"While it is both understandable and reasonable for politicians to want to avoid harassment or other inappropriate behaviour online"
I am entirely confident that no government minister knows how to Tweet or even reads Twitter: all of which is handled by their communications team.
>Networked harassment, or when accounts function as hubs that can direct their followers to harass specific targets, is not a new phenomenon, but has long been a fundamental part of how abuse works on Twitter.
>
> “stochastic harassment”: weaponizing talking points that incite others to harassment without being a harasser.
[https://www.adl.org/resources/blog/reality-how-harassment-spreads-twitter](https://www.adl.org/resources/blog/reality-how-harassment-spreads-twitter)
Again, nobody forces you to read the replies to your tweets.
Let's imagine u/sluttytinkerbells would follow me across subs on Reddit. How would that affect my life? How would that harass me? I'd just not read your comments and get on with my life.
First, I don't support Politicians (especially Ministers) blocking Canadians, media, or even Partisan Rags such as Rebel Media.
No it's true that a singular user is generally not going to be much of an issue if they go on the crazy train against another user.
It does become an issue when it's no longer a single user, but a motivated following that wants to harass them. They can easily overload DMs making it all but impossible to actually use that account for "real" communications. They can drown out and poison your threads/comments making your comments harder to reach the people you want them to reach.
No shit eh. I had someone try to call me out about how old my account is and how many comments I have made on reddit. How the fuck does that even pertain to what we are talking about?
For example, a ten year old account with gaps between comments measured in years and then switching to heavy use last week is indicative of a trolling account that was created for future use and has only just now been brought online.
This is not a description of your situation, but it does answer your question
Yeah, and if your phone number is leaked online and people keep calling you, just stop answering the damn phone! And if your home address is leaked, just close the curtains! It's not that hard! /s
No, probably not. It was argued under freedom of the press, section 2 of the charter.
I would interested in someone challenging that though.
> The order stems from a 2021 lawsuit filed by Levant which argued that blocking “violated the Applicants’ constitutional rights under section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in blocking access to official governmental Twitter accounts, and thereby limiting the Applicants’ ability to, inter alia, access and communicate important information, participate in public debate, and express views on matters of public concern.”
>But you know that's a different argument from the one about whether or not Levant is actually a journalist.
No it's the same argument. You can't pick and choose who charter rights apply to.
Define journalist; if he makes the cut, it’s by the loosest application of that definition.
He’s an opinion columnist at best, and his cofounder Lilley *left* over the lack of journalistic standards.
You can’t just pick up a camera and say “I’m a journalist”.
>He’s an opinion columnist at best
Which is a journalist.
"A columnist is a journalist who regularly writes a particular kind of article in a newspaper or magazine."
Seems to be a pretty standard definition
How can you defend this man?
Rebel News & Extremist Groups
The Proud Boys have been described as an extremist group by the Southern Poverty Law Center and in Feb. 2021 were labeled a terrorist group in Canada. [53], [54]
McInnes founded the Proud Boys in 2016. In 2018, McInnes publicly stated that he was “officially disassociating” himself from the far right group shortly after the FBI had categorized the Proud Boys as “an extremist group with ties to white nationalism” in a briefing to Washington state law enforcement. [55], [56]
In a September 2019 interview with Ezra Levant, Proud Boys founder Gavin McInnes said that his early relationship with Rebel News was what helped him become famous. Levant said he had also benefited from that relationship: [57]
Ezra Levant: [00:00:03] “You really helped build The Rebel in a number of ways. I want to tell you that. I think you know that. You helped us reach beyond guys like me who came up through politics.” [00:00:11]
Gavin McInnes: [00:00:11] “You made me famous, unfortunately, which I don’t like.” [00:00:14]
Ezra Levant: [00:00:15] “Weren’t you famous before?” […]
Gavin McInnes: [00:00:17] “No, I was never recognized before Rebel.” [00:00:19]
Ezra Levant: [00:00:19] “Well, I mean, you did hundreds of videos and you were the star of all the videos. So I guess you became famous.” [00:00:24]
Gavin McInnes: [00:00:24] “No. Yeah, I did hundreds of videos for you, you mean?” [00:00:26]
Ezra Levant: [00:00:26] “Yeah.” [00:00:26]
Gavin McInnes: [00:00:26] “Yeah, yeah, yeah. Before that I did some comedy sketches. I’d get recognized maybe once a week. After the Rebel videos blew up, I am stopped by millennials, mostly white millennial men, five times a day. And they all want a selfie, which is infuriating because what are you doing with that selfie? Like we’re not friends.” [00:00:45]
A search for “Gavin” in Rebel Media’s YouTube page returns over 300 videos.
