Why is Fox News banned in Canada?

BlkbrryTheGreat · Post by **BlkbrryTheGreat** » 2004-05-09 02:10am

Can someone explain this?

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-05-09 02:14am

Because they don't like feeling dirty?

Natorgator · Post by **Natorgator** » 2004-05-09 02:17am

They don't like american bullshit propoganda?

Post by **Gandalf** » 2004-05-09 02:17am

Fox News is banned in Canada?

How long has this been so?

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2004-05-09 02:27am

Gandalf wrote:Fox News is banned in Canada?

How long has this been so?

And why isn't it banned in Australia?

Wait... FOXtel... FOXnews... oh damn.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-05-09 02:36am

FOX News is banned in Canada because Al-Jazeera is banned in Canada. Both of them are propaganda rather than news. Having said that, I would support the broadcast of FOX News in Canada ... and Al-Jazeera.

BlkbrryTheGreat · Post by **BlkbrryTheGreat** » 2004-05-09 02:47am

So much for Canada's commitment to Free Speech as a fundamental human right; also proves how much you can trust the "we'll only use the power of censorship to ban 'hate speech'" arguement.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-05-09 02:55am

BlkbrryTheGreat wrote:So much for Canada's commitment to Free Speech as a fundamental human right; also proves how much you can trust the "we'll only use the power of censorship to ban 'hate speech'" arguement.

This from someone living in a country where a televised boobie causes a national uproar and the FCC cracks down on everything in sight.

Sarevok · Post by **Sarevok** » 2004-05-09 02:55am

It is interesting that while Canada banned Fox News it is still available in the Asia / Mideast region. We must be more liberal than Canada.

BlkbrryTheGreat · Post by **BlkbrryTheGreat** » 2004-05-09 03:03am

Darth Wong wrote:
BlkbrryTheGreat wrote:So much for Canada's commitment to Free Speech as a fundamental human right; also proves how much you can trust the "we'll only use the power of censorship to ban 'hate speech'" arguement.
This from someone living in a country where a televised boobie causes a national uproar and the FCC cracks down on everything in sight.

Short Reply:

True enough, but boobies don't have intellectual content.

Longer Reply:

The "crackdown" is on those who violate the FCC standards of deceny*- not on those who don't meet the governments standards of "truth". You don't, for example, have the FCC knocking on the door of CNN or NPR or that explicitly liberal radio station (whose name excapes me at the moment) telling them that they will be shut down for what they're saying, or telling Americans that they can be fined $25,000 if they watch/listen to these stations.

*I don't agree with these standards or the crackdown, for the record.

BlkbrryTheGreat · Post by **BlkbrryTheGreat** » 2004-05-09 03:04am

evilcat4000 wrote:It is interesting that while Canada banned Fox News it is still available in the Asia / Mideast region. We must be more liberal than Canada.

I find it hilarious that one can watch Fox News in Beijing, but not Toranto.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-05-09 03:10am

BlkbrryTheGreat wrote:Short Reply:

True enough, but boobies don't have intellectual content.

Neither does Fox News. Print editorials are fine, just not the broadcast of a network that commits fraud on a regular basis by misrepresenting political advertising as journalism.

Longer Reply:

The "crackdown" is on those who violate the FCC standards of deceny*- not on those who don't meet the governments standards of "truth". You don't, for example, have the FCC knocking on the door of CNN or NPR or that explicitly liberal radio station (whose name excapes me at the moment) telling them that they will be shut down for what they're saying, or telling Americans that they can be fined $25,000 if they watch/listen to these stations.

You're full of shit; no one is sending cops out to shut anyone down or fine people if they try to watch FOX News. The CRTC just won't give them a broadcast license in Canada because they were pressured not to give Al-Jazeera a similar license, and they have to be fair.

*I don't agree with these standards or the crackdown, for the record.

And I don't agree with not giving Al-Jazeera or FOX News a broadcast license in Canada, but you exaggerate the severity of the situation. If I were to print out copies of Al-Jazeera or FOX News editorials on paper and distribute them to people in front of the Metro Toronto police headquarters, no one would arrest me.

