Canadian Media: Not smarter than a 5th grader?

I am not sure when but it appears basic fact checking and investigative journalism has been too expensive, time consuming, or unimportant. Does the Canadian media invest any time or effort in qualitative research any more?

Our media are busy in pushing a Tabloid narrative that is filled with mistakes of facts and the omission of historical context.

• Sex
• Drugs
• Infidelity
• Conflict

Is it the support of our "Canadian culture" by our Canadian public broadcasters to report on marital affairs by Americans? Is this the lead story in many markets?

How many fathers, mothers, seniors from across Canada lose sleep because (insert name here), American celebrity is seen outside a bar intoxicated?

Why is the Canadian news media consumed in delivering the TMZ 15 second soundbites as insightful?

In countries, a "Free Press" is expected to report on issues that matter or just capture ratings?

In Canada our media repeatedly demostrates they are not smarter than a 5th grader. They are not interested in reporting on the problems, issues that matter with substantive research and fact checking. Instead our Canadian media have chosen to sensationalize the trivial routine matters as some affront to our democracy on a routine basis.

How does China compare to Canada on the Environment or Human Rights? Has the Canadian Free Press done a good job in explaining the differences of the two systems?

Superpowers have “attitude”– an attitude of superiority, that is. If consensus cannot be reached, they are ready to go it alone. It stands to reason that energy superpowers would be willing to do the same. On this basis, if Russia manages to expand its markets, secure a global reach, and even rebuild its military arsenal, it will become both the first true energy superpower and a military superpower as well.

This is as far from Canadian reality as one could imagine. Canada takes pride in working towards consensus. It is a law-abiding nation, and as mentioned, it doesn’t use coercion and bullying to impose its will on others. For these reasons, labeling Canada as an energy superpower is counterproductive.

Here is the Prime Minister unedited speaking in the London at the U.K. Chamber of Commerce on May 2008.

First, last year we began removing the special tax incentives brought in by our predecessors that actually encouraged and subsidized the growth of the traditional oil sands industry. We are phasing those out and replacing them with incentives for the deployment of green technology only. Second, our targets in the oil sands go well beyond the standards for other industries.

...industry accounts for only half of Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions. We must address other key areas of our economy. That’s why, for example, we’re mandating a five per cent renewable fuel content in gasoline by 2010. We’re imposing stringent automobile fuel efficiency standards starting with the 2011 model year and of course we’re undertaking many initiatives in the development of alternative fuels and energy efficiency

Differentiated strategies are welcome and are necessary. But if we want non-Kyoto countries like the United States, China and other major developing economies to be part of the solution, then we will have to bring them all into the solution or the reality is that none of them are going to be in the solution, and if that happens, all of our efforts, in Canada, in Europe and elsewhere, at stopping climate change, while noble, will be largely ineffective.

Where do we find "consensus" in Canadian Politics, and why do we demand the Conservatives follow it?

Does the "Canadian Free Press" inform or correct the importance and the amount of Carbon emmissions Canada produces? China and the US account for over 40% vs Canada's 2% contribution. The opposition,  advocate from environmental lobbies regularly praise China and the U.S. in attacking the Canada. The "Canadian Free Press", environmentalists  insert "Per Capita" when attacking the Canadian record. Canada is an export nation and some suggest we should measure carbon emmissions at their use not at their extraction. Canada’s oilsands could account for more than one-third of U.S. oil supply within two decades..

Is it possible the largest polluting countries do better when you use that criteria? China places 96th place when using per capita, the Falkland Islands is worse than Saudia Arabia when using per capita by country. Why would the Canadian Free Press use that comparison so often?

carbon emissions by country

Did we have a consensus for Conscription, WWI, WWII, N.E.P. or most recently the Afghanistan mission? The support from Francophone in Quebec is the lowest and support for conflict, war always diminish over time. That is expected. Does the Canadian Free Press present that facts and historical context well?

We know the media ignored the Liberal contribution to the Iraq War. Canadians never cared about the use of prorogue until the media made it the cause celeb for nearly two months. and used by the Federal Government in 2008. It was incredible reading about the dictatorship in Canada by this minority government from experts of Liberal bias.

How did the "Free Press" report on the public opinion of same-sex marriage introduced by the Liberal Majority Government?

