tinydancer
Diamond Member
It's bizarre that this is even a "story". Go figure.
Do you know why the Right Winged, Republican FOX news is banned in canada?
- Thread starter nitroz
- Start date
It's bizarre that this is even a "story". Go figure.
francoHFW
Diamond Member
Doesn't change the fact Pubs and Fox lie nonstop (see sig), and the hater dupes are fools. Sounds like Canada doesn't allow Air BROADCAST of lies. Bless them.
Missourian
Diamond Member
Last edited:
buckeye45_73
Lakhota's my *****
- Jun 4, 2011
- 33,888
- 7,486
- 1,130
Pubs what is that, is that what you call your curlies? Do you have crab lice? Man you better get rid of that before your boyfriend finds out.
Dreadnaught1968
Oh crap!
Looks like Rogers offers FOX News in Canada.
Oh well.
Oh well.
Lakhota
Diamond Member
I heard that Fox News can now broadcast into Canada, but it can't set up shop there.
California Girl
Rookie
- Oct 8, 2009
- 50,337
- 10,059
- 0
- Banned
- #27
An 18 month old child is way smarter than you.
And, FYI, FNC broadcasts in Canada. The OP is an idiot.
California Girl
Rookie
- Oct 8, 2009
- 50,337
- 10,059
- 0
- Banned
- #28
MSNBC does not broadcast in the UK. Ergo, they have been banned for 'lying'. And cannot set up shop there.
You are a gibbering idiot.
Lakhota
Diamond Member
Got any proof, Stepford Wingnut College girl?
- Banned
- #30
I do not think news commentary should be involved in any legitimate news station or program. Newspapers offer up a very destinct section for their commentary where they allow viewers and staff writers to make biased comments on popular news articles according to their interpretations. Unfortunately cable news networks do not offer up this same distinction.
Fox news, and MSNBC for that matter, offer up mainly news commentary. this gets much higher ratings than plain old news reporting, and I can see why so many have jumped on the bandwagon. Really fox and MSNBC have the reliability and faxcts you could get out of most turds with a blog internet sites. Many of their shows have taken to personalities more like shock jocks than actual news reporting. I would rate MSNBC as a little more concerned with the facts, but in the end it is the same exact thing.
I am not to fond of the idea of letting political people in the US government start dictating what can be said. Given the piss poor habits of bullshit and deceit that run through most of the US government, and the fact that most of those people try to cover shit up, it becomes way too easy for the people in charge to start banning negative press on the idea of keeping news accurate. I just simply do not trust any of them with the truth any further than i trust cable news.
The problem is that basic reporting of the news without commentary and interpretation has 2 problems. The first is that most americans are too stupid to understand the big words and what things actually mean. This means it has to be explained, and that explanation is often laced with the bias of the reporter. The other problem is bland old news reporting is boring and gets no ratings. Very simply when given the opportunity to watch Bill o blather on with his bullshit, and watch some basic spin free report on wht happened most people tune into the show that entertains them. This means cable news reporters are pretty much the equal of a dancing bear or clown.
You would have to get something funded by the public like PBS which would still have probably influence by the people who approve it's funding, and no one would watch it anyway except for the couple of informed people in the US. basically, the people want some loud mouthed asshole who gives the people who do not agree with them a good fight. No one wants a true debate, and no one wants the facts in america. They want name calling, something witty to laugh at, and some pretty graphics.
I also have a good feeling that canadians would fall into the same trap if they actually had freedom of speech. I learned a long time ago free speech is not a intellectual exchange of ideas and arguments. It is a world of spam and insults, and no one in their right mind would pay for it. If you want to see free unmoderated speech for yourself take a look at a place called alt.* on usenet. No mods, no rules, it used to be free, and there is a reason people stopped going there when the LCD hit the internet.
Fox news, and MSNBC for that matter, offer up mainly news commentary. this gets much higher ratings than plain old news reporting, and I can see why so many have jumped on the bandwagon. Really fox and MSNBC have the reliability and faxcts you could get out of most turds with a blog internet sites. Many of their shows have taken to personalities more like shock jocks than actual news reporting. I would rate MSNBC as a little more concerned with the facts, but in the end it is the same exact thing.
I am not to fond of the idea of letting political people in the US government start dictating what can be said. Given the piss poor habits of bullshit and deceit that run through most of the US government, and the fact that most of those people try to cover shit up, it becomes way too easy for the people in charge to start banning negative press on the idea of keeping news accurate. I just simply do not trust any of them with the truth any further than i trust cable news.
The problem is that basic reporting of the news without commentary and interpretation has 2 problems. The first is that most americans are too stupid to understand the big words and what things actually mean. This means it has to be explained, and that explanation is often laced with the bias of the reporter. The other problem is bland old news reporting is boring and gets no ratings. Very simply when given the opportunity to watch Bill o blather on with his bullshit, and watch some basic spin free report on wht happened most people tune into the show that entertains them. This means cable news reporters are pretty much the equal of a dancing bear or clown.
