Ron Erwin crowned king of sarcasm. All Hail the King :)

Uh, you think FOX news is unbiased?
It's not impossible to get in Canada, there's a free trial of it on shaw right now... and I watched it for about 15 minutes and in that time caught two disgustingly right wing comments made by supposed news anchors.
"Let's face it, left wing thoughts do not make compelling press. It's so tired."
Yeah, actually getting to the bottom of what is going on is totally a snore. Let's just concentrate on violent footage and kneejerk reactions. I predict a better world.
I don't understand how you could think FOX news is independent... it's baffling. After all of the stuff that's come out about the kind of stuff they pull how could you think that?

I've been discouraged lately on hearing of the Bushies' success in taking over the reins of PBS. Among a group of new Bush friendly media appointees, one has been named to head the Corporation For Public Broadcasting. One of the first things he did was fire Bill Moyer, of "Now" (for "bias"), one of the few mass audience US TV shows that routinely exposed political shenanigans and corruption among both the Republicans and Democrats, and in the US corporate world, that other mainstream networks wouldn't touch. Moyer frequently embarrassed the Bush admin. with penetrating reporting. PBS has hired new right wing and Bush friendly political commentators such as Tucker Carlsen.
There is a new chill affecting PBS personnel, a fear that if they are too critical of the status quo, they too will get sacked.
I'm disgusted enough that I'm turning off PBS,
as it is becoming a Bush propaganda machine.I hardly could have believed it possible, but that's what's happening. NPR is getting a "makeover" too.
I hope a strong message will be sent by PBS subscribers refusing to renew or continue contributing money. They could inform PBS that they intend in future to donate instead to IWT!
I was very happy today to read of this IWT proposal for a new network.
Al Franken likes to cite statistics suggesting US media is failing to inform Americans of simple, important facts. He cites opinion polls
from not long ago showing a majority of Americans still believing Saddam was involved in 9:11, and that Saddam was an ally of Al Qaida.And a large % believed Iraqi WMDs had been found recently. All 3 assertions are demonstrably false. I agree with Franken that the media must accept some responsibilty for this, for keeping people misinformed. And perhaps Bush would not have been re-elected if voters hadn't voted based on false beliefs about Iraq.It's scary to contemplate.
I am pretty disgusted with CNN too. Ted Turner is a rich man with a supposed conscience, sworn do his bit to "save the world" (he did give $1 Billion to the UN). So why does he allow his CNN to be so irresponsibly selective in its reporting/commentary? CNN is part of the problem.
So, yes, I say the US and the world badly needs an IWT!
The CBC has often disappointed me. On the other hand they've done some brave reporting, such as some of the Fifth Estate's investigations (eg. into Martin's shipping co., CSL).
And thank goodness we have The Tyee as an excellent alternative to Canwest's empire (which I boycott)!

"PBS has hired new right wing and Bush friendly political commentators such as Tucker Carlsen"

Jesus you've got to be kidding.

Bloody good show! I don't see how anyone can seriously object to a truly independent media.

There are many untold and under-reported stories. I believe the CBC makes more sincere effort, than the majority of Establishment's lapdog media but is ever conscious of its funding under threat.

Being against U.S. Government policy is not being anti-American. That accusation is invariably a cop-out.

Perhaps because they are Aye-rabs, some are able to shrug off the slaughter of thousands in an illegal conflict in which Bush and Blair are as complicitly evil as Sadam Hussein.

With a "quality" media, I don't think that conflict would have got off the ground - despite it being Bush's first choice, in the opinion of many.

Jamez : Tucker's got his own PBS show now.

Damn, that's just sad. I wish we could swear on this site.
I wasn't aware of that... but I don't watch PBS soo....

I suppose he's supposed to be unbiased?

Awesome, it's about time. I foresee allot of fear mongering and anger from certain people and the MSM in general. This is scary as hell for allot of people , imagine North Americans and people of the world hearing uncensored media for the first time. They should have some kind of disclaimer before the show starts. Imagine seeing criticism without corporate influence. Eg. Wow BC has a company called teck cominco that pollutes and gets tax write-offs . Esso and others have been exploiting a loophole and getting revenue Canada to write of their environmental fines. Saddam Hussein was not responsible for 911 . Image what real truth can bring, social conscience , social justice , wow I love it. How can anyone not support independent news, sorry but I'd rather have all my news sent threw Winnipeg first(CANWEST Headquarters and policy) so that they can censor water down and homogenize it for mass consumption . LOL. Truth is like light , you can pull the blinds for only so long before light slips threw the cracks . Its funny they did a US Study and found that the more people watched the MSM the more uniformed they were regarding history and the events of the world in general. And folks who watched FOX news came in worst for most uniformed.
Pissed off people shop less and care more. They have my $ 50

"One of the intentions of corporate-controlled media is to instill in people a sense of disempowerment, of immobilization and paralysis. Its outcome is to turn you into good consumers. It is to keep people isolated, to feel that there is no possibility for social change."

I'm paying $40 monthly too but $50 once doesn't seem like much to get away from the sometimes ridiculously jingoistic coverage provided by media other than Fox. If Fox news comes to Canada I will wait to see when the first charge of spreading hate is laid. Their editorial stance runs aggressively up against a law we take quite seriously. If I.W.T. offers cable in the future I'll give them my $40 too.

It's about time someone on the left put their money where their mouth is. Actaully putting someone else's money where their mouth is. But it's an effort at least.

