One of my brothers recently sent me this. It's an interesting documentary on the right wing in the states and how they have helped to shape and influence news reporting, so that now reporters and networks tend to tow the party line, instead of being fair and balanced (heh) reporters of the events as they happen.

It's really quite scary. Some of the things that the right wing pundits have been heard saying turn out to be bald faced lies. I know that this topic (all right wing = BAD!) has probably been done to death, but I think it's interesting to have a Canadian perspective on it, it's somewhat impartial (alright, a little bit, Canada is a liberal country and few people take it as an insult when you call them a liberal in Canada) and the exchange on Vietnam between the reporter and Anne Coulter is priceless.

Sticks and Stones

I'm on broadband and it started playing nearly instantaneously. It's 42 minutes long.

Ah, and check out the little 90 second blurb on the American network reaction. Bill O' Reilly compares "Sticks and Stones" to Nazi propoganda. Oh yeah.


(mods, should this be in Issues?)

Depends; I'll see how the discussion goes. If we're simply talking about documentaries, it'll stay here. If the debate gets political, I'll move it. As it is, posting it here first was probably the best call. I've not got time to watch it at the moment, but I'll do so later on today.

It's a pity that CBC News couldn't produce a documentry on _all_ the US and Canadian TV news channels to show them against eachother, instead they seemed to have picked the extreams. But I can understand why: They needed the shock value so that Sticks & Stones would get not just a decent airing, but also more likey reported in, and picked up to be discuss by other media.

Truth be told I was shocked, mostly by what Anne Coulter said but that seems to be why she says shocking things, to, er well, to shock.

However I was taken aback by just how appaling rude Bill O'Reilly was towards Jeremy Glick. O'Reilly (presenter) was telling Glick (guest) to 'Shut up' on live TV.

He does that an awful lot; he's really terribly rude. He's also been known to tell his producer to cut the guest's mic.

He's also been known (recently) to be accused of a number of sexual misdemeanours involving younger women on his staff.

An all round nice chap.

Have a look for Ann Coulter's books too (amazon.com will have them). Just reading the blurb is enough to make you lose hope for the human race when you realise that some people are going to take the crap that she spouts at face value.

Joe Scarborough's another one. Utter pillock.

To be fair, many criticisms of Ann Coulter could equally be made of Michael Moore. They cancel each other out, I feel.

Except that Michael Moore isn't incredibly sexy, beautiful or charismatic. Maybe he cancels her out by being inelegant, scruffy and fat?

[/spam]

EDIT: Also, I loved seeing Coulter being taken down a peg when she claimed that Canada took part in Vietnam. Nuh-uh, Annie, darling! You told a lie!

I find alot of the things Coulter says to be just hilarious. But they're only funny until you realize that she's not on a satirical talk show, she's on a news network that many people take seriously.

It scares me to think that there are people who watch this and look at her spouting her hilariously inaccurate and over the top comments and think "Hmm..You know, she has a point."