This is bang on. What is surprising is the Liberal media in both the US & Canada can’t see the obvious. Ratings and readership are dropping for legacy media while independent & Fox media ratings are growing. (Why is Fox Nation a success while CNN+ was a failure?)
It would be interesting to see what Canadian organizations would collapse if government ended the funding & bailouts.
I commented something similar to this on CBC and got banned. Refrained from using language and what not just straight facts about how the influence of money may be corrupting the views. Poof. Gone
The CBC now engages in outright lies. Not shoddy reporting, or biased reporting, they outright spread lies to the great detriment of everyone in our country. You're better off ... off CBC. And I say this as one who used to listen to several great shows on the radio and recall the great investigative journalism they once did. I'm no Johnny come lately to the CBC, it's sad what it's become. The sooner people leave it the better. Let it die on the vine.
CBC was decent up until 2010 listened to CBC RADIO OFTEN , THEY HAD MANY great shows doubt any of them would get airplay today . CBC should e shut down we don't need the liberal party propaganda machine
CBC is state-sponsored media. That's not surprising. But many Canadians don't seem to realize so is the rest of your media. They literally rely on Trudeau's government for financial support to survive.
There is now a Ministry of truth. Funny thing is, this isn't the government that will decsend into full on totalitarian rule, these are the caretakers. Building the tools neccassary to absolutely crush dissent to policies in future governments, smiling and virtue signaling while they do it. Like it will somehow all work out because people are so reasonable and respectful with power. Corruption, greed and status are almost as much a part of us as breathing air. That's why we need robust laws to protect people from eachother to protect them from limiting each one's ability to organize. Or declaring one side is all racists. Or declaring they hold unacceptable views. Or to declare to stop spending time with unvaccinated people.
I Created and Produced a TV series from 2001-2007. The nature of the series was one which the network wasn't willing to go all-in on with a big license fee to finance the budget so they offered us the entire 1/2 hr. vs the 22:00 we would have for the content of our show if they retained (and sold) the ad inventory. This was scary as we didn't know the first thing about selling advertising (:30 sec commercials). But they assured us that we had full control of our 1/2 hour to do whatever we wanted (other than nudity and the usual).
As we started down this road we found that our show content was actually more valuable than the :30 spots. The advertisers wanted to have their products in the show with the cast using them and the most value was letting them help with content ideas around how that would happen. The advertisers were Labatt's, McDonald's, Milk, Toyota, Red Bull, etc.
With the rise of online video content and mobile devices, content producers and advertisers continued to blur the line. After the series I helped create one of the first streaming video platforms and the viability of the entire company hinged on figuring out how to embed interactive ads into the video stream.
I have continued to watch as legacy media dies a slow death only to be revived by some fear-based content to haul back eyeballs. I now see that advertising for drugs in Canada is common. This wasn't the case a few years ago and a component of the Trudeau legacy media "bail-out", I suspect.
Now, veteran newscasters and journalists with more than 5 years of life experience and who've actually lived through actual scandals, pandemics, wars, manufactured "democracy" through dirty foreign policy, etc. have all left or been ousted from their posts because they wanted to remain ethical to their profession. We're expected to watch and read (and believe without question!) radio show producers, national journalists, reporters are all plucked straight out of a leftist ideology-captured post secondary system and told to read the script.
The script that the advertisers (through agencies and PR firms) write, or at least approve.
Don't forget about Canada's current self-flagellation project vis a vis residential schools and "mass graves," which don't exist and nothing has ever been found to corroborate any such claim. It's a lucrative claim and MSM has NEVER questioned it that I have read. EVER. It's Phil Fontaine's personal project, aided by a TRC summary that cherry picks "facts" and as far as Canadian taxpayers are concerned (who are, after all, the funders of this immensely expensive undertaking), we will fund for eternity, unless some time limit is placed.
This is a complex issue, as anyone who knows indigenous people personally knows. The residential schools were real, and the harm they caused was real. The abuse (especially sexual) was real. However, that does not mean that all these graves were real, or that deaths that happened at the schools were intentional. In my experience, systems & governments are indifferent to the suffering of those whose lives they destroy, so the deaths were deaths of indifference, not intention. Even worse, the technocrats really have "plausible deniability
" because they really did not know they harm they were doing. In fact, they viewed themselves as good moral citizens.