But I do have one question. How do we know this will be unbiased? They are going to be getting money from left wingers only. If they report in a fair and honest way and news happens to come up against left wing ideals. Will people stop donating? Or will there only be fluff stories in favour of the left? (It's begining to remind me of a certain website)

If they do the news with a left wing slant to satisfy their supporters. Isn't that then biased journalism and in a way no better than Fox or your arch nemesis Canwest?

In the end the vast majority will decide what the truth is, once history and information is out their with context I have no worries humanity will respond in a positive way. People are good by nature, their has been a real war to suppress information and its just getting worse. This is a real breath of fresh air, give the people the information and let them decide . Do you support the status quo where the top of 5% elites will take care of us and we will benefit from open markets and trickle down tax cuts or do we improve the working conditions of the world and create an equitable society where the top 5% do not earn 50% of all disposable income made, a society where we treat every person with compassion and live within our means. It will be interesting to see who opposes this network , the right is going out of style. The BC Fiberals lost the popular vote even with all the MSM support, imagine if we had a platform to launch our message . Even David Dodge from the Bank OF Canada(not exactly a leftie ) admitted the US economy was headed for a major recession if they can't control their spending. Right wind governments are usually bad for business and global stability etc.

Anyway I digress.

Good for them. I'm skeptical of their odds for success, but it's not impossible, and it would be good to have more diversity of opinion.

Great idea to "capitalize" on the atill-untapped potential of the Web to open doors and level playing fields.

Fox shook up the traditional media with its bold & brash right-wing agenda. This will do the same to the current media landscape and add some much-needed balance, if it succeeds.
With public broadcasting under fire--from CBC and PBS to the BBC--this funding model may also offer new hope.

Who is talking about an "unbiased" anything. The need is for an "objective" left wing view of the world.

And hell, capitalism uses "other" people's money and labour all the time, without that "use" of other folks, capitalism could not function nor turn its precious profit.

I'm not optimistic about this venture myself, as having much more potential than a, ohhh, say Toronto Star, well within what is really none-threatening to The System.

We will know that the right wing and capitalism bias is being broken through, in my view, and The System under serious threat, only when we see large numbers of folks in serious motion, challenging ruling class and their apologists' presumptions, take on economics and poltics.

Short of that, what mostly exists here, in this proposal, is smoke, mirrors and wishful thinking. Though hey, just about anything would be an improvement, again, from that left wing view of the world. Even the CBC is now hook, line and sinker, a part of the Capitalist Broadcasting System.

All for save the most rightist nut cases of course, awaiting the second coming of Der Feuhrer and the triumph of the Fox, the voice of the Project for a New American Century. (Having given up on Canada as they have.)

Bootlicks for Yankee boots that they be.

If they can raise $25 million from $50 donations worldwide then there are a lot of people who want this type of TV. Hopefully, they won't have hosts who try and have phone sex with their employees like FOXNEWS does. But, you never know.

But Global ran away with the award in news excellence...

I don't think it is possible to have a completely "independent" news service, either in print, or on the air, because we're human and our opinions are biased, regardless how objective we're trying to be. This is how and why power corrupts. What we should insist on in reporting is that it should have a balanced content of all angles of personal bias.

I have seen both the nazi and communist propaganda machines at work and have worked against the latter as a propaganda analyst in 3 languages. It may come as a shock to the faithful, but neither the nazis, or the communists could hold a candle to extent and success of the presently dominating neocon, ideological propaganda brainwash in our corporate media.

I also find it very amusing when the faithful can not express themselves without labeling anybody whose words, or reporting, they don't like with "right", or "left" wing. Which is nonsense to begin with, as there are no such things as left, or right wings, but it gives a good picture of the writers' personal prejudices, experience and mental capacity.

Like the nazis used to say: "If you don't understand anybody, hit him with a chair!"
Ed Deak, Big Lake.

So far the journalists that have signed on are not "international". If this truly does become international and we do get a global voice then I will be very happy to support IWT.

In many ways I wish the option for individual Canadians to support CBC in this way would have been given to us. It would have been better than them turning to corporate advertizers. It makes me sad to see how pathetic they have become. "Politics" was pre-empted for freeway coverage of Michael Jacksons entourage into court today. That's it for me. The only thing worth watching on CBC Newsworld anymore are their documentaries. I loved "Return to Kandahar" and without "Counterspin" CBC Newsworld has become very skinny indeed.

I disagree about there being no such "objective" phenomena as right and left wing in politics, I would say, reflecting primarily, but not exclusively and always, allowing for those pesky exceptions, social class positions. It is the contrary "nonsense", that thee begin with, in my view, my friend. :-) But I find that to be a tolerable bias of yours, Fait Lux, explainable at some level currently unknown to me. :-)

That said, your observation that, "It may come as a shock to the faithful, but neither the nazis, or the communists could hold a candle to extent and success of the presently dominating neocon, ideological propaganda brainwash in our corporate media." is an entirely correct observation. in my view.

And I don't expect to agree with anyone on everything. In your case, I agree enough however-, again, for me. :-)

Well, I would really like to see this happen, for sure.

After the outright fraudluent election in BC, which saw the corporate media lie through its teeth about everything from the state of the economy to the last decade of the province to fool people into re-electing the most corrupt, dihonest and incompetent regime in BC history, it's about time we got some hard hitting TV that tells the truth for a change.

