Thursday, July 10, 2008

Canadian Media: Errors and Distortions

Canadian Media: Errors and Distortions

July 10, 2008

By: Mike Fegelman

Dear HonestReporting Canada subscriber:
 
Many of our members have asked us to define what constitutes media bias. Because "bias" is sometimes in the eye of the beholder, and is often painfully ambiguous, we monitor the Canadian media for fairness and accuracy, including factors like objectivity and balance, and whether a report lacks context, uses true facts to draw false conclusions, or contains misleading definitions or terminology.
 
In an effort to ensure that you're more than just a passive player in this process, we have detailed several errors and distortions made by the Canadian media in recent weeks, how we responded, and the results we secured, so that you too can spot lapses in Canadian journalistic standards and take action to hold the media accountable.
 
Distortion of Facts at CBC Online
 
Reporting on the terrorist rampage of an Israeli Arab construction worker who killed three Israelis and wounded over 40, CBC Online made the following erroneous statement in a report last week: (See our exclusive screen grab below)

This sentence uses language that assumes land was taken from the Palestinians and can therefore be returned. However, historical record shows that while the land was controlled by various entities throughout time, it was never controlled or taken from the Palestinians.
 
HonestReporting Canada brought this error to the attention of CBC Online editors who promptly issued the following correction:

The original sentence was also amended online to reflect the following:

            

Misleading Headline in the Hamilton Spectator
 
A headline in the Hamilton Spectator on June 30 erroneously reported that notorious Lebanese terrorist Samir Kantar had been freed. The headline stated "Murderer freed in exchange for bodies."
 
Contrary to the headline, and as the report stated, Samir Kantar has not been freed yet. The Associated Press article in fact only detailed that the Israeli cabinet had agreed in principle to the deal.
 
HonestReporting Canada brought the error to the attention of Spectator editors who issued the following correction on July 8:

                               

Incorrect Statistics at RadioCanada.ca
 
The French-arm of CBC, Radio Canada, carried two reports (see here and here) on its website on June 15 which incorrectly stated that "Nearly 20 000 Jews live in settlements in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and East Jerusalem."
 
Contrary to this statement, Israel disengaged over 8,500 settlers and soldiers from the Gaza Strip in 2005. There are currently no settlers nor is there any physical Israeli presence in the Gaza Strip.
 
HonestReporting Canada brought this error to the attention of RadioCanada.ca editors who removed the erroneous paragraph from the online reports: (See our exclusive before and after screen grab)

Before

After

How You Can Make A Difference
 
As the Canadian media are the primary lens through which Canadians learn about the world, they play an important role in influencing public opinion and government policy toward Israel and the Middle East. We require accurate information about the world in which we live in and you can play an important role in this process by ensuring fair and accurate media coverage of Israel. If you come across a problematic media report that you feel requires our attention or if you need any assistance in drafting a letter to the editor, please contact our offices at: info@honestreporting.ca or call: (416) 915-9157.
 
 
HonestReporting.ca
 
To support our continued efforts to hold the Canadian news media accountable for their reporting on Israel, please donate here today.
 
 
Or send a cheque to:
 
HonestReporting Canada
PO Box 6, Station Q
Toronto, Ontario M4T 2L7
 
Thank you for your ongoing commitment to fair and accurate
media coverage of Israel and the Middle East
 
Get Involved Today
                                    HonestReporting Canada
                PO Box 6, Station Q, Toronto, ON, Canada M4T 2L7
                                   
info@honestreporting.ca





You are currently subscribed to honestreportingcanada as: pressing4truth.canada@blogger.com
To unsubscribe click here
or send a blank email to leave-6932519-30846861.70055780e4c7785a46ecfd4be95feb9c@pr1.netatlantic.com

No comments:

VIDEO:Canada Human Rights

VIDEO of CTV PowerPlay Canada Human? Rights Commission?

Iranian S-Elections?

Evolution / Intelligent Design

Legitimate Questions Should Be Discussed

I am reminded of how established "science" has been wrong many times before such as in the case of Piltdown man. So could it be wrong now? Or has it been perfected? Should not reasonable arguments be considered?

We have become a nation of beggars

Terence Corcoran reports in the National Post on Friday, January 16, 2009 that the STIMULUS everyone is yelling for may only work over a short period and may actually MAKE THE ECONOMY WORSE over longer periods.

[Read the article below for the researchers who studied this phenomenon.]

POINTS

- "What if, as a wide and growing school of economists now suspect, the government spending and stimulus theory is a crock that is shovel-ready to be heaved out into the barnyard of economic waste?"

- Even disciples of Keynes, such as Harvard's Greg Mankiw, recently highlighted economic studies that show government spending binges -- shocks, they are sometimes called -- don't seem to help the economy grow. They might even make it worse.

-One of the studies cited by Mr. Mankiw was by two European economists (Andrew Mountford and Harald Uhlig), titled "What are the Effects of Fiscal Shocks?" It looked at big deficit-financed spending increases and found that they stimulate the economy for the first year, but "only weakly" compared with a deficit financed tax cut. The overriding problem is that the deficits crowd out private investment and, over the long run, may make the economy worse. "The resulting higher debt burdens may have long-term consequences which are far worse than the short-term increase in GDP."

