Jane Taber's latest hit piece on the Conservative Government compliments of an "advocacy" group.
Bias by source control? here
Critical questions for detecting bias?
What is the author's / speaker's socio-political position? With what social, political, or professional groups is the speaker identified?
Does this group have an agenda?
Stephen Harper and his Conservative government get a big fat “F” for restricting information to the public by invoking national security at “the drop of a hat,” an advocacy group says. -As stated by Cultural Princess Warrior Jane Taber
A quick Google search andthe Cultural Princess has enlisted in narrative of "hiding something" meme. Go ahead Janey keep asking CBC employees what they think of the current government.
Is Google not a research tool used by CTV?
Canadian Journalists for Free Expression was born in 1981, and parented initially by the Centre for Investigative Journalism (now the Canadian Association of Journalists).
Arnold Amber is a former executive producer at CBC, and the current Director of CWA-SCA Canada, the parent body of the Canadian Media Guild and 25 other smaller union locals that represent employees in the newspaper industry.
Alison is a regular contributor to CBC radio's, The Current and she has worked as a TV producer at CBC NEWS Sunday.
Would these people have anything potential conflicts with the Conservatives asking for an investigation into institutional bias at the CBC?
I could go and look for more potential bias or conflicts.......my head is spinning after only two minutes of using Google and looking for credibility issues.
4 comments:
I don't have a problem with pundits having a bias. I have a public opinion, and I fully confess that I am biased. The difference is at the top of my web page there is a disclaimer that says I vote Conservative. That way everyone who visits my site knows where I stand before they ever start to read a post.
Someone like Kady O'Malley on the other hand, her job is supposed to forbid bias. She hardly even tries to disguise it.
My objection is the media are citing groups, experts without examining if they might have a potential bias or conflict.
If you examine the history of its membership of the group do you think their agenda is left pro union, pro CBC? The omission of those facts leave the impression this group may not have an agenda or bias.
I did not make it clear I don't care about a cultural princess opinion. It is the use of "experts", "sources" that have an agenda without qualifying their background or agenda.
There is a best selling book here for any journalist willing to take on the establishment in Canada. Quotes and twits of the truth would indict a whole bunch of them.
Post a Comment