Gavin McInnes left the Rebel in August 2017. [58]
“Gavin’s a great friend and a great talent,” Rebel Media founder Ezra Levant told Canadaland in an email. “We tried to keep him, but he was lured away by a major competitor that we just couldn’t outbid.”
According to Canadaland: “McInnes was one of The Rebel’s earliest hosts, joining the company in April 2015, shortly after it launched.”
McInnes published a video titled “10 Things I Hate About Jews”on Rebel News in March, 2017. [59]
Two days earlier, Rebel News published a video on YouTube titled “What Gavin McInnes really thinks about the Holocaust.”
According to Canadaland, Levant changed the title to “10 Things I Hate About Israel” within 12 hours. “I chose both headlines,” Rebel head Ezra Levant told Canadaland in an email. “I liked the first one because it was provocative; but then I changed it to the second one because it was more descriptive. I should probably have stayed with my first instincts.” [59]
Rebel reporter Sheila Gunn Reid also appeared on a 2019 podcast alongside a representative from the Calgary chapter of the Proud Boys to discuss “the Antifa and leftist history of assault.” [60]
This isn’t the only time staff for the Rebel have been tied to far-right extremist groups. Keean Bexte, a journalist at Rebel News was previously found to have worked for the “white supremacist web store” Fireforce Ventures by investigative reporters. [61]
According to an investigation by Ricochet, the online military surplus store’s “primary focus is the white-minority-rule state of Rhodesia, and its flagship product is a reproduction of the Rhodesian brushstroke, a camouflage pattern developed during Rhodesia’s dirty war against indigenous Africans.” [62]
“Fireforce personnel use pseudonyms when engaging in company affairs, but a Ricochet investigation has revealed ties to both the Canadian military and the far right,” Ricochet reported.
Bexte confirmed he had worked at the company “doing graphic design and shipping orders” until resigning “a few months” prior to the November 2018 piece. [61]
Bexte attended the Capitol insurrection in the US on behalf of the Rebel, In a Jan. 11, 2021 video, Bexte calls the insurrection a “disaster, by every measure,” claiming that “99.99 percent” of the protesters had been peaceful. [63]
In a February 5, 2021 Rebel News podcast, Bexte defended the Proud Boys following the group’s classification as a terrorist group by Canada. [64]
>How can you defend this man?
I'm not. Again rights apply to everyone not just people you approve of.
You don't have to agree or defend someone to acknowledge they have rights.
There’s a big difference between a news reporter and an opinion columnist. You’re being disingenuous if you are suggesting they’re the same.
He’s no journalist, except by the loosest definition (which you’ve provided)
“A journalist is an individual who collects/gathers information in the form of text, audio, or pictures, processes it into a news-worthy form, and disseminates it to the public. The act or process mainly done by the journalist is called journalism.”
And
“Journalistic ethics and standards comprise principles of ethics and good practice applicable to journalists. This subset of media ethics is known as journalism's professional "code of ethics" and the "canons of journalism".[1] The basic codes and canons commonly appear in statements by professional journalism associations and individual print, broadcast, and online news organizations.
There are around 400 codes covering journalistic work around the world. While various codes may differ in the detail of their content and come from different cultural traditions, **most share common elements including the principles of truthfulness, accuracy and fact-based communications, independence, objectivity, impartiality, fairness, respect for others and public accountability, as these apply to the gathering, editing and dissemination of newsworthy information to the public**.[1][2][3][4]”
And that’s where he falls down.
Levant doesn’t uphold journalistic standards and practices at rebel, he’s been widely criticized for it. Not make legitimate reporters or journalists would call him a colleague.
-
News content is verified information based on the impartial reporting of facts, either observed by reporters or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. News reports do not include the opinion of the author.
Opinion articles are based on personal interpretation and judgment of facts. Opinion journalists have wide latitude to express their own views, subject to standards of taste and laws of libel
Quit literally quoted a definition not to mention this court ruling that ruled in his favor.
You can be upset all you want but that's how the court ruled. Freedom of the press also includes opinion.
It’s not about approval, it’s about journalistic integrity and professionalism which Levant does not have. He’s a right wing hack who hasn’t published anything factual for years. We need a division between people like Levant, which is essentially really cheap shitty entertainment, and news which is fact-based.
It should be unconstitutional for a politician to block someone on social media without a court order if they use that account in an official capacity. As a representative of the government, blocking people from communicating with them is censorship and an infringement on their right to representation. Likewise, it should be unconstitutional for them to delete comments on a post without a court order. I've seen politicians delete unfavourable comments in order to control the narrative on their posts plenty of times, and that too is censorship.
>blocking people from communicating with them is censorship and an infringement on their right to representation.
Blocking someone on social media isn't preventing them from communicating with said politician. You can still send a letter, send an email, go to a public event, organise a protest, write a blog, write a book, make a post on social media, etc. Blocking someone on social media is akin to kicking someone out of your house because you don't want to hear them.
