jmlang@water.UUCP (02/20/87)
It is quite interesting to watch (listen to , read) news on the U.S. networks, the anglo-canadian and the franco-canadian networks. For instance, in the french speaking networks, (radio, press, tv), there is quite a lot of stuff that comes from the agence-France-presse. The outlook on the rest of the world is refreshingly different. Mind you, the amount of news that is not related to Quebec in the Quebec-based media is depressing (I am a francophone from New Brunswick). Note however, that the news covered there is very often not seen in the anglo-canadian media. AND the news (international or national) carried on canadian media is very often ignored by the networks south of the border (and north of it, now that I come to think of it...) The three big, ABC, CBS and NBC however carry very very similar stuff. Having access to three perspectives sure gives a better picture, if the three perspectives are differents. As an example of what happens on US news w.r.t. Canada, I remember the anchor man saying about the Ocean Ranger disaster : only nine [not sure about the actual figure] AMERICANS were on board. I almost heard: fortunately only nine americans. -- Je'ro^me M. Lang || jmlang@water.bitnet jmlang@water.uucp Dept of Applied Math || jmlang%water@waterloo.csnet U of Waterloo || jmlang%water%waterloo.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
brewster@watdcsu.UUCP (02/21/87)
>From: jmlang@water.UUCP (Jerome M Lang) >As an example of what happens on US news w.r.t. Canada, I remember >the anchor man saying about the Ocean Ranger disaster : >only nine [not sure about the actual figure] AMERICANS were on board. >I almost heard: fortunately only nine americans. Lets not blow our own horn about how noble and worldly we Canadians are. You are much better off and probably closer to reality when you assume that people are pretty much the same in a basic sense. This includes a heightened sense of interest about events closer to "home". As an example of our worldliness consider what happens on Canadian news w.r.t. news south ofthe border. Remember the recent hotel fire in Puerto Rico (and I really dont remember much so I may have got the location wrong). Who did we see being interviewed for over twenty minutes on the national news that evening. Two Canadian women who had survived, and their families back home. In fact, in that disaster which was probably the second largest hotel fire in history, only x (some small number) of Canadians were killed. I almost heard : fortunately only x Canadians. I did hear Barbara conclude the live interview with, "Thank God YOU're safe". Authors emphasis on YOU. As if YOU were the only people in the hotel who mattered, being Canadian and all. Also consider all recent events in Europe and Middle East. What gets the most news ? An event that has a Canadian connection, such as the "spy trial" of Enge (of St. Catherines, Ontario, Canada, north of the U.S., just in case you forgot where this guy lived. On the first night the story broke I watched one newscast that showed the cameras driving through St. Catherines and arriving at his home.) When a gondola breaks in the Alps and thirty die which ones do we here about ? When a train tunnel in Italy is bombed and over one hundred die who do we here about ? I am not saying that this is not the way the news should be presented (although maybe is shouldn't); I'm simply saying that some humility with respect to our own worldview is in order. When it comes right down to it, we aren't very much different from Americans. Try not to become a man UUCP : {decvax|ihnp4}!watmath!watdcsu!brewster of success but rather try Else : Dave Brewer, (519) 886-6657 to become a man of value. Albert Einstein
jmlang@water.UUCP (02/23/87)
In article <3045@watdcsu.UUCP> brewster@watdcsu.UUCP (Dave Brewer, SysDesEng, PAMI, UWaterloo) writes: >>From: jmlang@water.UUCP (Jerome M Lang) > >>As an example of what happens on US news w.r.t. Canada ... > Lets not blow our own horn about how noble and worldly we Canadians > are. My point is not that WE CANADIANS are better nor is it that we are worst. Rather, it is that : 1- we get a better view of the world if we have access to many sources of information. 2- in the US, there are 3 major tv networks and they have almost no difference in perspective for the news. 3- Having basically one point of view in the news necessarily gives one are rather poor idea of what's going on in the world, and that sometimes elsewhere can be just as good even though it is different. 4- Have you listened to very different news: Radio Cuba or Radio Moscow? Of course it is biased, but so is Voice of America. The two together, and add Radio Canada International (doing great even with all the cuts), Radio Australia, and Radio Netherlands, BBC, etc. and you get a reasonable idea of where things are slanted, and where things are better presented. I learned recently that 60% of the citizens in the neighboring country have never left their home state. I suspect most Americans, (and Canadians) rarely if ever bother to get news from different sources. No wonder we Canadians are not well understood south of the border, and Americans north of their border. Oh, by the way, I do not pretend that I am better informed than most of you are. It is just that sometimes I did catch some conflicting reports when listening to some of the sources I mentionned above. To bad time is a bit short to do some Short Wave Listening lately. -- Je'ro^me M. Lang || jmlang@water.bitnet jmlang@water.uucp Dept of Applied Math || jmlang%water@waterloo.csnet U of Waterloo || jmlang%water%waterloo.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa