And here is their undertaker.
Posted on 02/01/2005 12:42:41 PM PST by UpHereEh
Fox News star Bill O'Reilly is a big fat baby.
Friday night, he wah-wah-wahed on his top-rated cable news show about last week's edition of CBC's the fifth estate.
The U.S. is at war, the Iraqis were voting, social security reform is a huge issue and this guy devotes precious TV time to denouncing Canada, Canadians and CBC, repeating the same tired and untrue lines about how Fox had been "banned" here.
"The Canadian government gives these people $1 billion of Canadian tax money, and the Canadian government is at fault here for allowing this kind of stuff to go on," he railed.
Titled "Sticks and Stones," the hour-long fifth estate report focused on the highly polarized political discourse in the U.S., devoting about 10 minutes to the loudest mouth of them all, O'Reilly.
O'Reilly, who can dish it out but can't take it, complained to his viewers that it was "dishonest" and "a vicious attack."
This from the guy who invented vicious and dishonest attack TV? Mediamatters.org and other watchdog groups have meticulously documented his distortions and deceptions.
CBC had a Friday night follow-up on The National by Neil MacDonald, who laughed off O'Reilly's contention that the public broadcaster was running scared now that Fox News is available in Canada.
Cross-border TV catfight!
But why is O'Reilly so defensive?
It's no secret that many media organizations in the U.S. offer up partisan hackery for cheap fun and easy profit — and the fifth estate merely travelled the same groove laid down last year by filmmaker Robert Greenwald in his documentary Outfoxed.
Which is why CBC's magazine show ran tape of O'Reilly shouting "shut up" no less than eight times at program guests and at liberal broadcaster Al Franken.
But it can't be the first time that O'Reilly has heard Franken say that he "lies constantly," is a "big sanctimonious hypocritical jerk," and is "pathological."
Ever since Fox landed on the cable dial here late last year — Roger's free digital preview ends in mid-March — I have been mesmerized by how often O'Reilly accuses guests of not supporting the troops or being anti-American, making up factoids to suit his view of the world
For example, he once cited the "Paris Business Review," an economic journal that doesn't exist, to bolster his case that the right wing-led boycott of French goods over its anti-Iraq war stance had cost France billions — even though the value of American imports from there increased in 2002-2003.
So anybody with half a brain and a finger on the pulse of some real journalism knows that O'Reilly's nightly, and laughably named, "no spin zone" is a wash.
As the fifth estate's Bob McKeown put it, "often what Bill O'Reilly has in mind is not debate but diatribe."
(For the record, Fox and O'Reilly refused to participate in the fifth estate documentary because they claim they're not conservative, but "mainstream." Well, maybe. From the Ku Klux Klan's perspective.)
Among the untruths allowed to stand on Fox on Friday night:
*Fox is seen "in about seven million or eight million homes" in Canada, said O'Reilly.
Not true. Not even close.
There are 7.2 million homes total in Canada with basic cable. Rogers boasts about 675,000 digital households. Many cable and satellite services don't even carry Fox.
*CBC "has enjoyed something like a monopoly on news coverage and commentary up until now, and true diversity is now arriving in broadcasting."
This from Carl Hodge, billed as a professor of "political sciene" (sic) at B.C.'s Okanagan University College. Hasn't he noticed that CTV, Global and Chum have all been doing TV news for some time now?
But do you think O'Reilly cares? He's all about selling mail order pet meds and second mortgages, according to the ads that I've seen.
Fact is, although Fox has more viewers than CNN, advertisers prefer the latter because they reach a better class of customer. Seems the thinking people are not watching Fox, except for a laugh — or because they're paid to.
It's a dirty job, let me tell you. PRESS GANG: Look, I am as happy as the next person to see singing and dancing Iraqis getting to vote but when the cable news nets can devote hours of coverage to the elections and never once see a downside?
Come on. For an alternative view, check out Juan Cole's Informed Comment www.juancole.com.
POST SCRIPTS: All hell seems to have broken loose up in Don Mills where the National Post is published. Publisher Les Pyette, who took over in December, has been stomping on toes all over the newsroom.
He got off on the wrong foot by hiring sportswriter Scott Taylor to pen a freelance column. That after Taylor and the Winnipeg Free Press parted ways over allegations of plagiarism.
Last year, the Post packed off three writers and one editor for copying from others and/or making things up.
Now word is that editor-in-chief Matthew Fraser has come to the end of his rope and will move to a strategic planning type job at the CanWest Global mother ship.
This would explain why the paper's newly reconfigured Toronto section plopped on doorsteps without fanfare last Saturday. It is said to have been Fraser's baby — and Pyette did not want to give it any promotion.
Watch for more changes this month.
Other editors are expected to go.
One last thing: Last week, I started asking questions about Post sportswriters having to do their reports off TV screens in Toronto but having their stories billed as originating from the cities where games were played. When Pyette heard I was nosing around, he ordered the writers to drop the phony "placelines'' he had instituted in the first place.
No wonder Posties are concerned about their credibility.
Ironically enough, with all the press they're giving Fox more viewers are going to tune in to see what all the fuss is about. After all, there's no such thing as bad press.
And here is their undertaker.
<< Many cable and satellite services don't even carry Fox.>>
Liar, there is only one satellite that does not carry Fox News and it's Bell ExpressVu. Take your head out of your a**.
He's both a right-wing extremist and a left-wing extremist.
