Some people are so touchy!
I wrote that the students should considered themselves lucky that it was a mellow attack compare to what could happen in China or the way the minorities used to be Treated in the Loyalist City?
I received a lot of feedback and I didn’t even send the email out yet.
So? I stand by my views on this issue!
Remember this one?
or visit this website-
target="_blank">Charles
Blog
I still say that racism is very much alive in the Loyalist City.
As a matter of fact, I was talking to someone about this very issue in Saint John a few weeks ago.
Of course, it’s not like the old days when the Acadians and the Blacks were often attack!
In those days? Many Acadians were force to change their French Family name to English. Such as LeBlanc to White!!!
But racism it’s still going on today.
Go read my complaint to the Human Rights Commission!????
target="_blank">Charles
Blog
Of course, the Irvings have the backing of those racist members of the New Brunswick Human Rights Commission so we can we do?
Yes, maybe you can cover the issue of racism but it’s very much alive.
As for human rights in China? We know there’s no such rights in the peoples Republic!!!
Did you know that any website sites has to be register through the Government of China?
Thank God that we don’t have to follow this practice here in New Brunswick because I don’t believe this blog site would be accepted!
Did you know that many bloggers are jailed in China?
This blogger defence rest!!!
258 comments:
1 – 200 of 258 Newer› Newest»I do not feel like reading your nonesense anymore. Irvinings are Nazis because they could not put up with you. Do not blame them. Human Rights Commission is racist becuause they did not decide in your favour. Chinese students should feel lucky that they are here. What are you saying???
Every country has its dark moments. You are constantly saying that about Saint John that what a dark era it went through. According you Nazis live there which is nonesense. So what is the difference. You are putting both your feet in your mouth.
The way you are yapping nonesense, may be they should register your blog because you are offending too many people.
Charles, you have certainly touched a nerve but maybe it's time the media examined this story a little further. CBC Radio the day after the incident jumped all over another story about two Chinese students being hit with ice from a cup. CBC was trying to portray a rash of racism in Saint John, however even the Chinese student they interviewed admitted the students may have just been hit by punks and the colour of their skin may or may not have been the reason. People are attacked every day and no violence is acceptable. However this uproar in Saint John asking for tons of cops to go find the perpetrators is ridiculous. This is why so many crimes don't get solved because we're tying up resources on things that are minor. Catch the perpetrators and hang them high but remember this was probably just a bunch of idiots living in the moment and not a grand conspiracy.
I changed my comments? I don't think so! It's still in the blog! The Irvings are Nazis??? I never said that! I said tey're doing the same action as Hitler! They are denying the right of New Brunswickers to write critical letters of the Irving Empire!!!!
Crime must be nipped in the bud. These punks who are getting kicks out of subjecting university students to horror, if left alone, may go for bigger kicks. They may hurt someone or kill someone. That is how crime hatches. So any assignment of police to get hold of these punks now is very important in order to protect population and protect them from their own stupidity.
People get very defensieve when they are called racist, even if its a collective city or province. In New Brunswick it isn't a big surprise, I worked with very educated people who often made comments about "wagon burners" and far worse.
There were riots in the 1800's between loyalist protestants and irish catholics-even white people who speak the same language and are the same religion (christian I mean) couldn't get along. So we should be surprised? For those who didn't know the blacks who came to New Brunswick during and after the civil war were treated so badly they chartered a ship to Nova Scotia and africa. NB is as 'white' a province as I've ever seen.
Racism goes hand in hand with a culture's standard of living, and we know that New Brunswick's is now about the same as the southern states, which aren't considered bastions of open-mindedness, in fact there are places in the south that northerners simply won't go. In other words, stuff like this is bound to get worse. I watched a news report on the CBC about a kid who was killed in the 'language wars' in Bathurst, hardly a commercial for multiculturalism. It's hard to be open minded when life just sucks for so many people.
As for china there's no doubt there's an empire there, but there are also considerable freedoms. The government of canada has very strict hate laws and there are lots of ways around human rights in Canada. Try being an activist and you'll find out just how much freedom you have.
I wouldn't be surprised if the attack was racist, a bad sign since the government is trying to get immigrants. The question is whether CBC went overboard, or is the only one not afraid to tell the truth.
I do not think CBC went overboard. That is how wave of hate crime begins. If it is not stopped and exposed it can get out of hands as it has happened many times. Remember when FLQ killed a British diplomat in Quebec. Trudue had to declare marshal law to overcome that hate crime. No hate crime should be taken lightly. Or make stupid remarks that Chinese are better off here than in China. That is insulting the whole nation of over 2 billion people. I hope Charlie realizes how stupid his remarks were.
Yes we all know that Human Rights are being violated even in our Country. The perfect Human Rights Declaration was written by Sir Jonethan Humpry's who was himself a New Brunswicker. He was a member of the United Nations and you can find the declaration that he wrote on the United Nations official website. If every Nation, from the federal to the Provincial and Municipal level would adopt that Declaration as it is written, instead of taking little bits and pieces from it, Human Rights would be truly respected. What the Problem is however, that the individual nations have their own Idea of Legtislating rights and so they only take from the Declaration what goes along with their Agenda. How much better we would all be if we would all adopt the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as it is written. We would be a much better world to live in.
PAX VOBUSCUM.
Michael Mckay your comments are great. John Humphrey was from Hampton. A great man. Met him once. It brings back some memories. You are so right. If that declaration is adopted then lot of problems can be overcome.
Unfortunately our own premier is a bigot and racist. What you expect? Young people are following his example.
You can say what you want about Bernard Lord, but he is not a racist or a bigot. That is the most ludicrous thing I've ever heard. If you've ever met the man or talked with him, you would know that. To call him such a thing is nothing short of libel. No doubt Lord shoudl choose his words more carefully, but to call him a racist is unfair. As for CBC being the only ones to tell the truth, give me a break. There's not a more biased media outlet in this country. They blow stories out of proportion again and again. As for sending a Swat Team after egg throwers, let's put this issue into proper perspective. I understand the anger and it is justified and hopefully the people who know something will call the police and turn these scumbags in, however the police have lots of cases they're working on. Without public assistance, they're not going to go to every house looking for egg on people's hands.
Person used the wrong words...had to delete...sorry.....
There wasnt any wrong words there.
You deleated the post because he exposed you for what you are.
The irving wont post your letters cause you speak against them.
You deleat post that talk against you.
Your doing to this blog just like hitler did. You control it and decide what post to deleat.
What a joke
Some one is upset because Bernard Lord was called racist and a bigot. Sorry but he is. He made racist remarks in the legislature then pretended that he was misunderstood. Just like any other bigot. Is that not a lie too? It will be fun if he considers this a libel and sue. Media will have field day. Many people know him now who he really is. One does not have to be his buddy and play golf with him or drink beer with him to find out who he is. A racist and a biggot.Was he not being investigated by Fredericton city police for that . Does anyone know what happened to that investigation??
"I am outraged at the abuse that is being levelled at Chinese students. What kind of sewer do these types crawl out of? My wife and I have been going back and forth from China for the past 12 years. In that time, we have only been met with courtesy and friendship from the Chinese people."
KEITH ELDRIDGE
Sussex
This was in Saturday's Telegraph Journal. Someone who has been to China. To make comments that Chinese student are better off here, despite the attacks on them by hooligans, is plain wrong. We are not comparing governments here. Such crimes will be unacceptable in China as they are here. Keith Eldridge said it well above. Chinese people are very hospitable and friendly people in their home country. Ignorant statments about Chinese society must be avoided.
Thousands of our business people do business with China. Imagine if there is a reaction. We Canadians will be the big losers. We will not only lose immigrants we will lose a very large client base for our goods in China. Smarten up Charlie.
Lord is not going to sue anybody but unless you were there in the legislature that day, I don't think it's fair to call him a bigot. T.J. Burke made a reference to fat people in Miramichi. Does that make him a bigot to fat people? Probably not, he just chose the wrong words same as Lord. Fredericton Police are investigating the complaint about Lord and this is another example of wasting the police's time on pointless activities. This is why real crimes don't get solved. Thanks for the site Charles. I might not always agree with you but it's great to have healthy debate about NB issues.
I do not think one's personal family should be brought in. I totally disagree with Mr. Leblanc about his comments on Chinese students. One can express displeasure there but to bring his family into dicussion is wrong. Those comments simply do not belong here. They were rightly deleted and should have remained deleted. It is none of our business as to what his relations are with his family members.
If Bernard Lord is alleged to have made racist remarks in the legislature and police is investigating then it is waste of time? If those morons in Saint John make criminal attacks on university students and police is investigating then it is waste of police's time. What are you saying here? Police should wait until they kill someone then ivestigate.According to you it is waste of time to investigate racism and hate crimes.. You are not coming across good. You are presenting a very distorted and defective argument.
You investigate but you don't tie up half a dozen officers for weeks at a time. You make what is a reasonable investigation. Gather the evidence, talk to the witnesses and come to a conclusion. Were the Chinese students assualted. Yes. Was the first attack motivated by racism? Possibly. If so the Justice Minister can use Hate Crime legislation and charge the perpetrators in addition to assault. This type of legislation has only been used once or twice in the history of N.B. When the burning cross was placed on the lawn of a black family in Moncton. Clearly a hate crime. However when black slurs are painted on houses in Fredericton lived in by WHITE people, it is not a hate crime. It IS unacceptable but it's clealry a bunch of idiots running around. Should they be charged? Absolutlely. I'll stick by the first statement. Lord is a lot of things and he's crewed up plenty but he is not a racist. Burke was way off on this one and even he's admitted the native group which wanted Fredericton Police to investigate is off base on this one. Let the police go catch some pedophiles not spend weeks investigating if Lord is a racist which likley it will turn out he is not. But hey if I'm wrong, so be it and I'll eat my words. Don't count on it though.
When a crime is committed against you personally you will reach out to the whole world for a full investigation. I believe what police is doing is right thing to do and may be more resources should be assigned to it.
There was a prominent politician in N.B who was opposed to capital punishment. Dead set against it, pun intended. Then a reporter asked him that if his own young daughter was raped what would he do to the rapist and he said, "I will kill the son of bitch with my own two hands". So there it was how he really felt. The moral of the story is that unless you yourself are a victim of a crime it does not look so grim to you. I believe Bernnard Lord made racist remarks and he must be investigated and those hoods assualted Chinese students repeatedly and all resources must be made available for proper investigation, culprits must be apprehended before they do any more damage and punished.
I guess what I'm trying to understand is why do you think Bernard Lord is a racist? Is it because a group with an axe to grind against the government said it on CBC? Let's leave it to the police to decide. Maybe it will look like a good use of our dollars to investigate him. If it is, so be it but I'd still feel safer on the streets if police resources weren't being tied up with frivalous (sp?) allegations and were out catching pedophiles and getting the real scumbags who are dangerous off the streets. Our police forces get tied up with this sort of thing far too often and as mentioned only once or twice in the history of N.B. has has someone been charged with a hate crime. There was no evidence to the rest. The attacks on the Chinese students may very well be found out to be a hate crime. Did Lord commit a hate crime? I doubt it. Does he need some sensitivity training towards natives. Maybe but that doesn't necessairly make him a racist, it just makes him ignorance and sorry folks, that's not a criminal offence.
I must admit that's it is wrong about dicussing my family in this blog. I received a couple of emails from some family members. We tracked down the write and I'll handle it face to face...I'll make sure that he has something to write about!...lol..This blog is getting bigger by the day and I really don't wish to do this but maybe we should give away a username and password for people to post a comment! It would be sad to do this but this blog is attracting a lot of people from different part of the world.
Logged on. Great idea Charles.
Track me down? You know Im at cap bimet all summer and talk to your uncles all the time there.
Because someone doesnt aggree with you your going to track me down and settle it face to face?
You can insult people but when someone dissagree with you you cant take it?
Like others said before Im done with this site. bye
Discussing your family here is wrong. However, just for one person you want to remove the anonymity will be wrong too. You will prove his point that whenever anything goes against you, you want to end it. Some people will like to remain anonymous for good reasons as WCIE wants to remain anonymous. Do not let the wrong person win. You will lose lot readers that way.
The person who continues to say that investigating racism will tie up resources. Only an armchair thinker will do that. Since these students are from China therefore there is no need for that much investigation. Since it is only natives therefore we should not waste resouces for investigation. That is a very hypocritical argument. I do not know about Bernard Lord, if these punks are let go easy they will do more damage.
As far as Lord is concerned he has proved to be incompetent too. He should be investigated for Ormimulsion, LNG, his extensive travels, squandering public money and yes for making racist remarks.
Yeah...I know...look at the Irving's HERE forum???? The Irvings wants you to register before you have the right to post a comment! Hmmmmmmm???? China and the Irvings??? Hmmmmmm????
WCIE wanted to start this site recallbernardlord but wanted people to identify themselves. How many visiters did he get? Lord government will love that you remove anonymity. That will be the end of your site.
If there is ever a libelous comment just delete it.
Do not let one person, who unfortunately is discussing your family, win. It will be a major boo boo on your part.
Just put a notice on the main page that says
"No one is allowd to post negative coments toward Charles
or coments opposing Charles views"
Hmmm
sounds familiar?
Noooo...My GOD? We sure cannot have that policy in this blog? Have to sign your name? Of course not!!! This is a bureaucratic City! I remember when they would print letters without any names. What I meant was you would have to register to me or WCIE! But I don't believe this will work? As for writting against my views? Why do you think that I'm doing this for? It's a hobby and I enjoy it!!!
