pblues said:
I noticed the same thing during the recent election. The Star might as well renamed itself the Toronto Martin Star. Ironically enough, it was the Sun who published a full page support article on the Conservatives.
Historically most of the major Canadian papers have taken the stance that editorially they support one party over another during an election. The theory was then that they returned to a more objective reporting practice after the election.
However since we seem to be ever falling into that adolescent American media trend of only being able to handle two political options at one time, black or white - even though the realities are better described as nightshade or ebony - our papers are taking on ideologies from a foundation position rather than logic. In turn we see these absurd apologist approaches from both sides where the information is secondary to the placement of the ideology they supporting.
Just read some of the "intellectual descirptions" - I guess the monkey can't always be working on Shakespeare - we see here;
Liberal Rag - Right Wing Mouth-piece, etc.
The underlying idea being that once labelled nothing printed in the offending paper could EVER be true. Instead we see something out of some newsprint twilight zone:
NP: LIBERAL BILL WILL RESULT IN DEATH FOR SOME DRIVERS!
STAR: MARTIN CREATES JOBS!
Two different healines, both could be the same story about the Federal Government signing off on a Highway Roads Infrastructure bill to build a new highway. Is either banner wrong? No, but is either banner correct either? No.
Do we perpuate the stupidity by endorsing this ideologically biased media system? Yes. It doesn't matter which side you are on, anyone who plays that game is supporting it.
T.
