they do it. Common ownership doesn't mean that Canadians aren't getting biased news from 5 different sources just because they are owned by the same person though.

 

A more relevant example of a paper bending to the leanings of it's owner.  According to Gwynne Dyer when Conrad Black took over certain newspapers back in the day Dyer's column started getting dropped from Conrad Black's newspapers because Black, a staunch conservative, didn't like Dyer's own leanings in his columns.  I got that story from one of Dyer's books so the source may be biased, but it sounds like something Black would do.  

[Fraser]

The majority of those papers that are backing the Cons are owned by one company, Postmedia Network, which owns all the Sun papers and generally promotes right of centre views if I'm not mistaken. You could consider all those Postmedia papers as one entity really. So is it really a surprise that the chart posted is going to be primarily Con blue? About as surprising if Fox News backs the Republican candidate and MSNBC backs the Democratic nominee down south.

I'm more surprised by the Wpg Free Press backing the Cons. Or the Globe and Mail with their backing of the Cons, but not Harper.

I'd say you could count all the regional suns together as one national entity. I would argue common ownership is not a good enough reason to consider that national sun entity the same as the post though.

Every entity owned by Rupert Murdoch's NewsCorp seems to toe the company line. So it's not unprecedented for a national entity to fall in line with their owners, maybe not as extreme as NewsCorp. Much like CBC will fall in line with whomever will maintain their funding and secure their future, which the Cons haven't over the years. Hence CBC's bias. Much like politicians many media outlets will act in their own self interests as they do their jobs.

Yes. I get why they do it. Common ownership doesn't mean that Canadians aren't getting biased news from 5 different sources just because they are owned by the same person though.

A more relevant example of a paper bending to the leanings of it's owner. According to Gwynne Dyer when Conrad Black took over certain newspapers back in the day Dyer's column started getting dropped from Conrad Black's newspapers because Black, a staunch conservative, didn't like Dyer's own leanings in his columns. I got that story from one of Dyer's books so the source may be biased, but it sounds like something Black would do.

I'm not arguing it doesn't happen. I'm saying if you have 10 national media outlets owned by one person pushing the same agenda they are each influencing the media landscape in the same way 10 individually owned media outlets would influence it.

[Brandon Blue&Gold]

 

 

 

 

 

The majority of those papers that are backing the Cons are owned by one company, Postmedia Network, which owns all the Sun papers and generally promotes right of centre views if I'm not mistaken. You could consider all those Postmedia papers as one entity really. So is it really a surprise that the chart posted is going to be primarily Con blue? About as surprising if Fox News backs the Republican candidate and MSNBC backs the Democratic nominee down south.

I'm more surprised by the Wpg Free Press backing the Cons. Or the Globe and Mail with their backing of the Cons, but not Harper.

I'd say you could count all the regional suns together as one national entity. I would argue common ownership is not a good enough reason to consider that national sun entity the same as the post though.

Every entity owned by Rupert Murdoch's NewsCorp seems to toe the company line. So it's not unprecedented for a national entity to fall in line with their owners, maybe not as extreme as NewsCorp. Much like CBC will fall in line with whomever will maintain their funding and secure their future, which the Cons haven't over the years. Hence CBC's bias. Much like politicians many media outlets will act in their own self interests as they do their jobs.

Yes. I get why they do it. Common ownership doesn't mean that Canadians aren't getting biased news from 5 different sources just because they are owned by the same person though.

A more relevant example of a paper bending to the leanings of it's owner. According to Gwynne Dyer when Conrad Black took over certain newspapers back in the day Dyer's column started getting dropped from Conrad Black's newspapers because Black, a staunch conservative, didn't like Dyer's own leanings in his columns. I got that story from one of Dyer's books so the source may be biased, but it sounds like something Black would do.

I'm not arguing it doesn't happen. I'm saying if you have 10 national media outlets owned by one person pushing the same agenda they are each influencing the media landscape in the same way 10 individually owned media outlets would influence it.