You started a topic which was very controversial. Take your lumps and move on.
Asking people to idententify in any way will end vistors from Irving employees and civil servants. That is where you may be getting most of the visitors and comments. Unhappy civil servants and irving employees.
Above note of putting a note up front is someone just making fun of you.
Racism should be investigated but you're missing the point. All crimes should be investigated but we have a finite amount of police officers. Put the appropriate number of officers on the case. Yes absolutely, but the native group demanding an investigation of Lord wants as many officers as it takes as quickly as possible so do some regarding the Chinese students. This just isn't realistic when there are unsolved murders, missing people and pedophiles roaming free. We need to have some ralistic expectations of the police and just because the media jumps all over the story, doesn't mean society has to come to a crashing halt.
In the Chinese student incident, the most reasonable voices in that debate have been the Chinese students who have seen it for what it is, a few idiots. However watch the National CBC News and there's an epidemic of racism in Saint John and the province is run by a racist premier. Again, Lord is a lot of things but a racist is a long shot at best, but sir or Maam I'll respect your opinion. I for one would prefer to see the evidence then just believe what a reporter who may very well be biased tell me, although The Telegraph Journal has been very fair in their coverage of the story.
I do not understand your argument. You are coming across as hypocritical. Investigate some crimes and do not waste resources on others. Many crimes start from minor ifractions.These young people who carried out these crimes, if left alone, will do major crimes. I will not underestimate it. You are fooling yourself if you think that there is not a major problem of intolerance in Saint John and other places in N.B. It is already giving us bad name in the world community. Lord has shown total insensitivity to it time and again. Not to listen is his major trait. You must live in some la la land that you think everything is fine.
The Premier must be investigated. He is the leader of the province and if he continues racist actions and then justify them that it is just a misunderstanding then he is setting a very dangerous precedent. As others will follow thinking that if Premier can do it then it ok for us. Young people especially. I read transcripts published in the papers. I have no doubt that his remarks were racist. He is the Premier and he may get away with it but that will be very unfortunate.
Just for the record! This afternoon I met a girl from China! < student > I explain to her that I was a blogger and there's a debate going on! I point blank asked her if there was Human Rights in China! She answered- Yeeesss but different kind of human rights than here!!!! So there!!!
Sh@T!!! I posted the same comment twice...too hot in here.....I need a fan!!!
Investigate all crimes but recognize that there are only so many police officers to go around. As citizens we need to have some realistic expectations. The Fredericton Police shoudl investigate Lord because someone made a complaint BUT it shouldn't take precedent over other cases that they are certainly looking at. Expect it to take some time. I'm not sure where the hypocritical argument comes from. I'll try to be more clear.
If the Frdericton Police can spend the time to protect those racist members of the New Brunswick Human Rights Commission! Remember when they showed up as undercover cops at the Anti-Poverty meeting? What a waste of money! This tells me they should also investigate other issues!!!
Charles. Good point on a waste of police resources. It's all about choices folks. How much do you want to pay in taxes and what do you want the police to focus on? If it's investigating egg throwing, by all means send the entire squad to check it out but I would doubt the majority of Saint Johners want the majority of their police looking into it. The Saint John Police SHOULD investigate but make sure a reasonable number of resources are used. Ultimately it's up to us as citizens to report incidents AND provide evidence to the police. It makes their job a lot easier. Yes I know sometimes we don't get the results we're looking for and despite the way it shoudl be justice doesn't always get servede but it's the best system we got.
Does anybody have any idea just how much time the police are putting on this? I doubt it, with the access to information being so bad, we can't even find out class sizes, the cops certainly aren't sharing that information. I happen to know some cops and anybody who thinks they're overworked is crazy, they certainly aren't putting 'too many'hours on this when other crimes are occurring. The idea that another crime is being neglected is pretty farfetched. I hate to say it but some of the most racist remarks and actions I've come across have been from cops.
Not to open up the native issue, but it certainly shows that most New Brunswickers are racist in some way. Racism doesn't just mean throwing things at people. The idea that a billion chinese are all 'friendly and courteous' is equally racist, although obviously not racist in a harmful way.
I think it would be interesting to see a transcript, but the CBC is a separate issue. That the CBC likes to paint the maritimes in a certain way is definitely a valid topic.
However,the racism one is an important one as well, especially since, if NB is anything like Ontario, the future doctors, engineers and university students will be chinese or indian. NB isn't exactly known for multiculturalism, maybe biculturalism. But that may change in the future and people should get this stuff out in the open.
Charles wasn't completely off base, saying that chinese students are better off here. There's certainly a reason why so many chinese come to Canada. If you are from western china and are persecuted or you are looking for increased individual rights then you'll definitely be on the wrong end of the bars. Likewise, after the war many brits came to canada because they found england so bureaucratized and class based, if somebody said the brits are better off in Canada I doubt we'd think it was a generic comment against britons. I certainly hope the Indonesians, Chileans, or Haitians aren't equating 'canadians' with what our federal government happens to be doing to them.
As far as the personal comments go Charles, I too am somewhat uncomfortable with the KKK references and the Hitler references. You don't need hatemongering to call a government fascist. Simply noting that a powerful state is acting unjustly does the trick.
However, people need to remember that this is a blog, not a news feed. People certainly aren't forced to read it, and I'm always suspicious of those who need to advertise that they won't be reading anymore, it's as if they think Charles will change his style because they won't be reading anymore.
Comparing Charles blog to the Irvings is ludicrous. Charles gets no tax breaks like they do, and no subsidies from the federal government. He doesn't have a company that was given loads of money during the war and cheap access to resources which enabled them to cut the trees and make the paper to print newspapers. I doubt Irving papers pay nearly what others do for newsprint, although they might since of course the money 'stays in the family' either way.
As far as the personality stuff goes though, there's no point in playing nice. The comments that the poster thought were being negative have been shared by Charles already all along. It's charle's belligerence that makes him so good at what he does, anybody else would have given up long ago. And just because everybody else stands around like an anonymous spectator at an accident while Charles dives in is certainly no comment on his ethics but on the posters.
As for the 'racists' at the Human Rights Commission, I don't see why people would even be surprised at that. This is the province that bred the COR party, a single issue party designed to do away with official bilingualism. In NB one can easily see 'the two solitudes' very clearly, in fact there is virtually a physical line in the province separating the two. There is a reason so much of northern NB and reserves are poverty stricken compared to the south, and it's no stretch to call it racism, but other terms also suffice.
Ask a Tibetan how 'caring and friendly' the Chinese are. Ask a native how 'caring and friendly' canadians are. Ask a CHinese how 'caring and friendly' the japanese are.
Society has all kinds, not standing up for a culture when it is being harassed and oppressed is racist, but at least there the Chinese have a better excuse than Canadians. How many make treatment of natives a political issue? Our government doesn't persecute on that basis while a "Free Tibet" sign around your neck in Beijing will get you a one way ticket to prison. The chinese have 'communal human rights' which is another way of saying that its imperialistic. You think all the cheap crap you buy at Wal Mart comes because the chinese are so protective of their workers?
Sorry but words like pr@ck will be deleted! Listen, try not to use bad words when you write a view? Merci!
"When I went to Korea, I was spoken to on the street by complete strangers with, "Canada good! Welcome!" I was treated like a queen there. It is both a very large and in many ways, a very small planet."CAROL BENNETT, St. Andrews
Ms. Bennett writes in today's Telegraph Journal, July 18. Those are the kind of Chinese people whether in Korea or China. Where does Charles Leblanc get his information and make ignorant statements.
Those who tell Mr. Leblance that he did the right thing cannot be his friends becuase they will like him to screw himself and lose his credibility. It is about time he realizes that he was dead wrong.
Mr. Leblanc prick is not a swear word as you are interpreting. It simply means very annoying. It is like ass means dunkey and something eles. English does have double meaning words quite often. In the above comment word 'queen' is used which has double meaning too.
I'm maybe french but you can use prick as Pr@ck!!!
As asshole as assh@le!!!
F@ck!!!
You know what I mean?
As for retracting my views on China? Of course not! This will never happen!!!
We know there's no human rights in China and after that shameful act in Saint John?
The students are still much better living in Canada than China!
Hey? Go talk to the Blogglers who's in Jail in China?
All web site must be register through the Government of China!
They even have Government employees working in these blog sites or forum to protect the Government interest!
By any chance? Are you working for the Chinese Government??
I understand what you are saying and I still say that these student should consider themselves fortunate to be in Canada compare to China! Here we have freedom of speech which is non-existant in the so call People's Replublic! They met the Mayor and the issue was front page news in the media! Would this happen in China? Of course not!!!!
Have your ever gone across the pond to Europe or Asia? If you did then yo would not be this narrow-minded and will admit your ignorance.
If a Chinese citizen assaults another Chinese citizen there are laws and consequences. You are hung up on the government and you continue to expose your ignorance.
I love the differing points of view on this site. That's what makes Canada great. God bless this country. Wait, am I allowed to say that? LOL
Here's the latest CBC story. Not too bad although they should probe deeper into the story. What's causing the racism? Is it rampant? Does it come from ignorance? Would these people have thrown eggs at a white person just as easily? Does our government breed racism with it's policies favouring minorities for jobs? All good debate questions but we may as well do it here because CBC will never cover that angle.
Don't retaliate for attacks: Chinese student
Last updated Jul 18 2005 11:16 AM ADT
CBC News
A Chinese student leader urged her fellow students at the University of New Brunswick in Saint John not to retaliate for recent attacks on two Chinese women.
Li Song, the president of the Chinese students association, made the plea at a public meeting of 150 people at UNBSJ on Friday. She also urged the Saint John community to help police in their investigation.
"It hurts. [People in the community] threw eggs. Threw rocks. Threw firecrackers. Threw a bottle of ice," said Li. "Who knows what is going to be next. So please every citizen, and all the people right here, on the street, do the best you can, but legally, do it in the right way."
The meeting was arranged after the international students were pelted with eggs and racial slurs. The attacks struck a nerve with other students, who say they've experienced the same treatment over the years.
No one who has tossed eggs or made the slurs has been caught yet. Police Inspector Bill Reid says charges of assault will be laid if they get enough information from the public. He also said there will be increased patrols on Millidge Avenue, where most students walk to the university.
In recent weeks, eggs and firecrackers have been thrown at Chinese students on several occasions. They've also been told to "go back to China."
Last Wednesday, a cup full of ice was thrown from a car onto a Chinese couple walking down the street. "We're so scared to go out on the street," said Li. "You gotta watch your back. It was eggs and firecrackers, and now it's a cup of ice, who knows what's going to be next."
Li said the city needs to educate people about multiculturalism.
One Saint John resident is upset about the recent attacks on the students, but isn't sure the city can change the behaviour and attitudes of the attackers.
Seventeen-year-old Cory Harper lives in the neighbourhood where the attacks took place. He and his friends were shocked by them, but he's not sure if much can be done to prevent more from happening.
"I believe that there's probably going to be more acts of violence," said Harper. "There's not much we can do about it."
Harper said that Saint Johners can encourage tolerance of racial diversity by doing things like holding rallies, but "people who are making the attacks aren't going to attend those," he said.
He said some of his peers' attitudes towards race are slow to change.
Gives real black eye to Saint John and New Brunswick.
China is the biggest market that Canadians are trying to tap. These criminal acts will not help because word gets out internationally. We live in a global village.
Where is the Premier on all of this?? Why does he do not speak up??? It is giving New Brunswick a big black eye. We are coming across as uncivilized people because of these few idiots.
If the above is the CBC report then I think it's fairly accurate, at least as far as we can find out. If those quotes were actually uttered then clearly there is HUGE race problem in St.John.
These aren't isolated in NB, look at irish catholic/english catholic, black/white, french/english. These types of problems are caused by government, but perpetuated by individuals. Take a look at Ontario, every southern city has a university and every one has HUGE population of chinese/indian. There's nothing wrong with that, that's not the race issue. The race issue is simply that while the federal and provincial governments keep investors happy, canadians can't afford to go to university and universities need (want) the extra dollars that overseas students pay. Studies clearly show that university education doubles, even triples one's chances of a well paying job.
Now Ontario has been surpassed by all of the surrounding american states as to proportion of people who attend university. There are huge numbers of canadians who are dropping out of high school. At least in Ontario there are insurance and automotive industries where community colleges can give people a leg up. Those industries don't exist in NB where only branch offices exist.
Racism comes from unhappy people, angry people. If you're making 60 grand a year what would you care if chinese people were going to school here? However, these people ARE rightfully angry, but they are taking it out in the wrong way. It wasn't these chinese students who priced university out of reach, gutted maritime industry, cut out bursaries and made education moot.
Take my word for it, the future is looking bleaker if people don't get politically involved. The other side is what happened in BC, where once enough chinese or asians came they formed gangs to protect themselves, which makes others form gangs as well, and, well, I think you can guess the rest.
Good commentary. Yo are right. It is foriegn students who pay double the tuition fees and keep some of these universities finanacially going . They are sometimes on scholarship from their own governments and have to work hard to survive. They cannot afford to be bums as they have to justify that scholarship.
Our own kids do not want to be bothered with university education. Then they could not get good jobs and take it on others. It is very unhealthy situation.
