Thursday, November 23, 2006


Adam Daifallah pre-fabricates an excuse for the Conservatives failing to achieve a majority in the Commons. The culprit: the media, of course.

I'm starting to question if a majority government is even possible given the current state of the Canadian media.
Never mind that Adam only provides two links to the CBC(!) as examples.

It always struck me that anyone who blamed the media for the inability of their side, either right or left, to communicate their ideas, was seriously condescending the intelligence of the citizenry.

What makes Adam think the majority of people are incapable of judging media bias for themselves? Adam can read through the bias, what makes him think that other people can not? What makes Adam think that the majority of people are so incapable of judgment that they allow 'the media' to think for them?

Of course political media coverage is going to influence people. But the voice and judgment of the people is the ultimate determinant of our elected legislatures. To blame 'the media' for the result of elections is to call the people dupes.

Posted by Matthew @ 10:54 a.m.

Read or Post a Comment

He obviously looks through the lens of partisanship: "How can the Conservatives win converts when everything they do -- such as standing up to imperialist Communist human rights abusers -- is spun negatively?"

In the press, EVERYTHING a government does is spun negatively. In the media's attempts to keep things "fair and balanced" they always put in the opposing view point, even if they have to scour the earth for the one person, alive or dead, that would view a decision negatively. I seem to recall Mulroney, Cambell, Chretien, Martin and now Harper all getting negative press.

This is one of the reasons Canadians distrust of journalists and the MSM.

Posted by Blogger Closet Liberal @ November 23, 2006 2:23 p.m. #

I just noticed! Thanks for the link!

Posted by Blogger Closet Liberal @ November 23, 2006 2:28 p.m. #

I'm totally with you, Fletch.

Fletch? I don't know where that came from...

Posted by Blogger J. Kelly @ November 23, 2006 7:04 p.m. #


You seem to be channeling my high-school experience, as I was pretty commonly referred to as 'Fletch' back in the day.

Posted by Blogger Matthew @ November 23, 2006 10:24 p.m. #

Hey Matt, how have I been missing your new & improved blog this whole time?? Great to see you back in form!

I think there's a middle ground here lending weight to Adam's main point. While I certainly don't dispute that all governments regardless of ideology tend to get hammered by the media, I'd submit that conservative principles certainly aren't framed in the same light as liberal policies in Canada. I remember my grade 12 politics teacher showing us Chomsky videos and at 17 years old I certainly knew no better. Organizations like Greenpeace or Amnesty International are, quite clearly I think, cast in a much more positive light (by media, public institutions, etc) than any of their conservative counterparts. Thus after 15 years (K4-OAC) of public school I could only equate Greenpeace with "Good". It wasn't until college that I began to get exposure to conservative arguments (I went to Western, thankfully) and starting to develop my own perspective.

Posted by Blogger CharLeBois @ November 24, 2006 12:43 p.m. #

Fletch, I admire your faith in people but talk to people who are not news and politics junkies like us. They do not detect bias at all and never even think about it.

Posted by Blogger Adam Daifallah @ November 24, 2006 2:06 p.m. #


So you would agree that you have less faith in the ability of the general public to judge and reason for themselves on political topics?

If that's the case, it would seem still that the media is not the principal problem as much as the education, ability, and participation of the citizenry.

Posted by Blogger Matthew @ November 24, 2006 3:47 p.m. #
<< Home