CBC the 800-pound News Media Gorilla

A part of the ongoing public discussion over what can be done as traditional news media are weakened in their ability to do public interest journalism. The answer, according to CBC executives, is: Let’s have more CBC! But the solution to the disrupted news media scene in Canada is not for taxpayers to shell out more to a public provider of news, no matter how high-quality or how high-minded.

The CBC has rapidly become the 800-pound gorilla in news media in many communities across Canada, not just because of its own increased resources but also because of reduced revenues at private media outlets. The result is a distortion of the marketplace that undermines the ability of private firms to transition and to continue to report the very same news and information that CBC executives say it should be publicly funded to provide.

Over the past year, the Winnipeg Free Press has found itself in bidding wars with the local CBC station trying to hire away reporters and editors from the newspaper. The journalists were hired not to do innovative work that was not being done by private media, but rather to report on areas like city hall, the very beats that they covered for the newspaper.

These weren’t journalists shed by indiscriminate layoffs. They were the most valuable resources the paper had in its continued comprehensive coverage of Winnipeg, and the paper had spent considerable money over the years developing their knowledge and skills. In most cases, the CBC won, offering greater security backed by taxpayer funding.

Bob Cox is publisher of the Winnipeg Free Press, also responsible for the Brandon Sun and eight community newspapers in Manitoba. He is currently chair of News Media Canada, the association representing daily and community newspapers across the country.

Source: The 800-pound news media gorilla – Policy Options

(Note: The CBC, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, is funded in a large part by the government of Canada. Total funding when adding some advertising revenue and cable subscriptions is almost $1.6 billion per year. The government portion is $1.1 billion of the total.

At this point the funding gets very hazy. The CBC will broadcast a special program produced by someone in Canada. Costs related to the program are not included, except for royalties paid, in the overall CBC cost. In almost every case the extra programs receive their funding from several government fully funded sources. Government funded Canada Council for the Arts is one of the big players especially for those who know the application process. The recent Liberal government budget allocated $1.9 billion to it an various other arts funding.)

Save

Golden Showers Zinoviev letter of 2017?

Neil Clark – Op-Ed

fireplace

Just when you thought Fake News had nowhere else to go, up pops BuzzFeed to take it to a whole new level. The site’s publication of an unverified, error-filled dossier on Donald Trump and his alleged links to Russia, marks a new journalistic low.

If The Donald continues to call for a new ‘partnership’ with Russia, then, we will be told, it’s all because he’s being blackmailed by Putin. There can be no other explanation. But, in fact, it’s the Western intelligence services and their political/media allies who are doing the blackmailing. The message to any prospective leader of the US or Britain is clear – if you don’t toe the Establishment line on Russia, we will do everything we can to destroy you. The pressure on Donald Trump to ‘conform’ on Russia is tremendous. It’s this attempt to bully foreign policy ‘dissidents’ into taking the Deep State line, and the complicit role of the media in promoting/publicizing fake news which furthers the agenda, which is the big story.

When it was #PizzaGate everyone laughed, but when it was Golden Showers it was a case of: “True or not true – this is an important story which needs airing!”

And that’s because of the geo-politics.

To update the A. J. P. Taylor quote about Labour and the Zinoviev letter: ‘Trump was denounced as the accomplice of the Russians; alternatively as their dupe.’ It’s the same for any leading public figure who wants a change in Western foreign policy.

To understand why the prospect of better relations with Russia terrifies the Deep State, all we have to do – as I noted here – is to follow the money trail.

As the great Upton Sinclair might have put it, it’s hard to get someone to understand there is no Russian threat when their (very high) salary depends on there being a ‘Russian threat’ – and promoting that ‘Russian threat’ very aggressively.

Source: ‘Golden Showers’: Zinoviev letter of 2017?

Read Scott Ritter – Exposing the Man Behind the Curtain

Image by Jim Unger giving the World a Perspective

“High confidence in a judgment does not imply the assessment is a fact or certainty” Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) stated: “Such judgments might be wrong.”

Western Capitals, Reeling over Syria, Consumed by Mass Hysteria

Western media is still complaining about the liberation of Aleppo, in that way empowering those militants, radicals, terrorists and justifying them holding people hostage, says Catherine Shakdam, from the UK’s Shafaqna Institute for Middle Eastern Studies.