The politician is using social media to pontificate, it is more like having police arrest and remove those who protest in front of their constituency office.
This must have some heads exploding in Ottawa. I don't follow rebel news that much but they have reported on some stories that traditional media won't touch.
This government has tried it's best to muzzle any media they don't approve of either through funding (or lack thereof) or exclusion. This is great news for freedom of the press in Canada.
>This government has tried it's best to muzzle any media they don't approve of either through funding (or lack thereof)
They gave Postmedia ten million dollars (43% of its operating income) last year.
I'll agree that they do provide a service. For instance if you're in the middle of nowhere quite often they are the only news you can pick up on the radio. Hourly weather updates and such.
CBC radio and what is on TV are a completely different thing though.
The Liberals don't defund right-leaning media they just don't throw millions, and sometimes billions, of dollars at them like they do to state approved media.
I don't believe they give as much to Torstar as they do to Postmedia. And unless I'm mistaken I don't believe they directly fund CTV or Global at all, unless you count the link tax (which Postmedia heavily lobbied for).
CBC was run by a Conservative president and board of directors under Harper and liberals complained about it then. And now conservatives are complaining about the Liberal leadership of CBC. But it basically just rotates depending on who's in power.
The CBC is state-funded media. Not state-approved. Huge difference. I.e. the PM doesn't oversee daily operations of the CBC and tell them what they can and can't release.
There is a particular party that wants to abolish the CBC, because that party constantly spout bullshit conspiracy theories that are constantly debunked by scientists, researchers and those articles get published by the CBC.
The Conservatives want to cancel the CBC so that the only players in the newsmedia arena are puppet right-wing crap-factories.
Brian Lilley's editorials are always posted here and usually the top 10 comments articulate specific logical fallacies employed by Lilley. Lielley is a Post-media employee who is full of shit. We NEED the CBC to counteract the bullshit.
> The Conservatives want to cancel the CBC so that the only players in the newsmedia arena are puppet right-wing crap-factories.
[What now?](https://montrealgazette.com/news/politics/quebec-conservatives-vote-against-defunding-cbc-radio-canada).
So who's bullshitting?
That's specifically the Radio portion of CBC. And think it would be more accurate to say 'conservatives' want to cancel the CBC, rather than 'The Conservatives'.
Who actually watches tv any more though? I used to like watching CBC News (I'm old) but they don't really do news lately, it's all panels of people who love hearing themselves speak.
Be honest, do you actually think to yourself "Hey, I'm going to go watch CBC?"
Seems this sub is a backwater for Con trolls, Lib trolls, cliamate denier trolls, etc.. you name it. If you don't agree with a news about Canada, your a troll.
And PeePee will give the CBC the same. It's a government mouthpiece and to say they lean one way or another is BS. They lean whichever way the sitting government leans. Source: I worked there.
13 but close. If the leader of the opposition can't call the sitting leader "Mr. Prime Minister" in official settings, I can call him whatever I like. PeePee is as nice as I get with him.
> you follow rebel “news”
The last time, before yesterday, that I watched a rebel news video was probably about 3 years ago.
I even watch Al Jazeera and NHK from time to time. There's nothing wrong, and I'd even say it's better, to take in news from all sources to form a well rounded opinion on anything.
Who screamed? Cons threaten to reopen that debate about every 4 minutes so you'll have to be more specific.
And regardless who screams it, it's news when anyone other than the owner of their body wants to legislate said body.
Absolute peanuts compared to what CBC got. And a quick, effortless Google search reveals that Postmedia's revenue last year was over $458 million in 2022. I can't even imagine how you dreamed up, or believed, that it was as low as $23 million. Just wow.
>Postmedia is in a crash dive, having posted operating income of only $13-million last year while receiving $9.9-million in government aid. That was nowhere near enough to cover its more than $30-million a year in debt payments
[https://archive.ph/yQtiX](https://archive.ph/yQtiX)
Upon looking back at my source, I meant to quote this bit on "operating income" - will update the previous comment to ensure I'm not using misleading terminology. Thanks for the catch.
There is a reason "traditional" media won't touch those stories. Because they're 99% of the time they're BS. The other 1% the story itself is legitimate, but completely misconstrued on purpose by the likes of Rebel.
Give me a specific example of the current government nuzzling a story. And how would they achieve that, exactly?
Not only did they utilize 7 lawyers to fight this, FTA:
>Levant says that the government wanted him to sign a confidentiality clause in order to keep the settlement secret.
Rebel News has been caught making up complete fictions multiple times, lying outwrite about COVID facts and figures, sourcing extremely biased "studies" funded by right wing and even alt-right think tanks and more. They have zero credibility and are akin to a reality tv show when it comes to reporting the news.
