It happens to us on a daily basis – we flip the channel, pick up the paper, or click onto a website about a fatal car accident.

But what constitutes this as news? Most often it’s not.

Why not?

Well, I am astonished that media conglomerates choose to exploit death while failing to contribute to an overarching political debate. There are examples where accident stories are important to promote a cause or inform the public about a specific danger – as is the case as with drunk driving or a defect in certain car models.

As I write this, there is adrenaline pumping in my shoulders at the thought of the many fatal accidents that are occuring. And I believe it is this type of fear the media has been instilling in us for years; playing with our emotions and distracting us from finding the positives in our world.

What makes an accident news?

As a journalist, I have been in the unfortunate position of covering fatal accidents.

In one particular case, I had the responsibility of honouring a college student, Natalie Sylvestre, who passed in a car accident.

I chose to focus on the memorial the college started in her honour – providing a bursary to students in the nursing program from which she graduated.

Also, in interviewing friends and colleagues, I attempted to paint a picture of her character in life and not the tragedy that was her death. I did not go into interviews to dig up the dirt on how she died but rather focussed on what people would miss about her existence.

By starting the story with the unification of her peers to remember Natalie, I felt this was a better approach than bluntly exploiting her death. I did mention how she died in the second paragraph but stuck to the facts: date, parties involved, and her role as a passenger.

But wait, Riaz, what about your story where the women dies in the car accident after surviving the Air France crash?

The story was an interesting twist of fate where Johanna Ganthaler passed away after averting death. I opted to speak about luck versus fate, and was well aware of the laughs being shared around the blogosphere about this case. It continues to surprise me how ‘funny’ some people can find death when it is not someone close to them.

You may find this view uptight, but I prefer jokes where people at least have an opportunity to defend themselves.

So what is my problem with accident stories?

I think it is necessary to inform the community of a local’s passing, but the manner in which this is done is often impersonal and provocative. There are instances in which I have read accident articles without any names at all.

So my question is: what is the point of sharing with readers that there was a fatal car accident if no one is going to be mentioned or honoured?

I am not sure of the hidden agenda behind this type of journalism but I know there is definitely an aspect of fear-mongering involved.

I really don’t understand how publications plan to sell content in the information age when the stories are redundant.

The media explains how everything can kill us nowadays – but wait, everything already could before.

* * *

This story is dedicated to every nameless and faceless accident victim who was exploited to sell media.

- Riaz Sidi

Related posts:

1. Woman Late For Air France Flight #447 Dies in Car Accident
2. Baby Boomers Busted!
3. Promiscuous Women Prevent Armageddon

A viral Prophet Mohammad cartoon contest has enraged Pakistani officials who have temporarily blocked social media giants Facebook and YouTube throughout the Asian country.

Molly Norris was blamed for starting the controversy after she drew a parodized version of the religious figure to complement a recent South Park episode which was condemned and censored for its depiction of the muslim Prophet.

Norris was also accused  of creating the Facebook fan page ‘Let’s All Draw Mohammad Day May 20’. The page quickly gained 98,700 fans before being pulled. She vehemently denies being the group creator and links to a fan page which is against the original page from her own website.

The fan page has been countered by viral protests including a fan page called ‘We Love Prophet Muhammed’ which has 120, 595 fans as of this writing.

One of the wall posts suggests that now that the group has gathered masses through Facebook, that members collectively deactivate their accounts – how ironic.

Although Norris denies being involved with creating the fan page, she is taking responsibility for cancelling the event.

“I apologize to people of Muslim faith and ask that this ‘day’ be called off,” she said.

The Breakdown

The internet is anarchic. There are no rules – it is vile and ruthless. Are Facebook and YouTube to blame for the actions of its collective?

Where are the lines drawn between offensive content and freedom of speech?

Here’s the fundamental truth of the internet: an anarchist envionment cannot be controlled regardless of religious or political belief.

In this case, Islam understandably wants to maintain its sanctity. At the same time, this is compromised by democracy’s staple of realising the imagination and creating reality from ideas.

Although the two are not entirely opposing since both Islam and democracy do share many mutual commonalities, it is difficult to decipher how the global community will move forward when instances of this nature come about in the future.

In the western world, democracy and religion were a pinnacle of disagreement which is why the separation of state and church has worked so well since the Enlightenment.

My Opinon

If you are asking me specifically for an opinion on this particular incident – I will have to admit that I don’t have an opinion: no comment.

The function for this website is primarily to use these types of instances to reflect upon the media at large and to convey a course of action or to conclude that no resolution can exist.

For this case, I do not see a viable solution where governments can control their populations to such a magnitude.

We have seen China’s repeated attempts to censor what the government believes to be dissenting voices to their agenda. I think will be exceedingly difficult to maintain censorship with the emergence of revolutionary new forms to communicate messages.