Catherine Shakdam: The problem is, first of all, I don’t like calling them rebels; for me they are terrorists. The problem that we have is that those radicals are absolutely bent on inflicting as much suffering as they can on civilians. And you can see the fact that they have hijacked and taken hostage two villages… because they are trying to target those people they have labeled as being infidels. We have to remember that this is a sectarian fight when it comes to the radicals. What they are trying to do is to genocide any tiny segment of the population so they could claim they sanctified Syria and the rest of the Middle East.

Source: Western capitals, reeling over Syria, ‘consumed by mass hysteria & propaganda’

What’s Happening in Aleppo Isn’t as Black and White as ‘Our Political Masters’ Make It Out to Be

Robert Fisk, The Independent’s award-winning correspondent, writes that while the bloody clash in the Syrian city is horrific, many questions remain about American and British involvement and Western media’s portrayal of the conflict. – 2016/12/14

Source: What’s Happening in Aleppo Isn’t as Black and White as ‘Our Political Masters’ Make It Out to Be

Philippine President to Obama: Don’t ask me about Killing

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte warned President Barack Obama on Monday not to question him about extrajudicial killings.

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte warned President Barack Obama on Monday not to question him about extrajudicial killings, or “son of a bitch I will swear at you” when they meet in Laos during a regional summit.

Duterte said before flying to Laos he is a leader of a sovereign country and is answerable only to the Filipino people. He was answering a reporter’s question about how he intends to explain the extrajudicial killings to Obama. More than 2,000 suspected drug pushers and users have been killed since Duterte launched a war on drugs after taking office on June 30.

Duterte responded: “I am a president of a sovereign state and we have long ceased to be a colony. I do not have any master except the Filipino people, nobody but nobody. You must be respectful. Do not just throw questions. Putang ina I will swear at you in that forum,” he said, using the Tagalog phrase for son of a bitch.

“Who is he to confront me?” Duterte said, adding that the Philippines had not received an apology for misdeeds committed during the U.S. colonization of the Philippines.

Source: Philippine president to Obama: don’t ask about killings or ‘I will swear at you’ – National | Globalnews.ca

Save

False choice between Economy and Environment

In its bid to balance what’s urgently needed with what’s politically expedient, British Columbia’s new climate policy is a perfect symbol of society frozen in inaction

Certainly, this is the moment of impending catastrophe. In just the last few weeks, one scientist predicted that next year or the year after, the Arctic will be free of ice.

Rolling Stone magazine warned we’ve reached “the point of no return,” that sea levels could rise 10 times faster than predicted, and suggested “historians may look to 2015 as the year when shit really started hitting the fan;” the small village of Newtok, Alaska, voted to relocate as rising waters erode the town’s land; global coffee production is estimated to be halved by rising temperatures; and a New York Times map of projected temperatures across the U.S. showed 37c/100F days soaking the continent by 2100, like some deadly red dye.

Tossed into this whirlpool of bad news is the B.C. Liberals’ much-anticipated climate change policy, (downloadable documents available) providing a perfect example of a society frozen in inaction.

Released last week, it’s a document written for gentler a time, or a time when we had time on our side. Tom-Pierre Frappé-Sénécleuze, a senior advisor at the Pembina Institute, described it as disappointing, but another equally apt word would be useless. Premier Christy Clark is seeking to balance something desperately needed, the curbing of greenhouse gas emissions, with something politically expedient. Protection of gas prices at the pump as well as jobs and the economy.

The carbon tax will remain frozen, instead of increasing by $10 per tonne a year, as the province’s Climate Leadership Team recommended. B.C. is already off track in meeting 2020 emissions targets set in 2007.

The new plan aims to keep a promise to reduce emissions by 80 per cent from the 2007 level by 2050, suggesting accountability is really only important a few decades from now.

(Rosemary Westwood is a columnist with Metro News. She’s worked as an editor, writer and broadcaster for Canadian and international media. She’s a former writer for Maclean’s magazine and has contributed to the Edmonton Journal, Toronto Star and the Globe and Mail. As a broadcaster, she’s produced and reported news for the CBC and the BBC world news programs.)

