Monday, April 13, 2015

Media bias in coverage of Mike Duffy versus coverage of Liberals

Brian Lilley compares the "wall to wall" coverage of Senator Mike Duffy's trial versus the relatively scant coverage of Liberal and convicted child porn offender, Benjamin Levin:

And, at Crux of the Matter, Sandy compares Mike Duffy's treatment with that of Liberal Senators Jim Munson and Mac Harb. The Duffy/Munson comaprison is interesting because of the similarity of the two individuals:
Both Senators Jim Munson and Mike Duffy were born in Atlantic Canada and are 68 years of age. Both were also former journalists, including being foreign correspondents at crucial events in history.


Sandy C. said...

Thanks for the link JR.

Anonymous said...

I think the answer has less to do with bias or more to do with selling papers, getting more viewers, and listeners. The simple fact is Duffy is a household name, Levin is not. In 1994, over 100 murders of ex-husbands killing their wives in anger occurred in the US, but only one made national news big time. That was the OJ Simpson case as he was a household name the others are not.

If you want to claim the media has a liberal bias, explain why the overwhelming majority of newspapers endorsed the Conservatives last election? The problem with many Reformers (I use this term as Lilley and Levant and other SNN are Reformers not Progressive Conservatives) as anything that isn't from a right wing ideological slant is considered biased even though the vast majority of Canadians are either on the left, in the centre, or moderate right, not ideological right.

Sandy C. said...

Just to clarify. I am a progressive conservative, not a reformer. And, who the mainstream media endorsed last time is not dealing with today. Besides Rebel, the mainstream media hate Mr. Harper. If you can't see the bias, you are part of it. Just turn on your TV and really listen. CBC goes out of its way to find something bad to say about either the PM or his gov't at every newscast. Just sayin.

ward said...

Most media spent 364 days criticizing Harper and on the 365 endorsed him only to be able to say they were unbiased.

Martin said...

To claim that broadcast media doesn't have an inherent liberal bias, displays myopic disregard for the obvious IMO. With CBC, it's not only what they refuse to cover at all, (the leaked e-mails of the AGW scam), but the subtle editorializing slant they attach to stories they do cover.
Municipal politics is not a prime concern of National news, yet CBC spent hours covering trials and antics of Rob Ford. In contrast, The trial and conviction of Mayor Joe Fontana a few miles away in London was relegated to local news, and very briefly at that. The simple fact that he was a Liberal minister was buried deep within the story.

Anonymous said...

Sandy C - What evidence do you have the media hates Harper. From what I see the report whatever will make news and while some things might make the government look bad, it's not the job of the media to give the government line. On the National, they have the political insiders with Jamie Watt from the Conservatives, David Herle from the Liberals and Kathleen Monk from the NDP which seems fair to me. Never mind Rex Murphy at least in his viewpoints seems to be a small c conservative. Rebel is blatant Conservative propaganda that digs up everything to make opponents look bad and Conservatives look good. That's fine, but I am interested in analysis of the issues, not one sided viewpoints. Also Rebel comes across like Fox News as appealing the angry right wing who are a small minority in Canada. It's the right wing version of is to the left and both appeal to a fringe element. Besides whether the media is biased or not is in the eyes of the beholder. I try to take an open mind not expect the media to give everything from my world viewpoint.

Martin - The leaks from the university on it were discussed. The reason there isn't a lot of discussion on it, is simply 97% of the world scientists believe in climate change and accept humans are largely responsible and as a news source they should do things based on facts not conspiracies. The Conservatives can still win on this issue, but rather than deny climate change, argue adaptation is cheaper (note humans live in almost every corner of the globe) or perhaps even argue a warmer world will benefit Canada which I believe it will. As for the focus on Rob Ford vs. Joe Fontana, that is simple. Toronto is a large world class city, London is a small city few outside of Canada have heard of and even many Canadians couldn't find it on the map. Regardless of politics, if you in the US had a crack smoking mayor in New York City and one convicted of fraud in Omaha, I suspect it would be huge news on the NYC mayor while very little on the one in Omaha. The reality is the bigger the city is, the bigger its impact is so the more attention it gets. Same with our provinces, the bigger ones get more attention than the smaller ones. It has nothing to do with being Liberal or Conservative in fact outside of Ontario most people don't know what Rob Ford's politics are.

Martin said...

CBC did not discuss the leaked e-mails in any significant way. In an unforgettable TV moment, their resident blogging expert Kady O'Malley whined that she couldn't possibly sort through all the documents. She was responding to a question from Adrian McNair P&P Dec 2009; McNair has never been seen on CBC since. see

The story here is why so many world scientists felt the need to fudge, or hide data to support the AGW theory, and that 2 Canadians were active in exposing the hockey stick graph scam.Many bloggers covered on their own dime what O'Malley is paid to do and didn't.

Joe Fontana's convictions for fraud and breach of trust were for crimes committed while a fairly recent Federal Liberal cabinet minister.The fact that he was only mayor of London when charged does not absolve CBC from covering the story thoroughly.

Anonymous said...

To further prove my point, see this and its higher up on than anything on the Duffy trial.

As for climategate, I recall it being discussed on the National. The only reason it didn't continue much beyond the week it happened is despite the leak, it did not change the fundamental fact the earth is warming and humans are the primary cause. As for referencing BC Blue, his blog is a rabidly partisan one that basically criticizes anything that doesn't follow the PMO script as biased, even though the media should be independent both from the government and opposition.

As for discussing Joe Fontana, it was mentioned on the media for starters and it happened almost a full decade after the Liberals were tossed from power and when they were a third party nationally. As mentioned London is not a major city like Toronto so I believe it was size not politics why Rob Ford got more attention. I should note the jailing of two former Montreal mayors who were neither Liberal or Conservative also get a lot of media attention.

The reality is the media is about getting more viewers, listeners, or readers so they can get more advertising so I think the question Conservatives need to ask is why does Sun News and Rebel Media fail in the free market. Perhaps maybe they are trying to market a product people don't want. I am all for the free market and the free market means those with biases that don't sell will fail. As for CBC, the subsidies are more for the radio than television as television relies heavily on advertising. Perhaps maybe we should follow the BBC and fund it through licence fees as they do.

Sandy C. said...

Re Anonymous -- You said on April 15th at 2:50pm: "I try to take an open mind not expect the media to give everything from my world viewpoint."

Yea right. Like you have here -- while remaining anonymous.