CTV's election coverage....slanted to the right?

I sure think so. Seems the journos there are bored covering the Chretien/Martin Liberals. 12 years I guess is enough for them. CBC gets pinned with the left-wing label, but I honestly think they are much more balanced than anything else. Anyway....

and they want a close race to keep their ratings up so they will try and foster any conflict that may or may not be occuring. I watch them keeping that in mind, that is when I am not working to avoid all media coverage of the election, lol.

...spinners together in one room, and then letting them have at it. The "war room" format. It turns immediately into a battle of wills, who can talk over the other person the longest and spew out as much unfettered talking point trash as possible. Very informative. If I want the talking points I'll read the press releases.:puke:

and not just one. Mike Duffy of CTV is particularly egregious, imo, in his bias. He almost leaps out of his seat into the face of anyone who dares to contradict the faux cons position yet is like a cuddly puppy with any faux Con rep. I detest him.

when I hear Duffy or other commentators or even Harper spout off about the fact that they don't think Paul Martin is doing what he should to cultivate a better relationship with George Bush....Have they not noticed that Bush does not have a good relationship with ANY world leaders?...He gets on with Blair, for obvious reasons, but even his much touted friendship with Fox of Mexico has gone by the wayside...I'm sick of the right wing nuts in this country blaming Martin, and before him Chretien, for the lack of closeness!

break agreements such as NAFTA, try and sabotage efforts to address climate change but HOW DARE the PM actually criticize the great baby bush. I go back and forth between fits of laughter and fits of rage, lol.

When my parents and I visited Ottawa in 1985, we saw him coming out of a shop or cafe or office from across the street. I still remember him as a fat baldie from back in the 1980's. Fast forward 20 years. He's still around and does not look different to me! You know how super fat dudes don't usually have that many years. Look at John Candy and Chris McFarlane! Duffy is sure beating the trend.

:)

:thumbsup:

and should have been put out to pasture years ago, imo. They need new bloood reporting from the House, imo.

Did anyone see Duffy's performance with that little snake David Frum?....He had him on (I think it was yesterday) and between them they made fun of Martin and the Liberals and Clinton....everything that put Martin in a good light they poo-pooed....I've always found Frum to be repulsive, but yesterday he outdid himself....Smirking and blinking and oozing sarcasm....He is now a dual-citizen, and spends all his time on TV trying to ingratiate himself back into the good graces of the White House, since they fired him as a speech writer....I don't think I've ever seen anyone who comes across as so thoroughly unlikable as he does....No matter what he is talking about, he's just impossible to like...IMO

It was sickening.

At times, the CBC coverage sounds like it is straight out of the PMO. CBC Radio consistently buries Tory coverage near the end, while still framing Liberal announcements as if they are government policy.

In fact, the otherwise decent The Current did a shameless 'ad' this morning for the Liberal's hand gun ban; grieving relatives, no analysis. Jeez guys, the gun violence in Toronto or Vancouver is hardly new...they could have ran the same 'non-story' last week.

CTV is bias (their local news here in Vancouver is little more than an extended commercial for product placements under the guise of consumer reporting), but they are the only one's following the 'budget leak' story--the CBC won't even touch it, other than to discount Harper's criticism of it.

Given the Liberal's recent tainted history, discussion of a possible insider leak is more than fair.

The CBC is playing a dangerous game as a public broadcaster--unless they got a crystal ball, they should really play it straight this time around because who knows what might happen in a long campaign. Especially a campaign, where voters will be looking at their credit card bills in January and thinking that Harper direct tax bribes don't look so bad...

Anyone with one eye and half an asshole can spot empty phrases re tax 'relief' from Harper a mile away and don't need to look at their credit card bills to decide when crap is crap.

Re the CBC, I found they did report both sides in the leak story, I saw the President of the Over Fifties group on there as well as the response from the Finance Minister's office. There is no question there seems to be some confusion as to what did or did not happen there with the man from the Over Fifties group recanting what he first said and then only half re-canting. It should be pursued for sure and, I suspect it will be. The faux Cons and the media will make sure of that.

but a 100 bucks a kid goes a long way, as does a tax break for buying bus passes.(did you miss that one?)