Read entire article at Source: The false choice between ‘economy’ and ‘enviroment’ | Metro News

Top 10 Acceptable Western Conspiracy Theories

The label conspiracy theorist is used by Western Establishment gatekeepers as a means of shutting down debate and smearing those who have the temerity to challenge elite-friendly narratives.

So here are the top ten acceptable Western establishment conspiracy theories. If you peddle them you won’t be labelled a crank or nut-job, but be hailed as an expert who may even be deserving of a column in a serious newspaper like the Washington Post, or the London Times. And who knows, you might even get a lucrative $offer$ from a top publishing house to write a book about conspiracy theories.

1. Iraq has WMDs which Threaten the World!

The most deadly conspiracy theory of them all – one which led to an illegal invasion and the destruction of a sovereign state and the deaths of up to 1m people. But the people who promoted it paid no professional penalty. Thirteen years on, the punditocracy in the US and UK is still dominated by those who assured us Saddam had WMDs (and also that the secular, cigar-smoking Sound of Music lover had links to al-Qaeda). Remember that the next time you see a smug, self-regarding member of the neocon elite journos club loftily accuse someone they regard as their social and intellectual inferior of being a conspiracy theorist. (mushroom clouds)

2. Iran’s Developing Nukes!

Since the early 90s we’ve been told the Islamic Republic is on the verge of developing nuclear weapons, or has already got them. The claims made repeatedly over the past 25 years by Israeli PM Netanyahu have been echoed by the same bunch of uber-hawks who pushed conspiracy theory 1. If you assert, without any evidence that say, Zambia is on the brink of developing nukes, you’ll be called a nutcase. But if you assert, without any evidence, that Iran is doing the same, then you’ll greatly increase your chances of being invited as an expert into the studios of Fox News or Newsnight.

( Neil Clark is a journalist, writer, broadcaster and blogger. He has written for many newspapers and magazines in the UK and other countries including The Guardian, Morning Star, Daily and Sunday Express, Mail on Sunday, Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph, New Statesman, The Spectator, The Week, and The American Conservative. )

Read and Recognize the other 8 from source: Top 10 ‘acceptable’ Western Establishment conspiracy theories — RT Op-Edge

Why has NATO chosen Russia as its enemy instead of ISIS?

According to statements made at last weekend’s summit in Warsaw, NATO regards Russia as a bigger threat than ISIS. Of course, that’s ludicrous but when you scratch beneath the surface, the use of these falsehoods makes perverted sense.

Gleb is a Russian student in Dublin. Recently, at the request of a mutual friend, I’ve been helping him with his university thesis which focuses on the reasons Ireland is one of the few Western European countries that has resisted NATO membership. A distinction that most Irish people are extremely proud of.

As an Irishman myself, I’ve always been baffled by why so many members of the British and continental European elite see NATO as a good thing. After all, where’s the glory in being dictated to by an external power whose interests are often at marked variance with your own?

Like right this moment, when it’s plainly obvious the biggest threat to Western Europe is Islamic fundamentalism and the fallout from a destabilized Middle East. But the US remains somewhat impervious to these issues, which it largely helped to ferment, and instead continues to be, bizarrely, focused on Russia.

Let’s be clear here. You don’t require submarines or nuclear weapons to engage ISIL, but you would in a putative conflict with Russia. The fact that such a collision would probably, due to the atomic arsenals involved, mean the end of human civilization, is irrelevant to NATO because it doesn’t actually want a war with Russia.

Instead it desires to use Moscow as a convenient bogeyman in order to maintain US defense spending, which grew 9 percent annually from 2000-2009 during the war on terror.

My Note: (How did it happen that our rights and liberties were so easy taken from us? Declare a war on a word that has no army, no headquarters, a scattered unseen organization and call it Terrorism. Our home and all our possessions can be taken away by a banking system backed by corrupt governments, IMF and WTO. Phone calls are monitored and emails read without our knowledge. Presidents can be awarded the highest office by a Court rather than the people. We are told to take the lowest paying degrading job while the Corporations pollute our air, water and land daily. – Dennis Cambly)

Gore Vidal explains the War on Terror

The simple fact is that six of the top eight defense contractors in the world are American. Together, they directly employ close to 750,000 people and that’s in addition to millions of other service and supply roles that depend on their patronage. Any reduction in munitions outlay would jeopardize a lot of those jobs, creating unemployment black spots in many US towns and cities. And those would be primarily in blue collar areas which have already been hollowed out by decades of outsourcing, many of which happen to be situated in electoral swing states.