Spinks, sir, madam. Yo are coming across as racist. They hire more women in civil service to overcome past injustices. If tomorrow there is violence against women then you will say becuase they were being preferred over men that is why there is violence.
Yo argument has been very distorted.
But how long do we pay for sins of the father. In the true spirit of non-racism shouldn't we hire the best person for the job? I don't think my argument is distorted. It is different than yours my friend and that's the essence of a good debate.
My friend yo are on a treacheous path, now. Then same argument is extended towards bi-lingualism in New Brunswick. Should people start violence against women and Acadians. There is no justification for racism of these young kids and we will be wrong to offer justification for violent and pervert behaviour.
I do not think less qualified people are being hired. Anita Sharma is not my favourite anchorperson either but she sure is improvement on Terry Seguin. CBC generally can do better in general. It is best that some issues are left alone. Yo are opening another pandora's box. Tread carefully here.
Agree. We should leave this alone.
Exactly. You are 100% right. I am opening a Pandora's box. These are the issues you will not see debated in the media or even presented by a reporter because there's fear that someone is going to be offended as clearly a few writers have been here. My intent is not to offend but to engage in healthy debate. If everyone is to be treated equal why are some given special treatment? The same goes for a white person being given a free ride in a company because their father owns it. That is not fair either. If we as a society are to treat everyone equal, let's do just that.
As for CBC, that's a whole other debate. Their relevance is waning more each day. The fact that they have less than 6,000 viewers a night compared to more than 50,000 in their heyday a dozen years ago should tell you something. People aren't watching because it's irrelevant. CBC Radio still has some relevance most days but the left-wing bias is still prevalent.
By the way, I think you're missing the point of the debate. I want to be clear, there is no justification for violence, but you won't solve racism or violence unless you know the cause. To say leave it alone, solves nothing.
I wouldn't call the CBC a 'left wing bias', in fact they are treading heavier and heavier to the right. They may SEEM left because of the lunatic right wing that is the Irving media or National Post. The CBC at least covers things, you'd swear that in the province of Irving everything is just wonderful as long as you kowtow to Irving.
What better example of unfairness that this crop of Irvings who were essentially handed a billion dollar empire by daddy (who was handed a lot of it by the various governments). Life is often not fair, but at least efforts to balance the rampant racism that existed throughout history is an attempt.
I think the Sharma lady is as competent as any newsreader that I've come across, she rarely messes up words and is pretty dependable in her speaking. That she may have gotten that job because she's indian or a woman isn't really the point. She got the job over white males because demographics show that people want more women newsreaders. If you've got satellite TV take a look across the dial, all across the country female leads are taking over. Take a look at NB's past in journalism-a white boys club almost entirely. Most women can't even stand working here in the industry and leave ASAP. Terry Seguin is a complete lunatic if you've ever come across him.
There's no doubt though that it is unfair if you're a white male. I've been at the short end of the stick almost my entire life, my neighbour got good jobs handed to him by his dad while he finally got his way through computer school, but he still talks as if he 'made it on his own'. In the town where I grew up you had to have a certain last name or else had no chance of getting a job in the works department. No, it's not fair, but life ain't always easy. As I said, I'm not going to take it out on the chinese or women students who may have gotten the job ahead of me, I'm going to blame the federal government that has turned this beautiful part of the world into an economic backwater so that Ontario and Quebec can go full steam ahead.
Your assessment of CBC being on the right is correct. There are no left-wing revolutionaries there. You are also right about Terry Seguin.
I think Charles Leblanc's one inconsiderate statement has opened up a flood gate. What is he going to say next that black people are LUCKY, even if they suffer racism, that they are in Saint John and not in Africa as certain parts have famine there? One should think before making such ignorant statements.
We must all be careful and not make incosiderate statements.
But if the CBC is doing what people want, why is CBC's TV ratings collapsing to virtual oblivion in NB and across Canada? I think you're right, the news should refelect your community but 75% of CBC NB's TV team is visible minorities. That does not reflect the audience in NB and that's part of the reason they're failing. Take ATV. Good mix of women and minorities. Very reflective of the maritimes and they're number one by a long shot. They're in touch with their communities. CBC in it's crusade to be politically correct, IE " Calling fishermen fishers. (Even the women fishermen hate to hear fishers) has lost touch and is irrelevant to most Canadians.
Spinks is not only right winger but way in the left field. He is starting many new controversial topics. If the attempt is to screw Charles Leblanc and his site then he/she is succeeding.
So those employers who are hiring women are just trying to be political correct. Be real.
Thank God for the more I blog? The more this blog goes at the bottom of the list! My..this has been a touchy issue but lets try to keep it civil!!!! Merci!!!
Why can't we have a debate my friend. I'm not sure what I've wriiten that has you so upset. The point of Charles website is to bring issues forward the media and politicians are afraid to touch. These are questions we shouldn't be afraid to ask. Instead of just calling me names light right winger, why not present sound arguments in defense of your position. Unlike others on this site I respect that this is CHARLES website and if he wants to take my comments out because some folks here are ultra-sensitive, I completely respect that.
By the way, how does this screw Charles website. This thread has 73 posts, the most ever. Clearly controversy sells. I think we have a great forum to debate some ideas. Let's look at some solutions folks.
This kind of controversy does not sell. It just pisses people off and they do not want to be bothered with it anymore. Certain controversies simply cause repulsion. That repulsion is obvious in many comments and there is no need to put more oil on that fire.
People will decide simply not to visit the site.
Charles is right. It is tough to have a good debate. It's easy to talk about tolerance but if someone has a different view, the intolerance of that view is rampant. Your probably right asking questions instead of accepting things at face value doesn't sell. That's why the media and politicians don't get to the heart of problems by asking what the cause of something is. It's like going to the doctor. They can prescribe you something to make it feel better but if they don't know the cause the problem won't get fixed.
I agree that Charles was out of line with the way it was said,
it did almost border on racism itself. That wasn't the intent I'm sure and I hope this has made him think. Nobody who is attacked is ever 'lucky' that it was 'mellow'. Although I know chinese people who don't like people from Laos, that doesn't mean they antagonize them. That's like having a kidney fail and being lucky that there's dialysis.
As for CBC their ratings reflect what is going on in the world. ATV news is pure pablum, and after a hard days work who wants to see reports that show them complicit in their government or how their government is screwing people over etc. It's far better to endlessly talk about a fiddle contest in Scottsville or Tiger Woods, or how pretty Cape Breton is. CBC sells at the national level, not at the regional level because it has been gutted of funding. For the TV team I've only ever seen one person, so I can't comment on that. But that people watch a news channel because of who is reading it is pretty insulting to people's intelligence.
Charles Leblanc lost his credibility on that statement and he does not even know it. He stands by his stupidity. In his case there is a violation of rights only when he thinks his rights are violated. Otherwise everyone should consider themserlves lucky that they are here in New Brunswick. Will he get any more ignorant?
Yes it is insult to intelligence that people watch news based on who is reading it. Bigots are coming out of the woodworks.
I can't believe I missed the comment about CBC being right-wing. That is true if you're a communist. I'd love to see some examples of right-wing bias on CBC. Please provide them. In the interest of fairness let me give a recent example of left-wing bias on CBC. The day after same-sex marriage became virtually the law of the land, CBC Radio in Fredericton interviewed Allison Brewer, who is currently running for the leadership of the provincial NDP. She is a gay-rights activist, pro-abortion, anti-church feminist. She was an excellent choice for an interview about this issue as she is well spoken and brings that perspective to the debate. Here's the problem. She was the ONLY interview CBC had on. This despite the fact that half the country according to polls was against changing the definition of marriage. Balance is extremely important to news and CBC does not do an adequate job if it counters their liberal view.
Now how on earth my asking a few questions degenerated into me being against women, blacks and who knows what, I don't know. We'll never solve problems like racism without getting to the root of the problem. If yu're not interested in solving it, so be it.
On CBC's woeful viewership, maybe there are other factors leading to CBC's decline. The argument that they have been gutted locally doesn't wash. They have lost employees but still have more than the other networks combined. Again, they have lost their relevance to most Canadians and if they were shut down few people would notice because they aren't watching.
Anita Sharma is anchorwomen on CBC. She is an Indian and a woman therefore ratings of CBC have gone down. They give coverage of visible minorities on CBC that is why there is racism according to Mr. Spinks. People see visible minority on t.v and then rush out to throw eggs on Chinese students. Good one. Mr. Spinks, whatever, his real name may be, comes across a bigot. He need not say no more to reveal his self.
Again anonymous, you're not getting the point. hat are the causes of racism. Maybe the questions I'm raising aren't the causes, maybe they are. You have presented no arguments to back your position whatever that may be except to make derogatory remarks towards me. It feels like the House of Commons in here. Finger pointing and name calling. I rsepect you opinion. You do not respect mine despite trying to come across with an air of tolerance for all.
Your own statements are all the backup you need. Read through your arguments and may be you will find the answer. If not there is nothing in the world one do.
Anonymous. What about babies in the womb who are killed by abortion legalized by the government. 800 babies killed in Fredericton alone last year. What rights do they have? They don't have the same rights as everyone despite the Charter.
I pasted the abortion comment in here!!!
Let's leave the abortion argument out of it shall we. It is quite true and I agree that the CBC is a mouthpiece of the government, but that doesn't make it liberal, any more than when Mulroney was PM it was conservative. Nobody said that they were 'right wing', what I said was that they were not left wing but only seemed so because so much of the other media is SO right wing. I would call them 'centrist' (meaning they typically tow the 'central canada' line) It is true that they towed the 'seeming' government line about same sex marriage, but look at coverage all the way along and there was plenty of exposure given to the other side.
Keep in mind that it was the courts that ruled in favour of gay rights in marriage-NOT the government. The government merely recognized it and refused to challenge it. That doesn't make it 'left wing' coverage if all they are doing is accepting a supreme court ruling.
Like I said, I watch ATV news and CBC news and there is not a world of difference, except CBC seems to cover fewer 'softball' stories while ATV seems full of it. There is far more weather and sports coverage on ATV (time it sometime). However, CBC has been gutted in NB and there's hardly any reporters around so there is very little investigative journalism from ANYBODY.
Here's a thought, starting tonight let's watch the CBC news and the ATV news and do a study on the amount of time given each story, what it's about, who it effects, etc. Then we can stop with the bullplopping.
For the CBC I'd like to know the names of the other 'visible minority' people that are being referred to. I have no doubt that whoever hired Ms Sharma may well have just wanted to project New Brunswick as being more multicultural than it is (since satellite carries the news around the world) but I really haven't seen anything wrong with her performance. One thing of notice-has anybody EVER seen or heard a native american on ANY media in the maritimes? Besides APTN I mean.
Issue of abortion does not belong here. How racism relates to abortion. Let us buy Mr. Spink's argument that abortion is violation of rights. Then are natives causing that violation? Or are immigrants (Mr. Spink is an immigrant too, may be descendent from immigrants) causing that violation? I do not have a clue where Mr. Spink is coming from with his argument. I do not think he does either.
I checked the NB demographics and here's how they read: white 96.4%; aboriginal 2.3%; black .5%; .8% other.
So there is something to be said about representation. Clearly if we go 'by the book' we'd never see anybody but white folks, although there'd be a split between men and women and a quarter would be francophone. And of course we'd see aboriginal representation sooner than 'other'. That paints my problem with CBC right there. CERTAIN minority representation is quite welcome, while native representation, well, that's just crazy talk. Of course we know no native has ever known how to read the news.
The question is how far do we go for minority representation. Is it even right to have minority representation when there are so many white people.
First, though we need proof that they are not the best qualified. Who made the statement they weren't? Who were the other candidates?
I doubt we really know. It is a perfectly valid argument though, who's place is it to decide for others that they can't do a job because a minority or a woman or a francophone 'should' get it. The typical response is that the government should decide these things because 'the tyranny of the majority' will mean that the majority will forever keep the minorities down.
In fact, if you look at many places that is far from true. Typically it is ONLY when the government is controlling the issue. When people act on their own they usually work these things out. Before Burnt Church native groups and fishermen were working out their own program and then the government got involved and mucked everything up.
Thanks to Charles Leblanc. He made one ignorant statement and bigots are coming out of woodwork.
What CBC has to do with the punks in Saint John. Do you really think these young people watch CBC news? I do not know of any. Muchmusic may be but CBC?? So there is no connection between CBC and racism. Racist are ignorant indifferent to CBC. If someone watches CBC and then goes out and commits a crime that should make national news.
"Of course we know no native has ever known how to read the news." The anonymous says above. Will he get anymore racist? There are native business people, a judge in Woodstock, professors, an MLA. According to this ignorant person they do not know how to read newspaper?? I feel sorry for the writer as he suffers from a severe case of ignorance.
I feel sorry for the above poster because he seems to be completely unable to understand SARCASM. Of course natives can read the news every bit as well as everybody else, that's my point (hence the SARCASM). As I said, we SHOULD see natives represented on the news, especially the CBC news, before we see others, if representation was actually the issue.
As stated above, of course we see natives in every kind of profession so why don't we see them on the CBC or as journalists? Well, we DO see them as journalists, or more accurately as bloggers and website administrators because the media won't hire them. There are some excellent native websites out there. For the above poster who can't figure out SARCASM, this is RACISM, and very clear cut. I've worked in many different companies and anybody who would suggest to me that there are no racists in New Brunswick and this is a singular event in Saint John I'd call a liar. Racism is a learned behaviour and New Brunswick is full of racists. This is why we are keeping this dialogue going, unfortunately, the real racists probably stopped reading and went on to other things. Racism is a societal issue and minority representation is a valid part of that, which is why we are discussing it. We have gotten off track some, but there's only so much that can be said about Saint John.