 

I can see that.  I can also see that media group get summarily dismissed by a large portion of the populace because of their perceived bias.  Fox News, MSNBC and SUN News would be good examples of this.  People can certainly blindy follow what is presented to them in the media, but they can also dismiss it out of hand depending on how they feel about the source.  

[Mr Dee]

This is what I woke up to this morning here, in Kelowna…and I'm not sure about using what is supposed to be neutral colouring? Looks like an official message.

 

 

 

[Noeller]

I can confirm the same thing on the Regina Leader Post yesterday,while out there for a wedding...

[Mark F]

no bias there.....

[Fatty Liver]

This is what I woke up to this morning here, in Kelowna…and I'm not sure about using what is supposed to be neutral colouring? Looks like an official message.

 

 

 

 

Wow, never seen anything like that before, that's basically a full page advert. on the front page.  So much for journalistic integrity.

[kelownabomberfan]

while I agree with the message, I don't agree with the way it was presented. I would have made the message even simpler "If you vote NDP, you need to have your head examined."

[iso_55]

Concussion protocols seem to be working, KBF. NDP in 3rd place.

[The Unknown Poster]

I thought only Conservatives dodged questions:

 

http://bobmackin.ca/?p=3139

 

Introduced by restaurateur Vikram Vij, Trudeau relied on his speaking notes, even for recounting childhood memories in North Vancouver. He passionately urged his supporters to get out the vote on election day, to defeat Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

 

As I was leaving, I spotted ex-Richmond Liberal MP Raymond Chan outside the building. Chan has been the subject of many stories in recent months locally, nationally and internationally about his Liberal Party fundraising activities and his links to Michael Mo Yeung Ching, a Richmond, B.C. developer wanted by the Chinese government. My story for the Vancouver Courier was first to confirm that Ching is also known as Cheng Muyang.

 

South China Morning Post correspondent Ian James Young’s Oct. 1 story, under the headline “Group based in Chinese graft suspect Michael Ching’s office helped stage big Toronto gala for PM contender Trudeau” included photographs of Trudeau, Ching and Chan at a fundraiser in Toronto. Young’s Sept. 30 story included a photograph of Trudeau, flanked by Ching to his left and Chan to his right, at a June 2, 2013 Liberal fundraiser.

 

The Conservatives complained to Elections Canada at the start of October. NDP director of operations Dave Hare’s Aug. 21 letter to Elections Canada said: “The allegations that have been raised in connection to this ongoing controversy are potential violations of the Elections Canada Act and of serious concern.”

 

I reminded Chan that I had been trying to get his side of the story since April, but all he told me today was: “What I don’t like is people feeding on rumours, and then we don’t respond to rumours. It’s so unfair.”

 

I began to ask about his Liberal fundraising activities. Chan turned around to walk away. I turned on my video app and tried following him on the public walkway, to the parking lot, while loudly asking more questions. Several people, who later claimed to be Liberal volunteers, physically blocked both my lens and my passage. Mobile users, click here to see the video.

 

 

***I thought the video was hilarious with the supporters trying to block the camera.  It would be one thing if this guy happened upon Chan while he was taking a leak or bludgeoning someone...but they went to such efforts to block the camera from catching him...walking.  lol  If he had just walked silently, there is no story.  Goofballs.

[The Unknown Poster]

Global:

Justin Trudeau is poised to move back into 24 Sussex Drive following Canada’s 42^nd federal election Monday, as the newest Ipsos poll suggests the Liberals have staked out a seven-point lead ahead of the Conservatives.

 

The new poll conducted on behalf of Global News suggests 38 per cent of decided voters prefer the Liberal party. Thirty-one per cent of voters are planning to cast a ballot for a Conservative candidate, while 22 per cent of voters support the NDP.

 

Seat projections released by the Laurier Institute for the Study of Public Opinion and Policy (LISPOP) on Sunday suggest the Liberals are in the lead but still 30 seats from the 170 seats needed for a majority government.

 

BBC:

An opinion poll released on Sunday showed the Liberals on 37.3%, seven points ahead of the Conservatives at 30.5%. The NDP had 22.1% according to the Nanos survey taken on October 15 to 17. The margin of error was 2.2%.