The fact the usual corporate apologists/BC Liar lovers here don't like, proves it's a good thing.

It is clear even here, if one but cast about, there are what have been historically, and more or less accurately described as right and left positions which arise out of fundamentally different social class positions. And a rose by any other name, remains a rose just the same.

(And I understand that the ruling ideas of any age are the ideas of its ruling class, unapologetically stealing a Marxian line, to which all classes are vulnerable, no less the working class than anyone-, indeed mayhaps even more so, for many and complex reasons.

To fail to see that, is to either feign or be ingenuous, or, to fail to see what should be a rather obvious differentiation in social phenomenon, which give rise to different interpretations, perspectives and ideas about social reality, again, described as "right" and "left".

That different social classes, and even the different "strata" within each class, all of whom "experience" society somewhat differently, should "tend" to throw up different political ideas along something of a spectrum of differing, even clashing "ideologies", should certainly not be surprising, and is certainly far from "nonsence". It's persistance within society should demonstrate that to all but the most ingenuous and naive, however many languages one can analyze propaganda in.

Ron Erwin obviously lives under a bridge as per tradition ;-)

As I explained before, the so called right and left are like the C and F on a thermometer, divided by a thin line. I call this the "nut ladder". The higher, the crazier they are.

People are born with all kinds of talents and programmed behavoural patterns. In history there are only the "exploiters" and the "exploited". People, who are born, or in many cases are taught, to be predators will be able to exploit any and every opportunity to come out on top and most of the time use faith based ideologies to justify their exploitations. It makes no difference whether this oportunity comes under ideologies, or religions. In history the predators have used nazism communism, capitalism, Muslimism, Catholicism and Calvinist fundamentalism to conquer, subjugate, exploit, enslave and murder.

So, which side have the exploiters been and on which side are they now?

My bias originates from the fact that I have seen them all, have seen their crimes, bear some of the scars and have heard their scriptural explanations on how and why their actions have been sanctified by the Bible, or Khoran, or the prophets Smith and Marx. The difference betwen them is that there isn't any difference. Our gilt edged capitalists would have fitted very well into the ranks of the Politbureaus, the Crusaders, Jihadists and Conquistadores. So, which is the right or left side ?

Civilization can only exist and survive under democracy. If civilization is to survive we must fight against unilateral powers in anybody's hands, regardless of what flag they're waving. Ed Deak, Big Lake.

A nice piece. Very educative.

Many who consider themselves neither right nor left want accurate and complete news reports, and are entitled to them.

Instead, they have been fed lies - frequently lies of ommission. If one doubts this, consider the coverage of Iraq actions with its "embedded" reporters.

We have to have an effective "alternative" media. Without it the drift toward fascism will be unstoppable.

I think all those embedded journalists in Iraq that we weren't to hear from were unfortunately met with an early demise during their coverage....
I can't wait to see this new development - though their stipulation not to take any funding from gov't, businesses, organizations etc would make it a bit more challenging since they may be cutting off some worthy aid which possibly wouldn't have any strings attached - but this policy does uphold their credibility a bit better. There are some great "independent" news media out there - perhaps too small to make anything more than a small ripple - but together one would imagine they would be able to garner enough energy for a full wave. I would think that combining some of these efforts in some way would be a desirable route which would also help in the recruitment of an interested audience.

I'd have to say that the 'not accepting any money from companies/corporations' bit got my hackles up.

First of all, a corporation is being created here, any way you look at it. It will seek profits, and as such, it will do so by purposefully airing inflammatory/extreme leftist propaganda. The Yin of Fox, I suppose.

Secondly, to think that real news will ever be broadcast is a waste of time and mental energy. The truth (in my experience) has always been shrouded in the media, no matter what the bias. Which is why I love the internet...it puts the power of research and discretion in my own hands. When a corporation is involved in any sort of information process, the means always justify the ends, and the end is usually profit.

This continual effort to become anti-right is a farce, and a poorly conceived one at that. I think my suspicions as to the content of this channel will be confirmed when it goes on-air. Apologetic, politically correct, and patronizing.

Although it's a nice thought to have an antithesis to the torrents of crap forced through the television screen, the content is defined by the medium, and will ultimately be more of the same.

Who is Ron Erwin? An American? Why does he even bother reading The Tyee? Why does Norther Luddite think that Left wing news is "inflammatory"? Like right wing news isn't? Who the hell does he think promotes the war on Iraq, or other wars wherever there's oil and/or a gov't that won't kowtow to Washington and its corporate backers?

By the way, Northern Luddie laddie, there's no "effort" required for being anti-right wing. It's not a farce, either. It's called "Humanitarian Instincts".

Fiat Lux is always correct. Coyote, too:) Stuart,really good points. Kurt and others.

JIm does not READ The Tyee all the way through. The Left is a very critical group, even of itself. I belong to the NDP, yet I disagree with the mushy middle road the majority of its members seem to have taken all across Canada.

Average folk (not millionaires; not making over $60k a year) have lost wages, lost medical coverage, lost pensions, etc., in the last 20 years. A good 40% of the population is in dire straits, while their share of the common wealth has gone to the overpaid, the already over-rich and the multi-national corporate wretches. Read The Monitor. Read the UN reports. Stats Canada (not filtered through the corporate-sucking eyes of the Fraser Instapuke).

