Balance and Opinion The complainant, Peter Labrie, objected to an opinion piece that was oakley titanium anti Trump.
He thought it was partisan and its premise ludicrous. He is entitled to his take on it, but by its nature opinion argues for a point of view. He further noted that there was no balance within the CBCNews Opinion section when dealing with Donald Trump. Overall, the pieces cover a range of perspectives on issues raised by a Trump presidency. Really ninety six percent? Where does that data come from? Reid just plucks it out of the air. That really is an outright lie. You objected to the notion that it is, in any way, in Canada best interest to wish for the Trump regime to fail: The premise of the article is ludicrous: If Trump fails, the USA fails. Why would we, Canadians, want our most important ally and neighbor to fail? If the USA does poorly, Canada does poorly, too. Nevertheless, Reid explains that our American neighbors must fail because that would support Reid myopic worldview. Who cares about Reid worldview? You said CBC had given up on its objectivity to adopt a particular political agenda. You questioned any notion of balance over time by citing the last 10 pieces published in the Opinion section which dealt with President Trump and stated that 90% of them were to President Trump. But it actually sourced to fact checking site Politifact, a reputable source of news that has won a Pulitzer Prize. This content adds public understanding and debate on the issues of the day. When presenting content (programs, program segments, or digital content) where a single opinion or point of view is featured, we ensure that a diversity of perspective is provided across a network or platform and in an appropriate time frame. When we choose to present a single point of view : it is clearly labeled, and it does not misrepresent other points of view. While not every piece is explicitly labelled as a point of view logically, when an individual is invited to write about his or her perspective, it will be from that point of view that is the purpose of opinion pieces. The wider issue is the obligation to provide a range of perspectives over time. This is what JSP has to say about that: We contribute oakley jacket sunglasses to informed debate on issues that matter to Canadians by reflecting a diversity of opinion. Our content on all platforms presents a wide range of subject matter and views. On issues of controversy, we ensure that divergent views are reflected respectfully, taking into account their relevance to the debate and how widely held these views are. We also ensure that they are represented over a reasonable period of time. As Mr. Ladurantaye pointed out to you, this was clearly labelled as an opinion piece. You may oakleys cheap online reject the views and premise presented, but it does not make it in violation of CBC policy on that count. The policy is vague about what time frame is reasonable for achieving balance. There is no correct answer, but the general approach is that the more controversial the subject, the closer together the range of views should be. It is a little more clear cut when dealing with news and current affairs programmes and sections of the website, because the volume of material is so much greater. In this case, in many ways, we are in uncharted territory. His style has been polarizing and divisive, his disregard for facts challenging. Journalists have an obligation to report and explain that state of affairs. As Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel explain in their book "The Elements of Journalism", it is a misunderstanding of the principles of journalism to think that at its core there is a completely neutral voice. They explain that when early twentieth century journalists embraced notions of they meant that while the journalist was not objective, acknowledging we all have bias blue oakley sunglasses or perspective, the method he or she used could be. It is the discipline and transparency of the method that makes for excellent journalism. It means that the trap of equivalence, assigning all views the same weight and value is not the goal of good journalism. As they put it, familiar, supposedly neutral style of news writing is not a fundamental principle of journalism. The article you cited was not in violation of CBC journalistic policy. You raise some broader issues about balance over time.
I reiterate that balance is not equivalence the style and loose regard for facts generated by this administration means it will come under critical scrutiny. There has been a clear attempt in the Opinion section to balance that out with more favorable perspectives. It is a practice that should continue.
Prev: oakley white
Next: oakley frames