Sorry about that. Your SARCASM was little too camouflaged. There are poeple who actually believe it and I know some of them. I need another cup of coffee.
I agree with your assessment.
Untrue. CBC does hire natives for reporters. Michael Dick in NB is aboriginal and a good young reporter. If you have satellite there are several out west particularly in Sask and NWT. Very representative of the population and most are quite good. The questions raised is do you hire people based on the colour of their skin or because of their skills. CBC is merely being used as an example. If you want to capture your audience, it should be reflective of your audience if you want to be relative. That doesn't mean don't have minorities or even that you need to start into percentages and have 98.4% white but you also shouldn't get so freaked out by political correctness that you start into reverse discrimination which is being conducted by governments now. What do I mean by reflective of your audience? Look at the U.S. Back in 2000 the show Frasier was the #1 show among whites, it was #154 among blacks. The Steve Harvey Show was #1 among blacks and #160 among whites (Nielsen ratings). I suspect Canada was somehwhat similar but ratings aren't done as exact here. That's business. I'm accused of being controversial but these are facts.
So how Anita Sharma is related to act of harrassment by young fellows in Saint John. You said those are some of the causes. Dah! Young people hardly watch news, not to speak of CBC.
Mr.Spinks who said you are controversial. You are plain irrational.
I've been called controversial on this very blog. The CBC and the Anita Sharma case are merely examples. I'll try to think of a better example of reverse discrimination in the future. CBC was used because they tend to blow things out of proportion. The first incident of Chinese students attacked seems to be at least somewhat racially motivated. The next with the ice cubes CBC jumped all over and even Chinese students couldn't agree it was racially motivated. How many other people were assaulted in Saint JOhn that night. Probably quite a few. The media needs to do a far better job of reporting and should be held to task when they screw up or tryo to make something out of nothing. Racism exists in Saint John and every other community in Canada. I'm throwing out some questions that reporters should be asking as well but they're too scared of offending people instead of doing factual reporting. Given the comments on this site towards myself and Charles for simply raising valid points of view, I can see why.
Mr. Spinks it is obvious that you are irrational. You say there too many minorities on CBC that is why people are angry. Then you say that because there are minorities on CBC therefore hardly anyone watches it. Go celebrate as no one watches it. Also if people do not watch it then how can they get upset when they do not even know what was said.
Then you say CBC has blown it out of proportion. Who cares if no one watches it?
Go take some sanity pills.
Typical liberalized view (I don't mean the party) Accept everything but is someone disagrees with you call them names and irrational. I think I heard Paul Martin do that several times in the past few months. Sir/Maam, you have your opinion and I have mine, why can't you simply respect that? My arguments are always rationalized. If you require clarification because you're not understanding it, I would be happy to do so. This site is probably one of the few places if not the only to discuss and debate issues in N.B. Why can't we do just that without name-calling?
No as for the CBC comments. I didn't say no one was watching it locally because of a heavy-minority content. I merely asked the question whether that could be a factor. Clearly the folks here don't think that's the problem. Then I tried to raise the point that they are creating the news rather than reporting it. Again disagreement. That's okay, but there's some reason Canadians are tuning out to the national broadcaster that we as taxpayers pay a billion dollars a year for. It is irrelevant to most Canadians and I am certain there are many factors. Perhaps the questions I've raised require a no answer and those aren't the problems. I'me merely asking questions that reporters shouldn't be afraid to ask if they are true journalists. No question should be out of bounds. That's what free speech protected in the Charter is all about. I'm enjoying the debate here, I just wish there was more true debate and less name calling.
Ok. Mr. Spinks you win. Your threw a knock out punch and you knocked yourself out. Now you should inform CBC reporters about it and may be they can make some sense out your arguments.
No reporters here to answer your questions any way.
Good idea but the bias is unfortunately so prevalent at CBC, even they think they are providing balance. And yes I recognize your dripping sarcasm, my friend. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.
The one bias I've noticed at CBC is the exact same bias that I've noticed at places like Rogers. And that is that they are controlled out of Ontario and send Ontario managers out east to manage their offices. This isn't just the case for communications industries, but is more obvious because they are so public.
Racism is clearly a HUGE issue for New Brunswick. In New Brunswick minorities are very minority and should be DOUBLY protected. This is a quote: "We're so scared to go out on the street," she said. "You gotta watch your back. It was eggs and firecrackers, and now it's a cup of ice, who knows what's going to be next." This is clearly not blown out of proportion, however, that is a good point that ANYBODY who is in similar circumstances should make this as public. If they were gay or french or native it would be newsworthy as well, but also if the person was just unpopular. However, if other groups are not going public, then that's their problem, the CBC doesn't have staff to hang around the police headquarters to see who comes in.
On the one hand CBC would like to make NB look more 'cosmopolitan'. Whether you like it or not in the world today multiculturalism means different colour for one thing. At most malls all you see sometimes are fat white people, should there be more fat white people doing the news? More with braces? More poor?
However, I'm still not convinced that Ms Sharma simply wasn't the most qualified person. No doubt whoever DIDN"T get the job might start saying she was favoured, but we have no way of knowing.
And I suppose I should have watched my language as I know many NB'ers as well who would be saying similar things as I was without the sarcasm, I'll try to be more careful. There are many natives working in journalism in other parts of the country, but I was referring to here.
Anita Sharma did not score the highest and we should believe that as you want us to believe the rest of your harangue.
You don't have to believe anything. That's from insiders at CBC. I assume they would know but maybe it's not true, much like ice thrown at Chinese students may not have been racially motivated. Maybe that was just idiots looking to throw something at anyone. Again, the first incident was very likely racially motivated. The CBC has played judge and jury on the second. I'm not sure about what other "harangue" you're referring to. You really haven't responded to my questions without sarcasm or insults so I can't really respond to that.
My GOD???? OVER 100 COMMENTS??? TAKE YOUR RITALIN GUYS!!! Sigh...That's good keep it in this blog here...I do have one comments on CBC!!! CBC radio did a good so so job covering my protest. CBC television never covered one second of the protest! A tent in front of the Legislature for six months and nothing! I cannot stand that Roy whathisname??? Even I time I hear his name I change the channel!
What was the comment on CBC? Spinks will be really disappointed. Why is he barking up the wrong tree? He should go after CBC the way you went after Irving and Lord government.
Naw. No point going after CBC. They're doing a good enough job themselves by not doing their job as the public broadcaster and the Canadian public is turning it off. We need another blog, media in N.B. or something likes that. "Take your Ritalin" Charles, you're a funny man. Roy Gjelstead is his name. For the record, he's a white male and he doesn't belong there either. They need to go out and buy some talent. For crying out loud they have enough of our money. Alll media or most of them get Charles updates via e-mail. Maybe a few CBC types are wandering by and are a little sensitive.
It all depends what you mean by talent. Take a look at the flashy news programs, they just look like out of work actors who are just reading a script.
For my money I'd prefer my money go into reporters. Remember when the CBC blew the lid off of McKenna's VLT crooked deal? We never see that anymore. I don't mind if the newscaster doesn't look and sound like a Toronto automaton, I'm more interested in the stories they cover.
Just as an aside on the CBC, they do have serious problems, but not nearly as serious (to my mind) as the private broadcasters who are far more biased. As for funding, I think more of our taxes should be going to specific things into of just into a pot where it can go who knows where. Great Britain has a special tax on televisions, much like we have on blank discs, which goes to the BBC for new programming. I haven't seen a decent show on CBC in I don't know how long.
Other privately owned outlets get their income solely from big business through commercials and advertising. If you think they are unbiased and have talent then think again. CBC remains the least biased as it has to bow less to private sector. When you watch news you are looking for news and not entertainment as most commercial outlets have become.
I think we almost agree on something. CBC, if it is to survive needs a massive shake-up. As for bias, it is sometimes in the eye of the beholder but often it is more blatant. Take last night's newscast about the native logging rights. No one from the forestry industry was on the CBC TV newscasts to comment. My first thought was maybe they weren't talking but flip to ATV and GLOBAL and there's Yvon Poitras speaking on the issue at a news conference that CBC attended. There was obviously a conscious effot by CBC to leave that side of the issue out. That is bias and unbalanced reporting. It's the equivalent of doing the story and not asking natives for theor reaction. Shoddy journalism and we deserve better since we're paying the bills.
I somewhat agree, but not really. After all, the courts were deciding on native logging rights, not on it's impact on the forestry industry. You would have to reference past articles about the forestry industry in general that only talked to natives-and I have a feeling that there were none.
In fact, if I were (more) native I'd be quite upset that air time was given to the industry, when native rights don't concern them. They concern their pocket book, but when we talk about rights in canada we don't give airtime to americans simply because it may affect their pocketbooks. If anything, that would be the right wing bias I refer to that thinks everything is the business of large corporations (and their government spokespeople). If you want to see a network or editor's bias, always watch to see who gets the last word. A report on government funding tuition had a government line, then a short critical line, then the last word was the government rebuttal which was so illogical you could run a truck through it. THERES your bias.
The argument can be made that the government wasn't given a voice, but remember, this was a FEDERAl court ruling, not a provincial one.
However, I don't know about the 'shakeup' at CBC, while I don't agree with many of their decisions it would depend on what kinds of changes are to be implemented. I would personally rather see major shakeups at Global and CTV, but we aren't likely to see that. I think the CBC should be more of an 'indymedia' type place, where canadians can actually contribute. Their radio programs are popular, but very one sided, I know from experience that CBC won't air anything from independant journalists. Private broadcasters sometimes will, but usually only when it fits their Asper like aspirations, leaving a huge chunk of canadians out in the cold.
Sorry, that wasn't a federal court, although the bulk of the argument still stands. The report was about native rights, not about the logging industry.
Genrally anys ide is upset when the other side gets airtime. I don't imagine the forestry industry was happy with the heavy native airtime anymore than natives would be happy with heavy forestry content. The point of journalism is to show all sides and let the viewer make their mind up based on the facts. Forestry did have an interest and was left out by CBC for reasons only they know. Government was given a voice at least provincially by Brad Green. Personally I would have rather seen some more analysis from the native community on what this means. Is it fewer jobs, less dollars for First Nations? I don't know. The only questions the journalists asked was "Are you happy?" The answer was obvious.
I didn't see the report so I can't comment except in general. As I said, native rights have nothing to do with the forestry industry.
I would argue that this is the right wing bias at work, namely, that the above poster thinks that to be fair and biased the 'two sides' that should be represented on a native rights issue are natives and industry. Natives trying to earn a living to me is a HUMAN RIGHTS issue, which means industry has no part in it. When we argue about gay marriage we don't ask industry how it's going to affect their bottom line.
The 'two sides' represented here quite clearly are the lawyers on the two sides, the government lawyer on the one hand, and natives on the other. If the story is about native rights, I would argue that the government's 'side' need not even be given as it's been quite clear for some time. When apartheid was alive and well in South Africa we asked for Nelson Mandela's view, but didn't grant much credence to the government's side since it was quite clear.
However, I would agree that there is 'bad' journalism, such as is evidenced by questions like "Are you happy?"
"All land and resources belong to natives. Rest are squatters and must pay rent to real owners."
Well, according to the courts you're just plain wrong on this one but clearly aborginals view this differently. As for the forestry industry not having a say. It might be a natives rights or lack-of-rights issues but clearly the forestry industry has a vested interest and that's where balance comes in. If as the above poster mentioned that the native agenda is to either kick whitey out or make him pay some type of unknown fee, then everyone has a vested interest. Arguably First Nations are paid in some cases exorbiant funds by Canadians. Think of the Nova Scotia Chief paid $400,000 a year or the kindergarten teacher in Elsipogtog $100,000 tac free. This was money provided by the government. Clearly it isn't enough according to the above poster but it is an interesting debate. How much is enough my friend and I would encourage you to be realistic.
Rent is owed from few centuries and may run into trillions of dollars. Add punitive damages to it. The ancestral land and its beauty has been destroyed also.
Again, that's the right wing bias; of course 'industry' has a 'vested interest'. Industry has a 'vested interest'in everything, but that doesn't mean that it's right, and it doesn't mean that we need to grant it that.
That's showing your bias if you actually believe that, which means that its doubtful the CBC will live up to your expectations since it is a PUBLIC broadcaster. Fortunately for you the PRIVATE broadcasters (owned by industry) agree with you and believe that no matter what the issue, industry always has a 'vested interest' which must be part of 'balanced' reporting. If CBC agreed with you then they'd show the same bias, which you interpret as 'balance' and means that those, like me, who fundamentally disagree with you would have NO media representation.
As I said, if the issue were logging then it would be different, but as the judge clearly stated the treaty isn't about logging-it is about 'trading'.
Industry has a vested interest in logging, of course. Now, a quick question, count the number of articles where native rights claims were part of 'balanced' coverage of any report you saw on logging. You may PERHAPS see a line or criticism from an environmentalist, but certainly never the last word. So why isn't the native view part of 'balanced' forestry coverage?