Percy said the Global media ran away with an award in news excellence. Does he mean they stole it from some deserving medium? Because, let's face it-- Global BS doesn't deserve any kind of an award except for excellence in brainwashing Canucks into thinking that joining the USA is "inevitable", much like globalism is "inevitable". Like we should be competing with 3rd world slaves for jobs-- is "inevitable". Every time we shop at a slave-mongering company like Wal-Mart, we are showing our acceptance of that propoganda.

To: JIm Re: How do we know this will be unbiased?

We don't, and must assume a certain bias in ALL the media. It's up to us as individuals to read everything, and make up our own minds....

http://www.alternet.org/story/16157

Dont worry about Ron Erwin. Here's a guy who, during the election, not only said there is nothing wrong with driving inebriated but condoned it. Why? because Campbell was the perp. I can assure you that if Carole James was guilty of the same, he would be jumping up and down saying she should be jailed and she doesnt have the moral authority to govern.

Northern_Luddite may appreciate the Internet as, no doubt, do all message board users in particular, but the medium is not as unfettered as generally believed and is, in fact, very much under attack.

A news item today is headed: Microsoft admits helping China censor web logs. The story reports that an alarm is triggered when such terms as "Taiwan independence" "democracy" and Human rights" are posted.

I wonder who, on this continent, Microsoft is aiding.

"It can't happen here." you say?

Wrong. It already is.

A conclusion which I came to myself following "periods" in Eastern Europe in the 70s, actually. All of which says more about what happened to the October Russian Revolution, especially under and following Stalin, and the risks to would-be "working class revolution" when that class is ill-prepared, not engaged, and/or it falls into gangster hands. (Not unlike formal current democracy here.) Indeed, all the major players in current "modern capitalist" Russia, with its Russian Mafia and all, were virtually all lifted out of the pages of so-called "Communist Russia". They were all operational even then, Yeltsin from the Central Committee and Putin from the KGB, and merely made a decision at some point after the failure of Afghanistan, to move out from behind their Hammer and Sickle cover, to proclaim what was really there all the time, a kind of neophyte, state run capitalism, only to divvy it up amongst themselves, and which I had no trouble seeing there even during my time.

Which says to me, the process was at work for a very long time, long before Yeltsin crossed the floor, so to speak.

Democracy, real democracy, not "market democracy" or a "ruling class democracy", as in ANY ruling class, was the problem in the old USSR AND is the problem in current capitalist democracy. (Which is the fly in the ointment of all "vanguardist" theories of social change. They tend to replicate the "elitist" models of old, against which they initially arose.) After stating which, you and I will need to argue, "What is democracy? Precisely what kind of democracy? With what essential social, political and economic elements and characteristics?"

At which point one's "to the right" or "left" perspective begins to become evident and colour one's ideas about democracy, of course, as it does all the issues of society and class in general.

Outside of that, I continue to maintain, the right and left "tool" has evolved to help explain the kinds of ideological differences that tend to "typically" occur at the different levels of society's class structure. It is useful to that degree, I contend. The "nut bar" exists, not as a single ladder, as you describe, I suggest, but as a narrow band at both extremes. (Indeed, it is my personal observation that the left to right line in politics is, at the very least, an arced or curving line going out from the centre, with the two ends "tending" to draw down towards and mimic each other, as though trying to complete a kind of circle. For which I have no off-hand explanation.)

All that said, like I say, the essential component upon which we agree, I think, is the need for democracy-, BUT, as I've indicated above, opening up a whole other can of worms, of different "right" AND "left" perspectives and possibilities.

People who think the Internet is a more reliable source of unbiased information on current events than other forms of media make me laugh.

The earlier poster who said the medium defines the content hit the nail on the head. World Lefty television or whatever it's going to be called will undoubtedly start out with good intentions. Then they'll run out of money, start airing ads, become chained to the ratings game, and it's all soundbites and cute pet stories from then on.

Suggesting a left-wing tv station is the answer is to disavow the notion that two wrongs don't make a right.

re: Left needs a voice. See above.

The mass media does not represent the general population. Maybe 30% of Canadians see themselves as "left" and about two-thirds of the population share at least some "left" values. Yet the media pumps out mostly right wing propaganda. As but one example, 80% of Canadians opposed the Iraq invasion, yet this was not reflected in the media. So too with a whole list of positions and situations. What has happened is that the media - controlled by a handful of rihgt-wing corporate and US state apologists - attempt to brainwash the majority. This is unacceptable and people should do something about it. While, like Coyote, I don't hold a great deal of hope for a Left CNN, I do think a growing distaste and rejection of the dominant media is a good sign.

Where do I send my 50 bucks?

"As but one example, 80% of Canadians opposed the Iraq invasion, yet this was not reflected in the media."

You're kidding right? The anti-war movement was covered extensively.

Cite your sources for those statistics if you want to be taken seriously.

If Ron Erwin doesn't like it that's good enough reason for me to anticipate I will.

It continues to baffle me that people will show up here bemoaning loudly that Tyee is nothing but a left-wing rant as though the majority of us just dropped in for a loaf of bread.

Stuart, you're right. We are already getting the negative feedback from the mainstream apologists.

No ads eh? That in itself makes the proposal a winner. Maybe I will return to the tube afterall.