Every politician who would advocate this would be self-immolating their career.

Read the entire article, written by Bryan MacDonald, an Irish journalist based in Russia.

Source: Why has NATO chosen Russia as its enemy instead of ISIS? — RT Op-Edge

Oh Look yet Another Russian baddie!

The BBC have made a new film of the classic 1930 children’s novel Swallows and Amazons, and you’ll probably not be surprised to know who the new baddies are.

Arthur Ransome’s book, set in England’s beautiful Lake District region, was about the outdoor adventures of two families of children. The 2016 adaptation has introduced two new characters to the story. Guess what? They’re Russian spies!

What makes the tampering with the original text all the more objectionable, is Arthur Ransome himself was a Russophile, and an admirer of a certain Vladimir Lenin. Swallows and Amazonsand Shady Soviet Spies? Red Arthur, who shared a flat with Radek and who married Trotsky’s secretary, must be turning in his grave.

The makeover of Swallows and Amazons is only the latest example of Russian baddies being wheeled out in new film and television productions. Since 2013, when, purely coincidentally, Russia became official enemy number one for the western Establishment by blocking plans for regime change in Syria, we’ve had a glut of productions featuring diabolical, sinister Russkies.

At the same time in book publishing, a spate of anti-Russia/anti-Putin titles have appeared and been aggressively promoted (and done very well when it comes to winning literary prizes). Anyone who arrived back in Britain from a few years abroad could be forgiven for thinking that we’re being prepared for a major war. It’s hard to escape from all this Russophobia. It hits us when we switch on the TV to watch mainstream channels, go to the cinema or pop down to our local bookshop, where we’re likely to see books with subtle titles like 2017 War with Russia: An Urgent Warning from Senior Military Command, by General Sir Richard Shirreff, prominently displayed.

On the telly, it’s not just the Russian spies in Swallows and Amazons we’ve got to look forward. There’s a new production of Joseph Conrad’s The Secret Agent. In the original 1907 novel it is only implied that agent provocateur Adolf Verloc is working for the Russian government. But the new production – it seems – will leave us in no doubt as to who’s behind the devilish plot to bring terror to London.

It’s not only in Britain where dramas with Russians as the baddies are in vogue. It seems to be the norm elsewhere in NATO-land. Last autumn, Okkupert (Occupied), a drama depicting a future Russian invasion of Norway, premiered on Norway’s TV 2 channel. The budget for the series was 90m kr ($11m) making it the most expensive production in Norwegian television history. It goes without saying that the UK is one of the countries which Okkupert has sold to. The Baltic States have also bought it. That will do a lot to ease tensions with Russia, won’t it?

The Russians, quite justifiably, feel offended by this very cold piece of cold war propaganda. The Russian Ambassador to Norway noted that it was the 70th anniversary of the Red Army’s victory over the Nazis that involved the liberation of Northern Norway from the Germans. In fact just a year earlier King Harald V had paid tribute to the Red Army, saying:

“Norway has never forgotten, and will never forget, the contribution our Russian neighbor gave to our freedom. Many hundred Soviet soldiers fell in the battles in Eastern Finnmark in the autumn of 1944. Of the nearly 100.000 soviet prisoners of war that were sent to Norway, more than 13.000 died, and are resting in Norwegian soil.”

EUPolicy201606

Resource: Pew Research

Neil Clark is a journalist, writer, broadcaster and blogger. He has written for many newspapers and magazines in the UK and other countries including The Guardian, Morning Star, Daily and Sunday Express, Mail on Sunday, Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph, New Statesman, The Spectator, The Week, and The American Conservative. He is a regular pundit on RT and has also appeared on BBC TV and radio, Sky News, Press TV and the Voice of Russia. He is the co-founder of the Campaign For Public Ownership.

