Alberta

[The Green Barbarian]

How unfair it is to "Label" these crosswalks as LGBTQ??
Anybody bother to ask the crosswalk how it identifies?
Maybe it just identifies as crosswalk, not gendered by some group.
Who are we to force our actions/thoughts onto some poor crosswalk.

IMG_3495.jpeg

How I miss Japan….where crosswalks are clearly marked in white, inviting everyone who wishes to cross the street can do so without need of special colours.

The crosswalks identify as crosswalks, nothing more, nothing less.

Just people crossing.

End of story.

Clearly this is a sign that "Japan is engaging in a war on the LGBTQ+ community". What else could it be?

[George Orwell 1984]

IMG_3495.jpeg

How I miss Japan….where crosswalks are clearly marked in white, inviting everyone who wishes to cross the street can do so without need of special colours.

The crosswalks identify as crosswalks, nothing more, nothing less.

Just people crossing.

End of story.

Clearly this is a sign that "Japan is engaging in a war on the LGBTQ+ community". What else could it be?

[fluffy]

Now why does this not surprise me ?

‘Take Back Alberta’ Organizer Leading Campaign Against Rainbow Crosswalk in Small Town Alberta

"The vote by the local town council was unanimous: A rainbow Pride crosswalk in the rural Alberta town of Westlock proposed by local youths would go ahead.

The unanimous decision came in spite of a weeks long anti-Pride campaign led by a top Take Back Alberta organizer to stop it from going ahead. The escalating protest has now drawn safety concerns from the Westlock mayor and council.

The campaign continues however, led by TBA organizer Benita Pedersen, who recently ran the right wing anti-mandate group’s efforts in Edmonton and the surrounding area during the provincial election. Protests are expected this Sunday as the sidewalk gets painted."

>snip<

"A number of conspiracy theories have been cited by Pedersen and her group. The campaign against the crosswalk began weeks ago with a flyering campaign in the city.

The flyer, which reads like a manifesto, promotes a conspiracy theory that the “transgender agenda is part of a larger agenda called Agenda 2030” and describes a deliberate conspiracy to “confuse children about gender and sexuality” so that they are less likely to have children.

The flyer directs readers to the website of a group called Action4Canada, which distributed flyers in Chilliwack BC falsely claiming a school library carried child pornography.

Pedersen told PressProgress she believes the unanimous decision to proceed by town council was undemocratic and orchestrated by a federal Liberal plot."

https://pressprogress.ca/take-back-albe ... n-alberta/

Note: This article was published in June of 2023.

[George Orwell 1984]

IMG_0998.png

[Fancy]

Now why does this not surprise me ?

‘Take Back Alberta’ Organizer Leading Campaign Against Rainbow Crosswalk in Small Town Alberta

"The vote by the local town council was unanimous: A rainbow Pride crosswalk in the rural Alberta town of Westlock proposed by local youths would go ahead.

The unanimous decision came in spite of a weeks long anti-Pride campaign led by a top Take Back Alberta organizer to stop it from going ahead. The escalating protest has now drawn safety concerns from the Westlock mayor and council.

The campaign continues however, led by TBA organizer Benita Pedersen, who recently ran the right wing anti-mandate group’s efforts in Edmonton and the surrounding area during the provincial election. Protests are expected this Sunday as the sidewalk gets painted."

>snip<

"A number of conspiracy theories have been cited by Pedersen and her group. The campaign against the crosswalk began weeks ago with a flyering campaign in the city.

The flyer, which reads like a manifesto, promotes a conspiracy theory that the “transgender agenda is part of a larger agenda called Agenda 2030” and describes a deliberate conspiracy to “confuse children about gender and sexuality” so that they are less likely to have children.

The flyer directs readers to the website of a group called Action4Canada, which distributed flyers in Chilliwack BC falsely claiming a school library carried child pornography.

Pedersen told PressProgress she believes the unanimous decision to proceed by town council was undemocratic and orchestrated by a federal Liberal plot."

https://pressprogress.ca/take-back-albe ... n-alberta/

Note: This article was published in June of 2023.

I expected as much

[rustled]

LOL. Journalism and critical thought at their "finest".

Alberta's ahead of the curve on pushing back against using municipal resources to foment division. It's unsurprising to see mindless inflammatory support of the status quo.

[fluffy]

I use Media Bias / Fact check quite a bit. I understand the fact of media sources today is that there are political leanings one way or another, it's important to know where a source is coming from. If one sees political bias as reason to disregard a source then that would have to apply to right leaning sources as well as left, which would significantly limit the information available. But information on political bias is useless without the second metric Media Bias /Fact Check offers, that of Factual Reporting. If you know where a source is coming from politically, you can use that to filter what you take home as meaningful to you and thus it is still useful. But if a source has a poor rating for factual reporting then anything they say is suspect. One needs to take both metrics in tandem.

EG:
Press Progress:
"Overall, we rate Press Progress Left Biased based on story selection and wording that consistently favors the left and High for factual reporting due to strong sourcing and a clean fact-check record."

