babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is a Five-member Invite-only Club
October 16, 2016 - 5:44pm
Quote:
While the CTF's mandate is to hold elected officials to account, who holds the CTF's five members to account? Each other. Who decides who else can become a member? They do. It should be no surprise that the CTF has, as a result, faced accusations of being an Astroturf organization — a fake grassroots organization.
http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/manitoba/canadian-taxpayer-federation...
Damned CBC slackers. Maybe we should boycott them for this story too.
So I guess both you and the CBC have been asleep on this story for years. Good thing some alternate media keep up on things so that eventually the CBC can play catch up. So do you think the CBC deserves an award for this ground breaking coverage?
I just noticed the author of this piece is a Liberal strategist. Great that the state media weighs in after the change of government.
So they shouldn't have published it? Or Liberals aren't allowed to write? Or both these things means it is all just propaganda and they are wrong and the CTF is actually a solid grassroots organization?
How many years after one story being written do we have to wait to start a new thread? If waiting over two years - as in this case - is unacceptable then what is? Five years ? 10 years?
Or is your opinion that if something is posted in a blog that means we are forbidden from starting threads about it, on pain of scorn and mockery?
Please inform, as I don't see any of these rules, important as they obviously are, in babble policy.
Lets see you post this piece and instead of a comment about the content you taunt people that don't like the CBC. Then the story turns out to be another indication of the very bias that makes them look much like every other state media in the world. I suggest you put down the shovel your hole is merely getting deeper.
But for the in your face taunt I likely would have not said anything about this dated story. LMAOROF
krop
Sometimes you post some interesting stuff but it loses a lot when you level the personal attacks. Let's try and stick to the issues and leave the personalities out of it as best we can.
kropotkin, you didn't even post in the thread I was referencing, and if you are taking a general comment about boycotting CBC as getting "in your face" I'd suggest you might be being a bit hypersensitive.
In fact I did just find out about this today from seeing this link on FB. So what? Is this a competition?
And again, it is kind of bizarre to spin it as politicking just because it is an editorial by someone who holds a Liberal Party membership.
Bias? How? Is there anything in there pushing the Liberal brand? If anything it calls into question the CTF going after the Manitoba NDP.
My point is that the CBC doesn't spend all its energy smearing people who have been convicted of promoting anti-Semitic hatred. They do actually publish worthwhile pieces on occassion. Like this one.
Fair comment, I'd say.
That would have been fair comment but that is not what you posted.
This is what you posted and it is not a comment on the CBC but a new thread to harass people you are fighting with in another thread. Again I urge you put down the shovel.
My point, now that you have tried twice to misrepresent my views, is that the CBC did not publish this piece when the government was the main booster of this right wing corporate propaganda mill. In fact through those years after the CTF membership structure was well known they kept quoting them as an authority on the economy. Unlike the CCPA which they never fail to identify as a "left wing" organization they consistently have presented the CTF as a reputable source.
That in Chomsky speak is called manufacturing consent. So get off your fuckng high horse and stop opening threads with taunts aimed at posters from other threads. If you wonder why the tone is often not real civil then try looking in the mirror. Your cheap shot was not called for and it certainly didn't deserve a new thread, just to deliver your mealy mouthed insult.
Consistently? Well not in this case.
And I edited a bit, so you may have missed my question. If you really think this all comes down to Liberal bias then how is that reflected in the editorial? There are links in there showing the CTF criticizing the Manitoba and Alberta NDP - news pieces (along with one about a NB Liberal soft drink tax) that would seem to be called into question here.
But hey, if a Liberal Party membership is all it takes to get in on editorial decisions at the Mothercorp nerve centre in Toronto, maybe I might consider getting one myself. Not sure how that works given that their board is still mostly Conservative supporters, but then it isn't my theory.
Its all about the timing. The CBC is subservient to the government of the day. When the government of the day likes the CTF they quote it despite the fact that any one with an internet connection and a desire to look has known for a long time that it is merely a corporate shill outfit. However after the government changes to one that doesn't like the CTF they then publish an attack piece written by a member of the Liberals.
That kind of slavish following of the government line is why I respect them so little. Our opinions on the CBC are obviously different so don't bother trying to convince me that they are independent journalists.
Also before you go into one of your absurd strawman arguments I have never said the CBC has never published anything that was worthwhile. Frankly if they didn't keep up a bit of a facade even imperial sycophants might start to see the truth and they would lose their audience of self righteous do gooders who salivate at the prospect of regime change in far way places.
Doesn't that seem a tad conspiracist to you?
I mean, yes I do know that media have biases and slants just as you do (some of them major), but do you really see this editorial as some kind of policy reversal directed by the Liberal Party? And suppose you were right, and the Liberals actually were bitterly opposed to the CTF and the Fraser Institute (also called out in a piece by Lamont from earlier this year, linked to in this article).
