well, he once put a phrase similar to that which you have stripped all the context of to distort its meaning, but sure “always said”

Great news that Elon abandoned his deceptive “government funded media” tags. Hopefully poilievre will immediately remove his harmful assertions about the cbc being propaganda and not news, and gleefully connecting this to Elon’s now abandoned label.

It is though, which is why you are so concerned about it.

What is inaccurate about the CBC being government funded media . The CBC is media and is Government Funded .

Does Justin Trudeau sign their paychecks? Nope Is the CBC biased towards the Liberals? Some in the CBC are and some are not. Uke would say no Shifty and I would say yes

I would agree that Pierre should not call the CBC propaganda they are News in what we define news as in today such as CNN , Fox and MSNBC

even lozen agreed that poilievre’s comment was a lie.

There were two main problems with the “government funded media” tag that Elon abandoned when it was widely condemned. The first is that many of the news organizations slapped with the label were partially government funded (some like npr only a tiny percent, and others like most other Canadian news organizations receiving some money from the government still). So it was being applied in an arbitrary way that implied a clearer binary than exists. But the much bigger issue was that in twitters definition of government funded it implies that this included editorial bias. This is false for the cbc/bbc/npr. There are reasons to apply that to things like Russia today.

In poilievres dangerous lies about the cbc, he was using that implication of editorial bias from twitters definition to justify his lies about the cbc.

I think your term dangerous lies is a little strong its his personal opinion and he is entitled to it. I think Elon has not delivered on what he said he would do with twitter. He is censoring folks he does not like at the beginning. As for paying for Blue Check marks. Its a private business I wish they verified every account on the platform. I have a twitter account but never use it

As for dangerous lies I think we could highlight Justin Trudeaus reign as a never ending barrage of them as far more serious.

Holy **** he does!! Great argument, you've now convinced me that until Poilievre retracts his statement he will not be getting my vote, even if it takes 2 years.

No I did not say he lied I said he should keep that personal opinion to himself. He is entitled to Believe CBC is government propaganda . I also think Justin Trudeau fear mongering the abortion issue is a lie to garner votes and that is what Pierre is doing with the CBC. Both are not right but its politics

I am often amused when people from the left call on the opposition to do something, as if it will make a difference when they vote. It's a ploy and one Scheer/O'Toole fell for.

This is a fascinating juxtaposition. I've never heard you say something like "its (sic) his personal opinion and he is entitled to it" for things you perceive as false that Trudeau says.

The reason I find Poilievre's attacks on the CBC characterizing it as propaganda and not news is so dangerous to canadian civil discourse is because it leads to a whole segment of right wingers (like Shifty) who think they can't trust the basic facts and reporting of news organizations like the CBC. Ironically, far right wing propaganda bubbles (example the fox news you watch multiple times per week) which are far less trustworthy and far less likely to do basic things like equal representation from both sides end up attracting people via the mechanism of claiming that non-partisan news sources are themselves propaganda. Poilievre's line is part of an extremely dangerous post-truth era of politicization.

It's a reasonable position to believe the CBC shouldn't receive its current level of funding from the government, but it is absolutely outrageous of a lie to claim it is trudeau propaganda.

True but many here say that about Fox News . There are elements of CBC that are Liberal Biased. Bottom line when the governments paying part of your salary you may want to be careful what you say about that Government especially in light of the recent bill regarding online content

Let me ask you this Do you consider Rebel Media a news organization?

The juxtaposition continues to be stunning. When Poilievre says something objectively false (and he 100% knows is false too) you rush to the defense of the Dear Leader to recast this disgraceful lie as just a personal opinion he should be quiet about. But when Trudeau talks about his opinions on abortion, you pretend this is a "lie". Note that you don't even bother to present any quote of what is supposedly a lie here. I suspect you are referring to the recent exchange where Trudeau absolutely pwned an ignorant right wing college kid and earned a bit of a viral moment; if so, nothing he said there is a lie. You are just mad he said his "personal opinion".

Hypocrisy.

