Fox News Blocked by Canadian Law Against Lying

OhWiseOne

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 15, 2010
Posts
4,518
Media
251
Likes
2,967
Points
358
Location
Florida
Verification
View
Sexuality
60% Straight, 40% Gay
Gender
Male
In every kindergarten we teache the children not to lie and punish every lier... But as soon as you can run a company everything is allowed.
This is the same diskusion as it is now with the finance industry. You have to be personsable for what you do or say.
And who has to desite? The state has to make cleare rules and laws... And if you still think its a wrong desition to shut you off. Go to a cort
So the gov. should be my parent and teacher. Interesting concept.
 

Klingsor

Worshipped Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Posts
10,888
Media
4
Likes
11,638
Points
293
Location
Champaign (Illinois, United States)
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
I didn't indicate whether or not it could be enforced. It still is wrong to start being selective about what can and what cannot be shown.

If Fox airs something which is a lie then it is up to other broadcasters and media to expose the lie. That will also teach the people to look more closely at what is being fed to them instead of accepting everything on face value.

The problem which arises from your idea of "a little government oversight" is that it rapidly turns into complete rule over everything. You end up with no rights.

Possibly. But the food analogy I used (and admittedly, it's just that--a necessarily imperfect analogy) suggests that it's possible for there to be government controls--standards, if you will--that prevent a certain extreme degree of malfeasance without overreaching.

Even more on topic, we already have the FCC policing certain aspects of broadcasting, without it having become a slippery slope of increasing censorship over the years (if anything, just the opposite).

So no, when it comes to government regulation of media, I'm neither as dubious about the benefits nor as concerned about the risks as you. But I grant the potential for abuse is always there.
 

vince

Legendary Member
Joined
May 13, 2007
Posts
8,271
Media
1
Likes
1,674
Points
333
Location
Canada
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
So the gov. should be my parent and teacher. Interesting concept.
I fail to see how you draw that conclusion. He didn't write a thing about parenting. Perados was writing about regulating commerce and drew an analogy with teaching kids not to tell lies.
 

OhWiseOne

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 15, 2010
Posts
4,518
Media
251
Likes
2,967
Points
358
Location
Florida
Verification
View
Sexuality
60% Straight, 40% Gay
Gender
Male
I fail to see how you draw that conclusion. He didn't write a thing about parenting. Perados was writing about regulating commerce and drew an analogy with teaching kids not to tell lies.
Scratch parenting how about "the state" and "take it to court"? You honestly believe that the people in these positions have no self motivation/purpose/what in their mind is right? Sure let's have others decide what is best for us.
 

erratic

Loved Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Posts
4,289
Media
0
Likes
508
Points
333
Sexuality
No Response
It's really interesting to see conservative Americans' reaction to this.

News services are absolutely allowed to have editorial slants on their reporting, and Canadians are absolutely allowed to vote with their remotes. None of that has any sway on whether or not a network is allowed in Canada.

What separates Fox News from that is that there's a wide-spread perception in Canada that Fox News reporters purposely misrepresent facts to suit their own agendas. In fact, there's some pretty persuasive evidence that they do so. And there's no law in Canada saying that the press is free to say absolutely whatever it wants without recourse: Rather, news organizations are held to the minimal standard that they not purposely misrepresent the truth or purposely mislead people on a regular basis. Basically, you can't call yourselves journalists if you're not being journalists. Just like you can't call yourself a cop if you're not a cop.

Fox News didn't make it over that basic hurdle. Take it as you will.
 

vince

Legendary Member
Joined
May 13, 2007
Posts
8,271
Media
1
Likes
1,674
Points
333
Location
Canada
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
Exactly. Fox News applied for a license and was unable to prove that they didn't misrepresent the facts (tell lies), hence no license. No one is telling anyone what to think or how to think, just that what you represent as fact, has to be a fact.

What as the story? Back at the height of the teabagging frenzy in the US, the protesters held a rally in Washington and FOX News aired a report on it. Only thing was the video they showed of it was of a different, bigger rally held some years earlier in the same location. They made the event look much larger than it actually was. This is the kind of "journalism" that Canadians don't want to be allowed to be called "news". Because it is not. It is fiction.

But all that is changing now that the Conservative government has decided that they'd like Sun News to tell lies on their behalf.
 