Frankly, denying a broadcast license to a station which routinely lies on air and calls it "journalism" is considerably less offensive to me than trying to shut down people who have done nothing objectively wrong but who offended some nebulously defined "moral standard".

Sarevok · Post by **Sarevok** » 2004-05-09 03:13am

Al-Jazeera is not that bad. If you watch it you will see that they merely report the facts. They are not as politicaly motivated as Fox News.

BlkbrryTheGreat · Post by **BlkbrryTheGreat** » 2004-05-09 03:33am

Neither does Fox News. Print editorials are fine, just not the broadcast of a network that commits fraud on a regular basis by misrepresenting political advertising as journalism.

Bullshit; Fox News obviously has intellectual content because it has VERBAL editorials.

You're full of shit; no one is sending cops out to shut anyone down or fine people if they try to watch FOX News. The CRTC just won't give them a broadcast license in Canada because they were pressured not to give Al-Jazeera a similar license, and they have to be fair.

So, Mike your telling me it isn't against the law to watch Fox News in Canada even though it wasn't given a broadcast license? Are you telling me that someone could not be jailed for up to a year, or fined $25,000 dollars, if they were caught, say, playing a sattilite feed of Fox News (or any other none liscensed channel) in a bar?

And I don't agree with not giving Al-Jazeera or FOX News a broadcast license in Canada, but you exaggerate the severity of the situation. If I were to print out copies of Al-Jazeera or FOX News editorials on paper and distribute them to people in front of the Metro Toronto police headquarters, no one would arrest me.

And it strikes you as perfectly fair that if you displayed the exact same editorial from a sattilite feed you could be fined or arrested?

Frankly, denying a broadcast license to a station which routinely lies on air and calls it "journalism" is considerably less offensive to me than trying to shut down people who have done nothing objectively wrong but who offended some nebulously defined "moral standard".

Personally, I find both disguisting. I see no reason why government should have the power to do either. In terms of fraud, if its actually true, then there is no reason that FOX shouldn't be brought to court over fraud/libel/slander; and fined for any damages instead of censoring the entire network.

Part of having a free soceity is having people free to make up their own minds.

Dahak · Post by **Dahak** » 2004-05-09 06:27am

BlkbrryTheGreat wrote: Part of having a free soceity is having people free to make up their own minds.

Different countries, different standards and idea of rights.
Not everyone has to have the same ideals as the USA.

Sharp-kun · Post by **Sharp-kun** » 2004-05-09 07:00am

BlkbrryTheGreat wrote:Short Reply:

True enough, but boobies don't have intellectual content.

Are you suggesting Fox News does?

Xenophobe3691 · Post by **Xenophobe3691** » 2004-05-09 11:02am

evilcat4000 wrote:Al-Jazeera is not that bad. If you watch it you will see that they merely report the facts. They are not as politicaly motivated as Fox News.

The problem is, they report only the facts that their viewers want to see, and since those viewers are all Middle Easterners with a quite...slanted...view on the West in general, those stories tend to have the same slant.

J · Post by J » 2004-05-09 11:23am

BlkbrryTheGreat wrote:So, Mike your telling me it isn't against the law to watch Fox News in Canada even though it wasn't given a broadcast license? Are you telling me that someone could not be jailed for up to a year, or fined $25,000 dollars, if they were caught, say, playing a sattilite feed of Fox News (or any other none liscensed channel) in a bar?

In this case the bar owner could be fined for it can be argued that he's showing a channel for profit without a proper license. The people in the bar watching the broadcast will not be charged at all. It's the unauthorized distribution that'll get you charged, not the fact that you're watching something that's not cleared for broadcast.

To illustrate, if I setup a satellite dish in my backyard to pickup Fox News for myself or my family to watch, that's perfectly fine and they can't do anything to me. If I were to invite people over to my place and charge them a couple bucks a pop to watch Fox News with me, then I'd probably be in trouble if the authorities found out.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2004-05-09 11:34am

BlkbrryTheGreat wrote:Part of having a free soceity is having people free to make up their own minds.

