Liberal Bias In The CBC News

A liberal is a person that believes that the government should provide equality for all, while a conservative is a person that believes in limited government and that the government should provide the necessary freedom for people to pursue their own goals. Over time, it has been argued, mostly by conservatives, that there is a liberal bias in the media. Liberals have combated this idea with the belief that conservative media is devoted to making efforts to invoke fear and division in the general public. Though liberals make a fine counter-argument, it is easier to observe that the media is liberal-biased. The liberal versus conservative debate can be compared to facts versus values. Another reason for bias within the media is that a significant percentage of minorities, or smaller groups within the population that are often thought to be poorer, politically identify themselves as liberals. To make these minorities feel like the government is on their side as well as everyone else’s, the media must accommodate the needs of these minorities. Because of this, the media becomes liberal-biased.

The Canadian government could not possibly stand for further American conquest on their culture and media. It was time to stop the inundation of Americanization before they had lost all original material and their identity had vanished into the shadows of Canadian history. A suitable action was taken by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), stripping as much American content from the station as possible, leaving only what was necessary to satisfy the popular demand (removing all American substance had its consequences, severe as losing money and audiences, and ensuing in the downfall of the broadcasting industry due to the lack of well-known content). This would leave space for more Canadian programming, as a result fulfilling the promise of making Canada more Canadian, taking into consideration even such a small modification.

This essay will discuss Justin Trudeau’s interview in the Ottawa Citizen, titled “Q and A: Why Justin Trudeau says he’s the real alternative”, where he shares his plan to increase taxation on the rich in order to give the middle class a tax break. This plan is in response to the larger issue of income inequality in Canada. Analysing the income inequality from a liberal “justice as fairness” perspective, one can conclude that Justin Trudeau is taking the correct action, as taxation on the rich is in compliance with the two principles of justice as described by John Rawls.

After reading Bernard Goldberg’s Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News, I could recognize the medias divide and opinion when reporting the news. Growing older and more understanding of certain issues and what is going on in the world it has been easier for me to acknowledge this bias and opinion of news reporters when watching the news. Being more in the middle of the right and left wing I can see how the media inputs its views that are not objective or twists stories to make it politically correct.

That's biased; It is unfair to not let someone do something because of their race, or gender. Canada in the nineteen-hundreds was extremely biased. Canada placed a lot of restrictions on people because of their race and gender. Canada was only interested in white males, they got all the attention. No one else could take the spotlight. Females, and men of colour were not treated the same by any means, and were disliked and treated poorly by white men. White men appeared to be at the top of the food chain. Canada in the early nineteen-hundreds was a very discriminatory country as they showed favoritism to certain races of people, treating other races poorly, reserved the duty of a soldier only for white males, and

Our country of Canada has a dark past. First Nations and Indigenous people in Canada were oppressed to the point where people now refer to what happened to them over 150 years as a cultural genocide. In this essay, I will attempt to explain the media’s coverage on the oppression that Indigenous people have faced, and why media coverage was so rare prior to this year. I will do this by looking in detail at three scholarly articles, five newspaper articles, and a YouTube video.

Canada is internationally renowned for its commitment to multiculturalism. In fact, Canada was the first nation to officially adopt a multicultural policy. However, while the Canadian government has developed a broad-based multicultural mandate that includes a national human rights code and increased penalties for hate-motivated crimes, and most Canadians oppose overt forms of discrimination and hate, racism continues to exist in Canadian society, albeit in a subtle fashion.