To turn off the giant cyber-machine is to stand up and leave the dialogue without addressing the lesson – and as an advocate of communication and social media, this is one measure which I oppose.

How do you think the world can unite online while maintaing mutual respect for the many global cultures?

What is our best course of action?

- Riaz Sidi

Related posts:

1. Web 3.0: Semantic Web
2. UN Boycott: Absurd
3. UN Appoints Iran to Women’s Rights Commission!

I will admit that I tend to highlight some stories which herald left-wing politics as superior and poke fun at gaffes perpetrated by the right.

However,  the National Post and Fox News are reporting an unusual decision which has been completely wiped off the media map: The UN has appointed Iran to the Women’s Rights Commission!

Documents from the Economic and Social Council meeting show the decision for Iran to become a member of this commission:

Next, the Council elected 11 new members to fill an equal number of vacancies on the Commission on the Status of Women for four-year terms beginning at the first meeting of the Commission’s fifty-sixth session in 2011 and expiring at the close of its fifty-ninth session in 2015.  The Democratic Republic of the Congo, Liberia and Zimbabwe were elected from the Group of African States; Iran and Thailand were elected from the Group of Asian States; Estonia and Georgia were elected from the Group of Eastern European States; Jamaica was elected from the Group of Latin American and Caribbean States; and Belgium, Netherlands and Spain were elected from the Group of Western European and Other States.

The news organizations are calling-out the UN on this decision and I think this time the ‘right’ may be on to something. I am not concerned necessarily with political affiliation but after an Iranian cleric early last week declared that promiscuous women cause earthquakes it seems a bit ridiculous to have a country where this ideology exists to be elected to a body which promotes the rights of women.

Is it possible this move may in fact transition Iran as it ushers into an era of equality? I hardly think so but I am willing to listen to anyone who can somehow justify this.

Is this a masquerade designed to give Iran the false identity of a country which promotes equality? We shall see.

Not surprisingly, there is an uproar over this decision and it will be interesting to see how much media attention this decision receives over the next few weeks, if any.

Needless to say, I am somewhat startled – not only by this decision but by a lack of supposedly credible news organizations catching wind of this story.

- Riaz Sidi

Related posts:

1. Promiscuous Women Prevent Armageddon
2. Surprise! G20 wants Global Balance – LOL!
3. Why is Greece Broke?!

Iranian cleric Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi has revealed the mystery behind devastating earthquakes -  promiscuous women!

“Many women who do not dress modestly … lead young men astray, corrupt their chastity and spread adultery in society, which (consequently) increases earthquakes,”  Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi was quoted as saying by Iranian media.

This statement was then re-quoted in an Associated Press article and now here at BiasViewer.

According to meteorologists, Iran is a high-risk area for earthquakes and (obviously) how women dress or act will not change this – or will it?

Some women in the Western world are taking this unusually sexist statement endearingly.

Purdue student, Jen McCreight, organized Boobquake 2010 to determine whether women baring their breasts April 25, 2010, would trigger an earthquake of pandemic proportions.

According to reports, there were fewer earthquakes than the previous three days and now I am concluding that Boobquake 2010 may have in fact prevented an armaggedon!

Almost 66,000 people ‘liked’ Boobquake on Facebook and McCreight has continued the movement on other social media sites including Twitter.

This level of fear-mongering by Sedighi is outrageous and ridiculous. Why people who are put into positions of power abuse this authority is beyond me. I sincerely believe Mother Nature is pissed off at this guy…

…but without Sedighi there would be no Boobquake 2010 – so thanks  for putting up the challenge dude; great reverse psychology.

- Riaz Sidi

Related posts:

1. UN Appoints Iran to Women’s Rights Commission!
2. Baby Boomers Busted!
3. Why a Fatal Car Accident is NOT News

An article appearing in the Montreal Gazette suggests Canada and other G20 members are ‘coming to terms with addressing global imbalances’. They quote Bank of Canada Govenor Mark Carney with being the mastermind behind this epic revelation.

I think the article should be renamed: The powers that be accept the powers that shall be - because this shift in global imbalance has already been happening for years and the Western world ‘coming to terms’ with this change is not newsworthy.

The story speaks about the US not needing to discuss their fiscal plan with the world and China’s decision not to mark its exchange rate against other countries. So really, where is the sobering truth being addressed? It’s not!

Large imbalances materialized as developed countries, led by the United States, spent beyond their means and emerging markets financed the bill through the purchase of government bonds — in the process accumulating trillions in foreign-exchange reserves.

BINGO! The main point of the story or what is called the lead (because it should start the article and not be buried deep within it) is right here!