I wish we could get away from the narrow confines of Left & Right debate. It limits dialogue to ideological rhetoric and ranting. I think anywhere where there is an opportunity to provide stories with balanced and opposing views is progress...especially if that information is more than a standard 30 second "news" clip "off the wire." The corporate reality (whether you're opinion is left or right) is that corporations need to create profit, period. Subsequently foreign correspondent and research budgets are cut and organizations have to rely on a smaller world view, second or third hand, from a limited pool of resources.

Further, anarcho, that mass media was invariably gung ho on joining forces in an illegal slaughter abhorrent to the majority of Canadians.

We've been indoctrinated to think of two Iraq wars when, in fact, it has been one continuous conflict with the contriving of incidents to allow hundreds of bombing sorties between the two major attacks - following the first cessation.

There are many war criminals yet to be tried. And many in the mass media who should hang their heads in shame.

"People who think the Internet is a more reliable source of unbiased information on current events than other forms of media make me laugh." - Yup the internet is the bathroom wall of the world.

The media doesn't do a good job of telling people what to think, but it does do a great job of defining what it is that people think about. In other words, framing the debate.

If any new media source broadens this frame, biased or not, it would be a good thing. Surely there are greater tragedies than the drunken adventures of youth on houseboats.

Well said. And most of them from the Evil Empire to the south, are unfortunately, likely to escape unscathed. Unless plain folks there come to play a larger role in how their eventual defeat evolves-, as in their own outrage on the day of the war's judgement causes them to hand much of their own Neoconazi political and military leadership over to moral and legal judgement.

No, I ain't going to hold my breath. It's just that what's fair for smaller states, should apply to the great imperial powers as well-, which like dealing with the schoolyard bully, does get a little trickier. Not impossible mind, just trickier.

What we need, I think, is less a formal "media" per se than a media of folks in motion creating their own news, access to it, and cutting through the bullshit of the corporate media, trashing their kind of censorship and control.

Democratize the media, aye, including the corporate one-, by creating democratically controlled editorial and operation functions-, in the hands of its journalistic and other workers, and with community and user group representation on boards of directors and management etc.

Then apply that principle throughout the economy. That's the real need of a serious democracy that functions at all levels.

Are we not missing the point? Left and right are labels that can mislead. Richard Nixon will be remembered as a crook, but few people know how close he was to introducing a welfare on demand regime that would have entitled any citizen to receive benefits without any more proof of need than a tax return. Before the modern era in the War on Drugs, the Nixon administration provided treatment on demand for heroin addicted junkies in New York City.
And we know what political stripe Tony Blair wears, but it hasn't stopped him from war-mongering and setting up detention camps.
Critical thinking is far more important than labelling because it doesn't destroy complexity.

Stump sez, "As but one example, 80% of Canadians opposed the Iraq invasion, yet this was not reflected in the media."

You're kidding right? The anti-war movement was covered extensively.

Cite your sources for those statistics if you want to be taken seriously."

I know Skepticool already answered this, but what I was referring to way not coverage, but editorial opinion, comment and news slant. Did any mass cirulation newspaper or TV station encourage people to oppose the invasion, say the way they encourage people to hate trade unions or student strikes?

Stump sez, "As but one example, 80% of Canadians opposed the Iraq invasion, yet this was not reflected in the media."

You're kidding right? The anti-war movement was covered extensively.

Cite your sources for those statistics if you want to be taken seriously."

I know Skepticool already answered this, but what I was referring to was not coverage, but editorial opinion, comment and news slant. Did any mass cirulation newspaper or TV station encourage people to oppose the invasion, say the way they encourage people to hate trade unions or student strikes?

Who gets it. Anarcho sees through the smoke and mirrors bullshit of the corporate media, and its built in biases that have been there for so long and are built into the culture of capitalism so deeply, that it seems the norm to all but the most critical thinkers. The concepts of balance and objectivity in The Media are largely the myths of "servant" intellectuals so used to grovelling and spewing apologetics that, they don't really know what balance and objectivity are any more.

Balance and objectivity are phenomena seldom seen in REAL corporate media, rhetorical illusions, high blown notions that are but thin veils behind which it seeks to hide its real class partisan face and manipulative agenda. Some are, like The Globe and Mail and CBC, marginally better at their pretence, some like the National Post are worse, don't even try to hide their blatant propaganda function. But all really see their task as rationalizing "the system" to the unwashed, winning them to the corporate "ruling class" agenda, or failing that, disillusioning them with their obfuscations that pass for "news", and arming with partisan analysis their many apologists-, some of whom we meet here.

The only real way to cut through it all and end the scam is, to democratize the media, period.

Why was Rex Murphy's sorry puss, and the sound of his nasally superior voice so stubbornly in my mind, throughout the writing of that last wee piece? :-) It was almost as if he typified the apologist, hack intellectual journalist. :-) Can't be, can it?

What a sorry state that venerable institution has fallen to. (Welll, it always was really, but at least they did it better, with some semblance of competence at least, such that even I could comfortingly, like sucking my thumb, fool myself.)

Ihave signed up - very good luck to a much needed organization - am looking forward to reporting that is fair, objective and reflects the real interests of the citizens of this small planet. Now if we could just get Avi Lewis to run for the Ed Broadbent constituency in Ontario in the next election, my cup would indeed runneth over.

For those annoying times when someone else is controlling the remote, or the dial is out of reach, I've discovered a simple and effective method for jamming out Rex Murphy.

Has anyone else noticed Murphy's overuse, approaching that of a verbal tic, of the word "particular"? Once you're aware of this, it becomes almost impossible to notice anything else that he is saying.