Do you think that would be a bad thing?
But I am not sure how you imagine that 180 turnarount is happening, since the CBC board is still dominated (8 out of 10) by Conservative Party donors appointed by Harper. Do they and their appointees no longer run the CBC? If there is some other body that is making these decisions (quite a lot of decisions if this fellow in Manitoba got the directive for this hatchet job) please tell me how you imagine that is happening.
http://www.friends.ca/reformtheboard/
Is there a secret Liberal CBC Star Chamber somewhere that is really controlling everything, or are all those Harperites shilling for Justin Trudeau now?
And to repeat my question, how exactly do you see this as a Liberal bias? Do you think the Liberals are not a business party? How does it play into Trudeau's machinations for the CBC to reveal their criticism of Greg Selinger and Rachel Notley as bogus? And if it they do in fact want to use the CTF when it suits their evil purposes why would they slag them like this at all?
(assuming your theory that this is all part of some Liberal Party plan, and they control every editing decision right down to the fake story facade to make critics think they are progressive, and that this is not in fact separate writers with their own perspectives on the issue)
There you go with the strawman arguments again. It is your favourite go to when you have put your foot in it. And just to show that you love good dialogue you throw out the conspiracy theory meme. I even asked you not to use your strawman card but apparently that is the only thing you know how to play.
LMAOROF
The biggest and most constant conspiracy theoory on this board is the Russian cyber war conspiracy theory. You know the one that says that anyone who agrees with Russia often must be being paid by Putin's minions with his direct approval. Hell it is so pervasive that they pay people to come on babble to undermine freedom and democracy.
In the Chomsky model, there's no need for the Liberal government to dictate to the CBC what they say about the Canadian Taxpayers "Federation." The propoganda system works insidiously, so that media like the CBC - and private media even more - reflect the bias and the desires of the power-holders. So it absolutely makes sense as kropotkin says that the CBC would now do an expose about the CTF now that it's no longer "in" with the current government.
I also did not know it had only five members. No shock, but revealing nevertheless. Perhaps we'll see less of the silly "Tax Freedom Day" annual stories now?
It was an honest question , and I am going by your words.
You are saying that CBC flips on a dime because Justin Trudeau is PM, even though the boards is full of Harperite hacks, and that any articles that run counter to the party line are just there by design as a diversion.
I'll repeat: doesn't that seem a tad conspiracist to you?
Now do you want to talk about it, answer some of my questions and back up some of your claims - about how you think they are doing this, and how going after the CTF is in fact pro-Liberal propaganda -
or do you not want to talk about that, and not back up any of the things you have said?
CBC Manitoba posts an op-ed about the CTF - and we are to conclude that this is because of the change in government?
I'm suspicious, skeptical, cynical about the MSM - but this goes way way beyond paranoia.
I did a 5-second search, and here's a sample item from the Harper era - March 2014 - which roasts and ridicules the "anti-taxers" of Fraser, CTF, Rob Ford, Kevin O'Leary, and yes, Harper himself. And it's not by some unknown op-ed type - it's by the "senior producer at CBC's business unit":
Not all business people hate taxes - but just try to get them to admit it
Excellent analysis, actually.
So, please. Relax. Take a breath.
And by the way, we need the CBC. That doesn't mean we need to believe all the crap parts of what they report. But we need a public broadcaster. Just need to improve it.
I did not say that you lying asshole. Please stop with your disingenuous lies about what other people post.
Guess I must have imagined it.
Look k, I'd rather not fight about this, and I don't think anyone else is too interested in that either.
Do you want to talk about this or not? Having a conversation is going to be kind of hard if you think it is unfair for me to make reference to things you said, and ask you to back them up.
This is a lie. I never said that. You interpreted my words in the worst possible light. Of course when I say you display an anti-Russian bias you insist I find those exact words in your posts not extrapolate from what you write. As usual you hold others to a different standard than you hold yourself to.
Well I have asked a couple of times what you meant, and you don't seem interested in clarifying how you are NOT saying that. Maybe you can start by explaining how this opinion piece constituted a flip of policy, and how the Liberal government managed to get CBC Manitoba to run this piece. Same for your idea that CBC runs pieces as a diversion.
Maybe this piece is actually one those diversions you are talking about. How do we know which is the real propaganda? Assuming your theory is correct (as I understand it, anyway) that might make more sense if Justin decides he wants to run a story using a quote from the CTF sometime in the future.
But just calling me a liar isn't really making your points any clearer.
We have gone around the CBC issue on more than one occasion and like I said above if you had not posted this in a new thread with a taunt to people who don't agree with your views on the CBC I would likely have not bothered, much like in the Boycott CBC thread.
