Monday, February 23, 2009

Quality Control Problems Continue at CBC

Quality Control Problems Continue at CBC

February 23, 2009

By: Mike Fegelman

Dear HonestReporting Canada subscriber:

In recent weeks we have exposed several examples of unfair and inaccurate CBC news coverage of Israel. At the onset of Operation Cast Lead, CBC Newsworld unfairly presented a pro-Palestinian activist as an objective "media analyst". At the height of the conflict between Israel and Hamas, CBC National misrepresented a statement by then president-elect Barack Obama, making it seem as though Obama had only expressed concern for the loss of civilian life in Gaza, when in fact he had expressed concern for the Israeli casualties as well. CBC subsequently issued an on-air correction to remedy their error. Finally, after the Gaza operation ended, CBC.ca falsely reported that Israel had failed to open border crossings to the Gaza Strip since the January 18 ceasefire had taken effect. CBC.ca issued a correction after HonestReporting Canada intervened.

Unfortunately, these were not isolated incidents. Recent CBC news coverage of Israel indicates that "quality control" problems continue at our public broadcaster, perhaps revealing a troubling pattern of bias.

CBC "The Current" Airs Conspiracy Theory

On February 17, CBC Radio's "The Current" featured an interview with former CBC Editor-in-Chief Tony Burman (now Managing Director of Al Jazeera English) who is in the process of formally seeking cable and satellite carriage for Al Jazeera English to be viewed in Canada. 

The interview sparked some debate from The Current's listeners and on February 19, the program read some of their listener's letters on-air. 

One listener, arguing in support of Al Jazeera, alleged that the pro-Israel lobby controls the media. Host Anna Maria Tremonti read the following letter aloud:

"Bill Holevoth (sp?) of Lethbridge, Alberta responds to that as he writes: "North America not only has a right to Al Jazeera, but a fundamental need for the network. The filtering system America's pro-Israel lobby forces on the media is used only to promote Israel's agenda against the people of the Middle East and anyone opposing the Zionist agenda is quickly seen as anti-Semitic. Thousands of Jewish people also oppose the atrocities occurring in Gaza. We must learn to distinguish between Judaism and Zionism, networks such as Al Jazeera help the common person to understand this and should be accepted as an important part of our media."

The myth of pro-Jewish or pro-Israeli media controls has long been a staple of anti-Semites worldwide. This canard, which sometimes names the "Jewish lobby" outright and sometimes implicates a more shadowy "pro-Israel lobby," is widely accepted in the Arab world and is pervasive in the Muslim and Arab Media, along with the myth of Jewish control of the U.S. government or its usurpation by a pro-Israel clique. For Canada's publicly-funded broadcaster to air conspiracy theories claiming that the media are controlled by pro-Israel interests is a gross and odious violation of the CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices. While the letter writer is entitled to his warped views, the CBC should not have given him a platform to air his outlandish statements, as the network bears a special responsibility to act as a safeguard against bigotry and hatred.

Please ask The Current to apologize for airing conspiracy theories of pro-Israel control of the media. Send your considered and polite comments to The Current's Executive Producer Pamela Bertrand at pam.bertrand@cbc.ca or call the Feedback Line at 1 877 287-7366.
 
CBC.ca Issues Three Corrections After HRC Interventions
 
In a February 18 report on CBC.ca entitled "Lifting of Gaza blockade depends on abducted soldier's release: Israel," the following egregious error was stated by CBC writers: "The conflict between Israel and Hamas earlier this year killed roughly 3,000 Palestinians, say Palestinian officials. Israeli officials say 13 Israelis, including four soldiers, were killed."
 
Contrary to this statement, it's believed that only 1,300 Palestinians were killed, a majority of whom were Hamas terrorists. This CBC report overstated the total death toll by a shocking 1,700 people!
 
In light of the severity of this error, HonestReporting Canada immediately contacted CBC editors and requested an urgent formal apology to correct this serious mistake. The following correction was promptly issued by CBC editors the following day:
 
 
 
 
On February 10, CBC.ca erroneously reported that "Lebanon has had a tense relationship with Israel — brought to the fore in 2006, when war broke out between the two neighbours." 
Contrary to this statement, Israel never went to war with the Lebanese government, the country, or their army during the 34-day war. Instead, Israel fought the Lebanese terrorist group Hezbollah which had initiated cross-border attacks against Israel.
 
After HonestReporting Canada informed CBC.ca editors that there were no clashes between the Israeli and Lebanese armies, the following correction was promptly issued:
 
 
 
 
On February 1 and 2, CBC.ca erroneously reported that there were "no reports of casualties or damage" after 2 rockets launched from Gaza had landed inside Israel. In reality, three Israelis were injured (2 soldiers, 1 civilian) in these attacks.
 
After HonestReporting Canada brought this error to CBC's attention, the following correction was promptly issued:
 
 
 
 
CBC Radio Wrong on "Israeli Raid"
 
On February 18, CBC Radio's Kim Stefler, host of the "The World This Hour" program erroneously stated that:
 
"Gilad Shalit was captured during an Israeli raid into Gaza in June 2006, but Hamas rejects any link between the release of Shalit and a long term truce in Gaza."
 
To listen to this report online please click here.
 
Contrary to this statement, on June 25, 2006, Palestinian terrorists tunnelled from Gaza into Israel proper and attacked an Israeli military base capturing Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit from within Israel and not from the Gaza Strip. Contrary to Ms. Stefler's statement, there was no Israeli raid into Gaza at the time.
 
HonestReporting Canada filed a complaint with CBC editors, who in today's edition of the program issued the following correction: "Before we go - a note to our listeners. On February 18th, we reported that Corporal Gilad Shalit was captured in June 2006, during an Israeli raid into Gaza. In fact, he was captured by Gaza militants during a raid on an Israeli army post."
 
To listen to the correction online please click here.
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
The CBC's continuing pattern of promoting false information to the Canadian public is disturbing. Please do your part to keep the CBC honest by contacting the network today to express your concerns or otherwise please notify HonestReporting Canada of future lapses in CBC journalism by emailing us at: info@honestreporting.ca
 
 
HonestReporting.ca

To support our continued efforts to hold the Canadian news media accountable for their reporting on Israel, please donate here today. Through your donations, you can help ensure that Canadian journalists are held to the highest standards of "Honest Reporting."

Or send a cheque to:

HonestReporting Canada

P.O. Box 6, Station Q, Toronto, Ontario M4T 2L7

(416) 915-9157

Thank you for your ongoing commitment to fair and accurate
media coverage of Israel and the Middle East

 


You are currently subscribed to honestreportingcanada as: pressing4truth.canada@blogger.com
To unsubscribe click here
or send a blank email to leave-9391929-30846861.70055780e4c7785a46ecfd4be95feb9c@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.