It's always wise not to engage in presentism, which is really the position du jour it seems. It is a complex issue indeed, but it has not properly been reported. One only has to see what happens to anyone in an academic position, say, who questions the current narrative.
Given the recent research done (which compliments a lot of earlier contemporaneous research and accounts), which I suppose will never see the light of MSM day, I'm not convinced that indigenous experience at residential schools was as abusive or shameful as is being made out. The whole thing is rooted in extortion, or what Widdowson calls "neotribal rentierism" and it absolutely is divisive. It's no wonder the CBC shuts down all commenting on its articles. They cannot even be bothered to do a smidgeon of a vestige of investigative journalism.
2 reasons Tara, like the vast majority of people who discuss such things, falls FAR SHORT of really understanding the problem:
A) "not saying there’s anything wrong with these stories"
There IS something wrong with these stories when they are promoted above far more important stories simply to PROPAGANDIZE a narrative. There is something VERY WRONG with many of these stories, and anyone who doesn't internalize that is nearly as lost as the people who publish them. And that means Tara.
B) "I’m just pointing out that they are popular."
They are popular ONLY with people in the CULT. It is simply pouring koolaid for cult members.
The interesting thing about Tara is how hard she seems to be trying to seek the truth, but how deep into the groupthink Tara still is. It comes through in every article. Shame.
I agree with most of what you say, but cut Tara some slack. She had the integrity and courage to critically examine her own views and those of her industry and act accordingly.
Many things Tara says show that she is still stuck with those views. Cutting everyone slack is how things never improve. Examining? Maybe. Seeing the underlying issues? Not yet.
Shame? I don't think so. She's still transitioning, as she admits. The demands of daily journalism and limited staff often mean going to the tried and true narratives and stories. Unfortunately in recent years those stories are only covered from a single side, that of propaganda. I'm fascinated with stories about climate change, transgenderism, and everything else, but only when there's actual debate taking place in them. Which is never.
Excellent article! I love your "no-fly list" of subjects we simply no longer see actual reporting about. Since the beginning of this charade 2 years ago the best argument has been the one sided reporting. No one ever has a good answer as to why we don't see debate about the most important issues of our time. Thanks, and keep up the great work!
This is almost sad to read -- a journo still wet from media fishbowl, struggling to explain what those of us on the outside have understood for years.
There's another way to explain the phenomenon of why the media "looks and sounds much the same" -- it's called journalists eating each others turds. The blind acceptance of narrative and recycling of other mainstream reporting without conducting even a nanosecond of due diligence.
I agree 100%, Kate. I honestly wonder if Tara is what she says she is or is the "I'm reforming" publicity just her business plan to attract a different audience. For someone who makes the background claims Tara makes, she sure does struggle to understand the foundations of the issues. Or maybe she is just so programmed to be PC that she simply can't call a turd a turd. Whatever it is, I quickly learned to be very choosy about reading her stuff. It depends totally whether I think a person she is interviewing can make a strong case in spite of Tara.
Nice article. I remember somewhere Chomsky recounting a story that journalists are mainly hired because their views are not a threat to the consensus. It's not that journalists conform, but that the people who are hired already fit the class and status that creates the consensus. I speculate whether this is also reinforced through an ageist policies which also benefit the bottom line. That is, hiring younger cheaper journalists who are also more impressionable, less historically experienced and knowledgeable, while pushing older, more expensive and more critical journos to the fringes.
Excellent points, and in recent times these kids have been indoctrinated from middle school; too often under educated in civics, critical thinking, courage in the face of adversity and history.
We seem to be on a pathway in MSM which punishes diversity of thought and belief, which is very disturbing, boring and impoverished. Intelligent people have more questions than answers. Where did the skeptical, questioning, insightful journalists go?
i worked at Time Inc from 2001-2012 and what happened to the older journalists and editors is that with every "restructuring" these people were often the first to walk the plank, as they had the larger salaries and benefits (and this process very much accelerated after the 2008 crash, which was basically a wipeout for any employees over age 50);
and these older, wiser and more interesting journalists were replaced by fresh-faced graduates, many of whom were still be supported by their parents, and these younger journalists were much more conformist and careerist and much more interested in Identity and Identity issues than anyone from prior generations.
