Why news media must be public (commentary)

A renecnt advertising campaign that reeeeeally bothered me was CPAC's "We're better because we're independent" campaign. I only read about it in the paper, since I don't watch tv. However, the article explained that the spots featuring Tom Green (they would have gotten Rick Mercer, but his CBC contract wouldn't allow it!) claimed that CPAC was more reliable (than CBC, I would presume) because it is "owned by a group of cable companies" (I'm paraphrasing).

Uh, yeah. Rogers and Bell and Global. They don't have any interest in public policy whatsoever, do they?

Just now, it clicked for me: I was watching reading the director's introduction to the movie WAL-MART: The high cost of low price", which I was given a copy of recently. I had also just finished watching the producer's interview with Lou Dobbs on the website.

The introduction made a reference to footage of WAL-MART CEO Lee Scott that they had "secured". This reminded me that to use a media corporation's broadcast, you need their permission. Such permission means that the corporation can decide who they want to use their footage (e.g. of announcements, speeches, etc.). This gives them a way of being biased (i.e. not independent) towards the people they report on by only sharing the material with producers they know will use the footage in the way they want it to be used.

The only solution to avoid this conflict is to make all of their footage available for free, and the closest I think that we have is the BBC, which has opened up its entire archive for download on the internet (although I've never personally dabbled with trying to get a rebroadcast permit from any media company).

Ironically, the BBC is not, as CPAC put it, "independent". Go figure.

- RG>

More trees, less Bush (commentary)

While playing online backgammon the other day, someone commented on my username (which combines "realgrouchy" and "canada" in an entirely unimaginitive way).

Their comment was, "What do you have to be grouchy about up there? At least you don't have Bush."

As much as I hate to chat while playing online games (after all, I don't go into other people's chatrooms and start playing backgammon), in this case I couldn't help but give a clever and concise reply à la moi:

"His foreign policy."

- RG>

Executive decision (announcement)

After a discussion with my style consultant, I have decided to grow my beard out.

- RG>

Bush diagnosed with Schizophrenia (commentary)

Shaath, now the Palestinian information minister, said: "President Bush said to all of us: 'I'm driven with a mission from God'".

"'God would tell me, 'George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan'.

"'And I did. And then God would tell me, 'George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq... ' And I did.

"'And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, 'Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East'. And by God I'm gonna do it'," said Shaath.

... and then God said, "George, you're putting too much pressure on yourself. Go take five weeks off, and start paying yourself more."


Need I say, 8P.

- RG>

Ahahahahahaha.... but seriously, drop the tariffs (commentary)

Okay, so Paul Martin is talking to a bunch of Wall Street peeps about the US softwood lumber tariffs, and guess what he says:

"These tariffs make your lumber companies happy - American consumers and workers, not so happy,"

Next, he'll be meeting with the leaders of the Canadian Media Guild to tell them that this whole strike thing is putting pressure on CBC managerial staff!

- RG>

Professor Phlox (comment)

Lol. I have a philosophy prof who reminds me of a combination of French Stewart (eyes) and Dr. Phlox from Star Trek: Enterprise (mannerisms). It's about the only thing that keeps me awake in that class...when I am awake.

- RG>

Yahoo! still hasn't forgiven Dixie Chicks

As you can see here, Yahoo! still hasn't forgiven the Dixie Chicks for their anti-war stance. While they have put links on the names of the other artists performing at an upcoming Katrina-relief fund, Yahoo! has opted to not let news readers easily search for stories related to the Dixie Chicks.

Although some of the other artists may indeed have been against the invasion and occupation of Iraq, the Dixie Chicks were put front and centre, and many media outlets decided not to play their music. Yahoo! obviously does not want people to know this.

...also, this is all speculation on my part...

- RG>