Canadians Take Fright At Fox News Channel

I read a letter to the editor in the paper that made total sense to me: the writer said that Fox couldn't be licenced under news programming, but if it applied under fictional programming it might.

Now that's funny.

I've watched this channel, it's a lot less biased than the CBC and pronounces its biases honestly, unlike Canadian media.

I'm sorry, but any program that adopts "fair and balanced" as its slogan(and trademarks it) strikes me the same way as spam email that states "this is not spam". Giving lip service to a concept is not nearly good enough. <p> Some links for your perusal:<br> <A href="http://www.fair.org/extra/0108/fox-main.html">Fox News Channel's extraordinary right-wing tilt</a><br> <a href="http://ad-adex3.flycast.com/server/iframe/Antiwarcom/LewRockwell/123456">Fibbing It Up at Fox</a><br> <a href="http://slate.msn.com/id/93999/">It's not fair. It's not balanced. So what?</a><br> <a href="http://www.deadbrain.co.uk/news/article_2004_04_28_1725.php">Qatar lodges official complaint about Fox News bias</a><br> <p> Among the overwhelming evidence for FOX's conservative bias is this particularly illustrative point: <blockquote> Gallagher then introduced a series of stories about one conservative cause after another: from white firefighters suing Boston's fire department for discrimination, to sawmill workers endangered by Clinton-Gore environmental regulations (without comment from a single supporter of the rules), to property owners who feel threatened by an environmental agreement "signed by President Clinton in 1992." (The agreement was actually signed by George Bush the elder, who was president in 1992--though that didn't stop Fox from using news footage of a smiling Bill Clinton proudly signing an official document that was supposed to be, but wasn't, the environmental pact in question.) </blockquote> <p> I challenge you to find actual examples of the CBC being biased. The above links were the results of a 30 second google search; if the CBC is just as biased, it should be just as easy to find evidence supporting your claims. <p><p>---<br>Jesse <br />

You actually think that it is proper for the government to select the news source for its citizens? Talk about Orwellian; and you socialist actually consider this to be good.

It's more an issue of truth in advertising. Our government has a duty to protect citizens from foreign propaganda masquerading as unbiased news. If Fox was honest about the slant on their programs, I bet it would have been approved.

---
Jesse

There is a difference between state-run, and party-run news sources. Canada is a multi-party state and therefore the CBC reflects a few biases. Fox news seems to me to be party-run news and therefore represents one bias.

Your determination to deny the obvious and preach falsehoods may work with the uninformed, (or misinformed) but it will not work here. Remember, anon, the true test of a theory or argument is not how well it copes with information that agrees with it, but how it responds to information that does not agree with it. And if you find yourself responding to information with lines such as "well, that's just stupid" or "obviously wrong" without being able to produce evidence (real world, not out of the mouth of a commentator) then maybe you should rethink your assumptions.

And you know what they say about assumptions. You make an ASS of yourself

---
If we are standing still we are moving backwards.

I don't really care if Fox News comes to Canada just as I don't care that CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN or any other made for U ninvolved, S elfabsorbed, A mericanized viewers are broadcast in Canada. But, if Fox is allowed in on cable so too should Al-Jezeera be allowed on cable in Canada. YOU DON'T HAVE TO WATCH PEOPLE. YOU DON'T HAVE TO PURCHASE IT. We need to trust that people are mature enough and responsible enough, (I know its scary), to turn it off. Let Fox spend all kinds of $ bringing itself to Canada and no one purchase it or watch it.

Free speech is more important than sensorship. What I do want however is CBC to have no commercial input. That should be just a Canadian voice because they are our public broadcaster. I don't want WALMART having ANY input into CBC. Canadians really need to put their own money into CBC. I heard somewhere that it would cost something like $29.00 a year per household to fund CBC. Get the government out and give it a true Canadian voice.

Go to www.friendscb.ca to help with the changes.

Fox News is probably the news network that is most truthful. All network news programs have agendas that aren't openly expoused. At least with Fox you know where they stand. But you may be right that Canadians aren't ready for Fox. It's too much reality for most of you.

Fox reports the fact that the world is a dangerous place and the United Nations is powerless. They can't protect you and they won't. Most countries like most people are willing to give in to bullies and hope they will be placated and go away. Unfortunately that doesn't work with bullies or with terrorists.

My own country the USA is wavering. Why? Because the people receive a steady diet of network news continually harping on the cost of Iraq in money and lives. They don't receive reports of the successes. The don't get reminded of terrorists activities in other countries. The images of the carnage aren't seen, perhaps because they might make the populace support the war?. Guess what freedom isn't free. My uncles and great uncles and grandfathers who fought in wars from the Civil War to WWI to WWII to Korea knew that. I a Viet Nam Vet (admittedly a political disaster that the politicians created and then wouldn't allow the military to win)know that. My nephews deployed in the Gulf War and the current campaign in Afganistan and Iraq know that.