Follow Neil on Twitter

Read full article Source: Oh look, there’s another Russian baddie! — RT Op-Edge

Reasons Western Media Lie about President Putin

The Official Reasons

We all know the governments of the West, lead by the US and the UK, have turned against Russia. There are many reasons offered by our media: Russia tried to stop the Ukraine from joining the EU. Russia helped the pro-Russian rebels shoot down MH-17. Russia invaded the Crimea illegally. Thousands of Russian troops and tanks are fighting in the Ukraine. Some of us think these claims are war propaganda for the citizens of the West used to justify sanctions against Russia and increasing military tensions.

The Geo-political Reasons

Less widely discussed but much more important are the Geo-political reasons which look at the areas of conflict between the economic interests of the US and those of Russia and China. At the moment the EU is heavily dependent on energy from Russia. The US would like to stop this. The conflict in the Ukraine is an important part of the process of economically separating the EU from Russia. But there is also a wider agenda. China and Russia lead the BRICS group of countries consisting of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. The BRICS countries want to develop a world wide economic system that does not depend the US dollar. They want to be independent of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World bank. China has also suggested to Europe that they join together with Russia and themselves in what they call the New Silk Road, stretching across the whole of Eurasia, from Lisbon to Shanghai. Needless to say there is no immediate place for the US in this plan, so this gives another reason to cut the economic ties between Russia and the EU.

The Secret Reason – The War that Didn’t Happen

While these factors are all important, there is another factor which is never discussed in the Western media. The trigger for the sudden hostility against Russia and Putin can be found in almost unreported events which took place late in August and early September 2013. What happen in that crucial period is that a planned NATO surprise attack on Syria was stopped by Russia. This was probably the first time since WWII that a military attack planned by the West was confronted by sufficient force to require its cancellation. The people in the West will not be told because their belligerent, tough-talking leaders “blinked”. They backed down and decided to change their plans. The new plan: Undermine the Ukraine and seize Crimea for NATO. This obviously didn’t work either, and the mess they created is still with us.

The Planned US-French Attack on Syria

Early in the morning of Saturday, August 31, 2013, an American official called the office of President Hollande telling him to expect a call from Obama later in the day. “Assuming that the evening phone call would announce the commencement of U.S. air strikes (against Syria), Hollande ordered his officers to quickly finalize their own attack plans. Rafale fighters were loaded with Scalp cruise missiles, their pilots told to launch the 250-mile-range munitions while over the Mediterranean.”(1) In other words, at this point in time the French pilots and the US forces were only waiting for the final command from President Obama to begin their attack. However, later that same day, at 6:15 pm, Obama called the French President to tell him that the strike scheduled for 3:00 am, September 1, would not take place as planned. He would need to consult Congress.(2)

Why Did the US Change Plans?

It is difficult for us to know all of the manoeuvres which took place behind the scenes during August and September, 2013, but the final outcome is clear. After years of increasing tensions and threats, the US and its allies decided not to launch a direct attack on Syria as planned. Given the rhetoric and military deployment directed against Syria seemed to follow the script used for Iraq and Libya, there has been little discussion in the West about why the US and its friends suddenly changed their plans. Now with hindsight we can see that this failed direct attack led to an increased indirect attack and the rise of what is know known as ISIS.

Two of the obvious reasons

I can see for this sudden change are not the sort of things the political leaders of the West want to discuss. One is the fact that these wars are very unpopular. As a result of countless lies and failures revealed about the pointless and savage wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, it seems that some of the politicians are listening to their citizens. How else can you explain the unexpected decision of the British Parliament on Thursday, 29 August, to vote against the UK taking part in any strikes on Syria?

The other reason is the extent of the military build-up by Syria, Russia and even China.(9) The Russians and Chinese have not only blocked the US in the Security Council. They “voted” with their military hardware. They are not happy about what the US planned for Syria and made it quite clear that they would use force to stop them. When was the last time the Chinese ever sent warships to the Mediterranean? Russia and China are clearly not happy with the way the US decides to invade one country after another.

Read more: WHY DOES THE WEST HATE PUTIN? THE SECRET REASON: australianvoice