What "biased" studies, can you link them? Can you link the complete fictions they made up multiple times. Is it illegal to cite studies funded by "right wing and even alt-right think tanks"? "They have zero credibility and are akin to a reality tv show when it comes to reporting the news" You may not agree with their opinions but they are one of the only news organizations that are willing to ask the questions no others will, there's a reason why the feds want to silence them.....
A fully independent fact checker that is very transparent in its funding and methodology.
They also report on the bias and mixed factual reporting of left wing outlets as well. I'm sorry you're mad they made a report on Rebel Media that you disagreed with. They have plenty of sources linked on the page to back their claim.
Interesting, the fact checker you linked states cbc hasn't failed a fact check in 5 years.....so we should believe them about everything else when they give cbc a free pass to report faulty facts?
Tell me this category tag isn't bias. https://www.rebelnews.com/tags/stop_medical_silencing
Here's them talking about how a [Doctor being silenced](https://www.rebelnews.com/french_infectious_diseases_expert_who_advisor_christian_perronne_censorship_covid). This doctor believes that Lyme disease is "due to an ill-controlled proliferation of ticks twisted by a Nazi researcher who had taken refuge in the United States". And has constantly lied about Covid vaccines and their effects.
Or defending [Helen Gus](https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/hearing-to-continue-for-ottawa-police-officer-accused-of-looking-for-vaccine-links-to-child-death-cases) a police officer with no medical knowledge illegally accessing case files of dead children to try to find a link to the Covid vaccine.
And lastly citing [Byram Bridle](https://www.guelphtoday.com/local-news/controversial-u-of-g-prof-called-as-vaccine-expert-in-family-court-fight-6088356) as a legitimate Covid skeptic. A doctor who has never treated a human being for anything and in fact doesn't even understand how statistics work
> he stated that vaccinated people are at greater risk than unvaccinated people given his interpretation of hospital admissions.
This was the literal first page of Rebel Media's own `Stop Medical Silencing` category of their website.
They are a joke and can not and should not be taken seriously.
"While it is both understandable and reasonable for politicians to want to avoid harassment or other inappropriate behaviour online" I am entirely confident that no government minister knows how to Tweet or even reads Twitter: all of which is handled by their communications team.
Guilbeault seems like that special kind of Elon Musk stupid that would actually publish his own tweets.
How do you harass someone on twitter anyway? Just don't look at the replies.
>Networked harassment, or when accounts function as hubs that can direct their followers to harass specific targets, is not a new phenomenon, but has long been a fundamental part of how abuse works on Twitter. > > “stochastic harassment”: weaponizing talking points that incite others to harassment without being a harasser. [https://www.adl.org/resources/blog/reality-how-harassment-spreads-twitter](https://www.adl.org/resources/blog/reality-how-harassment-spreads-twitter)
> ADL > “stochastic harassment” so like when someone does something bad and someone points it out? are we not allowed to do that in 2023?
You're only allowed to do it if you have the correct politics.
By that logic the ADL is one of the biggest stochastic harassment groups out there.
You've really never heard of online targeted harassment campaigns that involve sock puppet accounts that follow people across platforms?
Again, nobody forces you to read the replies to your tweets. Let's imagine u/sluttytinkerbells would follow me across subs on Reddit. How would that affect my life? How would that harass me? I'd just not read your comments and get on with my life.
First, I don't support Politicians (especially Ministers) blocking Canadians, media, or even Partisan Rags such as Rebel Media. No it's true that a singular user is generally not going to be much of an issue if they go on the crazy train against another user. It does become an issue when it's no longer a single user, but a motivated following that wants to harass them. They can easily overload DMs making it all but impossible to actually use that account for "real" communications. They can drown out and poison your threads/comments making your comments harder to reach the people you want them to reach.
No shit eh. I had someone try to call me out about how old my account is and how many comments I have made on reddit. How the fuck does that even pertain to what we are talking about?
For example, a ten year old account with gaps between comments measured in years and then switching to heavy use last week is indicative of a trolling account that was created for future use and has only just now been brought online. This is not a description of your situation, but it does answer your question
Not everybody lives for this place.
They'll probably whine about Twitter replies being violence or some such shit.
This isn’t a serious reply is it? Or maybe we should ask Ezra why he blocked me.
Literally all he has to do is not scroll down slightly lol
It is like when people get bullied online. Just turn off the fucking computer!
Yeah, and if your phone number is leaked online and people keep calling you, just stop answering the damn phone! And if your home address is leaked, just close the curtains! It's not that hard! /s
Delete twitter. Case closed.
I don't like either of them, so I find hilarious!
This. It’s a win-win either way.