It is important that news broadcasting networks do not let personal bias effect the story that’s being told to its audience. People who watch the news, opinions are heavily influenced by the information given to them. Viewers think their opinion is original but are unaware that the information they receive is biased and is meant to influence and form their opinions about a certain topic or argument. Many believe that the news is unbiased and factual because journalist or experts are providing them with evidence.When, in fact, these news outlets are filled with producers, reporters, and writers, who share the same viewpoints. This is groupthink and groupthink is very prominent in news broadcasting networks. Groupthink is when a group of people who share the same ideologies make decisions as a group. In an interview with Fox Business’s John Stossel, Bernie Goldberg explains that groupthink effects the viewer because like-minded people at news networks only show the audience one-side of an argument or story because of their personal opinions on a the topic. This means that news

Often media broadcasters tend to lean to this side, therefore giving them the image of being liberally bias. Chris Mathews and Keith Oberman from MSNBC are two examples of broadcasters that have been accused of delivering their news with a liberal twist to it. Journalists tend to vote on the liberal side of situations, but still say that while they are on the job they only tell the news in the fairest way and the way that will be least offensive as well as respectful to who it will be presented. In many cases however, this report can come out with an oddly left sided tone (thatliberalmedia.com). Since 1991 when Katie Couric became co-host of NBC’s Today Show, she has used her powerful spot in the media to praise significant liberal figures such as Hillary Clinton and Jimmy Carter. At the same time however, Couric has never been shy about complaining about “right winged conservatives”

It stands to reason in some remote locations, as in reservations are isolated and may not have access to national television or cable networks. Keeping a Canadian content message is important. In America’s free market approach to media one can gather there are many, many versions of events, including global or otherwise that might be skewed from the facts. It seems to me by pushing American media, potentially political messages onto unsuspecting consumers could and can have drastic effects on ordinary Canadians. On that note, I definitely can see Canadian magazine producers using political pressure on the government. Almost to the point of quid pro quo and politicians bending for those with the power of the pen. But I honestly believe it was more in terms of attempting to keep things fair. In the sense, American magazine producers can manufacture at much below the cost that of Canadian magazine producers, based on economies to scale. As soon as American magazine producer encroach into the Canadian market, it will be next to impossible to push back, taking into account the purchasing habits of ordinary Canadians.

Canada is considered to be a cultural mosaic, where all cultures are embraced opposed to a melting pot where it is expected to adopt one culture. Government regulated media is more favourable than policies based off of self-regulated solutions when addressing Canada’s media industries and cultural needs. Canadians place importance on national identity and without government regulated policies, the content in the media would have minimal Canadian information. According to the Aird Commission, when Canada’s media was operating through private enterprise, many stations expressed conflicting content, however, with state regulated media, broadcasting allows the nation to have a unified vocation. One unified message being sent to the nations citizens is more beneficial than multiple broadcasts on differentiated and insignificant information.

When you think of politics today in America, what is the first thing that pops into your head? If you’re like me, your first thought was about Hilary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and Donald Trump. Your second thought might be about the major hot button issues in the United States today, such as Health Care, Immigration Reform, and Gun Control. Whether you’re like me or not, I’ve noticed one thing during this presidential race that cannot be avoided: media biases. The media today is a major part of politics, and often times is who we look to when deciding what candidate we want to vote for. Media biases involving politics, in my opinion, should not exist because it is unethical.

How can meaningful and revolutionary change be achieved when we keep using the same words to address climate change in the same old ways? The answer lies in study existing forms of communications to uncover how certain messages can be reworked in order to engage the public. The Calgary Herald is the medium that will be studied because Calgary is the largest metropolitan area in the province and it is where the majority of Canada’s oil companies are headquartered. As such, the Herald’s readership is made up of people whose lives revolve around oil and are key players in the public discourse on oil and the environment. In light of this, the Calgary Herald plays a role in supplying the frames, metaphors, and storylines

As for who should report the story, I think if the Los Angeles Time’s was able to be honest and upfront they could report it. However, given the bias the newspaper might lack the ethical news value equality. Which states, “seeking justice for all involved in controversial issues treating all sources equally.”(ME, 36) That would mean the Times would also have to tell the sides of Jeff Johnson, and other employees who were terminated. Given this fact, it might be better for a local outside source to write the story. Either way, the newspaper should be upfront and should not hide the truth from the public.

A closer look at the same Pew study reveals a startling fact about factual news content on cable news channels. Of the big three cable news channels (CNN, Fox News and MSNBC) only one provides more than 50 percent of factual news content. The others go beyond the half-way mark in providing commentary or opinion. MSNBC was found to provide a whopping 85 percent of commentary/option content