How often have you ever even seen mention of native forestry outside of stories about them running to the woods and cutting down all OUR trees?(sarcasm) There's your industry 'balance' for you. In fact if you can find five articles on native forestry from the past five years in an Irving paper or private broadcaster I'll give you ten bucks!
However, this isn't surprising in a province where the written media, which most are familiar with, is owned by a company whose idea of 'balanced' is quite well known. They don't say it, but in NB you might as well say it, that not only do we mean that 'industry' has a vested interest in everything, but IRVING has a vested interest in everything and their point of view must be consulted. When you actually put a name to it, it sounds far different, in a report on native rights we have to give voice to Irving in order to have 'balanced' reporting.
As for the other junk, we see that natives can't even get rights to log the forests, it's pointless to talk about reparations for past injustices as if WE can do anything about it.
I agree with above comments. I have no idea where Spinks is coming from and where is he headed. His comments are long-winded baloney. As far as raparations are concerned some one is just pulling Spink's leg to see how far he will extend his convoluted argument.
I want to address the Native pay scale since this is a common pre-judgement of many canadians. First, although such anamolies may exist, they pale in scale to what a senior bureaucrat in Indian Affairs is paid, and they don't represent anyone.
I would have to see the source and contexts before I believe such tales, as there are dozens of 'urban legends' about native life that routinely run through white canada, most coming from "a buddy of mine who knows a guy..."
However, in fact, if Indian Affairs were done away with and the money put into the pockets of natives themselves, they would be among the highest income canadians. Far from it. A good percentage (higher than ours) live in abject poverty. Ironic that we live in a country where media and singers will hold a concert to 'forgive africa's debt' so they don't starve, while sitting on our own little South Africa.
However, there is one thing thats missing from this, and that's context. For one thing, it takes a LOT of money to get an individual to go against a large population of their community. Part of the reason natives want self government is because historically natives were far more democratic and 'the guy at top' had far less power. Canada forced its hierarchical system, but the majority of natives do not support it. Many bands have set up democratic 'leaders' parralleling those hand picked by Indian Affairs.
So in a outright racist system like Indian Affairs this isn't so unusual. There is TONS of money in Indian Affairs, just as there is TONS of money in the employment insurance program-that doesn't mean it gets to the people who need it.
I am not surprised that such pay scales may exist, after all, canadians by and large sympathize with natives, yet often just don't know what to do about the issue (listening to the natives isn't an option). So think about it this way, if you are working at a well paid bureaucratic job, which would be gone if natives had self government, what image of natives would you want to project? Well, if I were a nasty strategist I would make sure SOME natives are very well paid, just so that a good percentage of canadians will continue on with the belief that "they are just like us".
Andy Scott is going to be unhappy with your comments.
Indian Affairs is a farce. It is just to keep some employed and show the world how well native population is looked after.
Before we criticize China we must check our own backyard. We are a racist society and New Brunswick more so.
I could find five native forestry stories IF I count the court cases, but not counting that you're right I won't find it. Why not? Because there really isn't native forestry with one of the few exceptions being in Eel Ground which has a forestry model. Why? I'm not sure. Natives can own businesses like anyone else and apply for licenses to crown land. Why is there not sawmills on First Nations? Why is there not a bank, a grocery store, etc. in Elsipogtog. The population is there to support it. Why is unemployment on reserves hovering around 80% despite the fact that every native has access to post secondary education free of charge and can be whatever they want. I don't know. I imagine there's many socio-economic reasons which are no doubt complex. At some point though everyone has to move on and help themselves the best they can. Government should be there to help but everyone is responsible for themselves. As for trillions of dollars, I think we both know that is never going to fly so how about something which isn't a pie in the sky solution. As far as bias at CBC, and again the forestry was just another example (I'll look for a fresh one in the next few days), I don't think I've seen a native rights story shown anywhere without a native perspective, as it should be. A forestry story should have representation from the forestry industry. That's not right-wing bias. That's fair and balanced coverage.
Answer to your many why's is another question. Is it possible that centuries of abuse of natives and genocide they have lost trust in any of whitman's institutions including education system? North America has seen one of the worst human rights violations including slavery. And despite many centuries have gone by, world has move forward, yet in places like New Brunswick the racism is still alive and well. Where a Premier of the province makes racist remarks in the legislature what more can you expect? According to recent report by Stat Can New Brunswick has taken the biggest jump in crime. It looks racism is one of them. We have more brainless people (racists) per capita in New Brunswick than anywhere else in Canada.
Hmmmm. Good point on the whys. As far as racism, I agree it exists today as it did yesterday and likely will tomorrow. Society should continue to fight it. One observation though. I've been to many First Nations in this province to visit friends. (Yes I can hear the shock, Spinks has native friends?!?) Most of the First Nations are some of the most racist places you can visit unless you're a native. I know there's suspicion, hard feelings and everything else but if there is no justification for racism as I've heard here, there should be no tolerance on First Nations either but it is more rampant there than even Saint John.
Can you give examples of racism you encountered at First Nation's reserve? There is a difference between racism and suspicion.
Be careful when you say 'I have native friends'. It is a joke about racists that 'I have black friends but.............'
You were told that without provocation. Very unusual. Never heard of that before.
Now tell me that if I come into your house univited, take over your house, kick you out and never let you back in. That is what has been done to natives.
You were told that without provocation. Very unusual. Never heard of that before.
Now tell me how would you feel if I come into your house univited, take over your house, kick you out and never let you back in. That is what has been done to natives.
I'm not sure what's difficult to believe. The same thing happened to the Chinese students. Thus the problem. Racism is fine if it's against whites. Male-bashing is considered funny and Christianity is fair game. The old double-standard. My friend, I really doubt you truly want or think every non-aboriginal in North America should go back to wherever they came from which is...well...for most, North America.
If you have native friends I suggest you try listening and perhaps you won't have so many questions. There are hundreds of websites and native organizations who will provide you with no end of information. Why no sawmill? Because the court just ruled that they do not have the right to log commercially and with only 5% of the NB cut they haven't that kind of investment. It takes money to make money as they say.
Reserves are the last refuge for natives, they've been kicked out of everywhere else, so why are you surprised that you're not welcome there? You think you're their prodigal son or something? Keep in mind natives are far more communal when it comes to land, which means that it would be like a native walking unannounced into your kitchen, and I have no doubt you'd react similarly or else just call the cops.
Again, do I have to drill this in your head, the judge stated that this was NOT about logging, it was about TRADING. TRADING. TRADING. Got that? It just happened to be trading in forest products. Why should we be asking Irving what they think of native trading rights? YOU think that's fair and balanced, we've established that, but you have to understand that that is NOT fact just because it's your opinion.
As for forestry, natives have, and have been utilizing 5% of the allowable cut on crown land. Where are they doing this? Who are the loggers? Where do they sell? And what are the problems they've encountered? YOU don't know (I don't either) because your 'fair and balanced' media coverage doesn't cover it. If it did, you wouldn't have all those questions about natives. That's why I say the CBC is far from being 'left', because they don't cover such stories either. They may give a different perspective when a 'news item' comes along, complete with retarded questions, but they don't INFORM us of these things as they are happening.
We essentially live in a South Africa, and don't even know the basics about the people we've stolen the land from. I've started to find out now that I've discovered just how many of my ancestors were native, but I"m pretty white and not exactly hurting so I'm not expecting natives to claim ME as a prodigal son either.
If you think that male bashing and christianity jokes are oppressive, then you should consider yourself lucky, and perhaps read some native literature to find out what REAL oppression tastes like. Ask a native what it's like when they get pulled over by a cop, or get watched as their shopping just because of what they look like. There are far more cruelties, those are just for the law abiding ones, but there are too many to get into here. I urge anybody reading this to get searching on the internet. Believe me, natives are the only ones who can save our environment. They're already talking about selling off crown land and turning the rest into tree farms-and these are the people you think deserve airtime to be 'fair and balanced'?
As for double standards get real. Haven't you ever seen the "Happy Buddha" ads for the St. John restaurant? If I opened a "Smiling Christ Bar and Grill" it would be burned to the ground within a week.
For information cut and paste these addresses into your browser:
A real audio interview from the Elements website with native lawyer
http://www.elements.nb.ca/multim/millie/millie.htm
http://www.fundymodelforest.net
has representatives from native bands but unfortunately too much clout goes to Irving
http://www.nafaforestry.org
is national aboriginal forestry association, you can scroll down and on the left is a report for the various provinces, including NB
http://www.fnfp.gc.ca
is the federal training program, as if native culture needs training in OUR way of forestry (cut it all and let god sort it out).
You will note that bands taking part in this program are Eel River Bar, Papineau, Elsipogtog, Eel ground, madawaska Maliseet, Saint Mary's, and Kingsclear (out of a total of 15 bands).
This is from ten minutes of research, there is far more out there. Of special interest was the quote that "reserve forests are too small to be economically sustainable", and another which bemoaned the fact that to join the programs and be licensed natives must work according to Provincial rules, which means that many bands are complaining that these don't distribute wealth evenly, they want BAND access-which isn't allowed, not INDIVIDUAL access which enriches some natives over others.
In other words the disparity between those with money and those without becomes greater. Gee, now where have I seen an economic model like that...
Read the report at the nafaforestry.org site, there is better coverage on the logging industry in New Brunswick than I've seen from the mainstream media.
Spinks is looking to justify treatment of Chinese student by young hoods. Now he thinks Natives discriminate against him therefore what is the difference. Natives are very respectful people as far as I know.
His assertions of discrimination are not credible.
What Spinks is going to say next? He went to a Chinese restaurant and he did not get as good and a food & service as Chinese customers therefore he was discriminated.
I like the example of Happy Buddha Restaurant. If you open "Smiling Christ Bar and Grill" it not only be burned down but also you will face crucifixion.
I am very pleased to hear natives are above racism. You may want to talk to seom of the non-aboriginals who have married natives and live on reserves. They would likely give you a far different story.
I'll say it one more time as I have said numerous times. There is no justification for what took place against the Chinese students, period. If you wish to continue to twist my words to fit your ideal that anyone who disagrees with you or asks a question is a racist bigot, that is your opinion and unlike you I respect your opinion.
I'm still not sure what you want to have except trillions of dollars in back-rent or everyone to leave. If you're waiting for that, you're going to live a very disappointed life. I'm still waiting to hear some realistic ideas brought up here. It's unfortunate that instead you have chosen to simply slam others who raise a question.
"What Spinks is going to say next? He went to a Chinese restaurant and he did not get as good and a food & service as Chinese customers therefore he was discriminated."
By the way thanks for making my point with this line. What you seem to be saying is racism against whites is a myth and feel free to do what you wish against them. They should take it because a few of them have done it to others.
You are a rambler. You are making up stories to make your point. You do not have slightest clue how racism feels because you have been on the giving end. That is not all, you continue to belittle what Chinese students went through. You are the one who is upset because Anita Sharama reads news on CBC. There you claim to have innner knowledge of CBC hiring practices. CBC also has record of discrimination. There was a big case of black man discriminated against. When he asked for promotion he was fired.
You are saying that natives are my friends but they are abnoxious, lazy and do not know how to look after their own affairs. A typical racist says I have black friends but...... More statements you make more of your biases spill out.
Obnoxious, lazy? Your words not mine, my friend. You can make a difference in your own life though. Release your anger and hate. If it's at me, that's okay, I can take it. You'll live a lot happier and longer.
You may not have used those exact words but when you say that they told you 'get the f** out of here or ..' when you say you visited them. That means they are abnoxious according to you. You must have provoked someone to get that kind of reaction. Lazy, because you said how come they do not get eduction and how come there is not this thing or that thing on the reserve. Your implication that they are lazy and they do not want to do it. Now do not try to play innocent. Read your own comments.
Not at all. Although you do raise a good point. If something is yelled at you unprovoked, that is obnoxious. Just because someone doesn't get an education doesn't make them lazy. There are often many factors. However at some point no one can blame everyone else for your problems and need to take some responsibility if you want to make a difference in your own life. I'm not sure why you think it's okay for natives to be racists and that it is inconceivable anyone among the entire aboriginal population would do anything wrong or hurtful but that's probably a disagreement we'll never solve. If you and your collegues truly believe that aboriginals are owed trillions of dollars, go do something about it. Again, you'll find a lot more peace in actions than just bottling up your feelings and becoming more bitter.
Exactly you said it. If you are unhappy with CBC then go do something. Why are you bottling up, hurting yoursef, and posting pages after pages here. Contact CBC and go from there. Contact federal govt and tell them to stop funding CBC. Come on now!! Do something.
A FEW of us have done it to others? It case you haven't noticed you live in a democracy, you are free to take your government to task on any issue. You can protest, you can do like Charles and start blogs, you can join native solidarity organizations and church groups. You can join a party and lobby for them to make native rights an issue (try the NDP). Have you? I doubt it, ask any people involved in the above and they will tell you it's only a small minority of canadians who do and since you admitted to knowing nothing about native issues then I'm assuming that if you can't be bothered to read a book on it, you haven't exactly been an activist for them.
Nobody said that 'it's fine', and nobody said that all natives are humble, white ass kissing sycophants. Many are angry or sad,frustrated, and most of those things are a result of OUR government.
It's a question of perspective, do you really want us to equate the systematic attempted genocide of a race with you being told to f*&^ off by a native while at a reservation? Seriously? Should we call amnesty international for you? Or get Nelson Mandela's email so you can commiserate with a fellow 'victim'. Perhaps a candlelight vigil for your trauma.