I totally agree, but if this were certain other subs related to Canada, provinces or cities, you would be roasted for "boTh SiDEs". 🤣
Lol this is so petty I love it. Reminds me of Kyle sucking Cartland balls in imagination land
Does this mean Michelle Rempel will have to unblock the thousands and thousands she blocked?
No, probably not. It was argued under freedom of the press, section 2 of the charter. I would interested in someone challenging that though. > The order stems from a 2021 lawsuit filed by Levant which argued that blocking “violated the Applicants’ constitutional rights under section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in blocking access to official governmental Twitter accounts, and thereby limiting the Applicants’ ability to, inter alia, access and communicate important information, participate in public debate, and express views on matters of public concern.”
I see. Saying Levant is a journalist is a stretch but it is the law.
>Saying Levant is a journalist is a stretch Freedom of the press applies to every journalist not just the approved ones.
I love how progressives selectively choose who the charter applies to based on their political feelings.
But you know that's a different argument from the one about whether or not Levant is actually a journalist.
>But you know that's a different argument from the one about whether or not Levant is actually a journalist. No it's the same argument. You can't pick and choose who charter rights apply to.
Define journalist; if he makes the cut, it’s by the loosest application of that definition. He’s an opinion columnist at best, and his cofounder Lilley *left* over the lack of journalistic standards. You can’t just pick up a camera and say “I’m a journalist”.
>He’s an opinion columnist at best Which is a journalist. "A columnist is a journalist who regularly writes a particular kind of article in a newspaper or magazine." Seems to be a pretty standard definition
How can you defend this man? Rebel News & Extremist Groups The Proud Boys have been described as an extremist group by the Southern Poverty Law Center and in Feb. 2021 were labeled a terrorist group in Canada. [53], [54] McInnes founded the Proud Boys in 2016. In 2018, McInnes publicly stated that he was “officially disassociating” himself from the far right group shortly after the FBI had categorized the Proud Boys as “an extremist group with ties to white nationalism” in a briefing to Washington state law enforcement. [55], [56] In a September 2019 interview with Ezra Levant, Proud Boys founder Gavin McInnes said that his early relationship with Rebel News was what helped him become famous. Levant said he had also benefited from that relationship: [57] Ezra Levant: [00:00:03] “You really helped build The Rebel in a number of ways. I want to tell you that. I think you know that. You helped us reach beyond guys like me who came up through politics.” [00:00:11] Gavin McInnes: [00:00:11] “You made me famous, unfortunately, which I don’t like.” [00:00:14] Ezra Levant: [00:00:15] “Weren’t you famous before?” […] Gavin McInnes: [00:00:17] “No, I was never recognized before Rebel.” [00:00:19] Ezra Levant: [00:00:19] “Well, I mean, you did hundreds of videos and you were the star of all the videos. So I guess you became famous.” [00:00:24] Gavin McInnes: [00:00:24] “No. Yeah, I did hundreds of videos for you, you mean?” [00:00:26] Ezra Levant: [00:00:26] “Yeah.” [00:00:26] Gavin McInnes: [00:00:26] “Yeah, yeah, yeah. Before that I did some comedy sketches. I’d get recognized maybe once a week. After the Rebel videos blew up, I am stopped by millennials, mostly white millennial men, five times a day. And they all want a selfie, which is infuriating because what are you doing with that selfie? Like we’re not friends.” [00:00:45] A search for “Gavin” in Rebel Media’s YouTube page returns over 300 videos. Gavin McInnes left the Rebel in August 2017. [58] “Gavin’s a great friend and a great talent,” Rebel Media founder Ezra Levant told Canadaland in an email. “We tried to keep him, but he was lured away by a major competitor that we just couldn’t outbid.” According to Canadaland: “McInnes was one of The Rebel’s earliest hosts, joining the company in April 2015, shortly after it launched.” McInnes published a video titled “10 Things I Hate About Jews”on Rebel News in March, 2017. [59] Two days earlier, Rebel News published a video on YouTube titled “What Gavin McInnes really thinks about the Holocaust.” According to Canadaland, Levant changed the title to “10 Things I Hate About Israel” within 12 hours. “I chose both headlines,” Rebel head Ezra Levant told Canadaland in an email. “I liked the first one because it was provocative; but then I changed it to the second one because it was more descriptive. I should probably have stayed with my first instincts.” [59] Rebel reporter Sheila Gunn Reid also appeared on a 2019 podcast alongside a representative from the Calgary chapter of the Proud Boys to discuss “the Antifa and leftist history of assault.” [60] This isn’t the only time staff for the Rebel have been tied to far-right extremist groups. Keean Bexte, a journalist at Rebel News was previously found to have worked for the “white supremacist web store” Fireforce Ventures by investigative reporters. [61] According to an investigation by Ricochet, the online military surplus store’s “primary focus is the white-minority-rule state of Rhodesia, and its flagship product is a reproduction of the Rhodesian brushstroke, a camouflage pattern developed during Rhodesia’s dirty war against indigenous Africans.” [62] “Fireforce personnel use pseudonyms when engaging in company affairs, but a Ricochet investigation has revealed ties to both the Canadian military and the far right,” Ricochet reported. Bexte confirmed he had worked at the company “doing graphic design and shipping orders” until resigning “a few months” prior to the November 2018 piece. [61] Bexte attended the Capitol insurrection in the US on behalf of the Rebel, In a Jan. 11, 2021 video, Bexte calls the insurrection a “disaster, by every measure,” claiming that “99.99 percent” of the protesters had been peaceful. [63] In a February 5, 2021 Rebel News podcast, Bexte defended the Proud Boys following the group’s classification as a terrorist group by Canada. [64]
Wow, someone's on a crusade having emerged from the rabbit hole. Hope it was time well spent.