D_Bob_Crotchitch

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Posts
8,252
Media
0
Likes
106
Points
193
You need to do your own research. Years ago, the facts were reported, and editorials were reserved for the reporter to express their opinion. Now, most reporters left and right wingers are guilty of bias. Tell me the whole story, and let me make up my own mind.
The Washington Post knew that Janet Cooke's story "Jimmy's World" was questionable but went with it anyways. Then, they had their tail between their legs when it was discovered to be fraud. Sheesh.
 

cocktailweenie

Sexy Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Posts
141
Media
0
Likes
52
Points
163
Location
Ontario, Canada
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Funny how if Fox news was banned in Canada I manage to watch some of it most nights. People in Canada can get it on cable. I suspect that people who complain about its "lies" really are complaining about the opinions of certain commentators. I also note the lack of documentation of their "lies". Please submit them; and start with some big stuff (just so you won't look so silly).
 

vince

Legendary Member
Joined
May 13, 2007
Posts
8,271
Media
1
Likes
1,674
Points
333
Location
Canada
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
Funny how if Fox news was banned in Canada I manage to watch some of it most nights. People in Canada can get it on cable. I suspect that people who complain about its "lies" really are complaining about the opinions of certain commentators. I also note the lack of documentation of their "lies". Please submit them; and start with some big stuff (just so you won't look so silly).
When opinions of commentators are backed my falsehoods, yes I do have a problem with them.

In my post above, I mentioned the demonstration in Washington. You want documentation? Here you go-

Jon Stewart reported on his November 10, 2009 broadcast of The Daily Show that Fox News pundit Sean Hannity misrepresented video footage purportedly showing large crowds on a health-care protest orchestrated by Rep. Michele Bachmann. Stewart showed inconsistencies in alternating shots according to the color of the sky and tree leaves, showing that spliced in the shots was footage from Glenn Beck's much larger 9/12 rally which had occurred two months earlier. Hannity estimated 20,000 protesters were in attendance, the Washington Post estimated 10,000 and Luke Russert reported that three Capitol Hill police officers guessed "about 4,000."

Another lie-
Glenn Beck, the host of an eponymous afternoon commentary show, stated in 2009 that he believes President Obama is "a racist" and has "a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture."

And another-
On September 18, 2009, Fox News Channel took out full-page ads in The Washington Post, the New York Post, and The Wall Street Journal with a prominent caption reading, "How did ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, and CNN miss this story?" with pictures of a Tea Party movement protest on the United States Capitol lawn. A still picture in the ad was in fact taken from a CNN broadcast covering the event.

Fox News Channel photo manipulation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I could keep it up all day long, but you can just google it yourself.
 

cocktailweenie

Sexy Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Posts
141
Media
0
Likes
52
Points
163
Location
Ontario, Canada
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
When opinions of commentators are backed my falsehoods, yes I do have a problem with them.

In my post above, I mentioned the demonstration in Washington. You want documentation? Here you go-



Another lie-


And another-


Fox News Channel photo manipulation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I could keep it up all day long, but you can just google it yourself.

Funny stuff, Vince.

First, I hate to break it to you but Stewart’s show is a COMEDY show. Their job is to make things up for comedic effect. However, the item you cite could be true, but even if it was is it really such a big deal? Remember, I said I wanted some big stuff, say like the fictitious "story" Dan Rather reported on of Bush II’s National Guard Service. Now that was a whopper!

Glenn Beck. Sorry again. It was an opinion, a pretty stupid opinion I admit, but an opinion.

As for the third instance I can only laugh if you think this merits a mention.

Again, I want some big stuff, factual lies they do not correct. Perhaps I can help you out a bit: I think a lot of people confuse bias with lies. When these people cry "Fox News lies" they really are meaning to say (and cannot because of impoverished vocabularies) "I disagree with the bias of most of the commentators on Fox News".
 

vince

Legendary Member
Joined
May 13, 2007
Posts
8,271
Media
1
Likes
1,674
Points
333
Location
Canada
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
Jon Stewart did not "make" that story up. Hannity admitted it and apologized after he was called out for it by Stewart. Something about a "mix-up in production". Riiiight...

Sorry cocktailweenie. I answered your request for documented falsehoods and that's not good enough for you and I am predicting nothing would be. You don't seem to want to have a discussion beyond talking past people with different viewpoints. If you think that Fox and similar "news" organizations are doing a good job, then that's fine, you can watch or listen to what you please. Far be for me to convince you otherwise.
 