It might shock you to know that the CBC has many critical articles about precisely these recent bills. As they do on almost every political topic. So now, that "bottom line" doesn't appear to manifest in something tangible you can actually measure. I actually think it is entirely the wrong criticism, it might be the case that journalists in general tend to politically lean to the left as highly education politically aware people tend to do, and one can try and make an argument that despite excessive efforts to be balanced, this underlying tendency still slips out from time to time. Maybe. Much less than people suggest, but it is at least a reasonable argument. But that people at the CBC are quaking in fear about government funding and so feel editorial pressure to not criticize government bills? Absolutely false.


Sure. They are highly partisan - unlike the CBC - with far more bias and distortion in favour of one political party, but sure I'd call them a news organization.

Incidentally, I also am not a huge fan of the CBC, it definitely isn't close to my favourite place to consume news. Why? Mostly because it is utterly banal. It's so dedicated to non-partisan unbiased stuff that on any given article it provides the basic facts of the day and then quotes the liberal person and it quotes the conservative person and it quotes the ndp person. It's...blah. What they SHOULD do is take strong stands against things that are wrong and provide the information and context for that. But they are so petrified of ever appearing the slightest bit biased that they are timid.

It is with great irony that this fear of ever being perceived as biased both gains them zero wins with conservatives who are going to lie and accuse them of bias no matter what the truth, while almost harming the power of their journalism.

Lets be clear the CBC in no way is as biased as CNN, MSNBC or Fox

AS well I am more concerned with Trudeau's lies about knowing nothing about Chinese Interference or the conservative MP that was threatened by China . Ill give him credit he seems to learn most of the scandals like us from Global News

Indeed. Your debate is mostly with shifty.

How do you know it is a lie? As you seem to suggest with giving him credit, there is currently zero evidence that Trudeau was at all aware of the Michael Chong family intimidation prior to the Global story. Zero. Notice how you label this pure speculation of yours a "lie" while with Poilievre's objective life you label it a "personal opinion"?

You ever read the story of the boy that called Wolf? When you have a history of lying for your own political benefit and security agencies have told us that they were briefed and Telford under oath says security matters that her office is briefed about are told to the PM I will deduct he is lying again

Right, so your evidence is pure speculation. I've noticed also the alleged "lie" about abortion you've still failed to provide the quote that you think is a lie. Ironically in this case the person who needs to brush up on the Boy Who Called Wolf is you. When Trudeau actually does tell an objective lie, nobody is going to believe you for this endless stream of non-lies you conjecture or vaguely assert without evidence.

Sadly I was not referencing the interview you mentioned Ive never seen it. This has occurred last election and will of course occur next election its politics scare folks that the conservatives will ban abortions

Like I said I am basing my assertion on the evidence of past lies, statements from our security agencies . Heck maybe Justin every time he is about to be briefed says " Do I want to know about this" and is told nope and than leaves.

Take for instance the SNC lie. Justin Trudeau when questioned about what Jody Wilson Raybould had said . He denied it and said He said the same thing when accused of sexually assaulting a reporter . So since we know he was lying about SNC I am more inclined to believe the woman that said she was sexually assaulted

No question I have a biased against Trudeau just as CBC would have a bias against the conservatives

Right, so your accusation that he is lying about abortion is based on no quotes at at all. Poilievre's quote lies are just "personal opinions", Trudeaus unquoted vague allusions are "lies". Got it.

Your quote here is a fabrication I believe. You are correct that he said words to that effect about the ancient sexual assault accusation. But I don't see a similar quote about Jody Wilson Raybould. There were lots of things back in forth in SNC, but I don't think you can use a "he used a similar phrase as before" to deduce a lie. That's just bad. Notice how all of your WHATABOUT examples seem to be ending the same way? You've yet to identify a single clear and objective lie the way I did with Poilievre.

This is...weird. You keep going back and forth. Sometimes you make statements that imply CBC isn't really that biased. And indeed, the truth is that they are deliberately and excessively non-partisan and present their articles in balanced politically neutral ways. But then you switch back to generic "bias against the conservatives" claims. It's weird.

U think polievre will have more vote then sheer/otoole nation wide ?

Yes

Oh let me correct myself the term he uses No my point is CBC isn't as biased as MSNBC or CNN or Fox but still have a level of bias I would say CBC would have more credible than major US news networks but still leans to the left with the Liberals .