Part of what we're witnessing is simply generational turnover, and as we can see the older journalistic values have been replaced by the values and ethos of our younger liberal arts graduates: not so much dedicated to truth, accuracy, neutrality (in fact suspicious of these things), but instead more focused on feelings (esp the feelings of the formerly marginalized) and hewing to the approved narratives du jour.
For just 4 months from MSM your red pilling and deprogramming are progressing well. This is a great piece that hits nails on their heads. You missed a few biggies like climate crisis, economic bloat, fiat devaluation and how the WEF and its head Klaus Schwab brags openly about Canada’s subversion.
Unapologetically delve deeper. Keep peeling those layers exposing the rot to fresh air! It is needed.
Typically the term fiat goes back to the Ron Paul popularization of the term. As currencies fail, the alternative he championed was to limit currencies to commodity values such as gold. Most people are not rich enough to have gold however. Fortunately Schwab promises us that we won't need a currency, he has his own for us to become subservient to.
"We are inclined to believe that people want to be free, but most people don't. Most people are scared of freedom. Freedom brings with it responsibility; it brings challenges. It makes [it so] that you need to think. You need to do a certain mental labor; you need to think about your life, [and] you need to think about decisions you have to make... Most people prefer not to do it and prefer to look for someone who tells them what to do."
Yes, it would be a shock to most adults or most proto adults that are in schools and graduating, to know that our system is run by lunatics who do not like the people. People like feeling that the gov't or big daddy hi tech sector is somehow looking out for humanity. Denial is keeping them sane. The gov't cannot change the climate for you - most people cannot agree with this statement because of years of indoctrination.
So many 'vital' issues were discussed in this piece, and yet climate hypocrisy was never mentioned. Examine our collective cognitive conformity when thinking about climate issues. Our societies appear to be subconsciously 'convinced' that we have until 2100 to act...but we still don't have a clue as to what we should really be doing collectively. We are just too busy polarizing populations and making wars to be able to take climate and energy conservation seriously.
Any individual's specific belief in the efficacy of governments is irrelevant. The governments don't want to 'change' the climate, they only want 'normal', so do societies...and 'normal' appears to be the culprit. The obstacle is the path...
It's not about what I believe, it is about civilization figuring out how Homo sapiens will survive what's coming. It's about finally getting some 'smarts'...
Hydro carbon fuels presumably will not last forever, at which point we will not be able to drive Tesla's any more. We could of course go back to the horse and buggy era, that option is always there. But yes, the climate will change on Earth as it always has, the difference this time will be that a whole crop of young people were raised in a cult that told them they were evil humans who were killing the planet.
Guilt and blame around climate disintegration issues constitute luxury beliefs. Hatred for those who 'caused' too much carbon to be in the atmosphere can be cultivated like Russophobia was and the hatred for the convoys and Trump.
Um, haven't you heard of the Trusted News Initiative, where various major media organizations agreed to promote the COVID vaccines? It's not hard to research - even Google will tell you about it.
And then there are the massive amounts of COVID advertising in every media outlet, the numerous special government programs for media... The media aren't going to bite the hand that feeds them.
My friends and family are seemingly oblivious to the obvious. Yes, we are doing this to ourselves. I feel alone and do not know how to change the corruption about important issues….Covid, Ukraine War, the WEF and Canadian Political EXCESSIVE authority
There were several instances during the pandemic where I noticed a study would be released, the study would be picked up by Canadian Press, and then all of the major outlets would run the CP story. This would all essentially happen on the same day, which I thought was disconcertingly quick.
I wonder how much of the “unification” of media is driven by Canadian Press and Associated Press? Does anyone in the industry have a perspective on this?
This is bang on. What is surprising is the Liberal media in both the US & Canada can’t see the obvious. Ratings and readership are dropping for legacy media while independent & Fox media ratings are growing. (Why is Fox Nation a success while CNN+ was a failure?)
It would be interesting to see what Canadian organizations would collapse if government ended the funding & bailouts.