It's interesting how 'natives' can be generalized as a group, yet when WE suffer an incident it is a personal attack against us and the separation is made between 'us' and the people who run government. In other words, you separate yourself from government when it's convenient. You are as responsible for your government's actions as I or anybody else. While we don't make the decisions, we certainly aren't defending native rights, if anything we assume that 'the government is doing all it can' for them,which is completely false.
"..do you really want us to equate the systematic attempted genocide of a race with you being told to f*&^ off by a native while at a reservation? Seriously? Should we call amnesty international for you? Or get Nelson Mandela's email so you can commiserate with a fellow 'victim'. Perhaps a candlelight vigil for your trauma."
Well said. Poor Spinks. He is such a victim. They should also make a Hollywood movie on his plight.
Huh, I'll admit confusion at the post two up which I'm not sure if it was aimed at me or my I believe native friend.
If it's for me, I'm not about to take the candle up for natives getting trillions of dollars because I think it's a ludicrous proposal with little chance of actually flying. But if you believe in it you should do something about it instead of just arguing with me.
On CBC, I do practice what I preach. I have written to CBC, CRTC, etc. CRTC is the only ones which have responded. I'm not surprised, as mentioned CBC doesn't realize they have a problem even if their own ratings numbers prove it. As for the trillions, I would gladly support the billion dollars a year CBC gets going to First Nations to assist the deplorable poverty and unemployment issues.
Then keep after CRTC. Writting pages afer pages here are going to do you no good. Save the country from this unnecessary expense.
I'm glad to see we finally agree on something, that CBC is an unnecessary expense. I encourage you to do the same.
Fortunately few people agree that the CBC is an unnecessary expense, polls consistently show that canadians would rather see it as is than have it shut down. In fact, the previous argument is pretty much an argument in favour of it, since you have the luxury of lobbying it and having an impact on it, whereas if you called or wrote to an Irving or Asper media conglomerate you'd be laughed out of the building.
No. We do not agree at all. You think it is such a waste of money. I do not think that at all. CBC is the best source of news, including BBC news they forcast, better than anyother news network.
You think it is a waste of money and I suggested go and try and save that money and be 'saviour'. Good luck.
Irving and Asper should laugh me out of the building. I'm not paying and they can do whatever they wish. If they mess up too badly, people won't watch or but their papers and their out of business. Not so with CBC. Polls are interesting depending on the question and who's responding. In broadcasting, the ultimate poll is still ratings and CBC for the most part is lagging far behind because they are not providing the service Canadians obviously want.
I do want to comment on the perceived bashing of CBC's NB host. I don't think she shouldn't have got the job because of her race. I think she shouldn't have go the job because she wasn't the best qualified. I stand by my earlier statement that one of if not the best anchors in this country is Ian Hanomansing, regardless of colour. People shouldn't be looked at by the colour of their skin as is constantly suggested here.
Anita Sharma is the best host amongst local news hosts. CBC is the best for getting the right kind of news and not commercialized news. If you are unhappy too bad.
Irving's don't have that problem, since they own all the papers in the province, if you want provincial coverage they are the only 'paper of record'. That was facetiousness that you didn't pick up, obviously you are quite happy with your right wing coverage so there's no doubt you have no reason to complain to them; that at the CBC you have that luxury doesn't seem to mean much to you-it's unfortunate then that you have that right since it's so unappreciated.
It's interesting that you hold polls to be suspicious and yet hold ratings to be sacrosanct. Do you even know how ratings are calculated? You think every television is wired up so that they can see what you and everybody else is tuned to?
However, polls aren't gospel either, do some research. The CBC doesn't have money for polls, most are done by Decima, Ipsos-Reid or CTV, all are highly antagonistic to the CBC since they are their competition or are run by those who are no fans of government, yet they can't argue with the results. As I said, I have huge problems with the CBC, the idea of paying for a classical music radio station is absurdity, however, the option of not having them at all doesn't appeal to me at all.
I think your point has been rammed home about job selection and there's no point in debating it until you come up with your sources that she was actually hired over other more qualified people. If you'd like to start keeping a tab that would be at least objective. Count the number of times she messes up lines, or otherwise does something unprofessional. Without that or a source we really have no reason to believe that she was hired for anything but her abilities until you can prove otherwise.
While we can give you credit for your magnanomousness about Ian Hanimansing, it is interesting that if you aren't watching the television you wouldn't even know whether the guy were as white as Peter Mansbridge or not.
I think we can let this go now, when you come up with your source on her hiring post it and we can further the debate,but otherwise it seems to be a matter for opinion. I doubt anybody other than three people are reading this anymore, but on the off chance I encourage you again to check out those links posted above on native forestry. If you want to do a part against racism, at least have the decency to learn a little about the race being more oppressed than with ice. This isn't smugness, I'm learning as I go along as well. Ta
Anita Sharma is the best host locally.
CBC is the best source of news in Canada
Chinese people are intelligent and one of the nicest people in the world.
Those young hoods who bothered Chinese students should be punished. They are giving bad name to Saint John and New Brunswick.
Natives are one of the nicest and spiritual people.
Mr. Spinks you are comming accross as a borish and racist person.
I agree many native people are very nice. Many black people are nice. Many white people are nice. Lots of people are nice. Lots aren't. My point all the way along is that society shouldn't be categorizing people by the colour of their skin. I'm a racist for trying to think everyone should be treated equal?!? I'm being called a racist simply for asking questions which the answer everytime is that I'm a racist.
I am however encouraged to see you're interested in my opinion as well or you wouldn't keep the dialogue going. There's hope for this country yet.
Interested to the extent of pointing out your misguided views.
Native people at least have a good excuse for not being nice. Usually they are, it depends what natives, which is a credit to them. New Brunswickers have incredible political power yet have been trained not to use it. NB'ers have the lowest standard of living in canada yet there is only ten percent support for the NDP. People gravitate between being screwed by conservatives and being screwed by liberals. They don't see the Irvings and others behind them pulling the strings.
Just so I'm clear, what you're saying is that it's okay for natives to be racists but not anybody else? ...and I'm misguided?!? There's an old saying, don't worry about the splinter in your brother's eye when you have a 2x4 sticking out of your own.
With the comment on the NDP we have a new topic. There's only 10% support for the NDP for a number of reasons. Their candidates with the odd exception are weak, even to the point of having to rely on parachuting candidates into ridings just to ensure their on the ballot. Their platforms clearly don't resonate with Canadians or they would have more support. Their track record when in power stinks. Think the leadership in B.C., Mike Harcourt and Glen Clark. In Ontario, Bob Rae's government left the province $10 billion dollars in debt because of the NDP's policy for more government control and to spend your way out of problems even if it effectively ties the hands of generations to come. Don't get me wrong, I think the NDP provides excellent opposition and it's because of it's predecessor the CCF that we have medicare which is envied around the world but there's often a question when people look at government, could we do worse? The answer is yes...we could have the NDP. Given their current positions on issues, we're more likely to get a federal Conservative government first and I don't see that happening either.
Now finally you gave your secret, Mr. Sprint. You have 2x4 sticking out of your eyes and that is why you cannot see things in the right perspective. That must hurt. Please do get help. I hope Bernard Lord has left some health facilities in your area.
There is SYSTEMIC racism, which is racism held by a society against another, which keeps them oppressed and denies them human rights. This is the history of the british colonies, and is FAR worse than the individual acts of racism where somebody lashes out an another. That latter is unfortunate, but there are all kinds of people in the world. Iraqi's right now are not 'racist' in wanting americans out, and palestinians are not 'racist' for protecting themselves against Israeli agression. Natives are oppressed by US, so we shouldn't be surprised that they don't particularly like us. Credit should be given them that they try to live their life with as little contact with us as possible. They could be far more violent like the palestinians or iraqis. By changing the focus to the perception of their racism, which is essentially the "why aren't they nice to all us white people who oppress them" kind of racism I can see no better example of the plank in the eye symptom referred to. Natives aren't racist, they simply want their land and resources and freedom, just like the Tibetans aren't racist against Chinese, they simply want their freedom. If we were all chinese owning the land they'd act the same way towards us. As far as your example, somebody cursing at you isn't necessarily racism at all-maybe you're just a jerk.
I personally have never voted NDP, mostly because I know its a waste of time-they can't take the riding. Parachuting candidates isn't a new thing and it says a lot about New Brunswickers that they can't find candidates in every riding.
There are many reasons of course, but at least if we get proportional representation the NDP would get 10% of the seats, unlike now- which is why me, and probably many others dont' vote for them, and why a lot of people don't vote at all.
Some comments though, the NDP has been around since the thirties, the CCF was not its predecessor. That the NDP is head of the government in both prairie provinces, almost head in Nova Scotia and has held power is so many other places is exactly the point. In New Brunswick they have never even been close. You make the argument that somehow it is enough for New Brunswickers to live vicariously through the government of other provinces. As for 'weak' candidates that makes no sense, most people know nothing about their candidates, they vote for parties. Candidates in our political system have no power anyway, they almost always vote along party lines which come from the PM or Premier's office or cabinet.
That people don't share the NDP's way of thinking is blatantly untrue, their main focus' has always been shared by canadians in virtually every poll. Health and education are practically the only things referred to now during elections, this is because of the NDP.
Right next door in Nova Scotia the NDP have huge support, but not in NB. No doubt a big part of that is NB's Loyalist background, but wait, Britain has a Labour government, so it's not that. Could it be that the only media and the biggest company in the province is so virulently anti union? Hmmmm
New Brunswickers, of course, know nothing about British Columbia or Ontario, so we can't use that. In Ontario you can debate figures, but debt as a percentage of GNP under Rae was the lowest it has ever been. In case you didn't know, if you have tons of money, making payments on debt isn't a huge concern, sort of like earning 80 grand a year and paying 12 in a mortgage.
That's nothing compared to now where Harris virtually annihilated civil society by gutting every provincial ministry, which resulted in many deaths in case you hadn't heard, and passed all social costs to municipalities in order to 'pretend' that there is no debt. Now virtually every city is bankrupt, including Toronto, with property taxes going sky high. The new Liberal government immediately broke two promises, the first that it raised taxes (called it a 'health premium') and refused the legislated necessity of having a referendum on whether to raise taxes.
Many claim the NDP are in the hands of the unions, and there's some validity to that, but I'd take a union to being in a billionaire's pocket anyday. Virtually every society which has a strong labour movement shows a corresponding standard of living. The prairie provinces are the ONLY provinces in Canada where the spread between richest and poorest has not been growing, PEI is a close third place, which perhaps explains why islanders don't need to resort to the NDP. New Brunswick is down near the bottom of the list, but how often do you see this in the media?
Unions, in the end, represent workers, so that's not surprising. The prairie provinces have always had strong labour movements which usually keep the NDP in power. They have problems as well, but their public auto insurance has auto insurance at ten times lower than in New Brunswick. What's also rarely said is that maritimers can literally thank the prairies for medicare.
As for the being in the pocket of unions, the new liberal government in Ontario caved in to the teachers and doctors as well as automotive workers. The latter is done with help from the feds, so Toyota is opening a new plant because the government gives them hundreds of millions of dollars. As for the others, the starting salary for a principal is now $90,000.
Teachers and principals now make tons of money, but that doesn't mean more is spent on education. I have relatives in Sudbury who teach, one talks about their building which is forty years old with no air conditioning and twenty year old windows, while just above it new floors of state of the art building materials have administrators working in luxury.
This is caving in to unions far more than in the NDP's wettest, wildest dreams. After all, unions don't give a sh*& about classrooms, they want their workers well paid.
We know that fewer New Brunswickers favour the NDP, find umpteen reasons not to support them, but the question still is, why? Their policies are pretty much identical across the country. It's ironic that those who would most benefit from unions are often the most opposed. The NDP also has a higher priority for the environment, which canadians always CLAIM is very important, but in New Brunswick I'm thinking less so thanks to you-know-who.
When so many people need a living from the environment, you tend to get a lot less romantic about it.
It could be that Elizabeth Weir just 'rubbed people the wrong way', or maybe that NB is full of bigots that don't want a woman leader. However, we can go back further and note that they have NEVER been big here. Coincidentally the rise of the NDP was pretty much parrallel to the rise of Irving, which perhaps cancelled it out. Robichaud had some NDP tendencies, at least he pretended that people were more important than investors, and Irving was no fan of his. Say what you want, in a province with the lowest standard of living in the US and Canada (except mississipi) and the fewest proportion of people making over 100 grand-which would be good if the spread between richest and poorest weren't also growing- the NDP certainly can't do any worse.
I hate to disagree with Charles, but NB simply seemed to be a province where McKenna could show how well he kisses investors asses to get him new friends in the states.
Sorry if this is a repost, this post doesn't show up in the original page, but does on the comment page so I'll try it again.
There is SYSTEMIC racism, which is racism held by a society against another, which keeps them oppressed and denies them human rights. This is the history of the british colonies, and is FAR worse than the individual acts of racism where somebody lashes out an another. That latter is unfortunate, but there are all kinds of people in the world. Iraqi's right now are not 'racist' in wanting americans out, and palestinians are not 'racist' for protecting themselves against Israeli agression. Natives are oppressed by US, so we shouldn't be surprised that they don't particularly like us. Credit should be given them that they try to live their life with as little contact with us as possible. They could be far more violent like the palestinians or iraqis. By changing the focus to the perception of their racism, which is essentially the "why aren't they nice to all us white people who oppress them" kind of racism I can see no better example of the plank in the eye symptom referred to. Natives aren't racist, they simply want their land and resources and freedom, just like the Tibetans aren't racist against Chinese, they simply want their freedom. If we were all chinese owning the land they'd act the same way towards us. As far as your example, somebody cursing at you isn't necessarily racism at all-maybe you're just a jerk.