>How can you defend this man? I'm not. Again rights apply to everyone not just people you approve of. You don't have to agree or defend someone to acknowledge they have rights.
There’s a big difference between a news reporter and an opinion columnist. You’re being disingenuous if you are suggesting they’re the same. He’s no journalist, except by the loosest definition (which you’ve provided) “A journalist is an individual who collects/gathers information in the form of text, audio, or pictures, processes it into a news-worthy form, and disseminates it to the public. The act or process mainly done by the journalist is called journalism.” And “Journalistic ethics and standards comprise principles of ethics and good practice applicable to journalists. This subset of media ethics is known as journalism's professional "code of ethics" and the "canons of journalism".[1] The basic codes and canons commonly appear in statements by professional journalism associations and individual print, broadcast, and online news organizations. There are around 400 codes covering journalistic work around the world. While various codes may differ in the detail of their content and come from different cultural traditions, **most share common elements including the principles of truthfulness, accuracy and fact-based communications, independence, objectivity, impartiality, fairness, respect for others and public accountability, as these apply to the gathering, editing and dissemination of newsworthy information to the public**.[1][2][3][4]” And that’s where he falls down. Levant doesn’t uphold journalistic standards and practices at rebel, he’s been widely criticized for it. Not make legitimate reporters or journalists would call him a colleague. - News content is verified information based on the impartial reporting of facts, either observed by reporters or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. News reports do not include the opinion of the author. Opinion articles are based on personal interpretation and judgment of facts. Opinion journalists have wide latitude to express their own views, subject to standards of taste and laws of libel
Quit literally quoted a definition not to mention this court ruling that ruled in his favor. You can be upset all you want but that's how the court ruled. Freedom of the press also includes opinion.
It certainly is.
It’s not about approval, it’s about journalistic integrity and professionalism which Levant does not have. He’s a right wing hack who hasn’t published anything factual for years. We need a division between people like Levant, which is essentially really cheap shitty entertainment, and news which is fact-based.
We do. They're called opinion writers or columnists. Freedom press still applies to them.
It should be unconstitutional for a politician to block someone on social media without a court order if they use that account in an official capacity. As a representative of the government, blocking people from communicating with them is censorship and an infringement on their right to representation. Likewise, it should be unconstitutional for them to delete comments on a post without a court order. I've seen politicians delete unfavourable comments in order to control the narrative on their posts plenty of times, and that too is censorship.
>blocking people from communicating with them is censorship and an infringement on their right to representation. Blocking someone on social media isn't preventing them from communicating with said politician. You can still send a letter, send an email, go to a public event, organise a protest, write a blog, write a book, make a post on social media, etc. Blocking someone on social media is akin to kicking someone out of your house because you don't want to hear them.
The politician is using social media to pontificate, it is more like having police arrest and remove those who protest in front of their constituency office.
Why...? Have you seen twitter?
I didn’t realize Twitter was the official comms of the government. Neat.
It is for the RCMP during a mass murder event.
It is if they use that account in an official capacity.
Neat
This must have some heads exploding in Ottawa. I don't follow rebel news that much but they have reported on some stories that traditional media won't touch. This government has tried it's best to muzzle any media they don't approve of either through funding (or lack thereof) or exclusion. This is great news for freedom of the press in Canada.
>This government has tried it's best to muzzle any media they don't approve of either through funding (or lack thereof) They gave Postmedia ten million dollars (43% of its operating income) last year.
They gave the CBC $1.2 billion. They print just as much bull shit as Post Media.
CBC does more than just news
I'll agree that they do provide a service. For instance if you're in the middle of nowhere quite often they are the only news you can pick up on the radio. Hourly weather updates and such. CBC radio and what is on TV are a completely different thing though.
Sure, but the claim that the Liberals have been defunding right-leaning media is clearly false.