I commented something similar to this on CBC and got banned. Refrained from using language and what not just straight facts about how the influence of money may be corrupting the views. Poof. Gone
The CBC now engages in outright lies. Not shoddy reporting, or biased reporting, they outright spread lies to the great detriment of everyone in our country. You're better off ... off CBC. And I say this as one who used to listen to several great shows on the radio and recall the great investigative journalism they once did. I'm no Johnny come lately to the CBC, it's sad what it's become. The sooner people leave it the better. Let it die on the vine.
CBC was decent up until 2010 listened to CBC RADIO OFTEN , THEY HAD MANY great shows doubt any of them would get airplay today . CBC should e shut down we don't need the liberal party propaganda machine
CBC is state-sponsored media. That's not surprising. But many Canadians don't seem to realize so is the rest of your media. They literally rely on Trudeau's government for financial support to survive.
CBC for sure
There is now a Ministry of truth. Funny thing is, this isn't the government that will decsend into full on totalitarian rule, these are the caretakers. Building the tools neccassary to absolutely crush dissent to policies in future governments, smiling and virtue signaling while they do it. Like it will somehow all work out because people are so reasonable and respectful with power. Corruption, greed and status are almost as much a part of us as breathing air. That's why we need robust laws to protect people from eachother to protect them from limiting each one's ability to organize. Or declaring one side is all racists. Or declaring they hold unacceptable views. Or to declare to stop spending time with unvaccinated people.
Bingo. Well said.
I Created and Produced a TV series from 2001-2007. The nature of the series was one which the network wasn't willing to go all-in on with a big license fee to finance the budget so they offered us the entire 1/2 hr. vs the 22:00 we would have for the content of our show if they retained (and sold) the ad inventory. This was scary as we didn't know the first thing about selling advertising (:30 sec commercials). But they assured us that we had full control of our 1/2 hour to do whatever we wanted (other than nudity and the usual).
As we started down this road we found that our show content was actually more valuable than the :30 spots. The advertisers wanted to have their products in the show with the cast using them and the most value was letting them help with content ideas around how that would happen. The advertisers were Labatt's, McDonald's, Milk, Toyota, Red Bull, etc.
With the rise of online video content and mobile devices, content producers and advertisers continued to blur the line. After the series I helped create one of the first streaming video platforms and the viability of the entire company hinged on figuring out how to embed interactive ads into the video stream.
I have continued to watch as legacy media dies a slow death only to be revived by some fear-based content to haul back eyeballs. I now see that advertising for drugs in Canada is common. This wasn't the case a few years ago and a component of the Trudeau legacy media "bail-out", I suspect.
Now, veteran newscasters and journalists with more than 5 years of life experience and who've actually lived through actual scandals, pandemics, wars, manufactured "democracy" through dirty foreign policy, etc. have all left or been ousted from their posts because they wanted to remain ethical to their profession. We're expected to watch and read (and believe without question!) radio show producers, national journalists, reporters are all plucked straight out of a leftist ideology-captured post secondary system and told to read the script.
The script that the advertisers (through agencies and PR firms) write, or at least approve.
"Brought to you by Pfizer".
Don't forget about Canada's current self-flagellation project vis a vis residential schools and "mass graves," which don't exist and nothing has ever been found to corroborate any such claim. It's a lucrative claim and MSM has NEVER questioned it that I have read. EVER. It's Phil Fontaine's personal project, aided by a TRC summary that cherry picks "facts" and as far as Canadian taxpayers are concerned (who are, after all, the funders of this immensely expensive undertaking), we will fund for eternity, unless some time limit is placed.
This is a complex issue, as anyone who knows indigenous people personally knows. The residential schools were real, and the harm they caused was real. The abuse (especially sexual) was real. However, that does not mean that all these graves were real, or that deaths that happened at the schools were intentional. In my experience, systems & governments are indifferent to the suffering of those whose lives they destroy, so the deaths were deaths of indifference, not intention. Even worse, the technocrats really have "plausible deniability
" because they really did not know they harm they were doing. In fact, they viewed themselves as good moral citizens.
I think this was Tara's point
It's always wise not to engage in presentism, which is really the position du jour it seems. It is a complex issue indeed, but it has not properly been reported. One only has to see what happens to anyone in an academic position, say, who questions the current narrative.