Some people don't have the stomache for what it takes to protect their countries and their freedom. It isn't easy, it isn't pretty, and it isn't popular. Thank God for those who do.

Fox supplies an alternative to the sameness that is the major network news programming. It is just a different perspective on the world. Why are the Canadians afraid of it. Perhaps because the left wing politicos currently in power have much to fear from an alternative vision of the world and reality. Give yourself a chance to make up your own mind. Don't let somebody else decide for you what you think by determining what you see and hear. If you only get one side of the story you can't make good decisions. But then if the news tells you what you want to hear then I guess this message will fall on deaf ears.

Maudit d'Americain. Va te brunter ton cris de sal. Nous, nous sommes assez tanne avec tes idees neo-con. Icite la, c't'un site web fait PAR les Canadiens POUR les Canadiens. Toe, tu n'a aucun place ici. Alors, allez SVP

Pour le part de tous les utilisateurs CANADIENS de vivelecanada.ca je dirais VA CHIER FOX NEWS. Vive le CBC-Radio-Canada.

And if weren't able to understand a word of that American anon, i really don't give a crap.

Here in Canada we are inundated with TONS of American media. Now, i don`t feel threatened by this at all. It only makes it easier to distinguish between right wing propaganda and left wing propaganda. Although from what I can see, most of the news, be it American or Canadian, leans heavily to the right. But I must also admit, from what I can see, that it certainly appears to me that American news sources are more skewed by the right wing machine than Canadian news. Hence the term 'propaganda.' So in effect, American news does Canadians a favour by providing Canadians with a medium to recognize such propaganda! Also in fairness there are pockets in the American media that do broadcast their voices of disapproval for the current US imperial aspirations.Now, as for claiming that some countries don`t have the fortitude to 'defend themselves', well, not all countries are imperialist. But if such an insinuation was directed toward Canada, I must remind you that for such a small populated country, again I go back to the War of 1812, WW1, WW2, and Korea, where Canada, on a per capita basis, had MORE fortitude than any other country!!! Now, we`re just sick of war. But if we had to defend ourselves again in the future, WE`LL BE THERE!!!

---
Dave Ruston

You obviously have no knowledge of what the CBC is.

---
If you don't like what you got, why don't you change it. If your world is all screwed up, rearrange it - Trooper

I don't speak much French but I got the gist and I must say that if you think a little bit of nastiness and suggesting that this site is for Canadiens only will dissaude me from expressing myself then you're more parochial than you sound.

I'm sure there are just as many Canadiens who didn't understand what you wrote. I don't care if you try to insult me in typical French fashion. Say something in a language not understood by a non french speaker and then smirk feeling superior. I am unfortunately a product of a culture that doesn't place enough educational emphasis on foreign languages.

Be that as it may I think I've just been flamed by the UGLY Canadian.

There are plenty of instances where Fox News Commentators are not in line with George Bush's programs. I myself feel that his spending is out of control. He talks like a conservative and spends like a liberal. Many mislabel O'Reilly as a conservative but he could more properly be labeled a libertarian or an independent.

The majority of the news media whether print or television is primarily liberal in it's leaning. Talk radio is probably the most conservative medium but it's programming should be labeled as entertainment or commentary and not journalism. I really find nothing wrong with that as many "journalists" are really commentators but won't admit it.

Canada as a nation is to the left of the US in the political spectrum. As I young man I was as far left as anyone. I thought that everyone could be helped, unfortunately they can't. It has been said that if you aren't liberal when you are young then you don't have a heart. If you aren't conservative when you're old then you don't have a brain.

I glad it hasn't happened but if a terrorist attack had been successfully launched on Canadian soil this conversation might be different in tone.

I don't think the US is imperialistic in the traditional sense. Where I think most of us are coming from is that we think that if people are free they will make different choices than those that will be made by dictators and totalitarian regimes. Therefore if we are threatened by such a regime then we have the right to protect ourselves. As I stated before the United Nations is not capable of controlling terrorist regimes. Peer pressure had no effect on Saddam Hussein.

The people who are currently in power in the middle east in Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia for example need the status quo to continue. The chances of their continuing to maintain power is a democratic environment are little to none. They are basically feudal in structure. Power, social and economic status are based more on birth than achievement. If power is acheivement based it is usually because of success as a warlord. Kill off your rivals and consolidate your power base through arms and fear.

As to Canada's fortitude the time to defend yourself is here. If Israel gives in, If the US and Britian give in to terrorism then the rest of the western nations will be mighty lonely. It's interesting that the countries of the old Soviet Union seem to side with the US. The very countries most recently able to join the ranks of free societies.

Is it is imperialistic to want other lands and peoples to be free of torture chambers? Is it imperialistic to want them to have the right to educate their children? Is it imperialistic to want the right to not have foreign religous fundamentalists hijack our airplanes and kill our people? Is it imperialistic to want political rulers to not commit genocide on their own populations? If it is then I'm imperialistic and proud of it.