Try it!

"Did any mass cirulation newspaper or TV station encourage people to oppose the invasion, say the way they encourage people to hate trade unions or student strikes?"

Do you not understand this is the flip side of the coin you currently are decrying as the perverted currency of modern media?

Seems it's OK if the news media picks sides, just so long as it's your side.

Great, another left wing news source that bashes the USA
ill stay with FOX NEWS
at least there FAIR AND BALENCED

You said it bruvver. Ed Deak, Big Lake.

I had just cleared his establishment, ass kisser image out of my brain, when you put up this piece and fixed him there like a 24 hr virus to contend with again. :-)

And then there is kikasuiboy,

With his tongue freshly blackened, from licking Yankee boots.

You do just that. Stay with Yankee Fox News. We would consider it a favour.

Though I am a little confused why Canadian supporters of the Iraq War here aren't over there in the U.S. Army or Marines, helping their Master's Voice lose it, or sending their sons and daughters.

No greater love hath any man (or woman), but that they will lay down their own life for their friends.

Without that willingness to sacrifice for your principles, you are all just so many vacuous apologists and bootlicks.

I went to the preview at VS. last night. The web site is being launched today and you will be able to donate online. Paul Jay the founder did the presentation, and he then opened it up to questions.

One guy who said he uses the tyee asked Jay if they were just going to be a left wing bias network as the tyee calls it the CNN for the left. I love Paul's answer "no that’s just one persons opinion about our network , we are going to have investigative coverage of issues, we are not going to go out of our way to be balanced for the sake of being balanced , having said that , once we have investigated and come up with the truth or factual information we will just report it as is without pressure from any group. We will report what we feel is the truth, if people want to call that being left , well whatever. And if we report news that we feel is true based on facts and information, if someone wants to call it right, well whatever.

Anyway folks don't let people(Bootlickers) distract you from this wonderful news, they are going to give context to news go against the status quo, they are looking for ideas and support. This is your chance to stop wining about CanWest etc and do something positive.

Found your piece interesting, Stuart. Though I have some "doubts" as to how this will ultimately evolve, up against deep corporate pockets, I will certainly go online and make a donation to what sounds like a worthy effort. Nothing ventured, nothing gained is appropriate here, I think.

When anyone comes up with the URL to the web site, it would be appreciated if it could be posted here, in some future thread.

Re-read above, went to the IWT site and already made the donation. (It's finicky. Everything must be exactly right in the pay section.)

Good work Coyote, the public site is being launched today at IWTnews.com . It will
Be running by around 4 pm eastern time. This network is not going to be taking money from
Advertisers, government, or corporations. Just citizens who believe in a different world.
One in which folks have context and real news that encourages people to actually do something. Unlike the current news that just disengages folks, IWT also wants feedback and ideas from people who want to get involved. Anyway , you donation is appreciated. Spread the news and the url, check out the site and its time lines etc, very interesting. Once again check back later today.

IWTnews.com is up and running. Awsome. Go check it out, lots of good info. TTFN

Stump wrote "Do you not understand this is the flip side of the coin you currently are decrying as the perverted currency of modern media?

Seems it's OK if the news media picks sides, just so long as it's your side"

"Objectivity" is mostly rubbish. I have nothing against people taking an ideological stance. But why is only one ideological stance allowed in the mass media? What we need is enough media outlets to cover the major positions, or barring that have mass media that allow different viewpoints (other than tokenism) Then, in a true market place of ideas, let people decide for themselves. Let's have room for neocons, paleocons, social democrats, socialists, greens, anarchists and any combination thereof. Unfortunately we don't have that, but have a situation (other than the Internet and groups like Tyee) someonewhat like Eastern European countries before the fall of the Berlin Wall. We are continually propagandized by neocon ideology.

"anarcho" do your part to change things . Support this new network, you have nothing to lose. If you study the founding committee you will see many social activists etc like Naomi Kline, once you take the profit motive out of the programming you gain freedom to tell the truth, something missing at this time in history. I feel this network is the perfect start, so get informed and check out the site. Good posts.

"Unfortunately we don't have that, but have a situation (other than the Internet and groups like Tyee) someonewhat like Eastern European countries before the fall of the Berlin Wall."

Oh man, that's ludicrous. We don't have 1984 on our hands, it's Brave New World, and most people don't give a damn as long as they have a gram.

Listen to that laughable Stump. He has about the grip on socio-political reality as he does a handful of water.

Mostly, I agree with the gist of what I think Anarcho really means here: Two
sets of different class/ socio-ideological perspectives, as right and left, can look at the same social phenomena and draw radically different "objective" conclusions from it.

I think there is such a thing as objective reality, BUT, how one sees and interprets that is very much conditional on how one sees one's own particular individual, or given a "social conciousness", set of class interests. In short, we approach social, political and economic reality from a particular perception of our own interests. That is bias. And the bias viewpoint which overwhelmingly dominates within our "capitalist" society, along the broad material and intellectual front of that social reality, is that of "this system's" dominant or "ruling" class, especially its great "corporate ruling class". It is currently the great wind before which all but the strongest and most determined trees bend.

The priviledged class and its various strata, from their perch on high within society, assert that "partisan" view of theirs through all the media and institutions of society which they exert a controlling influence over-, and they are the major institutions of current society. The "lower", or if you will, working class and its various strata , looking up from the ground beneath them, see the same space between, over and around them, but from a quite different perspective, which tends to lead, given consistency and relative freedom from a controlling influence on high, to quite a different set of "objective" conclusions.