Yes, Widdowson has been fired on flimsy pretext. Rick Mehta was also fired when he began to question the fn victim narrative.
Given the recent research done (which compliments a lot of earlier contemporaneous research and accounts), which I suppose will never see the light of MSM day, I'm not convinced that indigenous experience at residential schools was as abusive or shameful as is being made out. The whole thing is rooted in extortion, or what Widdowson calls "neotribal rentierism" and it absolutely is divisive. It's no wonder the CBC shuts down all commenting on its articles. They cannot even be bothered to do a smidgeon of a vestige of investigative journalism.
2 reasons Tara, like the vast majority of people who discuss such things, falls FAR SHORT of really understanding the problem:
A) "not saying there’s anything wrong with these stories"
There IS something wrong with these stories when they are promoted above far more important stories simply to PROPAGANDIZE a narrative. There is something VERY WRONG with many of these stories, and anyone who doesn't internalize that is nearly as lost as the people who publish them. And that means Tara.
B) "I’m just pointing out that they are popular."
They are popular ONLY with people in the CULT. It is simply pouring koolaid for cult members.
The interesting thing about Tara is how hard she seems to be trying to seek the truth, but how deep into the groupthink Tara still is. It comes through in every article. Shame.
I agree with most of what you say, but cut Tara some slack. She had the integrity and courage to critically examine her own views and those of her industry and act accordingly.
Many things Tara says show that she is still stuck with those views. Cutting everyone slack is how things never improve. Examining? Maybe. Seeing the underlying issues? Not yet.
Shame? I don't think so. She's still transitioning, as she admits. The demands of daily journalism and limited staff often mean going to the tried and true narratives and stories. Unfortunately in recent years those stories are only covered from a single side, that of propaganda. I'm fascinated with stories about climate change, transgenderism, and everything else, but only when there's actual debate taking place in them. Which is never.
Excellent article! I love your "no-fly list" of subjects we simply no longer see actual reporting about. Since the beginning of this charade 2 years ago the best argument has been the one sided reporting. No one ever has a good answer as to why we don't see debate about the most important issues of our time. Thanks, and keep up the great work!
This is almost sad to read -- a journo still wet from media fishbowl, struggling to explain what those of us on the outside have understood for years.
There's another way to explain the phenomenon of why the media "looks and sounds much the same" -- it's called journalists eating each others turds. The blind acceptance of narrative and recycling of other mainstream reporting without conducting even a nanosecond of due diligence.
I agree 100%, Kate. I honestly wonder if Tara is what she says she is or is the "I'm reforming" publicity just her business plan to attract a different audience. For someone who makes the background claims Tara makes, she sure does struggle to understand the foundations of the issues. Or maybe she is just so programmed to be PC that she simply can't call a turd a turd. Whatever it is, I quickly learned to be very choosy about reading her stuff. It depends totally whether I think a person she is interviewing can make a strong case in spite of Tara.
Nice article. I remember somewhere Chomsky recounting a story that journalists are mainly hired because their views are not a threat to the consensus. It's not that journalists conform, but that the people who are hired already fit the class and status that creates the consensus. I speculate whether this is also reinforced through an ageist policies which also benefit the bottom line. That is, hiring younger cheaper journalists who are also more impressionable, less historically experienced and knowledgeable, while pushing older, more expensive and more critical journos to the fringes.
Excellent points, and in recent times these kids have been indoctrinated from middle school; too often under educated in civics, critical thinking, courage in the face of adversity and history.
We seem to be on a pathway in MSM which punishes diversity of thought and belief, which is very disturbing, boring and impoverished. Intelligent people have more questions than answers. Where did the skeptical, questioning, insightful journalists go?
i have limited insight but will offer it anyway:
i worked at Time Inc from 2001-2012 and what happened to the older journalists and editors is that with every "restructuring" these people were often the first to walk the plank, as they had the larger salaries and benefits (and this process very much accelerated after the 2008 crash, which was basically a wipeout for any employees over age 50);
and these older, wiser and more interesting journalists were replaced by fresh-faced graduates, many of whom were still be supported by their parents, and these younger journalists were much more conformist and careerist and much more interested in Identity and Identity issues than anyone from prior generations.
