The not so Great Racism in Canada Thread

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Another thing about the CBC is that it's a Siamese twin.

Most people in Anglo-Canada probably don't pay attention to or think about the French side of the operation, but if you kill one side you basically kill off the other too.

And while there isn't that much generalized love for the English services (aside from some of the radio I'd say), the French services are quite well-regarded in Quebec.

While the generalist TV network is now second in popularity to TVA, it's still a firm second and perhaps most importantly is seen as a cultural icon by most Québécois. There is so much essential Québécois stuff, cultural and societal, past and present, that is owed to SRC that sacking it would be unthinkable.

It's a federal political sacred cow as far as I can see, and as such in spite of the indifference/hostility towards the English services in much of the country, the anglophone side probably gets an easier ride politically than it would if the French services weren't so well-supported.

Out of curiosity, does SRC's news wing take on the same self-appointed 'crusader' role as CBC?

As an example of what I mean, since George Floyd, the local CBC constantly brings up incidents of alleged police brutality in Winnipeg. They have routinely referenced the teenage girl Eishia Hudson being shot by police. What they don't mention is the series of her terrible decisions that led up to that, including the theft of vehicles, robberies of liquor stores, driving on a car chase, ramming police cars, and refusing to stop before ultimately being shot.

Obviously the death of a young person is nothing to cheer about but I think it's fair to say there was a lot more to it than trigger-happy cops picking fights with Indigenous kids. Yet CBC doesn't really get into that... no real assessment of the impact on victims, it's just #justiceforeishia. And that approach costs them in terms of credibility.

Maybe if SRC's news operations takes a more nuanced look at complex situations, it might account for why they have a stronger following.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Great job, everyone, wearing people down so there is nothing left to say. Great job. Well done. Congratulations on your filibuster-ing.

Well, I for one am done with expressing any further opinions on this thread. The language used by some of the posters (accusations of being a fragile white snowflakes and the like) have actually succeeded in hardening my opinions even further, and I am the sort of person these activists should be trying to influence, since I am generally willing to listen to both sides of the argument, and occasionally changing my mind. Instead, the great chasm continues to widen.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by esquire

Out of curiosity, does SRC's news wing take on the same self-appointed 'crusader' role as CBC?

As an example of what I mean, since George Floyd, the local CBC constantly brings up incidents of alleged police brutality in Winnipeg. They have routinely referenced the teenage girl Eishia Hudson being shot by police. What they don't mention is the series of her terrible decisions that led up to that, including the theft of vehicles, robberies of liquor stores, driving on a car chase, ramming police cars, and refusing to stop before ultimately being shot.

Obviously the death of a young person is nothing to cheer about but I think it's fair to say there was a lot more to it than trigger-happy cops picking fights with Indigenous kids. Yet CBC doesn't really get into that... no real assessment of the impact on victims, it's just #justiceforeishia. And that approach costs them in terms of credibility.

Maybe if SRC's news operations takes a more nuanced look at complex situations, it might account for why they have a stronger following.

It's not as SJW as CBC but with Le Devoir, it's left inclined.

The Anglo media in Canada is horrible accross the board. There's no La Presse equivalent I know of.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Well, I for one am done with expressing any further opinions on this thread. The language used by some of the posters (accusations of being a fragile white snowflakes and the like) have actually succeeded in hardening my opinions even further, and I am the sort of person these activists should be trying to influence, since I am generally willing to listen to both sides of the argument, and occasionally changing my mind. Instead, the great chasm continues to widen.

That's what these discussions lead to. Good read here that reflects my opinion on the subject. https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/1/24/gao-identity-politics/

[wave46]

Originally Posted by esquire

Maybe if SRC's news operations takes a more nuanced look at complex situations, it might account for why they have a stronger following.

The CBC has much stronger competition and I'm not referring to CTV or Global.

At one point, the CBC had to speak for pretty much every (Anglo) Canadian. It had to be middle of the road, in a sense. In certain ways, that also limited the dialogue.

Ever since news media has become targeted to a particular audience (glances to country southwards of us), the incentive to present a broad perspective has diminished. Why waste effort on a broad picture when you can cater to what your audience wants to hear?

I'm not sure the SRC has that particular pressure to nearly the same extent.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by esquire

Out of curiosity, does SRC's news wing take on the same self-appointed 'crusader' role as CBC?

As an example of what I mean, since George Floyd, the local CBC constantly brings up incidents of alleged police brutality in Winnipeg. They have routinely referenced the teenage girl Eishia Hudson being shot by police. What they don't mention is the series of her terrible decisions that led up to that, including the theft of vehicles, robberies of liquor stores, driving on a car chase, ramming police cars, and refusing to stop before ultimately being shot.

Obviously the death of a young person is nothing to cheer about but I think it's fair to say there was a lot more to it than trigger-happy cops picking fights with Indigenous kids. Yet CBC doesn't really get into that... no real assessment of the impact on victims, it's just #justiceforeishia. And that approach costs them in terms of credibility.

Maybe if SRC's news operations takes a more nuanced look at complex situations, it might account for why they have a stronger following.

