Anti-Americanism in Canada at the CBC

An excellent research report by Lydia Miljan on anti-Americanism at the CBC in Canada:

There are many sources of anti-Americanism is Canada, from specific and conflicting interests over trade to symbolic issues such as health care. The former we call

A rightwing think tank says the CBC is too critical of the United States. This is news…why?

[quote=“Chewycorns”]the corporation
is at least partly responsible for enhancing and sustaining anti-Americanism in Canada following the 2001 terrorist attacks. … =pb&id=766[/quote]
Meanwhile a fairly large amount of the rest of the responsibility probably governs America.

This whole “how dare you criticize America” thing is getting pretty old I have to say. I don’t mean from Chewycorns specifically, but it seems to be a favourite tactic of the ruling right and their supporters these days. Any criticism comes immediately under fire and the critic gets shouted down in an impressive show of breast beating and hand-wringing “oh poor us, we’re the victims of CRITICISM!” Since when did criticism = anti- anything? :loco:

Tetsuo, I couldn’t have said it better myself.

Of Tetsuo’s 5,777 trillion posts to date, that, IMO, was his most succinct, scathing and accurate.




The thing about the OP’s post is that it utterly fails to take into account just how critical of the Canadian government the CBC is, as well. The CBC can be scathing in its attacks, and for the most part has kept the latest sponsorship scandal in the public eye.

The CBC is just critical, fullstop. And it should be, it’s a media outlet for goshsakes! Just because it doesn’t toady to one particular group or class doesn’t mean it is anti- something else.

It’s hard as a Canadian to really feel sympathy for Geo. Bush. However, it’s easy to feel sympathy for the average American. The thing that sticks in my craw the most (and gets me the most suspicious) about today’s American government is just how willing it is to do what it wants without anyone else’s input.

Let’s put the war in Iraq aside, if possible, for a moment. The American government pushed very very hard to get Canada to sign NAFTA. At the time there were many naysayers about this deal, but we went ahead and threw in with our neighbours to the south. Now, the NAFTA tribunal has on a number of occasions pointed out that the US is in the wrong (softwood lumber anyone?), but the government simply thumbs its nose and says “nyah, we don’t have to listen to you.” It gives one the sense that they truly believe that they are above the law, and can simply take what they want, where they want it and when they want it.

Not very neighbourly, I’d say. Where I come from that is called cheating and immoral.

How about the UN ambassador? Instead of going through the channels of command, Geo. Bush simply jumps the queue to put his guy in that position. WTF? So is he the president or the king of America? I don’t understand.

I guess my point is that for a country/government that says it loves democracy and freedom above all else, it’s hard to see where it is practicing those things on an international basis.

And let me also say this: my three very best friends in Taiwan are Americans. Americans are not the problem, and are not the target of most of these ‘attacks’ or criticisms, though it may feel like that at times. It’s your government and its policies that freak people out so much.

A state-owned media outlet. If it does criticize the govenment on any issue, it is most definitely a left-wing critique. On issues such as the Oil for Food Scandal, it definitely hasn’t covered the Canadian connections to this scandal. Ask your CBC-watching friends in Canada if they have ever heard of Maurice Strong. :smiling_imp: International media outlets ranging from the NY Times to Fox have given this “Canadian angle” extensive coverage. I ask you this question directly. Why do you think the CBC has given it only miminal coverage – could it be it doesn’t want to bite the hand that feeds it. … _the_1.php

The confirmation process was being stonewalled by Democrats in the Senate who were going to “Bork” him. Again, I think it is very critical of you to call him a “King.” Canada’s parliamentary system is much more “imperial.” I’d like you to read the article below. Martin has “carte blanche” power to appoint Supreme Court justices in Canada – no review or bipartisan confirmation process. Are you complaining about that? No, I didn’t think so. Liberal hypocrisy, again? :smiling_imp: … 74906.html

:loco: Mohammed definitely disagrees with you. … eehan.html