Hoss

Loved Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2010
Posts
11,801
Media
2
Likes
586
Points
148
Age
73
Location
Eastern town
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Gender
Male
Fox News Channel photo manipulation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I could keep it up all day long, but you can just google it yourself.

Please tell me you aren't relying on wikipedia for your news. They have many accurate items; they also have many pieces of nonsense which are written and submitted by people that have their own agendas.



Regarding Fox, a google search when fully done reveals that it was items broadcast over airwaves, as in radio or old fashioned television. The cable network is not what was being blocked.
 

vince

Legendary Member
Joined
May 13, 2007
Posts
8,271
Media
1
Likes
1,674
Points
333
Location
Canada
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
Please tell me you aren't relying on wikipedia for your news. They have many accurate items; they also have many pieces of nonsense which are written and submitted by people that have their own agendas.
You'll just have to use your powers to distinguish truth from lies Hoss. The information regarding the Washington demonstration I linked to is accurate.
 

D_Chesty_Pecjiggle

Account Disabled
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Posts
615
Media
0
Likes
26
Points
163
If this law exists and is to be properly enforced then almost all news organizations will have to be blocked. Lies proliferate from most broadcasters. All they really do by blocking one group is show they have no belief in their citizens to distinguish truth from lies.

I'm no fan of FoxNews and never watch it.

But I agree with this 100%. Every writer, producer, editor has biases. We all do. And where biases stop and untruths/lies start is a very hard line to draw.

When Madison was writing the Constitution cities (which were much smaller than today) had 10s of newspapers, almost all with their own political leanings. Madison never envisioned the government deciding was it and isn't news.

Let's leave that for China and Russia.
 

D_Chesty_Pecjiggle

Account Disabled
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Posts
615
Media
0
Likes
26
Points
163
I think this law is good. As soon as you are exposet as a lier, your channel should get banned.

But who gets to decide?

Right now Americans' approval rating of congress is 10-15%. Amazing low. Yet incumbent reelection rates in the House are >90%, sometimes as high as 95%.

Reelection Rates Over the Years | OpenSecrets

And notice they're as high now as ever. Why? Because politicians get to pick their voters (rather than voters getting to pick their politicians). Both parties do this. Look at an election map, it makes no logical sense. But politicians get to draw their own lines, the result is amazing high incumbency rates. Furthermore 'Campaign Finance Reform' that was passed a few years ago is nothing more than incumbent protection.

If you think we can give 'the government' the ability to critique news without it becoming just another mechanism to support the current establishment, you have far more faith in our politicians that I have.
 

t1ctac

Expert Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Oct 20, 2007
Posts
196
Media
23
Likes
196
Points
373
Location
DFW (Texas, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
But I agree with this 100%. Every writer, producer, editor has biases. We all do. And where biases stop and untruths/lies start is a very hard line to draw.

There are always cases of personal misrepresentations on air, but the level of factual inaccuracy on Fox is staggering to me. Facts of a topic, and the main person they are citing say "X", and Fox will blatantly spin it and say "A". All the media in our country spins politics to no end though.
 

cocktailweenie

Sexy Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Posts
141
Media
0
Likes
52
Points
163
Location
Ontario, Canada
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Jon Stewart did not "make" that story up. Hannity admitted it and apologized after he was called out for it by Stewart. Something about a "mix-up in production". Riiiight...

Sorry cocktailweenie. I answered your request for documented falsehoods and that's not good enough for you and I am predicting nothing would be. You don't seem to want to have a discussion beyond talking past people with different viewpoints. If you think that Fox and similar "news" organizations are doing a good job, then that's fine, you can watch or listen to what you please. Far be for me to convince you otherwise.

Hannity apologized! Then it doesn't count as a lie! But you confirm my belief that "Fox News lies" is based on nothing.
 

petite

Expert Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Posts
7,199
Media
2
Likes
146
Points
208
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Female
Please tell me you aren't relying on wikipedia for your news. They have many accurate items; they also have many pieces of nonsense which are written and submitted by people that have their own agendas.



Regarding Fox, a google search when fully done reveals that it was items broadcast over airwaves, as in radio or old fashioned television. The cable network is not what was being blocked.

There are 173 reference links on that article, which clearly support the claims in the article. For example, this reference link on that Wikipedia article shows the Fox clip and the before and after photos:

Fox News airs altered photos of NY Times reporters | Media Matters for America