some would argue i'm utterly unsuited to writing a post on television considering i only watch 1-3 hours per week, counting vhs episodes of trailer park boys. i don't think you need to have a sofa with a permanent imprint of your arse to comment on the crtc thing.
pogge has done a brilliant job of dispelling all the stupid fox news vs al jazeera business. i'd like to remind anyone who is still confused that the war is carried out by soldiers in the middle east, not by television stations and regulatory agencies on this continent.
this wall street journal editorial is cute. i've plucked a few gems for your appraisal:
When it comes to Canadian identity, Fox News Channel is apparently a threat. Al-Jazeera, on the other hand, is just another point of view enriching Canadian culture.
A few years back the CRTC told Fox it could enter Canada, as long as its 24-hour programming had 35% Canadian content. That may have implied a little too much televised gopher hunting on Baffin Island, so Fox stayed home.
The darkest interpretation of all of this is that Canada's liberal political elites find al-Jazeera's view of the world more compatible than Fox's. The Arab network is always putting the worst face on U.S. policies, while Fox doesn't mind suggesting that it is rooting for America to win when it goes to war.
yes - not extending rights to fox news really highlights how much canadians loooove al-jazeera. i don't think canada is as much of a posterchild for media censorship as the usa is, from tipper gore's crusade to eliminate profane lyrics to the repressive fallout of the janet jackson wardrobe malfunction. we have a few channels and papers that root for america to win when it goes to war - some are even american. there are people making noise about a liberal bias here, but last i checked it wasn't that different in the states. in fact, i hear this kind of thing has been popular since edmund burke explored the deficiencies of the "literary cabal" while reflecting on the revolution in france. for every disparaging comment made about the usa by a canadian politician, there is a scott brison, a pierre pettigrew, a stephen harper who will step up and convincingly commend america. forgetting figureheads, both in the legislatures and the media, of the people who bothered to vote, lots voted conservative.
i think the bigger question is why isn't fox news bothering to learn these things about canada so they can capitalize on them? could you imagine deb gray's candour being put to use on a fox news canada talk panel? she wouldn't be lonely either - there *are* conservatives in the country, they're just not the governing party.
the crtc has instances of meddling and favouritism - the snub of rai internazionale in favour of telelatino comes to mind. for all one could say about the crtc (mr coyne's contribution is another favourite), the wall street journal comments constitute an uninformed rant. that's about all.
speaking of 1-3 hour habits, that's how long i've been sleeping each day this week - it's paper season. for my english class, i wanted to do something exploring a possible dichotomy between machiavelli's body of work and the adjective 'machiavellian' given it is largely based on the prince and only certain aspects of it, anyway. shut up - it's not a theory paper, it's to satisfy an english requirement i never met having transfered from a french university. i'm currently attempting to cobble together something that proceeds from diIulio's famous 'mayberry machiavelli' comment thanks to the godsend i call sasha who is so very generous and patient while i'm freaking out. has w's administration been acting all machiavellian? i'd be glad to hear from people who have read machiavelli and those who just know the definition of the word.