"After all, there's no such thing as bad press"
Too true, my friend, but is interesting to see the establishment press "up there" going through the same gyrations as "down here" when FOX premiered. They will try to descredit it, then ignore it, then hate will set in as FOX finds it's audience. I'm no fan of O'Rielly, but I believe that a marketplace of news and ideas is better than a single point of view as is the case without FOX around.
The Canadian media establishment assumes, like the American media establishment assumes, that their viewers are too stupid to choose for themselves - or that viewers are unable spot the BS (That, plus they want to hold onto their marketshare). The fact is, with FOX, I see conservative and liberal points of view competing side-by-side, unlike the other news channels who slant their opinion decidedly left.
What you're not being told is that at the end of the Fifth Estate broadcast they gave information on how to subscribe to FOX . Fear of FOX ???
Hmmm, why don't we let the free market decide who is right?
The FCC has explicit mandate for control of broadcasting in the USA and reports to Congress . CRTC does the same job in Canada and reports to Parliament . The air waves are not free and are regulated . The use of the word banned by some posters here is insulting to the intelligence of the readers of FR . An out right distortion , if not lie . FOX and CanWest Global had approval in 2000 , with Canadian restrictions and chose not to broadcast . That was their decision based on economics . This stuff costs money and return on investment happens to be of some importance . Contrary to what some think . Ultimately the market place will decide, but it isn't a free market .
"CRTC does the same job in Canada and reports to Parliament."
I fully understand how things work both north and south of the border. I also understand, given the many Canadian government scandles of late, that a million Canadian here and a million Canadian there pretty much gets the result you want out of the Canadian (liberal)government.
Running a hit piece and then telling how to subscribe is not fair reporting. Please note that I never used the word "banned" in any of my posts, but understand completely how beaurucrats "ban" things they don't like via regulation, review, and the "process". I am also glad to see you admit that the Canadian market is not free. I look forward to the day when it is more free.
We do agree that ultimately, the market will decide.
Agreed, the Canadian MSM is showing fear. It must be scary to share the spotlight with a network that isn't anti-American. Oh, the horror of it all ;)
The CBC is garbage.
The only thing good on it is Don Cherry and Hockey.
And even that looks like it will be gone for awhile.
I am a Canadian.
I like the o'reilly factor.
I will be keeping my subscription.
The CBC caters to minorities and special interest groups.
It extolls in the garbage mindset of the Atypical Canadian.
I have had it up to my ears with all the garbage they
report.
Whenever I watch the CBC I just get incensed.
They should be taken off the air..but the gov't pays
for them so they are not going anywhere.
Someday this country will get it.
They had "it" in the sixties...and it has been long
gone since Trudeau and the seventies.
Keep er coming Billy.......
Then you would know I was talking about both markets , not just the Canadian one. I tried not to imply that you had used the word "banned". You didn't . My apologies . My remarks were directed at those posts that did .
And we both know a million here or there will get someone's attention . In either country.
As for O'Reilly . This is the same a-hole who said if the 2 US deserters where not returned there should be a boycott and close the Canadian border . Never mind the USA has never asked for their return .
The CBC at least had the courtesy to tell viewers where they could subscribe to receive FOX . Did O'Reilly offer the same for the CBC in the USA ? Of course not . Maybe they struck a nerve with him. Or he's more afraid of them than they are of he . Either way CBC isn't available in most American markets. Perhaps it's been banned.
Yes they do! Newsnet is owned by BCE which also owns EBell Expressvu. They are both content providers as well as transmitters of news and information. Fox dioes the same with their network FOX as well as FNC and Direct TV satellite service. How do you explain Bell Expressvu not carrying FNC after 6 weeks available in Canada? It is not technology that hinders this but protection of their programs.
Nope . You spare us all the misinformation . Intentional or just plain stupid . Either way a deal with FOX and CanWest Global was made in 2000 . Since then it has been in FOX's ballpark. Not the CRTC's.
This was FOX's first application , Not the drivel you posted . Unless in your world , and I suspect it does , 2003 comes before 2000 .
Decision CRTC 2000-565
Ottawa, 14 December 2000
Global Television Network (OBCI)
Across Canada — 200010025
14 August 2000 Public Hearing National Capital Region
Fox News Canada
On 24 November 2000, the Commission approved a Category 2 specialty television service to be known as Fox News Canada. The terms and conditions generally applicable to Category 2 services are set out in the public notice accompanying this and other decisions released oday.
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/eng/Decisions/2000/DB2000-565.htm
Exactly my point. They didn't approve Fox News at all, they "approved a Category 2 specialty television service to be known as Fox News Canada" to which CanWest declined due to research showing that the basterdized Canadian version would not turn a profit. It wasn't in Fox's ballpark at all. The links I posted for the Canadian Cable Television Association's applications have nothing to do with the ridiculous offer to basterdize the channel. It was for reference only. I may have coded the links in an order that doesn't suit your high standards, but at least I do my homework.
No it wasn't .
Your point was some crap about a Liberal CRTC banning FOX from Canada . For political reasons when the truth is FOX has had access to Canada since 2000 . Even in a bastardized version with some Canadian content would have been better than nothing . So now we get FOX with American news. As if municipal election results in Arkansas or Georgia are of interest in Nova Scotia or Alberta . And the CBC will keep right on as it always has. Just F'n Wonderful!
I couldn't quite figure out where the attitude from you was coming from but then I noticed your hometown is in Quebec... nuff said!
I thought you said you did your homework . I've never lived in Quebec in my life . Even if I had Quebec has nothing to do with it , you first addressed me, not the other way around . As for attitude, take your drivel elsewhere .
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.