tuned wrote:Do CBC Newsworld, BC 1, and CTV News not receive subscriber payments from cable and satellite companies? If I want to subscribe to cable TV I am forced to take these channels and pay for them whether I want their content or not. One of them, CTV News has an owner that has just admitted to interfering in their editorial content.
The CBC is not exactly a bastion of journalistic integrity. Jian Ghomeshi and their "report" on The Fifth Estate spring to mind. Then there's Amanda Lang.
I never got a chance to watch Sun News so I have no idea what the quality of their content was like. I do remember watching CTV Newsnet when it first appeared on the cable dial and it was as low rent as you can get.
Who made you the almighty God that decides what's a news channel or not? Sun News covered current events and politics. You made a bunch of smart ass comments about their "redneck" viewers. Did you subscribe to the channel or are you just parroting others?
You still never answered my question about your knowledge of the CRTC ruling. Posing more does not let you off the hook. Nevertheless I'll indulge while I await your's.
Yes they do. I'm not exactly sure how much, but it's like a whopping .25 cents per sub or something miniscule like that. Companies use profits to pay for technology upgrades, SAP and descriptive audio service. Liquor sales pay for hospitals, gas tax pays for roads. Yet here you stand, ranting about paying two bits for services we all benefit from. New technology, SAP, descriptive audio, program guides etc. Like the banks do, I'm sure you'll not be impressed for service charging everyone for minor things at inflated costs, right? That's what corps do. If you think for one second, a'la carte selection will reduce your monthly cost, you're in dreamland. Casual viewing gone. PPV costs in, especially if you want specific shows, but don't otherwise watch the channels. Free choices gone, service charges added for what? Your ideology, pfft to that.
And yes, I had SUN in my package with Shaw Direct. Unlike you, I actually watched it. Often. Not necessarily to be informed, but to be reminded of narrow-mindedness and within our own population. I formulate my opinions based on the observation of facts, convenience and serviceability, not from presumptions motivated by whatever chip is on other's shoulders. Scarcely a report came across the SUN desk that wasn't rife with neoconservative rhetoric written all over it. They were little more than paid lobbyists for big oil, the Conservative Party of Canada, mouth pieces for extremism, political bigots, outright liars and malcontents, from which are a matter of public record. Ezra Levant is a convicted slanderer on multiple counts, yet remains unrepentant or apologetic for his misdeeds. These are the fools you expect to bring you table as a solution to your perceived little problem with how everyone gleans knowledge? I think not, neither does the CRTC and neither does the population en mass. At best, you're in the minority on that issue, but sour grapes are all that's left. Yes, Bell interfered. Likewise, the commission itself had no business making public statements on the issue. Actually, I was surprised after all the muzzling the recent government has applied to it's employees recently. Makes one suspicious of politics, yes? To that end we'd probably agree, wrong is wrong and it ought not to be excused nor tolerated, but it in no way vindicates SUN's underhanded approach to the mandatory inclusion application. The two issues have absolutely nothing to do with each other, hence your point was off topic.
Me God? That's rich. Desperate and pathetic, really. Seeing how you admit to ignorance, I'll be gracious, but sarcasticly disappointed to inform you I'm not the god who makes these decisions. I'm also pained to inform you that you're not the god of what video services I choose to purchase, watch or listen to either, irrespective of your erroneous, over-zealous assertions about a non-issue. I'm quite satisfied with my packages and channel selection. TV, internet, phone. All good, thank you, and I take exception to your insistence it's wrong, on every level. I'm pretty sure though, the CRTC requires news networks to be in compliance with ethics prescribed by
http://www.caj.ca/ethics-guidelines/ and/or other bonafide agencies. SUN had no such affiliation, that issue alone disqualified them, no less the myriad of other inconsistencies.
So I ask you again. Do you actually read the thing before speaking to it, or are you going to evade the question entirely?