Hence, objectivity tends, like everything else. to be relative, or at least perceived so-, in this social case, to/from the position(s) which one looks at and/or experiences it. And nowhere is that more true, than when dealing with the social realities of a class divided society-, though it is entirely likely to colour many/all other levels of experience as well.

And what is happening now is, Neoconazi Capitalism is sharpening and making hard those different class positions within current society, and increasingly sharpening those "objective differences" within our perceptions of social phenomenon, their outcomes and effects. Hence, their is a sharpening class struggle emerging around these different objectivities and our perceptions of them, and over which the Neoconazi and other capitalist partisan groupings can only be feigning surprise. Unless, of course, they are way more stupid, at the very least naive, than even we had thought.

Now, bright and early, I'm away to the coast for a few days. Catch ya's later.

(I want some Spanish saffron from Galloway's in New West, some spices from, oooo, something Foods on Kingsway near 25th, a meal at Vong's, and some "bicycle" supplies from MEC.)

I've never posted to this site before but I had to extend a personal offer of compassion to Ron Irwin. Clearly he hangs around the Tyee's forums to have the kind of balanced debate our mainstream media just doesn’t support. I feel your pain.

Much as I liked the story, I must respectfully challenge Mr. Gutstein (or the responsible Tyee editor) for the unfortunate choice of title. It’s created a bit of a red herring debate.

Those who visit the IWB site will see their call is simply one for BALANCE. I don’t recall a single statement endorsing more “left wing” coverage.

So why does the seemingly benign concept of 'balance' evoke such venom in some people?

By the way, Anarcho, I appreciated your observation about the vilification of trade unions. Rick Cluff on CBC’s Early Edition blithely threw out the “Big Union” label not once but twice in his interview with Carol James this morning. Aye,'tis a slipperly slope to journalistic hackdom. Has anyone heard Gordon Campbell called on the carpet for his endorsements from "Big Money?" But anyway...

Coyote, just one observation: Blah-de blah-de blah-de blah, blah.!!!! You give Rex Murphy a good run for his money.

Don't worry Stuart, I am going to support IWT. I went to the site and it looks good. Coyote, your examination of "objectivity" is more or less in accordance with my own thinking, though class perspective alone doesn't always account for differences of opinion, such as those we find on the left. However, that is an other topic entirely. Stump, do you really belive we have a mass media open to all ideas or one that propagandizes one basic (class) position?

Cute. :-)

And whose concept of balance are we talking about here?

:-D

True. I think one's class position is the main feature of it-, which annoys the more high brown intellectual, of cosure. That said, there are doubtless other elements, such as upbringing and one's particular experiences involved as well, and then there are those pesky wealthy exceptions who display a capacity for solidarity with "lesser folks", and our working class neocon supporters, of course.

As you say, a larger subject.

What a more diverse media will do, hopefully, is to make the public question more. I don't think you can escape bias but if we have more than one massive influential plate serving up their version of the so-called "truth" then at least we, the public, will hopefully again, see the discrepancies that are exposed and exist between truths... and make in the end a more accurate judgment call on the events that swirl around us everyday... presenting opportunities to question, I think at least, is what its all about.

Maybe I'll tackle the role of the media in the class struggle after I re-read Coyote a couple of times, because there's a lot of stuff in there and for the most part I agree with him most of the time.

However. this question was posed to me. I'll confine my answer to deal mostly with television as that's what the original story is dealing with.

"Stump, do you really belive we have a mass media open to all ideas or one that propagandizes one basic (class) position?"

My answer is an example. I rented a DVD the other day. "The Control Room". If you haven't seen it, the documentary is about Al Jazeera's coverage of the U.S. invasion of Iraq. Takes the piss out corporate American news, the U.S. army media relations people, shows dead Iraqi kids, and in no way is the kind of thing that media mega-corporations want or need their viewers to see. I rented it from Blockbuster.

The real question (as Coyote has proven in other threads) is, who owns the means of production? Who owns the media? If you step far enough away, or get right into the belly of the beast, the answer is the viewer. Ratings are king and a remote control makes the viewer the producer, director, and editor of their own personal drama.

Further, image and sound recording devices are ubiquitious... and in the hands of average folk. The cat is out of the bag. The cows have left the barn. Pandora's box is open. Pick your cliche, but the days of 'mass' media are soon to be over, whether corporations want it or not.

I wish this new venture every success. But if they think that earnest panel discussions telling people how to think is the path to a socialist paradise they haven't really looked at the medium and its contrainsts. If they think that left-leaning intelligentsia make for good television they may be mistaken.

If you truly want a revolution, telling people that giving up the good life now for a rosy future they'll never see isn't the answer. If you want a meme to fuel a better tomorrow I offer you this. Vegetarian cyclists have amazing sex. Push that idea in the mainstream media whenever you can and you will hasten the change you seek. If you think I'm kidding or being arch, I assure you I'm not.

"constraints"

Hey admins, check out this site - vul.bc.ca. It lets registered users edit their posts after they've prematurely hit the post button.

One other thing.

Media isn't a flashlight showing the way. It's a mirror that reflects what you choose to believe.

Coyote:

'Famous' Foods.