In September 2003, the Canadian Alliance introduced a motion in the House of Commons to reaffirm the traditional definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman. Unlike the vote in 1999, however, this motion was narrowly defeated by a margin of 137-132, with Prime Minister Chrétien and many Liberals, including his successor-to-be Paul Martin, voting against the motion. More than 30 Members of Parliament did not attend the vote, the majority being Liberals who had voted for the traditional definition of marriage in 1999.

"No church, no temple, no synagogue, no mosque, no religious official will be asked or forced to perform a marriage that is contrary to their beliefs," says Prime Minister Paul Martin.

The unilateral changes to Political Party Financing that rewarded the Liberal and Bloc party with taxpayers money?

Compare how Canada is criticized and judged by our own media versus countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Venezuela, Russia  policies on the environment, rule of law, equality for women and  freedom of religion.

The Canadian Free Press seem to obsess on some trivial detail and ignore every other part of the story. Like Afghanistan, our free press dedicated all their  resources, energy on the treatment of Taliban prisoners captured and handed over by our  Armed Forces. Is this what is taking place in other countries that have a Free Press

Every single guest, expert that has come before the committee has said the reconstruction efforts will take a VERY LONG time. Does the Canadian Free Press disclose how much longer, the costs and if we leave how this will impact on the civilians we are protecting?

Does the Canadian Free Press give all sides equal opportunity to discuss Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) model or did they dismiss the skeptics as deniers,  teabaggers and oil bag men? The Science is not settled as is the green wash.

Many of them are not strictly scientists at all. Some are merely civil servants or environmental zealots. Some are economists — important to the debate but not experts on the science. Others are scientists in unrelated disciplines. The Chairman of the IPCC Dr. Ravendra Pachuari, is a Railway Engineer.

Our Canadian media regularly throw praise on the "wonderful display" by the Chinese determination regarding the Olympics and the Expo.

Was the Canadian "Free Press" interested in reporting on the labour conditions of those employed to help build the Olympic venues, thousands who were relocated and lost their homes? How many villages and citizens have been permanently relocated?

Our Canadian Free Press Media seem to rejoice when a small protest of political activists show up to criticize the Federal Government on any occasion. Weekends, after hours, holidays no problem just call us, we'll be there!

When hundreds showed up on a weekday during regular business hours concerned about the environment and regulations being deployed by the Liberal government in Ontario where was the press?

“In most cases, the (transmission) of a clearly partisan (item) from a single perspective obligates the CBC to provide an appropriate reflection of other pertinent points of view, so that the audience may see that different conclusions may also be drawn from the same facts. The CBC should also avoid cumulative bias over time by guarding against one perspective frequently appearing in a highly-produced form.”

Does the CBC give the other perspective time, resources or free publicity? I did miss the Climategate, Canadian Climate EXPERT Tim Ball Special Documentary but keep finding Al Gore and David Suzuki preaching for their team on our public broadcaster.

Is the Canadian Press not interested in examining the exposing the real costs benefit analysis of  "Green Energy", the Myth of Green Jobs? California, Spain, Portugal have been chasing the Green Fairytale for over a decade. The Canadian Free Press does not seem interested in reporting the deaths of birds unless they are covered in oil, why is that?

Correcting seasonally for searcher efficiency, scavenger and other removal rates, and the percent area searched, the 12 raptor/vulture and 88 other bird carcasses recovered represent approximately 602 bird fatalities over the course of this Reporting Period

The Canadian Free Press, are they not interested in discussing the Billions gone missing through Fraud on the Carbon Exchange Markets. Is the "Canadian Free Press" bought and paid for by large financial interests?

“On Monday, the stock plunged by 49%, soon landing at $5 a share. By early 1997, furious stockholders had filed a class action suit against the company and its directors. Ironically, one of the class action lawyers had tangled with Maurice strong in another insider trading case, involving a Swiss company called AZL Resources, chaired by Strong, who was also a lead shareholder. The AZL case closely mirrored Molten Metal, and in the end, Strong and the other AZL partners agreed to pay $5 million to dodge a jury verdict, when eyewitness evidence surfaced of Strong’s role in scamming the value of the company stock up into the stratosphere, before selling it off.

The Canadian Free Media is not smarter than a 5th grader and they just don't care.