Having said that I will make one last point before letting this thread die a natural death. You are absolutely right in everything you post and have an uncanny ability to cut to the heart of other people's positions and garner a more fuller understanding of the nuances of those positions than the poster themselves can even imagine.
Well if we are done with the personal stuff, I was actually curious as to why you thought this opinion piece played into Liberal ideology.
Because honestly I don't see it. Certainly not something so serious that we would have CBC building stories around CTF press releases one day, and then as soon as Justin Trudeau gets in they are shown up as not representative at all. Again, the Liberals aren't that far removed from Harper when it comes to financial policy. And the only story they cited going after Liberals was a hard-hitting one about soda pop.
And in a totally coincidental manner this is from the CTF home page and appears to predate the CBC piece on the CTF membership issue.
http://www.taxpayer.com/news-releases/ctf-slams-trudeau-s-carbon-tax
Okay, I'm gonna try this again. This is from MARCH 2014 (Harper time), and it's by the "senior producer at CBC's business unit":
Not all business people hate taxes - but just try to get them to admit it
Please read the whole thing. It's a far more powerful indictment of the right-wing talk tanks than the recent CTF article.
The CBC is a mixed bag of confusion. It quotes the CTF naively one day, and runs decent attacks on Harperism the next. As a whole, it's toxically infected by the neoliberal script of the day. But not nearly, not even slightly, in the same way as the dirty rags owned by billionaires. So instead of looking for conspiratorial explanations of why it runs particular articles, we should IMHO attack it when it does badly and encourage it when it does well.
This time, it did ok. Can't we just say so, without selling our souls?
Thanks, Unionist.
And yes, I agree that there are a lot of competing forces within CBC, not least of which is that Harper-appointed board I mentioned.
Which is why I find this theory of Justin running the show behind the scenes, to the point of running some stories to keep up appearances, bizarre to say the least.
But hey, if the CBC never runs another quote from the CTF so long as he is PM I will be happy to have been proven wrong about this conspiracy.
I find it bizarre as well. If you think it is bizarre why have you postulated it? No one else has said that only you.
Your strawman posts are so trite and predictable and boring.
If the CBC were really a bought-'n'-paid-for mouthpiece for the right wing, I'd expect Conservatives to say "it's balanced and fair".
If the CBC were really "the pinko press", eager to endorse all things Left, I'd expect the Left to say "it'a balanced and fair".
The fact that the CBC can apparently be biased in favour of the Left and the Right at the same time, such that neither side is happy with them, makes me think maybe they're balanced and fair.
You mean we shouild attack them when we disagree with them? Because I think that's going to be everyone's take-away.
Unionist didn't mean that Magoo (though I am sure you are right that some will take that from it).His bottom line is that the CBC is worth supporting, and I agree.
I know this has turned into a bit of a snark fest, but despite the accusations, I'm actually not trying to steer it in that direction.
I am actually inviting a more indepth conversation about some of the ideas raised. It just doesn't seem to be forthcoming.
I don't think he did either, but if that's not when we know they're doing badly, how will we know?
Have you ever seen anything else here?
Have you seen someone post "well, I totally agree with ___________, but I think the CBC really dropped the ball by not talking more about the costs and problems associated with it"?
And darn, so much for wishful thinking. It hasn't been two hours since I made that pledge at #23 and the CTF pops up as a source in another story. Does it count if they are being used to criticize someone in the Sask Party?
(look for the pic most of the way down the page)
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/gth-land-deal-bill-boyd-never...
Though again, if they were to be kept in reserve to use as a foil against Trudeau's enemies, then why the directive to run this editorial at all?
As they say, "On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog". Or, five dogs.
But on the flip side, how many people make up the CCPA? Does anyone even care? They have six offices, so it must be at least six.
Welcome to the internet. The CTF is bogus because it's only five people. But "the Saker" has much to teach us. He's ONE people.
Just to get back to the original point about CTF only having 5 "members"...
I appreciate the righteous indignation ("They call themselves a FEDERATION!"), but if truth be told, the overwheming majority of charitable organizations, NGOs, foundations, etc use a very similar governance model as CTF. ie they may well have a large pool of "supporters" / friends / donors / members -but the ownership and control of the organization is held by a very (very) small group that is relatively closed and "self-perpetuating" in the sense that the current board gets to appoint the next board,- be that themselves or one or two others.
One common variation is for organizations to have an inner circle or "council of members" - by invitation only. And then a star chamber style smaller group which makes up The Board.
The number of truly membership-based organizations run on wholly democratic principles (become a member, you get a vote and can contribute to policy and run for leadership posts) is relatively small, - and generally limited to co-operatives, unions, political parties and a very small sub-set of civil society and community organizations.
FWIW, I believe Rabble itself has a member's council of about a dozen, and a board of four. I for one am not complaining and wish them all the best in their labours.