Or another well known left leaning source, The Tyee:
"Overall, we rate The Tyee on the far end of Left-Center Biased based on liberal editorial bias and story selection that often favors the left. We also rate them Mostly Factual in reporting rather than High due to a failed fact check."

Compared to Western Standard:
"Overall, we rate the Western Standard Right Biased based on story selection and editorial positions that routinely favor a conservative perspective. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to poor sourcing techniques and a few failed fact checks."

Or Rebel News:
"Overall, we rate Rebel News Right Biased and Questionable based on the promotion of propaganda, conspiracy theories, poor sourcing, and several failed fact checks."

The "Factual Reporting" metric is probably the more revealing of the two metrics, because for readers, political bias is more visible than bad information and thus easier to account for. In terms of Media Bias/ Fact Check, a single failed fact check can result in a grade reduction from "High" to "Mostly Factual", while a grade of "Mixed" or below indicates numerous incidents of failed fact checks.

It's important to look at as big a picture as you can.

[Fancy]

Alberta's ahead of the curve on pushing back against using municipal resources to foment division. It's unsurprising to see mindless inflammatory support of the status quo.

Some of the community wanted it and others didn’t. I wouldn’t say anyone is ahead of the curve yet.

[Fancy]

The video was clear enough.

[rustled]

It's important to look at as big a picture as you can.

I quite agree.

Supporting a narrow view by finding "news" to confirm a bias prevents us from looking at as big a picture as we can.

Looking at as big a picture as we can, we can see the divisive effects of using municipal resources to erect symbols to promote special interest agendas.

Good on this Alberta town for shifting their municipal government's focus away from the DEI agenda and back to where the municipal government's focus belongs.

[George Orwell 1984]

I use Media Bias / Fact check quite a bit. I understand the fact of media sources today is that there are political leanings one way or another, it's important to know where a source is coming from. If one sees political bias as reason to disregard a source then that would have to apply to right leaning sources as well as left, which would significantly limit the information available. But information on political bias is useless without the second metric Media Bias /Fact Check offers, that of Factual Reporting. If you know where a source is coming from politically, you can use that to filter what you take home as meaningful to you and thus it is still useful. But if a source has a poor rating for factual reporting then anything they say is suspect. One needs to take both metrics in tandem.

EG:
Press Progress:
"Overall, we rate Press Progress Left Biased based on story selection and wording that consistently favors the left and High for factual reporting due to strong sourcing and a clean fact-check record."

Or another well known left leaning source, The Tyee:
"Overall, we rate The Tyee on the far end of Left-Center Biased based on liberal editorial bias and story selection that often favors the left. We also rate them Mostly Factual in reporting rather than High due to a failed fact check."

Compared to Western Standard:
"Overall, we rate the Western Standard Right Biased based on story selection and editorial positions that routinely favor a conservative perspective. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to poor sourcing techniques and a few failed fact checks."

Or Rebel News:
"Overall, we rate Rebel News Right Biased and Questionable based on the promotion of propaganda, conspiracy theories, poor sourcing, and several failed fact checks."

The "Factual Reporting" metric is probably the more revealing of the two metrics, because for readers, political bias is more visible than bad information and thus easier to account for. In terms of Media Bias/ Fact Check, a single failed fact check can result in a grade reduction from "High" to "Mostly Factual", while a grade of "Mixed" or below indicates numerous incidents of failed fact checks.

It's important to look at as big a picture as you can.

Gotcha , it’s ok if it’s left bias but a right bias is somehow propaganda .

[Fancy]

What difference does it make when you can hear a person spouting off?

[fluffy]

Some of the community wanted it and others didn’t. I wouldn’t say anyone is ahead of the curve yet.

Exactly. It was a really close vote, and it's quite possible that had the supporters of the rainbow crosswalk put in the same degree of effort into the debate that those in support of canceling the project, even without the aid of misinformation and conspiracy theory, the vote would have come out quite differently.

[fluffy]

Gotcha , it’s ok if it’s left bias but a right bias is somehow propaganda .

You're missing the point. These days it's extremely difficult to find a totally unbiased source, even moreso in such a contentious issue as the one Westlock is dealing with. One really needs to access numerous sources and learn how to get around any bias. That generally means listening to both sides of an argument, and having some knowledge of the honesty of the source you are viewing.

[rustled]

Some of the community wanted it and others didn’t. I wouldn’t say anyone is ahead of the curve yet.

Exactly. It was a really close vote, and it's quite possible that had the supporters of the rainbow crosswalk put in the same degree of effort into the debate that those in support of canceling the project, even without the aid of misinformation and conspiracy theory, the vote would have come out quite differently.

The hubris of perspective bias, fluffy: assuming those who don't think municipal resources should be used to support and promote the symbolism of special interest groups and divisive DEI agendas must have been convinced by someone's "misinformation and conspiracy theory".

The assumption seems to be that people who support the DEI agenda without regard for the consequences aren't as easily led as those who choose not to support it.

This lack of respect for these citizens' ability to think critically shows projection, IMO!