There is a bit of a drift in that direction at SRC but it's far from being as blatant as it is at CBC, from what I've noticed.

I should mention that SRC *news* does not necessarily stand out as something that is revered, as it does (for some) with CBC. I remember as a youth people used to say of the CBC (TV) that it was only good for news/public affairs and sports.

Never heard anyone say that about SRC. It's actually always in second place behind TVA in terms of ratings for newscasts and all-news channels, though SRC has the most popular public affairs, documentary and political satire stuff by a longshot. (TVA actually doesn't do much of that stuff.)

SRC is generally valued for its "cultural" impact, I'd say. In a way this includes news (the chattering classes do prefer SRC news for example) but it's not primarily about news.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Acajack

So this guy has a new boyfriend.

The new boyfriend's friends stalked this guy on social media (Twitter I assume) and found he had retweeted something that was skeptical of BLM. He linked to it in his trail of complaints about his BF's friends. It wasn't "BLM are SOBs" or "Floyd deserved to die" or anything like that. It was a cautionary post about the BLM protests and violence, etc.

Anyway, his new BF's circle of friends have been hating on him, harrassing him and dragging him through the mud ever since. And of course urging his BF to dump him.

Woke people at work. Same with what happened with Rowling. I absolutely have no respect for people, push by the media, that forces cancel culture.

https://eand.co/how-identity-politics-destroyed-the-left-9051e6ea580b

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by p_xavier

That's what these discussions lead to. Good read here that reflects my opinion on the subject. https://eand.co/how-identity-politics-destroyed-the-left-9051e6ea580b

I believe the proper, non-racist, non-alt-right, non-deplorable response to this is to say that Tony Blair and the author of that article are full of 🞵🞵🞵🞵.

Everything is perfectly fine with the left. Perfectly fine.

Right, my friends?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by p_xavier

Woke people at work. Same with what happened with Rowling. I absolutely have no respect for people, push by the media, that forces cancel culture.

I pretty much feel the same way, but there is a huge impetus to shame (and destroy?) anyone who dares question, much less push back.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I pretty much feel the same way, but there is a huge impetus to shame (and destroy?) anyone who dares question, much less push back.

Yes, hence why I usually stay away from a mile from them or those topics. Everything is by emotions these days and I don't argue with emotions.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by wave46

The CBC has much stronger competition and I'm not referring to CTV or Global.

At one point, the CBC had to speak for pretty much every (Anglo) Canadian. It had to be middle of the road, in a sense. In certain ways, that also limited the dialogue.

Ever since news media has become targeted to a particular audience (glances to country southwards of us), the incentive to present a broad perspective has diminished. Why waste effort on a broad picture when you can cater to what your audience wants to hear?

I'm not sure the SRC has that particular pressure to nearly the same extent.

Either blatantly or incrementally, there was a decision that was made somewhere at the CBC about aligning themselves to one side. What's ironic is that the battle they are engaged in is largely a quixotic one. Here in Canada, neither CTV nor Global are carrying the conservative or right-wing flag. I actually mentioned upthread that they often appear more neutral than the CBC.

And of course the U.S. networks don't give a 🞵🞵🞵🞵 about Canadian media, though yes they do influence Canadian minds and I suppose some at the CBC are mindful of that situation. Though I'd say that progressive American media and commentators like CNN, Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert influence far more Canadians than the right-wingers like Fox News and Breitbart.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Well, I for one am done with expressing any further opinions on this thread. The language used by some of the posters (accusations of being a fragile white snowflakes and the like) have actually succeeded in hardening my opinions even further, and I am the sort of person these activists should be trying to influence, since I am generally willing to listen to both sides of the argument, and occasionally changing my mind. Instead, the great chasm continues to widen.

It's interesting that IIRC none of the people here who are targeted by very strong insinuations that they are racist due to not wanting to give BLM a kind of blank cheque, have dismissed people with a "Oh, you just think that way because you're black/indigenous/visible minority". If there are any instances of this on this thread I must have missed them!

Whereas the "attackers" on this thread constantly dismiss the comments of fellow posters by referring to their (assumed) race, age, place of residence, socio-economic status, etc.

It's all rather ironic.

[savevp]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Either blatantly or incrementally, there was a decision that was made somewhere at the CBC about aligning themselves to one side. What's ironic is that the battle they are engaged in is largely a quixotic one. Here in Canada, neither CTV nor Global are carrying the conservative or right-wing flag. I actually mentioned upthread that they often appear more neutral than the CBC.

I wonder to what extent, if any, this has to do with the appointment of Catherine Tait as CEO of the English side. I'm not sure it's relevant that she was appointed by this Liberal government, but moreso that she has a fairly strong social justice bent, at least on her social media and interviews.

I often find myself feeling some kind of responsibility to evaluate the CBC for quality of work, including bias, not as a taxpayer but because it is a representative of Canada. I've often found reports of anti-Conservative bias to be somewhat overblown, though the standard anti-Trump bias is frequently in play, like anywhere else. It's only really the last couple weeks, as was posted earlier, that the CBC's crusade against policing has taken over the whole programme there. It seems they've caught that particular bug from the Toronto Star, and look how they've ended up.