 

CBC:

Up to and including those published by early Sunday morning, the Liberals have led in 17 consecutive polls, including surveys conducted by eight different polling firms using an array of methodologies.

 

There are a few factors that could contribute to a surprisingly good performance by the Conservatives on Monday night, making even a Liberal minority government unattainable for Trudeau.

 

Two of these factors cannot yet be measured. The first is the potential for "shy Tories," a phenomenon first noticed in the United Kingdom in the 1990s and which revealed itself again in David Cameron's unexpected majority victory in the country's May election. "Shy Tories" are Conservatives unwilling to disclose their voting intentions to pollsters for any number of reasons, including social desirability bias (people saying what they think others want to hear).

 

The second factor is organization and resources. The Liberals and New Democrats have their own well-oiled machines, but those machines are not as well-funded as that of the Conservatives. However, the experience of the Bloc Québécois in 2011 demonstrated the limits of superior organization and fuller coffers.

[Logan007]

 

This is what I woke up to this morning here, in Kelowna…and I'm not sure about using what is supposed to be neutral colouring? Looks like an official message.

 

 

 

 

Wow, never seen anything like that before, that's basically a full page advert. on the front page.  So much for journalistic integrity.

 

That's disgusting that they allow that.  I thought media was always supposed to be impartial.  Guess I need to put quotes around that word, I should know that by now.

[kelownabomberfan]

Have you never watched the CBC?

[The Unknown Poster]

Yeah thats true.  I mean, sure, those newspapers is absurd in their stupidity and unabashed partiality but the CBC is worse and we all get stuck with their bill.  If Harper loses today, my biggest regret is he didnt fold the CBC when he had the chance. 

 

Its one thing for media outlets to endorse parties in their opinion pages but those front pages are ludicrous.  There is no impartial journalism anymore.  And social media makes it worse.

 

Apparently a delay in opening the Osborn polling station due to "lost paperwork".  Open now.

 

#believeinSteve because its only 9:44 and I've already had #JustinNuff of Trudeau ;-)

[Fraser]

Yeah thats true.  I mean, sure, those newspapers is absurd in their stupidity and unabashed partiality but the CBC is worse and we all get stuck with their bill.  If Harper loses today, my biggest regret is he didnt fold the CBC when he had the chance. 

 

Its one thing for media outlets to endorse parties in their opinion pages but those front pages are ludicrous.  There is no impartial journalism anymore.  And social media makes it worse.

 

Apparently a delay in opening the Osborn polling station due to "lost paperwork".  Open now.

 

#believeinSteve because its only 9:44 and I've already had #JustinNuff of Trudeau ;-)

 

question, what has the CBC done that is worse than running a front page add that says "vote this way or terrible things will happen"

 

Can you show me an example of anyting even remotely close to that level?

[The Unknown Poster]

 

Yeah thats true.  I mean, sure, those newspapers is absurd in their stupidity and unabashed partiality but the CBC is worse and we all get stuck with their bill.  If Harper loses today, my biggest regret is he didnt fold the CBC when he had the chance. 

 

Its one thing for media outlets to endorse parties in their opinion pages but those front pages are ludicrous.  There is no impartial journalism anymore.  And social media makes it worse.

 

Apparently a delay in opening the Osborn polling station due to "lost paperwork".  Open now.

 

#believeinSteve because its only 9:44 and I've already had #JustinNuff of Trudeau ;-)

 

question, what has the CBC done that is worse than running a front page add that says "vote this way or terrible things will happen"

 

Can you show me an example of anyting even remotely close to that level?

 

Im not going to debate you and your love for the CBC.  No point to that.

 

But my meaning was that a) how many people read newspapers versus see the CBC?  this idiocy by the newspapers is one day out of the year as opposed to 24/7 by the CBC.

 

Or are you going to take the position that the CBC is an unbiased, impartial news source?

[The Unknown Poster]

This line sums it up for me..