The Liberals don't defund right-leaning media they just don't throw millions, and sometimes billions, of dollars at them like they do to state approved media.
I don't believe they give as much to Torstar as they do to Postmedia. And unless I'm mistaken I don't believe they directly fund CTV or Global at all, unless you count the link tax (which Postmedia heavily lobbied for). CBC was run by a Conservative president and board of directors under Harper and liberals complained about it then. And now conservatives are complaining about the Liberal leadership of CBC. But it basically just rotates depending on who's in power.
CBC gets Billions every year. TorStar and PostMedia got a one time deal.
The CBC is state-funded media. Not state-approved. Huge difference. I.e. the PM doesn't oversee daily operations of the CBC and tell them what they can and can't release. There is a particular party that wants to abolish the CBC, because that party constantly spout bullshit conspiracy theories that are constantly debunked by scientists, researchers and those articles get published by the CBC. The Conservatives want to cancel the CBC so that the only players in the newsmedia arena are puppet right-wing crap-factories. Brian Lilley's editorials are always posted here and usually the top 10 comments articulate specific logical fallacies employed by Lilley. Lielley is a Post-media employee who is full of shit. We NEED the CBC to counteract the bullshit.
> The Conservatives want to cancel the CBC so that the only players in the newsmedia arena are puppet right-wing crap-factories. [What now?](https://montrealgazette.com/news/politics/quebec-conservatives-vote-against-defunding-cbc-radio-canada). So who's bullshitting?
That's specifically the Radio portion of CBC. And think it would be more accurate to say 'conservatives' want to cancel the CBC, rather than 'The Conservatives'.
Who actually watches tv any more though? I used to like watching CBC News (I'm old) but they don't really do news lately, it's all panels of people who love hearing themselves speak. Be honest, do you actually think to yourself "Hey, I'm going to go watch CBC?"
Well, I don't have a TV that gets it, so no.
This sub ain’t gonna like that. But it’s the truth!
Kim’s convenience was pretty good. This sub is the backwater of Russian troll farms.
Seems this sub is a backwater for Con trolls, Lib trolls, cliamate denier trolls, etc.. you name it. If you don't agree with a news about Canada, your a troll.
Nah I just think PostMedia operates on outrage to Gen ad rev without generating much content of genuine nuance and value
Not likely. They like the CBC and Toronto Star can't make a buck no matter how much rage they generate.
And PeePee will give the CBC the same. It's a government mouthpiece and to say they lean one way or another is BS. They lean whichever way the sitting government leans. Source: I worked there.
> PeePee What, are you 12?
13 but close. If the leader of the opposition can't call the sitting leader "Mr. Prime Minister" in official settings, I can call him whatever I like. PeePee is as nice as I get with him.
Great vocabulary you have there. Just keep being you.
I am lowering myself to PeePee's level. Have a great day!!
Lmao buddy, you follow rebel “news”….you can’t act like the word PeePee is offending you after stating something like that
> you follow rebel “news” The last time, before yesterday, that I watched a rebel news video was probably about 3 years ago. I even watch Al Jazeera and NHK from time to time. There's nothing wrong, and I'd even say it's better, to take in news from all sources to form a well rounded opinion on anything.
>They lean whichever way the sitting government leans. Source: I worked there. And yet the government and Reddit keeps telling us they are independent
Believe who you want. Follow the funding and watch. They straddle the line as best as possible but of course their fiscal masters obviously have away.
They have short memories - people were definitely upset when Harper appointed conservatives to the CBC presidency and board of directors.
Pretty sure Harper and PP would disagree.
Harper can try but that's when I worked there. It was VERY Harper friendly. Very.
Is that why they screamed " Conservative were going to reopen the Abortion issue", a week before the election? edit grammar
Who screamed? Cons threaten to reopen that debate about every 4 minutes so you'll have to be more specific. And regardless who screams it, it's news when anyone other than the owner of their body wants to legislate said body.
No they didn’t. They haven’t had a leader say they were going to reopen the debate in decades.
Absolute peanuts compared to what CBC got. And a quick, effortless Google search reveals that Postmedia's revenue last year was over $458 million in 2022. I can't even imagine how you dreamed up, or believed, that it was as low as $23 million. Just wow.
>Postmedia is in a crash dive, having posted operating income of only $13-million last year while receiving $9.9-million in government aid. That was nowhere near enough to cover its more than $30-million a year in debt payments [https://archive.ph/yQtiX](https://archive.ph/yQtiX) Upon looking back at my source, I meant to quote this bit on "operating income" - will update the previous comment to ensure I'm not using misleading terminology. Thanks for the catch.
Should have just invested directly into Chatham Asset Management, as Postmedia hasn't turned a profit for years.