Happy shopping you old dog. I hope we meet in person one day.

with much respect

Stump

Good posts everyone, your right Lynn, I attended the preview for this channel at the VFS with Paul Jay the founder presenting. Paul put it this way, our news will give you context and will make people want to do something after your done watching it unlike what we have now. He said we are not a left wing network but are not going out of our way to be balanced for the sake of being balanced. We are going to report news based on the facts and investigation and if people want to call the results left wing than so be it. The current media system is so corrupt and self serving, in a Florida court ruling they said that FOX news had no obligation to tell the truth in the operation of its business. Any powerful group like a union or activist network or movement will be crushed by the MSM in its propaganda war against social change and a different way of living. Our current system has the top 1% of income earners in the world making as much as the bottom 57% combined. We are talking huge entrenched interest here folks, this could not have happened without the tools of empire.

I was at the PIC Pub last weekend for a rally, anyway this sweet girl had a badge that said Union Thug on it. We need to built up this net network and tear down the existing structure. This is very good news folks, lets get behind it.

"The Control Room". an amazing film, did you know the US marine that was featured in the film
Has actually left the marines now in disgust of their actions and was on the talk show circuit.
Stump is right , the MSM audience is declining in mass #'s . Recently only 22% of people polled said they trust the MSM, this is why awesome docs and shows like the John Stewart show are so popular. If this network is able to run and be successful you will see the gates open wide for this kind of network. Half a mil people paying 50 bucks is all you need to run it for one year. That’s nothing on a global scale, god you could come up with that just in Greater Van. The difficult part will be lobbing the CRTC and US Regulators to run the channel, this is where the fight lies, a fight worth fighting.

Where the neo-cons have triumphed is in the field of image making, framing the issues... advertising is in their blood and permeates their cold souls and they use it better than anyone...in that regard, both Stuart and Stump make interesting arguments for subversive image making, framing the issues, as a counter weapon...In Stuart's reference to the sweet girl with the Union Thug badge and Stump's reference to vegetarian cyclists...

In fact, from reading these threads for quite some time now it proves framing must work... because when I think Stump... I think bicycle...as I do with Coyote...but in his case I think bicycle... and a wee, very fine drink of scotch... not at the same time , of course... :-)

The right knows that their power hangs by threads, look at all the media saturation during the last election, all the negative references to unions, "special interest groups etc" The fact is that The Fiberals are one of the most extreme governments around full of patronage and special interest, even with all the propaganda and media they lost, they lost the popular vote, but the media won in playing the Greens like a 3 party horse race, sorry a party that has never won a seat should not get the same attention as the other parties. When very few hold the wealth of a people they are always running scared and spending whatever it takes to hold on to power, media in toe. I have seen the list of members in the founding committee of this new station, once these remarkable people hit the air waves it will be game over. Some wooden dick from the Fraser institute will not have a chance. The right has one purpose, to claw back any success gained by the people aka, Health care, welfare, CPP, Employment Ins, Public education etc put these onto the so called free market to enrich themselves and give blushing tax cuts to themselves. And they leave a F... Mess every time, Mike Harris for example set public health and education back 20 yrs and increased the dept by 6 billion and turned the environment into a toilet aka Walkerton.
Anyway I digress, support this network folks.

Actually this is like deja vu. The Independent started out in 1986, while Rupert Murdoch was busily tearing apart Fleet Street, when three Telegraph journalists decided to leave and start up a newspaper co-operative. They had a good run during an explosive time but the co-op didn't last long - it's now owned by O'Reilly - but it remains a great paper on what you might call the dovish left (anti-war, like the Lib Dems and MP indies like Galloway, and currently leading a campaign for electoral reform, prompted by the obscene results of last month's election).

The Guardian is the self-proclaimed paper of record for the left, and for Blair's Labour booster club cheerleaders.

Ironically, Murdoch presided over last week's "funeral" for Fleet Street, as Reuters' London bureau was the last to leave the area.

Seems to me my brother-in-law has the best attitude vis a vis news biases. He reads the Guardian when the Conservatives are in power and the Telegraph when Labour's in. Figures that's the only way to get anything close to a semblance of truth.

Sorry to arrive to this vital debate so late, but was out of town for a week.

In case anyone comes back, I would like to offer a slightly different perspective to the right/left debate: in this age of information, its completely obselete! I wish its champions would take their rightful place in the history books and let the rest of us get on with a life!

Why is it completely obselete? Because ladies and gentlemen, the left now IS the right.

According to Raymond James Bank, 68% of the US economy and 67% of the Canadian economy now belong to "we the people". It's in our RRSPs, in our pensions! Another 20% of each economy belongs to the nine out of ten businesses in each country that are small businesses, people still close enough to their communitites to support them and value them. Isn't possession 9/10s of the law?

I am a right wing small business guy who was so disgusted by the practices of big business in my field that I felt we small businesses had to fight. We did it out of duty. It didn't really occur to us that we could win, but we did, again and again. We have probably ibnherited one of the most powerful citizenships that has ever been.

I'm no lefty but I am terrified of our prospects as mere digits in the "corporate new-world order".

Ironically, the cornerstone of our communications law is still the responsibility of the tennants of our (we citizen's) airwaves to protect the public good. With Greg Palast on board they have my vote!

Fortunately, Tucker Carlson is no longer on PBS since June 17, 2005. MSNBC offered him a more lucrative deal.

Hopefully the same will happen with The (Wall Street) Journal Editorial Report.