I personally have never voted NDP, mostly because I know its a waste of time-they can't take the riding. Parachuting candidates isn't a new thing and it says a lot about New Brunswickers that they can't find candidates in every riding.
There are many reasons of course, but at least if we get proportional representation the NDP would get 10% of the seats, unlike now- which is why me, and probably many others dont' vote for them, and why a lot of people don't vote at all.
Some comments though, the NDP has been around since the thirties, the CCF was not its predecessor. That the NDP is head of the government in both prairie provinces, almost head in Nova Scotia and has held power is so many other places is exactly the point. In New Brunswick they have never even been close. You make the argument that somehow it is enough for New Brunswickers to live vicariously through the government of other provinces. As for 'weak' candidates that makes no sense, most people know nothing about their candidates, they vote for parties. Candidates in our political system have no power anyway, they almost always vote along party lines which come from the PM or Premier's office or cabinet.
That people don't share the NDP's way of thinking is blatantly untrue, their main focus' has always been shared by canadians in virtually every poll. Health and education are practically the only things referred to now during elections, this is because of the NDP.
Right next door in Nova Scotia the NDP have huge support, but not in NB. No doubt a big part of that is NB's Loyalist background, but wait, Britain has a Labour government, so it's not that. Could it be that the only media and the biggest company in the province is so virulently anti union? Hmmmm
New Brunswickers, of course, know nothing about British Columbia or Ontario, so we can't use that. In Ontario you can debate figures, but debt as a percentage of GNP under Rae was the lowest it has ever been. In case you didn't know, if you have tons of money, making payments on debt isn't a huge concern, sort of like earning 80 grand a year and paying 12 in a mortgage.
That's nothing compared to now where Harris virtually annihilated civil society by gutting every provincial ministry, which resulted in many deaths in case you hadn't heard, and passed all social costs to municipalities in order to 'pretend' that there is no debt. Now virtually every city is bankrupt, including Toronto, with property taxes going sky high. The new Liberal government immediately broke two promises, the first that it raised taxes (called it a 'health premium') and refused the legislated necessity of having a referendum on whether to raise taxes.
Many claim the NDP are in the hands of the unions, and there's some validity to that, but I'd take a union to being in a billionaire's pocket anyday. Virtually every society which has a strong labour movement shows a corresponding standard of living. The prairie provinces are the ONLY provinces in Canada where the spread between richest and poorest has not been growing, PEI is a close third place, which perhaps explains why islanders don't need to resort to the NDP. New Brunswick is down near the bottom of the list, but how often do you see this in the media?
Unions, in the end, represent workers, so that's not surprising. The prairie provinces have always had strong labour movements which usually keep the NDP in power. They have problems as well, but their public auto insurance has auto insurance at ten times lower than in New Brunswick. What's also rarely said is that maritimers can literally thank the prairies for medicare.
As for the being in the pocket of unions, the new liberal government in Ontario caved in to the teachers and doctors as well as automotive workers. The latter is done with help from the feds, so Toyota is opening a new plant because the government gives them hundreds of millions of dollars. As for the others, the starting salary for a principal is now $90,000.
Teachers and principals now make tons of money, but that doesn't mean more is spent on education. I have relatives in Sudbury who teach, one talks about their building which is forty years old with no air conditioning and twenty year old windows, while just above it new floors of state of the art building materials have administrators working in luxury.
This is caving in to unions far more than in the NDP's wettest, wildest dreams. After all, unions don't give a sh*& about classrooms, they want their workers well paid.
We know that fewer New Brunswickers favour the NDP, find umpteen reasons not to support them, but the question still is, why? Their policies are pretty much identical across the country. It's ironic that those who would most benefit from unions are often the most opposed. The NDP also has a higher priority for the environment, which canadians always CLAIM is very important, but in New Brunswick I'm thinking less so thanks to you-know-who.
When so many people need a living from the environment, you tend to get a lot less romantic about it.
It could be that Elizabeth Weir just 'rubbed people the wrong way', or maybe that NB is full of bigots that don't want a woman leader. However, we can go back further and note that they have NEVER been big here. Coincidentally the rise of the NDP was pretty much parrallel to the rise of Irving, which perhaps cancelled it out. Robichaud had some NDP tendencies, at least he pretended that people were more important than investors, and Irving was no fan of his. Say what you want, in a province with the lowest standard of living in the US and Canada (except mississipi) and the fewest proportion of people making over 100 grand-which would be good if the spread between richest and poorest weren't also growing- the NDP certainly can't do any worse.
I hate to disagree with Charles, but NB simply seemed to be a province where McKenna could show how well he kisses investors asses to get him new friends in the states.
Instead of writing comments you guys have started writing books. It is good. It is still better than Spinks' ALi Baba and Forty Theives style. It is not clear what Spinks' problem is.
No problem at all. Merely trying to bring a different perspective to the conversation. I keep getting called names by you folks but if that's your style, that's fine. Personnaly I'm enjoying the dialogue. There is a book in here somewhere or at least a panel debate on CBC Canada Now. Too bad no one watches. Ha Ha.
Luckily majority of the people do not share your views inclding on CBC. You are good at blaming the victims. If that is what pleases you then be it. You are like Brenda the 'Defenda' who just resigned as a minister of environment.
Au contraire. The majority do agree with me. The proof is in the CBC's ratings which are dismal with the odd exception such as The National News, 22 minutes, Air Farce, CBC's Information Morning in Saint John are just plain dismal. These are the facts. That's great you and your colleagues tune in, so do I on occassion but the product we're egttong for our billion dollars a year isn't justified. Again the proof is in the BBM's. I know you want to believe I'm making these things up but even the CBC is extremely concerned about their eroding numbers and trying to come up with solutions.
Sorry, before I get jumped on, I meant to write the ratings for those mentioned shows are the few exceptions to dismal ratings.
Yes you are making things up. Also you might as well be talking to brick walls because you are not going to get answers to your questions here anyway.
Go on CBC, go on national media and shed your rivers of tears there.
What am I making up oh wise one?
You know it. I do not need to tell you.
Look into your soul, you deluded one, and you shall see.
The CBC is the same as other networks, seeing declining numbers in all genres. Competing with the US just isn't possible. Not to mention that worldwide the 'corporate news' so called has seen radically falling numbers. Virtually nobody under 40 gets their news from television.
Public utilities are there because they are important, not for the masses entertainment. You have umpteen other choices if you don't support this one, and the percentage of your taxes that goes into the CBC is practically nothing.
The CBC is virtually the ONLY outlet for National Film Board productions, in fact I'd change the whole CBC into JUST that. Regional news has suffered, but that's because of cutbacks and of course the centralization of, well, everything in Canada means the maritimes are just toadying on. It's well known that Rita MacNeil was cancelled because the boys in Toronto were embarassed that she was the networks number one show.
Documentary shows on the CBC are typically heads above anything on rival networks. It has some excellent shows, one which was cancelled because it kept showing the episode on Paul Martin and how he got his company just before the election.
The other networks have virtually no investigative reporting, and that's what real news networks do. The rest is just editing. No doubt cutbacks have cut that back as well, the maritimes are inconsequential, however, many effects that affect Canada affect the maritimes as well.
I'd personally support making all networks public, like the british did, rather than getting rid of the CBC. It's a huge organization, and is far more efficient at what it does than the private networks.
You should attend a news conference sometime. Count the CBC employees versus other media outlets. I doubt you'll think they're so efficient after that.
How are they inefficient??
If you need to send 4 cameras and 9 reporters to one event, that's inefficient. (One example) Some are radio, some are TV, some are English, some are French, so I can see the need for more than one obviously but maybe 6 and I'm being generous. For crying out loud share some of your tape and send out a few on another story. I know you'll disagree with me but that's just plain inefficient and if it were the private sector they would be out of business. So I don't buy the cutback argument. Yeah, they lost some employees but there's still fat to be trimmed before I'll cry the blues for them.
For your information I have been to numerous press conferences. I always saw one CBC reporter. On few occassion I saw one CBC report and one cameraperson. On one occassion I saw the reporter was also handling the camera too. I do not know which press conference you have been to where they had six people.
It depends of course on the event. CBC is constitutionally bound to provide both french and english and are two different organizations. Likewise, radio and television are different organizations. When I said efficient I meant for what they did. Like I said, Global or ATV do not do investigative reporting, they simply regurgitate press releases. Of course when it comes to 'fat', well, the maritime population doesn't even warrant a full time reporter, so we could easily get rid of all of them and simply show fox news or global.
The Maritimes' don't warrant a full-time reporter? For who? You're working for CBC aren't you?
The only English reporter holding the camera for CBC in NB is in Bathurst. A few of the French ones do it on the north shore, and it's about bloody time. It's the only efficiency they've done in a while. You need to get to some more of the large news conferences. You'll see what I mean.
Take a look at demographics and the number of reporters CBC has, per capita the maritimes do well to have a single reporter. They could easily just get newsfeeds from ATV and not have anybody around. That they do is because its a public system. Per Capita of course Canada does well to have reporters, the country could simply get news feeds from the US, which it increasingly does, and then just send up a reporter to cover 'local' events when, and if, they warrant. It's the CBC and CRTC that keeps that from happening. It would be far more 'efficient' for 'some' people, but that's a strange way of measuring efficiency. It's more like 'neglect'.
I was not even talking about Bathurst. I was talking about major press conference. However I was referring to english reporters only. The french mandate part of CBC I did not get into.
I was at a press conference. Without naming names a person gave press conference and answered reporters questions. CBC reporter went on her way after the press conference and to be fair to ATV they did too. But there was this Irving media reporter who insisted to get written speaking points from the speaker. He was told there were no copies. He said he would run down the hall and make copies. So what was he doing during the press conference sleeping and did not take notes. There is your efficient commercial media.
To compare print and broadcast is like comparing apples and oranges. Print needs more exact detail. ATV is hardly about to start sending tape to CBC. CBC TV in NB still has more news staff than Global and ATV in NB combined. That should result in a better product and more viewers. It doesn't.
You got it all wrong, sir. Tape recorders have been available for ages. Print media uses these tape recorders all the time and transcribe it later so that spoken words are not missed. It was matter of being efficient and the other group was efficient. So, you see, it is not apple and oranges after all.
Of all the t.v media CBC is the best when it comes to news.
That's hilarious, that print needs to be 'more exact'. In part though, I agree, in fact for years I've lobbied for CBC to set up print media.
You are right, there's no point in comparing apples and oranges, anybody who thinks that the Irving papers are 'more exact' seriously needs to re-evaluate their logic circuits. If anything, radio and television is 'more exact' since they can simply show it 'as it is'. This is the case with the parliamentary channel where you can simply sit and watch the proceedings (they also use CBC equipment).
You can also read the hansard's which are in print, and say the same thing, so there is really no distinction, however, on television you can pick up body language, sarcasm, or people in the background, so in fact it is FAR more exact.
CBC may have more reporters, but of course since CBC also operates online we have to remember that ATV (obviously for all the atlantic provinces) and Global can get their newsfeed directly from CBC.
Global or ATV may have reporters in New Brunswick, but they have no news program for New Brunswick. Obviously if you have a program in the province you need more reporters. However, with cutbacks I'd like to know EXACTLY how many there are, and of course many are freelance, which is beneficial as it helps train newcomers and features more New Brunswickers.
There is no way to gauge 'better'. Obviously if you are the Premier then 'better' news coverage is reporting that makes you look good. So 'better' is subjective. Less subjective is that it gives more ratings and we've discussed that to death. Academic journals are FAR better at getting, gathering, editing, and providing pertinent information than magazines, websites, or television-but what are their ratings? Outside certain circles practically zero. That doesn't mean they are not important, in fact I'd argue they are far MORE important and far more resources should be put into them.
If anybody has found media studies on the maritimes I'd be interested in seeing them. If not 'better' then there's certainly ways of gauging editorial content. Content can be gauged by a number of criteria: what stories they cover, what sources they quote, who they choose to represent sides of issues, how long they give each side, which gets the last word, and how much follow up the story gets. More could be added. If anybody has sources or research on those things we can at least sound like we know what we're talking about and aren't a bunch of branging donkeys with too much time on our hands.
If the reporter is other than CBC than Mr. Spinks has excuses for them - they need to be more exact. Since CBC covered racism, in Saint John, in little more detail therefore it is no good.
You do not need extensive knowledge, or be a rocket scientist, that CBC is more objective in its reporting than other news networks. It is more objective than CNN and Fox. CNN and Fox may have more resources but they are biased like hell. It sickens one to watch them.
I heard many American say that they watched CBC during early part of the Iraq war because it was more objective, when American networks were not so objective.
We have to be careful here, because at issue is one of ideology, which is why I said it's hard to gauge 'better'. The CBC is a FEDERAL institution, and gets it's funding and appointments from there. The CBC has always been controlled out of Ontario, which has a certain very specific vision of 'canada'. Far different than the west or Quebec, obviously.