You would have to get something funded by the public like PBS which would still have probably influence by the people who approve it's funding, and no one would watch it anyway except for the couple of informed people in the US. basically, the people want some loud mouthed asshole who gives the people who do not agree with them a good fight. No one wants a true debate, and no one wants the facts in america. They want name calling, something witty to laugh at, and some pretty graphics.
I also have a good feeling that canadians would fall into the same trap if they actually had freedom of speech. I learned a long time ago free speech is not a intellectual exchange of ideas and arguments. It is a world of spam and insults, and no one in their right mind would pay for it. If you want to see free unmoderated speech for yourself take a look at a place called alt.* on usenet. No mods, no rules, it used to be free, and there is a reason people stopped going there when the LCD hit the internet.
- Banned
- #31
Actually, that is because the people in the UK have their own fucked up political system. Despite your UScentric opinion the people of other countries care about the bullshit that goes on in their country. MSNBC focusses on US news and issues, and aside from being of interest to a few people in the UK, it doesn't provide them with information on their lives.
The UK does have something called the BBC which is a few channels that are funded by the government and run against the murdoch empire. Even murdoch does not run fox news like you see in the US in the UK. His networks and newspapers have the same reputation, but often for different events.
Before making comments about a world you have little interest in or understanding of you might want to educate yourself on what people elsewhere in the world think. You have a tool in front of you that has made that task a hell of a lot easier than it has ever been before. Contrary to american opinion the rest of the world does not revolve around our comings and goings.
emptystep
VIP Member
- Jul 17, 2012
- 3,654
- 221
- 83
Ran into a guy at the library today. He was completely freaked out because 23-26 year-olds were going to get a free ride on Obamacare and he was going to half to pay for it and liberals were going to make him homeless.
For everyone's sake righties, if your base is so dumb your going to have to be more careful with the scare tactics? I thought the guy was going to clock me when I told him he was full of shit. (Well, I put it a little nicer than that.
)
For everyone's sake righties, if your base is so dumb your going to have to be more careful with the scare tactics? I thought the guy was going to clock me when I told him he was full of shit. (Well, I put it a little nicer than that.
)- Banned
- #33
Ran into a guy at the library today. He was completely freaked out because 23-26 year-olds were going to get a free ride on Obamacare and he was going to half to pay for it and liberals were going to make him homeless.
For everyone's sake righties, if your base is so dumb your going to have to be more careful with the scare tactics? I thought the guy was going to clock me when I told him he was full of shit. (Well, I put it a little nicer than that.
My grandparents think Obama is trying to kill them through healthcare. There are effects of being chicken little.
Black_Label
Registered Democrat
- Jun 20, 2012
- 6,306
- 512
- 48
Correct. American fox news is allowed because they lie about american politics. They are forbidden to set up a canadian version unless they stop lying.
Fox went as far as trying to change federal law to allow them to lie which was unsuccessful.
In the end they were left with two options. A) stop lying B) not create a network at all. Fox chose B) which really goes to show what a steaming piece of shit that network is.
emptystep
VIP Member
- Jul 17, 2012
- 3,654
- 221
- 83
Ran into a guy at the library today. He was completely freaked out because 23-26 year-olds were going to get a free ride on Obamacare and he was going to half to pay for it and liberals were going to make him homeless.
For everyone's sake righties, if your base is so dumb your going to have to be more careful with the scare tactics? I thought the guy was going to clock me when I told him he was full of shit. (Well, I put it a little nicer than that.
My grandparents think Obama is trying to kill them through healthcare. There are effects of being chicken little.
To be perfectly honest, when the guy went inside I felt really bad for him? He was really, really scared. I mean like honestly scared. I realize Romney really wants the job and all but is this the way make a point? I tried to work through some of the points. The core of it seemed to be that all the increases in premieums and reducing in benefits lately are just the tip of the iceberg for what is coming in Obamacare. I asked him a couple questions to see if he understood how the reimbursement mechanism worked for health insurance and when he didn't I kind of saw he was repeating lines he heard from somewhere. I wonder?
SayMyName
Live, Love, Laugh.
I would say that Fox is only now being offered by cable companies in Canada is for reasons of competition. There is a great market for news not reported in Canada, and with a perspective different than many in the government. The allowance now means more, not less, freedom for those up north.
Last edited:
CRTC approves Fox News for Canada
Last Updated: Thursday, November 18, 2004 | 9:52 PM ET CBC News
Facebook
131
Twitter
11
Share
142
Email
Video
Terry Milewski reports for CBC-TV
(Runs: 2:00)
play: RealMedia »
play: RealVideo »
play: QuickTime »
External Links
CRTC decision
(Note: CBC does not endorse and is not responsible for the content of external sites - links will open in new window)
The conservative-leaning Fox News Channel will soon be coming to Canadian digital television channels.
The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) approved an application Thursday to bring the Fox News Channel, one of the highest-rated news channels in the United States, onto Canadian digital airwaves.