Part of what we're witnessing is simply generational turnover, and as we can see the older journalistic values have been replaced by the values and ethos of our younger liberal arts graduates: not so much dedicated to truth, accuracy, neutrality (in fact suspicious of these things), but instead more focused on feelings (esp the feelings of the formerly marginalized) and hewing to the approved narratives du jour.
For just 4 months from MSM your red pilling and deprogramming are progressing well. This is a great piece that hits nails on their heads. You missed a few biggies like climate crisis, economic bloat, fiat devaluation and how the WEF and its head Klaus Schwab brags openly about Canada’s subversion.
Unapologetically delve deeper. Keep peeling those layers exposing the rot to fresh air! It is needed.
Do you know what fiat means, in the context of currency creation?
Who’s context, this?
Typically the term fiat goes back to the Ron Paul popularization of the term. As currencies fail, the alternative he championed was to limit currencies to commodity values such as gold. Most people are not rich enough to have gold however. Fortunately Schwab promises us that we won't need a currency, he has his own for us to become subservient to.
"We are inclined to believe that people want to be free, but most people don't. Most people are scared of freedom. Freedom brings with it responsibility; it brings challenges. It makes [it so] that you need to think. You need to do a certain mental labor; you need to think about your life, [and] you need to think about decisions you have to make... Most people prefer not to do it and prefer to look for someone who tells them what to do."
https://rumble.com/v12wts0-mass-formation-most-people-are-scared-of-freedom-and-dont-want-the-burden-o.html
Yes, it would be a shock to most adults or most proto adults that are in schools and graduating, to know that our system is run by lunatics who do not like the people. People like feeling that the gov't or big daddy hi tech sector is somehow looking out for humanity. Denial is keeping them sane. The gov't cannot change the climate for you - most people cannot agree with this statement because of years of indoctrination.
So many 'vital' issues were discussed in this piece, and yet climate hypocrisy was never mentioned. Examine our collective cognitive conformity when thinking about climate issues. Our societies appear to be subconsciously 'convinced' that we have until 2100 to act...but we still don't have a clue as to what we should really be doing collectively. We are just too busy polarizing populations and making wars to be able to take climate and energy conservation seriously.
Do you believe the gov't can change the climate?
Any individual's specific belief in the efficacy of governments is irrelevant. The governments don't want to 'change' the climate, they only want 'normal', so do societies...and 'normal' appears to be the culprit. The obstacle is the path...
Sorry, to be more specific - do you believe that humans can change the climate?
It's not about what I believe, it is about civilization figuring out how Homo sapiens will survive what's coming. It's about finally getting some 'smarts'...
Hydro carbon fuels presumably will not last forever, at which point we will not be able to drive Tesla's any more. We could of course go back to the horse and buggy era, that option is always there. But yes, the climate will change on Earth as it always has, the difference this time will be that a whole crop of young people were raised in a cult that told them they were evil humans who were killing the planet.
Guilt and blame around climate disintegration issues constitute luxury beliefs. Hatred for those who 'caused' too much carbon to be in the atmosphere can be cultivated like Russophobia was and the hatred for the convoys and Trump.
Um, haven't you heard of the Trusted News Initiative, where various major media organizations agreed to promote the COVID vaccines? It's not hard to research - even Google will tell you about it.
And then there are the massive amounts of COVID advertising in every media outlet, the numerous special government programs for media... The media aren't going to bite the hand that feeds them.
My friends and family are seemingly oblivious to the obvious. Yes, we are doing this to ourselves. I feel alone and do not know how to change the corruption about important issues….Covid, Ukraine War, the WEF and Canadian Political EXCESSIVE authority
Excellent article. From the viewpoint of the UK, it made me think about the consistency of views expressed by the BBC, Channel 4 and the Guardian.
There were several instances during the pandemic where I noticed a study would be released, the study would be picked up by Canadian Press, and then all of the major outlets would run the CP story. This would all essentially happen on the same day, which I thought was disconcertingly quick.
I wonder how much of the “unification” of media is driven by Canadian Press and Associated Press? Does anyone in the industry have a perspective on this?