None of which are actually bad ideas...

I hope your right...but I think with the handgun ban announcement is a disaster as it reminds people of the LAST 2 billion dollar gun program that is screaming for an inquiry. Once digested, it will drop their numbers.

Just a thought...do you think the liberals really have a problem.

give tax 'breaks' with one hand while taking back even more than the tax 'break' gives with the other. For example, give relief for bus passes but then reduce the monies in the transfer funds which cause the costs to be downloaded onto the province/municipalities which, in turn, causes the cost of the pass to go up past what it cost BEFORE the tax 'break'.

I don't see the hand gun ban as a disaster given very few Canadians even have hand guns and would be adversely affected by the aforesaid ban and the fact that the ban is only one part of a policy package.

Do I think the liberals have a problem? Not sure if you mean small l liberals or the Liberal party but will speculate you mean the latter. Are you referring specifically to the insider trading leak story or something more generic?

I think the fact that the Finance Minister person who was accused of making the phone call to the senior prior to the announcement first said he didn't, then said he did, then said he did but didn't give anything away smells to high heavens and needs to be followed up.

The fact that the senior has done the same kind of backtracking makes me want to know exactly what was said, why and whether having Finance Minister officials making phone calls to special interest groups ahead of announcements is done as a matter of course.

If you mean a generic problem in the election, the polls seem to indicate no, no more trouble than at the time of the previous election.

"then reduce the monies in the transfer funds which cause the costs to be downloaded onto the province/municipalities"

Well not sure that such tactics are exclusively the domain of 'Tories', in fact, the Romano Report outlined this LIberal approach as being the reason why health care is in trouble. Much of the privatizing/contracting out/union busting/waiting lists that has entered into the system, is as much a financial reaction by provinces to these cuts, than it is ideological.

(Mind you the Romano Report must have been simply a 'tactic' to fool the one eyed voter in itself, since it is never mentioned and even the NDP largely ignored it last spring)

The 'problem' is the Liberal campaign -- it seems to be far too low-key and out of touch -- the handgun ban is nuts. The Liberals have essentially decided they aren't even going to bother campaign out west it seems, perfering to battle it out for the NDP vote in some key urban ridings. But I don't think the 'law and order' crowd is really under some impression that Harper and his ilk won't get 'tough on crime'.

Both the Liberals and Cons are using tax dollars to buy votes, in fact, three weeks ago, the running joke were Liberal tax handouts under the guise of a 'fake' mini-Budget.

In fact, out west, NDP provincial leaders have been selling populist tax back schemes since their days of the CCF. Blakeney bought the election with his Triple 7 scam in the 80s. Populist Socred Bennett bought an election with BRIC shares. Harcourt, Calvert and Doer have all gained points with kicking back 'energy credits' courtesy of the Crowns (a social dividend!).

In other words, there is no shortage of voters being presumebly 'fooled' by such tactics and not all are church-going forklift driver from LLoydminister...some are good Liberals ;-)

So partisanship aside, I think we both can agree that turning elections into 'fixed' lottery spins is something to be avoided when more serious issues of finance and policy should be discussed.

Kissy Kissy

gifts' weren't part of the campaign and offered by all parties. I tend to ignore them for the fluff they are and watch for what is not being offered or said, that tells me the real agenda of the parties.

I wish elections were only about real policy differences and could actually contain honest positions but I stopped believing in Santa Claus at an early age, lol.

in their coverage of politics...I really do not detect any bias on their part toward any party....

They had an interview with the CON finance critic, just him nobody else. He spouted a bunch of talking points and spin and there was no rebuttal or attempt at fact checking.

I'd consider them a Canadian version of some CNN shows (much milder and without the glitz). I find the spontaneous comments by the anchorpeople on CTV News (except for Lloyd Robertson) to be rather airheaded and not good examples of deep thoughts or well-reasoned answers.

many of the U.S. mainstream media, imo. Everything being relative, I would prefer to watch CTV over CNN and, most of the time, do just that. I have seen Fox only once and that was more than enough for me, I even programmed my remote to skip it when it was offered free for a limited period of time.