The Canadian Cable Telecommunications Association (CCTA) applied to the broadcast regulator in April.
Canadians already have access to the main Fox network, but not the right-leaning, 24-hour news channel, with its trademarked slogan of "fair and balanced."
The Canadian Association of Broadcasters (CAB) opposed the application, saying it would discourage foreign broadcasters from partnering with Canadian broadcasters.
However, in its decision, the CRTC said Fox News offers little Canadian coverage and is not "partially or totally competitive with any Canadian pay or specialty service." It added that the channel would "significantly boost digital penetration in Canada" and increase the availability of digital services in the country.
The CRTC also approved the NFL Network, a 24-hour "lifestyle and entertainment" channel for football fans. It doesn't carry live games, with the exception of a few exhibition games.
Past application rejected
The CRTC rejected a CCTA application to bring Fox to Canada last November because Fox News U.S. and Winnipeg-based Global Television were planning to create Fox News Canada, a combination of U.S. and Canadian news.
However, in March, a Fox U.S. executive said there were no plans to create the combined channel.
The CRTC was thrust into the spotlight in July after giving conditional approval to the digital broadcast of Arab television station al-Jazeera.
FROM JULY 15, 2004: Al-Jazeera cleared for Canadian viewers
The commission said Canadian carriers had to keep an "audio-visual recording" of the controversial network's broadcasts. It told Canadian distributors to monitor the broadcast 24 hours a day, giving them permission to "alter or curtail" programming to keep out abusive commentary, especially of an anti-Semitic nature.
No Canadian distributors carry al-Jazeera.
Fox was launched in 1996 by a former Republican advisor, Roger Ailes. It's a subsidiary of News Corp. Ltd., which is controlled by right-wing Australian media tycoon Rupert Murdoch.
Since Fox was approved in Canada back in 2004 it's pretty obvious that SOMEONE is lying but I don't think it's FOX. Don't you guys get tired of this nonsense?
Last Updated: Thursday, November 18, 2004 | 9:52 PM ET CBC News
131
11
Share
142
Video
Terry Milewski reports for CBC-TV
(Runs: 2:00)
play: RealMedia »
play: RealVideo »
play: QuickTime »
External Links
CRTC decision
(Note: CBC does not endorse and is not responsible for the content of external sites - links will open in new window)
The conservative-leaning Fox News Channel will soon be coming to Canadian digital television channels.
The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) approved an application Thursday to bring the Fox News Channel, one of the highest-rated news channels in the United States, onto Canadian digital airwaves.
The Canadian Cable Telecommunications Association (CCTA) applied to the broadcast regulator in April.
Canadians already have access to the main Fox network, but not the right-leaning, 24-hour news channel, with its trademarked slogan of "fair and balanced."
The Canadian Association of Broadcasters (CAB) opposed the application, saying it would discourage foreign broadcasters from partnering with Canadian broadcasters.
However, in its decision, the CRTC said Fox News offers little Canadian coverage and is not "partially or totally competitive with any Canadian pay or specialty service." It added that the channel would "significantly boost digital penetration in Canada" and increase the availability of digital services in the country.
The CRTC also approved the NFL Network, a 24-hour "lifestyle and entertainment" channel for football fans. It doesn't carry live games, with the exception of a few exhibition games.
Past application rejected
The CRTC rejected a CCTA application to bring Fox to Canada last November because Fox News U.S. and Winnipeg-based Global Television were planning to create Fox News Canada, a combination of U.S. and Canadian news.
However, in March, a Fox U.S. executive said there were no plans to create the combined channel.
The CRTC was thrust into the spotlight in July after giving conditional approval to the digital broadcast of Arab television station al-Jazeera.
FROM JULY 15, 2004: Al-Jazeera cleared for Canadian viewers
The commission said Canadian carriers had to keep an "audio-visual recording" of the controversial network's broadcasts. It told Canadian distributors to monitor the broadcast 24 hours a day, giving them permission to "alter or curtail" programming to keep out abusive commentary, especially of an anti-Semitic nature.
No Canadian distributors carry al-Jazeera.
Fox was launched in 1996 by a former Republican advisor, Roger Ailes. It's a subsidiary of News Corp. Ltd., which is controlled by right-wing Australian media tycoon Rupert Murdoch.
Since Fox was approved in Canada back in 2004 it's pretty obvious that SOMEONE is lying but I don't think it's FOX. Don't you guys get tired of this nonsense?
- Banned
- #38
Yeah, things have changed. 2004 was a few years back. but I am wondering why canadians would want american news.
Mac1958
Diamond Member
.
Fox and MSNBC are both all-American embarrassments.
.
Fox and MSNBC are both all-American embarrassments.
.
Similar threads
- Poll
New Topics
-
-
MAGA and Putin bet big on Hungary’s election — it backfired- Started by C_Clayton_Jones
- Replies: 3
-
Pope Leo says he does not fear Trump, citing Gospel as he pushes back in feud over Iran war
- Started by C_Clayton_Jones
- Replies: 9
-
-