This would be the exact situation where some kind of oversight would hopefully push CBC journos to include more background on why these violent arrests are occurring, beyond the implication of systemic racism. It doesn't mean the CBC should stop pursuing investigative reporting, but there's some definite consensus here and elsewhere that many of these stories have been incomplete and follow a certain narrative at the expense of a complete factual picture.

It's not such a great ask that our national broadcaster be held to a higher standard of journalistic integrity.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by savevp

I wonder to what extent, if any, this has to do with the appointment of Catherine Tait as CEO of the English side. I'm not sure it's relevant that she was appointed by this Liberal government, but moreso that she has a fairly strong social justice bent, at least on her social media and interviews.
.

She is actually the boss of both the English and the French sides.

She does speak French though I am not sure how deep in the weeds she gets in managing the French side of things.

Often the custom is that an anglophone in that position leaves much of the direction of the French to a senior VP of sorts who is francophone.

You sometimes see that as well when the head of the CBC is someone who is very francophone. They might leave quite a bit of leeway to an anglophone "right hand person" to run things on that side.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by savevp

I often find myself feeling some kind of responsibility to evaluate the CBC for quality of work, including bias, not as a taxpayer but because it is a representative of Canada. I've often found reports of anti-Conservative bias to be somewhat overblown, though the standard anti-Trump bias is frequently in play, like anywhere else. It's only really the last couple weeks, as was posted earlier, that the CBC's crusade against policing has taken over the whole programme there. It seems they've caught that particular bug from the Toronto Star, and look how they've ended up.
.

I first noticed it a year or two ago with their coverage of the Colton Boushie killing on the Prairies. It was quite clearly portrayed as the case of a young indigenous man and his friends who had gotten a flat tire and had innocently gone to a farmer's house to ask for help, but the farmer shot and killed him.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Acajack

There is a bit of a drift in that direction at SRC but it's far from being as blatant as it is at CBC, from what I've noticed.

I should mention that SRC *news* does not necessarily stand out as something that is revered, as it does (for some) with CBC. I remember as a youth people used to say of the CBC (TV) that it was only good for news/public affairs and sports.

Never heard anyone say that about SRC. It's actually always in second place behind TVA in terms of ratings for newscasts and all-news channels, though SRC has the most popular public affairs, documentary and political satire stuff by a longshot. (TVA actually doesn't do much of that stuff.)

SRC is generally valued for its "cultural" impact, I'd say. In a way this includes news (the chattering classes do prefer SRC news for example) but it's not primarily about news.

So sell off SRC to the private sector or the Governemnt of Quebec.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by whatnext

So sell off SRC to the private sector or the Governemnt of Quebec.

The Quebec government would probably jump on that in a minute, but the feds have always wanted to hold on to SRC for a variety of reasons. First of all, it's a valuable (and rare) outlet for getting the Canadian message out in French in Quebec.

The private networks in Quebec aren't generally overtly separatist, but if you watch them they do treat Quebec like it's a country and that Canada is some larger entity we're a part of like the EU.

SRC also covers francophones communities outside Quebec to some degree, which is a federal policy point and also something the Quebec private networks do little of.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Acajack

The Quebec government would probably jump on that in a minute, but the feds have always wanted to hold on to SRC for a variety of reasons. First of all, it's a valuable (and rare) outlet for getting the Canadian message out in French in Quebec.

I always thought the CBC had value to the extent it sticks to some principles rather than just doing whatever the market-driven media outlets are doing. One good principle would be to cover Canadian issues or perspectives, and another would be to provide coverage around the county that wouldn't otherwise tend to happen (go out to smaller regions/areas or bridge the language gap).

They don't seem to be doing very well with this. It makes sense that they would cover Trump for example but they should not be obsessed with him, and he should mostly come up to the extent that he impacts Canada.

Last time CBC radio accidentally came on for 10 seconds in the car the clip I heard was "maybe if you are white and have racist family you shouldn't go to thanksgiving". I guess they invited the critical theory prof on for the 1,783rd time to rant about why everything is terrible. I turned it off.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by p_xavier

It's not as SJW as CBC but with Le Devoir, it's left inclined.

The Anglo media in Canada is horrible accross the board. There's no La Presse equivalent I know of.

I would think the Toronto Star comes closest, or used to.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by someone123

I always thought the CBC had value to the extent it sticks to some principles rather than just doing whatever the market-driven media outlets are doing. One good principle would be to cover Canadian issues or perspectives, and another would be to provide coverage around the county that wouldn't otherwise tend to happen (go out to smaller regions/areas or bridge the language gap).

They don't seem to be doing very well with this. It makes sense that they would cover Trump for example but they should not be obsessed with him, and he should mostly come up to the extent that he impacts Canada.

Last time CBC radio accidentally came on for 10 seconds in the car the clip I heard was "maybe if you are white and have racist family you shouldn't go to thanksgiving". I guess they invited the critical theory prof on for the 1,783rd time to rant about why everything is terrible. I turned it off.

Had to laugh at that example!