"The current government has lost its moral authority to govern.‎"

A lawyer who worked in Stephen Harper's PMO‎ and broke with the Conservatives over the Nigel Wright affair months ago announced Sunday he has abandoned the Tories in the polling booth and has cast his vote "for change" this time.

"As a lifelong conservative I never thought that would happen. But after what I've personally seen and experienced, there was no other choice," Ben Perrin, a former legal advisor in the PMO, said in a statement sent to media on the eve of Election Day.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harper-has-lost-the-moral-authority-to-govern-says-former-pmo-lawyer/article26864767/?click=sf_globefb

 

Interesting timing. 

[Fatty Liver]

 

 

This is what I woke up to this morning here, in Kelowna…and I'm not sure about using what is supposed to be neutral colouring? Looks like an official message.

 

 

 

 

Wow, never seen anything like that before, that's basically a full page advert. on the front page.  So much for journalistic integrity.

 

That's disgusting that they allow that.  I thought media was always supposed to be impartial.  Guess I need to put quotes around that word, I should know that by now.

 

 

I think this is a real low water-mark in laziness for print media that will not help them with their declining subscription rates.  It used to be print media would manipulate the public through editorials and common sense arguments with the goal of retaining the trust in their audience by presenting real facts.  The newspaper industry thrived for hundreds of years on this model.  Now you can pretty much regard newspapers as litle more than "flyers" hawking the products within their pages or further promoting their own self-interest over public knowledge.

[sweep the leg]

 

 

Yeah thats true.  I mean, sure, those newspapers is absurd in their stupidity and unabashed partiality but the CBC is worse and we all get stuck with their bill. 

 

question, what has the CBC done that is worse than running a front page add that says "vote this way or terrible things will happen"

 

Can you show me an example of anyting even remotely close to that level?

 

Im not going to debate you and your love for the CBC.  No point to that.

 

lol. You sound like a Conservative politician.

[Logan007]

 

 

Lol BB1. I would say women having zero choice one subject makes the face/body covering an oppressive thing.

Personally I believe in equality. You don't have to agree though. That's your right. Gullible is believing in the big bad conservative boogeyman.

But see, that's just it. That's your belief, not theirs. They believe in covering up, it's their choice. If you ask the women they will even tell you that that's what they believe in. You can call it offensive all you want, but it's what they believe in.

You may think it's ok for women to walk around half naked. In their eyes that's not right, and covering up women helps them to not sin by lusting after women, especially ones that are married.

You're right. It's either covered complete or half naked

Can't even discuss with logic like that. If you think the way women are treated in some middle eastern cultures is oky based on "that's their believe" I'm sorry, you're wrong. But regardless that should not be permitted here.

But this not the issue. Because women are free to cover their faces here. That's not the issue. So let's not have a debate where one side is arguing something different.

 

You sound like a politician when you twist, not only my words, but the words of others on this board to make your points.

[Logan007]

 

 

 

Yeah thats true.  I mean, sure, those newspapers is absurd in their stupidity and unabashed partiality but the CBC is worse and we all get stuck with their bill.  If Harper loses today, my biggest regret is he didnt fold the CBC when he had the chance. 

 

Its one thing for media outlets to endorse parties in their opinion pages but those front pages are ludicrous.  There is no impartial journalism anymore.  And social media makes it worse.

 

Apparently a delay in opening the Osborn polling station due to "lost paperwork".  Open now.

 

#believeinSteve because its only 9:44 and I've already had #JustinNuff of Trudeau ;-)

 

question, what has the CBC done that is worse than running a front page add that says "vote this way or terrible things will happen"

 

Can you show me an example of anyting even remotely close to that level?

 

Im not going to debate you and your love for the CBC.  No point to that.

 

But my meaning was that a) how many people read newspapers versus see the CBC?  this idiocy by the newspapers is one day out of the year as opposed to 24/7 by the CBC.

 

Or are you going to take the position that the CBC is an unbiased, impartial news source?

 

lol. You sound like a Conservative politician.

 

lol...look at my post above.  Funny how we called him the same thing at almost the same time.