This is where Blkbrry is slowly introduced to the idea that American values are not universal. This, of course, will be seen as EVIL.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2004-05-09 11:40am

SirNitram wrote:
BlkbrryTheGreat wrote:Part of having a free soceity is having people free to make up their own minds.
This is where Blkbrry is slowly introduced to the idea that American values are not universal. This, of course, will be seen as EVIL.

But aren't Canadians merely Americans with funny accents and the weird habit of misspelling words such as 'neighbor' and 'labor'?

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2004-05-09 11:41am

Glocksman wrote:
SirNitram wrote:
BlkbrryTheGreat wrote:Part of having a free soceity is having people free to make up their own minds.
This is where Blkbrry is slowly introduced to the idea that American values are not universal. This, of course, will be seen as EVIL.
But aren't Canadians merely Americans with funny accents and the weird habit of misspelling words such as 'neighbor' and 'labor'?

That's what the Empire wants you to think.

Einhander Sn0m4n · Post by **Einhander Sn0m4n** » 2004-05-09 11:57am

Speaking of FOX News, did anyone see that crackpot 'Mathematician' who used a 'mathematical proof' to say God exists with a probability of 67% yesterday?

Then he A: "Conveniently" doesn't tell us the formula, then B: says that DEPENDING UPON THE WORLDVIEW OF THE INDIVIDUAL DOING THE CALCULATION that different percentages can be arrived at, neatly SHOOTING HIMSELF IN THE FUCKING FOOT!!

Tell you the truth, I'd probly rather watch A-J than Fox anyway, but unfortunately David (my bf) watches it constantly...

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-05-09 12:07pm

It's funny how SKY News isn't anything like FOX.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-05-09 12:25pm

BlkbrryTheGreat wrote:
Neither does Fox News. Print editorials are fine, just not the broadcast of a network that commits fraud on a regular basis by misrepresenting political advertising as journalism.
Bullshit; Fox News obviously has intellectual content because it has VERBAL editorials.

I was not aware that fraud was considered "intellectual content".

So, Mike your telling me it isn't against the law to watch Fox News in Canada even though it wasn't given a broadcast license? Are you telling me that someone could not be jailed for up to a year, or fined $25,000 dollars, if they were caught, say, playing a sattilite feed of Fox News (or any other none liscensed channel) in a bar?

I see you are too goddamned stupid to understand what "You're full of shit; no one is sending cops out to shut anyone down or fine people if they try to watch FOX News" means.

And it strikes you as perfectly fair that if you displayed the exact same editorial from a sattilite feed you could be fined or arrested?

I see you are too goddamned stupid to understand what "You're full of shit; no one is sending cops out to shut anyone down or fine people if they try to watch FOX News" means. All they've done is deny Fox a broadcast license. Which is PERFECTLY FAIR since they won't give a broadcast license to Al-Jazeera either, for reasons which are obviously connected to a certain powerful neighbour our country has.

Personally, I find both disguisting. I see no reason why government should have the power to do either. In terms of fraud, if its actually true, then there is no reason that FOX shouldn't be brought to court over fraud/libel/slander; and fined for any damages instead of censoring the entire network.

The right to freedom of expression does not guarantee the right to A) misrepresent facts habitually or B) do it in whatever medium you want. In the US, they don't like people broadcasting swear words or boobies over the airwaves. In Canada, we have a problem with fraud, hate speech, and propaganda masquerading as news.

Part of having a free soceity is having people free to make up their own minds.

Which is not facilitated by political propaganda which fraudulently misrepresents itself as news. Moreover, people can always, oh, I dunno, READ if they want information.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-05-09 02:19pm

Dahak wrote:
BlkbrryTheGreat wrote: Part of having a free soceity is having people free to make up their own minds.
Different countries, different standards and idea of rights.
Not everyone has to have the same ideals as the USA.

This is stupid. I hate it when plurality of ideas is used to try and defend anything without a real argument.

The same logic could justify Islamic extremism and cultural misogynism, etc. in other countries, you know.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Why is Fox News banned in Canada?

Why is Fox News banned in Canada?

Re: Why is Fox News banned in Canada?