Ezra Levant Loses Appeal

[Pat-Taporter]

Our right to free speech guarantees everyone a chance to make their opinions known, no matter how extreme or factually correct they may be. The problem isn't so much clowns like Levant and his little band of whatever, it's the willingness of people in general to lap up what he spits out like it's the gospel truth. Somewhere along the line implicit trust in news sources unworthy of that trust has become so prevalent that we are losing any expectancy of ethical performance from all sources.

There is a quote from a recent TV series that says "The most important thing to any democracy is a well informed electorate". Since most media sources are chasing dollars and ratings with greater fervor than they are chasing the truth, that puts the onus on you and me to view the news with healthy skepticism and an some effort to make sure we're getting all sides of the story.

Of course, I'm all for free speech etc..

But when it suites Ezra to push for credibility, he claims to be a journalist, whereas on the other hand, when he gets into trouble he claims to be a pundit.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/ ... -1.3450577

And twice on this forum, I've demonstrated proof that the Rebel has lied. I've even contacted Ezra to point it out, but the stories still remain, uncorrected, in the public eye.

Spot the flimflam in this one.

Watch the video and compare what it says in the report.

http://www.therebel.media/john_is_a_liar

And that cow slaughter video . . . to go with the statistics on output . . ...

http://www.therebel.media/_graphic_vide ... _the_truth

[The Green Barbarian]

Of course, I'm all for free speech etc..

But when it suites Ezra to push for credibility, he claims to be a journalist, whereas on the other hand, when he gets into trouble he claims to be a pundit.

So I'm curious - is Ezra the only reporter/pundit/whatever that you fact-check? I am just wanting to know if your political leanings are affecting your decisions here, or if you enjoy fact-checking all political reporters. If you want to become a fact-checker guy, you should spend a few hours reading the articles oozing out of the CCPA and Broadbent Institute. You could fact-check to your hearts content, and I'm sure when you sent them corrections to their stories they'd be just as happy as Ezra to hear them.

[Pat-Taporter]

LOL 'Reporter'.

Oh please, o' great GB, don't pick on me, I'm just an amateur . . ..

And my political leanings ain't nobody's business but my own--unless I care to make them known.

And when it comes to politicians, I even have a personal story about Lizzie.

[fluffy]

Of course, I'm all for free speech etc..

But when it suites Ezra to push for credibility, he claims to be a journalist, whereas on the other hand, when he gets into trouble he claims to be a pundit.

That's where ethics come into play. Freedom of Speech laws, like a lot of civil rights are put in place with the intent to benefit people who will use those rights responsibly, but we all know things in the ideal world can differ a lot from the real world. Just like there are perfectly able bodied people collecting welfare there are people hiding behind freedom of speech legislation who have no intention of using that right in an ethically and morally correct manner. In my opinion, Levant et al fall into the latter group. That doesn't mean we should censor the blowhard, just that we should be aware of how he likes to conduct his business when we read what he says.

I, for one, agreed with recent attempts to bar his staff from journalistic events on the grounds that they hold no recognized journalistic credentials. In order to acheive those credentials there is generally some obligation to adhere to a code of ethics, something a lot of so-called journalists have no intention of doing. But politics and the media being what it is is took little effort on Levant's part to turn the whole issue into one of censorship and political prejudice, and that doesn't play well to the public, which is of course what politics is all about today. The whole thing reminded me of Fox News's application to broadcast the news in Canada, and how the application didn't pass because they wouldn't agree to tell the truth in their broadcasts. That's the meat of it, scandal and sensationalism sell better that objective fact, and the public gets what the majority of the public wants. Doesn't say much for the state of our society, does it?

[rustled]

^^The problem I have with barring people like Levant from certain events, is when those who are not barred seem beholden to tell only as much of the truth as their employers find acceptable. IMO, there has been a serious whiff of "barring dissenting voices" (or "muzzling") at play, and "controlling the message" is no more palatable when it's presented under the guise of truth in journalism.

[Pat-Taporter]

Yes, fluffy, we are in a bad state.

You know, anybody who receives a University degree takes an oath to adhere to their profession’s code of ethics. Maybe there should be watchdogs and a revoke clause . . ..

As well, does anyone think it harms Ezra’s ‘pundit’ income when some ‘armature’ points out the Rebel’s lies?

Oh, and GB, as far as my politics is concerned?
Besides my time with Elizabeth May,
I’ve had beers with Joe Clark,
Skied with Jean Chretien,
Met with Bob Rae,
Climbed a mountain with Pierre Trudeau,
Had my formal picture taken with Ralph Klein . . ..

So if you happen to be any of those people maybe we could get together and reminisce a bit?

[Pat-Taporter]

^^The problem I have with barring people like Levant from certain events, is when those who are not barred seem beholden to tell only as much of the truth as their employers find acceptable. IMO, there has been a serious whiff of "barring dissenting voices" (or "muzzling") at play, and "controlling the message" is no more palatable when it's presented under the guise of truth in journalism.

Yes, the gatekeepers and their ethics need to be watched too.
Even here.

[fluffy]

^^The problem I have with barring people like Levant from certain events, is when those who are not barred seem beholden to tell only as much of the truth as their employers find acceptable. IMO, there has been a serious whiff of "barring dissenting voices" (or "muzzling") at play, and "controlling the message" is no more palatable when it's presented under the guise of truth in journalism.

Was that a case of "controlling the message" or "controlling the distortion of the message" ?

This is where the ice gets thin.

[rustled]

Ah, but when one person calls a distortion is simply an unpopular statement of bald fact, who gets to decide who gets to hear what?

Personally, having seen the truth behind some news stories reported on purportedly legitimate news broadcasts, I'd much rather be given the option of hearing it all, and deciding for myself who's distorting what and by how much.

As you yourself said, we know Levant's agenda, just as we know the Tyee's. We would like to think they outliers are the only ones who put profit before truth by playing to their audience. That's simply not the case, and hasn't been for decades.

[The Green Barbarian]

^^The problem I have with barring people like Levant from certain events, is when those who are not barred seem beholden to tell only as much of the truth as their employers find acceptable. IMO, there has been a serious whiff of "barring dissenting voices" (or "muzzling") at play, and "controlling the message" is no more palatable when it's presented under the guise of truth in journalism.

I still remember when Sun News (before they went under) was trying to attend an event hosted by David Suzuki and of course, the disgusting Suzuki had hired goons at the door that were instructed to punt Sun TV out of the event. Elizabeth May personally intervened to allow Sun TV to come in to report on the event. As much as I find May's politics disturbing and wrong, I do give her credit for respecting free speech in that instance.

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canad ... f-reporter

[fluffy]

As you yourself said, we know Levant's agenda, just as we know the Tyee's. We would like to think they outliers are the only ones who put profit before truth by playing to their audience. That's simply not the case, and hasn't been for decades.

Oh for the good old days, when truth was still profitable. :)

[fluffy]

[Pat-Taporter]

. . . disgusting Suzuki . . .

Golly, doesn't saying that kind of bring one down to his level?

[Pat-Taporter]

Apparently, at one time, Ezra knew how to apologise too.

The Globe and Mail

Sun News host Ezra Levant issues rare apology for Roma ‘slurs’

Steve Ladurantaye - Media Reporter

The Globe and Mail
Published Monday, Mar. 18, 2013 5:26PM EDT

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-o ... le9924574/


Sun News Network’s Ezra Levant issued a rare on-air apology Monday, saying he hoped his comments about the Roma “will serve as an example of what not to do when commenting on social issues.” . . ..

[maryjane48]

poor ezra all ways brides maid never a bride