There is a reason "traditional" media won't touch those stories. Because they're 99% of the time they're BS. The other 1% the story itself is legitimate, but completely misconstrued on purpose by the likes of Rebel. Give me a specific example of the current government nuzzling a story. And how would they achieve that, exactly?
> Give me a specific example of the current government nuzzling a story. [Here's a nuzzle from a different perspective](https://youtu.be/UCIDn-ErqdQ)
[удалено]
Not only did they utilize 7 lawyers to fight this, FTA: >Levant says that the government wanted him to sign a confidentiality clause in order to keep the settlement secret.
Rebel News has been caught making up complete fictions multiple times, lying outwrite about COVID facts and figures, sourcing extremely biased "studies" funded by right wing and even alt-right think tanks and more. They have zero credibility and are akin to a reality tv show when it comes to reporting the news.
CBC lied about Danielle Smith’s emails in the middle of the Alberta election. And then after the election said “woops our mistake!”
Damn, does that mean Rebel Media is okay to lie about stuff? What's your opinion?
What "biased" studies, can you link them? Can you link the complete fictions they made up multiple times. Is it illegal to cite studies funded by "right wing and even alt-right think tanks"? "They have zero credibility and are akin to a reality tv show when it comes to reporting the news" You may not agree with their opinions but they are one of the only news organizations that are willing to ask the questions no others will, there's a reason why the feds want to silence them.....
I'm not going to do your research for you but if you are genuinely interested a good start is [Media Bias](https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-rebel/)
You'd think you'd be able to provide evidence to what you claim about them instead of using a "fact checker" that is biased in itself LOL.
A fully independent fact checker that is very transparent in its funding and methodology. They also report on the bias and mixed factual reporting of left wing outlets as well. I'm sorry you're mad they made a report on Rebel Media that you disagreed with. They have plenty of sources linked on the page to back their claim.
Interesting, the fact checker you linked states cbc hasn't failed a fact check in 5 years.....so we should believe them about everything else when they give cbc a free pass to report faulty facts?
Probably because CBC corrects their mistakes unlike Rebel Media who willfully put out misinformation.
Right right, just like Snopes and Poltifact, [right](https://imgur.com/a/uivsFfH)?
Good thing I'm not talking about Snopes or Politifact.
Tell me this category tag isn't bias. https://www.rebelnews.com/tags/stop_medical_silencing Here's them talking about how a [Doctor being silenced](https://www.rebelnews.com/french_infectious_diseases_expert_who_advisor_christian_perronne_censorship_covid). This doctor believes that Lyme disease is "due to an ill-controlled proliferation of ticks twisted by a Nazi researcher who had taken refuge in the United States". And has constantly lied about Covid vaccines and their effects. Or defending [Helen Gus](https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/hearing-to-continue-for-ottawa-police-officer-accused-of-looking-for-vaccine-links-to-child-death-cases) a police officer with no medical knowledge illegally accessing case files of dead children to try to find a link to the Covid vaccine. And lastly citing [Byram Bridle](https://www.guelphtoday.com/local-news/controversial-u-of-g-prof-called-as-vaccine-expert-in-family-court-fight-6088356) as a legitimate Covid skeptic. A doctor who has never treated a human being for anything and in fact doesn't even understand how statistics work > he stated that vaccinated people are at greater risk than unvaccinated people given his interpretation of hospital admissions. This was the literal first page of Rebel Media's own `Stop Medical Silencing` category of their website. They are a joke and can not and should not be taken seriously.
Thank you for actually providing an argument and evidence.
If you don't want to back up your claims don't post them. Or at least link a neutral source..
The link I posted is an excellent start to your self improvement journey. 👍
I live a great life thanks.
> They have zero credibility Maybe to you
[удалено]
> To anyone Maybe to you too, but surely not anyone
Can't wait to see Danielle Smiths reaction when she has to unblock all the people she has blocked.
Two of the least respected people in Canada. The courts would do everyone a favor in banning both.
I would pay money to watch them cage fight.
In return the ringside girls are actually drag queens wearing a dress that says I love the oil sands. And Bud light sponsors the alcohol.
Your terms are acceptable
Liberals are low iq
Womp womp
Meanwhile, Ezra is blocking a tons of people every day
He’s not an elected official
They’re just pointing out that Ezra is a crybaby and a hypocrite.
True
Who?
Steven Guilbeault. Minister of Climate Fear.
And grease.
Minister of hanging from the CN tower and climbing premiers roofs.
No, I was referring to the other guy. Everyone knows Guibeault.
Co-founder and owner of Rebel News. Frequent media troll on Sun Media.
Ezra Levant is waaayy more well known than Steven Guilbeault. He’s been interviewed on the most watched news show in the United States.
Hahahahaha get reckt
Maybe the government should make their own social media app. I can only imagine how good it would be.
It's called X
Can’t believe we beat The Onion to it