-A paper by two economists, including the current chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, Olivier Blanchard, concluded that increased taxes and "increases in government spending have a strong negative effect on private investment spending."

-Roberto Perotti, an Italian economist with links to Columbia University, in "Estimating the Effects of Fiscal Policy in OECD Countries," found nothing but bad news for Keynesians. Economic growth is little changed after big increases in government spending, but there are signs of weakening private investment.

- What we all might logically intuit to be true -- spend government money, especially borrowed money, and you stimulate growth -- has long been thought to be a fallacy by some economists. That thought is now spreading. British economist William Buiter said the massive Obama fiscal stimulus proposals "are afflicted by the Keynesian fallacy on steroids."

The whole article by Terrance Corcoran follows:

Are you "shovel-ready," poised to hit the ground running, or merely desperate for cheap cash to get through the recession? If so, here's your last chance to apply to Ottawa for a piece of the massive government spending-bailout-infrastructure-stimulus operation now being prepared for Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's Jan. 27 budget extravaganza.

To get you going, the National Post has created an all-purpose Stimulus Canada application document. Simply make sure your company/institution fills out the form here to get in on the action.

We're just kidding, of course, or at least we were until our satirical Stimulus Canada General Application Form was mugged by reality, which is rapidly turning out to be funnier than the fanciful idea of a government department called Stimulus Canada. To all intents and purposes, Stimulus Canada already exists.

Government money to flow, the taps are opening, deficits are no problem. The spending, as Stephen Harper said after a meeting with the premiers on Friday, will be "very significant" and there will be "very significant deficits." That could mean new spending of $20-billion and deficits of $40-billion.

Industry groups, corporate opportunists, charities, municipal politicians, arts groups, provincial premiers, tech firms, mining companies, forestry operators, banks, money lenders -- in fact, just about everybody has come forward to get in on Canada's portion of what is turning out to be a mad global government stimulus pandemic.

Each claims to have a plan or an idea that they say would produce jobs, spending, investment and activity that would get Canada through the recession and stimulate the economy.

At some point, though, the clamour of claims and calls becomes absurd, and that point looks to have been crossed the other day in the United States when porn merchant Larry Flint said the U.S. sex industry was falling on hard times, business was down 25%, and it needed a $5-billion slice of the $1.2-billion U.S. stimulus program.

And why not?

Mr. Flint has a point. It is not totally illogical for anyone to think that way. If you spend a dollar somewhere -- whether building a bridge or operating a forest company or buying a car -- it generates activity. And, after all, it's a grand old economic theory, created by John Maynard Keynes, that spending, especially government spending, rolls through the economy on a giant multiplier, piling jobs on jobs, growth on growth.

Except for one problem: What if it's not true? What if, as a wide and growing school of economists now suspect, the government spending and stimulus theory is a crock that is shovel-ready to be heaved out into the barnyard of economic waste?

The Prime Minister, in his comments on Friday, seemed to be riding right into the barnyard. He said the government would be simply "borrowing money that is not being used" and "that business is afraid to invest." By borrowing that money, and turning it over to all the groups and interests looking for part of the stimulus spending, he would be jump-starting activity while the private sector got its legs back.

Even disciples of Keynes, such as Harvard's Greg Mankiw, recently highlighted economic studies that show government spending binges -- shocks, they are sometimes called -- don't seem to help the economy grow. They might even make it worse.

One of the studies cited by Mr. Mankiw was by two European economists (Andrew Mountford and Harald Uhlig), titled "What are the Effects of Fiscal Shocks?" It looked at big deficit-financed spending increases and found that they stimulate the economy for the first year, but "only weakly" compared with a deficit financed tax cut. The overriding problem is that the deficits crowd out private investment and, over the long run, may make the economy worse. "The resulting higher debt burdens may have long-term consequences which are far worse than the short-term increase in GDP."

Two other studies point in the same direction. A paper by two economists, including the current chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, Olivier Blanchard, concluded that increased taxes and "increases in government spending have a strong negative effect on private investment spending."

Roberto Perotti, an Italian economist with links to Columbia University, in "Estimating the Effects of Fiscal Policy in OECD Countries," found nothing but bad news for Keynesians. Economic growth is little changed after big increases in government spending, but there are signs of weakening private investment.

What we all might logically intuit to be true -- spend government money, especially borrowed money, and you stimulate growth -- has long been thought to be a fallacy by some economists. That thought is now spreading. British economist William Buiter said the massive Obama fiscal stimulus proposals "are afflicted by the Keynesian fallacy on steroids."

Over at Stimulus Canada, Mr. Harper's plan looks somewhat more modest and Canada is not in the same fiscal fix as the United States. But Ottawa and the provinces are clearly ready to borrow big wads of money from the future to stimulate the economy today. It's money that is supposedly sitting out there in the timid hands of investors who will be repaid with tax dollars later.

But if that stimulus spending does not generate much fresh economic growth, and the borrowing chews up money that private investors could invest in the future, the shovel-ready brigades who get the cash today will produce only short term gains at the expense of the long term health of the economy.

Educational Purposes Only

All articles quoted here are for educational purposes only. Canada-For-Truth encourages you to read the original articles on their respective sites.
We do not necessarily agree with all links posted here but we include them to bring balance to an unbalanced media.