So there is a bias at work there, while private corporations will have little reporting on,say, local community organizations trying to start their own media organization, likewise the CBC will have little reporting on, say, a new 'separatist' political group which has significant political support.
Those are just examples, meaning that you ALWAYS have to look at who is controlling media organizations and what their interests are. In many cases the bureaucracy of CBC and the private interests of Global may hold parrallel views, in which case the reporting will be identical. So you will find that by and large the reporting on Genetically Modified food, or the scientists who were arguing against the use of bovine growth hormone were ignored by BOTH the CBC and private media. No surprise that this is because both the government bureaucracy at Health Canada and Agriculture Canada, and Monsanto and Pioneer were colluding to get both of these into the canadian marketplace. The CBC, by necessity, would maybe have one or two stories, during odd hours when nobody is listening, but the same might be true of private media (but usually isn't because Monsanto controls so many advertising dollars). These are not monolithic entities though, sometimes forceful reporters or misguided editors can get all kinds of things in.
One of the reasons young people are turning to web based media is because they know that to effect change an event needs momentum and time. So in media this is very important and is one reason why our media in general doesn't serve us well. A report printed one day or a mention during a report at newstime will not foment popular opinion, it will only help you recognize a problem, then the next report will mention another problem which will make you forget the first,even though it may be a more important problem and more importantly it may be a problem you can do something about. While violence or a train wreck in Poland may be of some interest, it has little effect on your day to day life, whereas a local municipal government opinion may have HUGE repercussions, yet municipal coverage rarely gets much attention unless it is violent.
This is why I've always lobbied, not for getting rid of CBC, but for getting rid of the 'centrist' bureaucracy of the CBC and making it more community focused in its decision making. This is especially important in television, there's no way that Rogers Cable should be responsible for community television.
Hmmm. That sparked some debate. My point is simple. CBC is held to a higher standard because taxpayers pay for it. The privates can do what they want because they answer to shareholders and/or viewers and readers. If people don't watch or but their product, they fold. CBC exists because Canadians pay for it and Canadians aren't watching or listening in the numbers which would justify it's existence. CBC Senior Management recognizes this that it's audience is quite literally dying off. Maritime media studies have been conducted by King's College and AIM over the years. There's lots of data. CBC either needs to start providing value, pay for itself, or be shut down. As always IMHO.
By the way, just because CBC covered the Chinese student attack doesn't make them bad. Every media outlet covered the story. They sensationalized it more by attempting to create news before the facts were in. Global and ATV do not take CBC feeds. CBC does not allow it unless the event is media pooled or if CBC has some exclusive video which CBC agrees to share, which in itself is rare. This is one of the interesting things. These private broadcast reporters tax dollars are being used to fund better paid reporters at CBC to compete with them. Ridiculous. CBC should get out of news and stick to public affairs which the private sector doesn't do instead of trying to compete in news which they do horribly with the exception of international news.
So what, don't read it. You've given me a great forum and I can't thank you enough.
And La la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la,.
I've got time while my wife watches bad TV. I'm not working on Spinks, but who knows who might be reading. If the studies are coming from AIMS then they aren't worth the paper they're written on, although if you have links to the various studies I'd love to see them.
Clearly, that is YOUR opinion about the CBC not being worth the money, again, we can go back to surveys. So there is no real way to know 'if people are watching'. It's interesting to note that a television station has NEVER gone bankrupt in Canada. So the argument that ATV will go out of business if they disappoint viewers just doesn't hold water.
What I want to address is the perception that somehow CBC has different standards. First, there is no real way of measuring ratings, there is a whole literature on that. Second, tax concessions, federal regulations, and the CRTC safeguard markets for stations. Across the country various groups have attempted to start television stations yet the CRTC consecutively bars them at the behest of Rogers and Global. It is actually remarkably cheap to start a local UHF channel for local viewers, yet this is constantly barred.
This brings us next into tax law; there are literally hundreds of ways which we are paying for them. In fact, if you look at the huge corporate tax cuts which Martin brought in, we are paying far more for Global than we are for the CBC.
For newspapers its obviously different, however, we should keep in mind that Irving didn't START their newspapers, they simply bought them. It's clearly difficult to start up a newspaper where the only place to buy newsprint is from Irving. There is quite a literature on how difficult it is to run a newspaper especially with a small population base.
Irving's of course, get all kinds of concessions from government, and with the tightest access to information laws you can bet there are far more that we know nothing about. For example, 55 million was given two years ago no questions asked as long as Irving 'invested' an equal amount. So Irving could have simply used that money to 'invest' by buying up more media companies. Those employees would then have half their salaries paid by you and me.
Next of course is the cleanup and discarding of the Irving whale which cost in excess of 400 million dollars. That money then could go back into paying employees while WE paid for it.
Those are of course just two quick examples, anybody that knows anything about how private companies and government interact can guarantee you that there's far more. The tax breaks in St. John are just another example. Remember, Irving is not a public corporation, there are no shareholders.
Likewise, environmental damage from various corporations costs US, and that's money that the company can then use toward other ventures. So WE pay for all that, but some people's bookkeeping seems to only stretch as far as their narrow ideology. Yeah I'm talkin to YOU:)
If the news isn't 'public affairs', I don't know what is. You're saying they shouldn't cover local news but only international news? That should make a lot of people seriously pi$$ed off.
Public affairs is different from everyday news. If you want AIM's material or the University of King's College, I'm sure they'll provide it to you.
I simply am not going to the time or expense to type it all out here. If you're really interested, they'll provide it to you, but given the previous postings, you don't seem interested in looking at an issue from any other side but you're own anyway. Otherwise you wouldn't insult me in nearly every post. We'd have a meaninful discussion which was always my intent, so what's the point? Others can search it out if they wish.
MY GOD???? ALMOST 200 COMMENTS???? ARE YOU PEOPLE HOCK IN THIS BLOG????? ...lol..
Hock In This Blog. What a great name for a book. I think we almost have enough material for one. One great thing about it Charles is it's representative and unbiased. It's always nice when you can make a positive difference. Now to get a CBC type in here to read it. Hmmmmm.
My! somebody is defensive, there have been many anonymous posts, they certainly aren't all mine, in fact the only time I insulted you was in my last post where I said "yeah I'm talking to YOU", which was followed by a smily face, obviously indicating sarcasm.
I have no interest in insulting people, everybody has different opinions and in fact this may sound insulting by I appreciate the at least thoughtful responses that differ from mine, rather than quick insults that some throw out.
I assumed since you named Kings college and AIMS that you had a website handy and so could save me some time. I've been to both AIMS and Kings college websites and haven't found them, and obviously having you provide the info is easier than me contacting them and perhaps even having to pay for studies.
When I talk about something it's because it's interesting and people have something of value to say, you'll note other of Charles' threads have nowhere near the number of posts.
We can assume you're just making up stories, or that you don't want these studies looked at carefully, or, as you state, you simply don't have access to them, in which case it's fine to simply say so and not be so defensive which only tends to make people assume that you were just making things up.
If you don't want to be misinterpreted, you should stick a name to yourself. Makes it a lot easier.
Okay, now that I'm clear who I'm dealing with, let's go through your comments.
Sorry you don't like AIMS. Not much I can do there if you go in close-minded.
Yes, the CBC issue is my opinion, but it's also an opinion much like yours backed up with something and that's the BBM ratings. That's what television execs including CBC go by. Sorry if you don't like it but that's their measure of performance and how they know what to charge advertisers. You're right, no television station has gone bankrupt in Canada because they run it properly, and ATV would go out of business if viewers tune out. They choose instead to keep their viewers.
CBC is different. It relies on a billion taxpayer dollars a year and as such should provide value to as many Canadians as possible not just the academics and elitists.
Your comments on the CRTC...well I agree. The operation is ridiculous and since we agree, there's no point wasting time.
Corporate tax cuts are a whole other issue and need to be weighed with number of jobs, value, etc. I wouldn't want to see a company taxed so badly, they leave Canada. At the same time they should pay their fair share. Before I'm accused of loving the Irvings, the Irving LNG fiasco was not one of those times. Although I also recognize without the Irvings, N.B. would be a far different place. I suspect in some ways good but I can also recognize that in some ways bad.
As far as narrow ideology, I think you may be the pot calling the kettle black. Critical thinking is looking at issues from all sides and then coming up with an opinion or plan and not blowing people off because they disagree with you. Try it, you might like it.
"We can assume you're just making up stories, or that you don't want these studies looked at carefully, or, as you state, you simply don't have access to them, in which case it's fine to simply say so and not be so defensive which only tends to make people assume that you were just making things up."
I agree with "making up" part. It is not that Spinks has different opinion, which is fine, it is that he repeats same thing over and over without giving facts and then backing them up with proper source. That is missing and that is why he is so boring and upsetting to some. You can read the same idea so many times and then it become nonesense.
What do you want, me to produce BBM surveys? I know I was asked to produce my CBC source on their hiring practices but give me a break, they'd be fired in a flash. Yes, I see the irony in a media outlet firing someone for squealing when the same person would win an award if it was a story about another company. Regardless, I can't do it. You'll have to understand. I can't. AIM reports are extensive. I do not have the report and have only read the executive summaries to back it up. That's the best I can do. More than happy to provide what is reasonable though. The latest TV ratings I read were for Fall '04. Evening news programming in N.B. ATV in NB 129,000 viewers. Global - 9,000, CBC TV - 6,000. If it were shut down, few would notice.
So someone shared the information from CBC. Why would they need to share it with you and not make it public knowledge? In what capacity you received that information? More you talk about it more incredible it sounds. If an employee is so unhappy, he/she would have challenged the decision by now. Now you are also implying that CBC is an oppressor of a sort and dictatorial. All unsubstantiated claims. It remains hear say. He said and she said stuff.
Would you publicly challenge your employer? I wouldn't. The consequences are usually less than favourable. You sure you don't work for CBC?
Before heading off to research BBM and AIM let's clarify. I by no means said the CRTC was a joke, without it clearly we would all be watching american channels with some canadian 'regional' coverage. It's the direction that I object to, community television is kept out all because the other stations don't want the competition. ATV, Global, and CBC ALL benefit from this, while communities lose out.
Taxation is NOT a separate issue. If Irving is handed 55 million of tax dollars than how is that any different than handing money to the CBC? This isn't changing the tact to Irving, it's simply using a local example. Likewise if ANY company is given a tax break then that money is made up by us, so literally is the same as giving them a cheque (which we often do). Do research on technology partnerships and of course the television industry is virtually propped up by canadian dollars. The difference is they are designed to make profit for owners, rather than value, like CBC.
It's interesting to note that I'm now watching ATV news and it's hosted by an asian lady. Now, do you think any of the white guys who applied are claiming that she was hired because she is asian or female?
It's also interesting to note that at least during this half hour virtually every story is about Nova Scotia. In fact, there has only been one story that featured New Brunswick.
We can also note that the newsreader is certainly no better than Anita Sharma. She constantly misses words (7 so far), she has the annoying habit which they train out of you in the first week of acting lessons which is that you don't hold your breath and then exhale at the end of sentences. So at the conclusion of every sentence you can hear her loudly inhaling.
So actually 6000 people in New Brunswick isn't bad, and of course we don't know for sure it is that number. YOU may claim that New Brunswick shouldn't have news representation, however, if people don't want to be informed, that's their problem.
Numbers isn't everything, so far the ATV news has had NOTHING political, and certainly nothing political in New Brunswick. So if people are preferring pablum, then that should have no bearing on the public necessity of having a public broadcaster. You'll notice from this debate that while one side wants to get rid of the public broadcaster altogether, you don't hear us on the other side arguing against getting rid altogether of ATV, Global, etc. This of course we could well do, and many societies have, weighing ALL the costs of private ownership of public airwaves.
I'm going to assume you're attempting to paint me as a racist once again. I didn't see ATV tonight but I would assume you're referring to Elizabeth Chiu. She came from CTV with loads of credentials and likely got the job on merit but I can't say that for sure. Although I'll agree she's a better reporter than an anchor. Maybe she wasn't hired on merit. If so, yes the same applies. I really don't care who reads me the news. CBC was an example I used because I had something to back it up IMHO, and it got under your skin and stuck. People should be hired on ability, not on the colour of their skin, red or yellow or black or white. I'm still not clear what's wrong with that except someone here (and since nearly everyone's anonymous, I don't know) said that minorities have been oppressed, so they deserve special treatment. Someone also indicated if a minority does something to a white person, the white person should get a thicker skin because other white people have done bad things. In the interest of fairness which you appear to be for, I don't get why we're into over 200 posts.
Spinks, you say someone told you something from CBC and you want us to believe that. What if I say that someone from CBC who knows the real you says that you are a bullsh***er. That you have tendency to keep on harping your stuff until people get fed up of you and ignore you or agree with you and mostly it is the former - people just do not take you seriously and ignore you to get you off their back. What do you say to that?
From 5-6 comments per post to over 200 comments makes sense about your real problem, keep on harping.
Boy, I'm really driving some or one of you nuts. In answer to your comments, I could use the same argument. Who at CBC knows me? If you won't tell me, why should I believe you?
Hey my friend has a name. Vive, you're staring to make some sense. Good argument. I obviously don't totally agree with you because I don't believe there should be favourtism based on race but clearly at least on this blog, I'm in the minority. How's that for irony? You still never answered my question whethere you work for CBC? Given the comments of some here, I suspect someone posting here does.
Post a Comment