The imbalance happened because developed countries went on a spending spree, exploiting other countries for years and now we are realizing that global imbalance needs to be addressed? Sickening really.

To help address the problem, there will need to be a shift in demand. Households in emerging markets, especially China, have to save less and consume more, and that will require Beijing to improve its social safety net.

Yeah, good call guys, China needs to save less and consume more. They are going to do that anyway! This is not some revolutionary concept. Emerging nations are going to consume at a higher pace than Western countries ever did because for so long they struggled to develop while developed nations produced material waste which was manufactured in these 3rd world countries.

If I came into your house, took a massive dump, and clogged your toilet, wouldn’t you be a little cheesed off too?

Meanwhile, developed economies, led by the United States, have to get their budget balances back on track, and start producing more goods for sale abroad.

So the United States is going to start producing more goods for sale abroad? I don’t think so.

US plants are closing down fast while emerging nations who were working all these years to be more efficient to meet US consumer demands have become experts at production. Why would these developing countries buy products from the US when they can create cheaper with little to no import/export fees involved and minimal pollution?!

The Western world can feed me this story about Bank of Canada’s Mr. Carney and the G20 coming to terms with global imbalance but it doesn’t make a difference because as we the West lose power, the media will not be able to lie to us any longer about how much influence we really have anymore.

The Gazette article was meant to be an objective news piece as I did not see any signs of it being called an opinion-editorial piece – yet the rubbish which appears within it, although optomistic, is unrealistic and only attempts to blind us like the sheep they think we are.

Related posts:

1. UN Appoints Iran to Women’s Rights Commission!
2. UN Boycott: Absurd
3. Why is Greece Broke?!

As economies continue to spiral out of control, a reaction is arriving which may benefit the integrity of journalism in Canada.

Canadian media empire Canwest is reaching its demise and bids are coming in from media giants like Quebecor and Transcontinental to take over. However, CRTC laws preventing media companies from acquiring certain publications or channels from competitors may bring an ‘independent voice’ to Canadian media and a return to regionally operated news.

Now, I am not necessarily saying that Canwest and their divisions have done a poor job. However, with any concentrated and monopolized media source, bias tends to surface. The newswire is narrow and what is considered un-newsworthy to Canwest’s interests may now receive a slot in the paper.

Talks of fracturing the company are already happening as a bid for 3 newspapers were made.

“Our partnership represents a cross spectrum of engaged Canadians committed to a vigorous, independent media voice for the communities that each newspaper serves. We are encouraged by the positive response we have received from investors,” the three consortium partners said. “We are firm in our view that there remains a bright future for newspapers supported by creative web platforms.”

- Toronto Star

Canwest is weighing the offer but maintaining a preference to an acquisition for the entire company.

So what?

A diverse spectrum of thought would only help to balance Canadian media.

These three investors may very well be leading us to believe that an ‘independent media voice for the communities’ is what will result from this transaction, and although they may be blindsiding us, a change of this magnitude will only help to transition media into 2010 by loosening the grip of monopolies in Canada.

How this would affect media and advertising consumption in Canada is still to be seen. Regionalism may surface with a return to sparse interests. Alternatively, a unified and diverse balance of Canadian interests may work to shape our identity in a different manner.

Regardless, I believe this is the shakeup the Canadian media needs.

When?

Ironically, the Financial Post, a sister-site of the National Post,  is reporting a deadline for bidders to acquire them both.

“The first phase of the sale will last seven weeks or until Feb. 26, during which bidders are asked to file indications of interest.”

No source is attributed.

No related posts.

Canadian Governor General Michaëlle Jean is garnering international headlines with her latest controversial act, eating a raw seal heart.

Attending a traditional Inuit event, Jean tasted the cultural delicacy publicizing the affair as an attempt to increase solidarity between Canada and the Aboriginal community.

“It’s delicious,” said Jean. “I tried the heart of the seal and it’s fresh.”

This publicity stunt happened only 20 days after Prime Minister Stephen Harper vowed to “vigourously” defend Canada’s seal industry. His reaction was sparked by the recent overwhelming support to ban seal hunting within the European Union.

Reactions

Canada, along with Norway and other seal hunting countries, plan to file a complaint against the EU ban with the World Trade Organization. They claim bans against seal hunting defy international trade agreements since the species hunted are not endangered. It becomes a tricky game of favouritism when other nations decide whether or not it is acceptable to hunt other controversial delicacies like dog meat.

“Hunting and eating a seal is not a political act, nor is it ‘bizarre’ or ‘disgusting’ as the anti-sealing lobby have commented,” said Mary Simon, president of Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami. “To us, this kind gesture is an acknowledgment by the Governor General of our culture and our dependence upon our wildlife as an important resource for our communities today.”

Animal activists have balked at this notion.

“It amazes us that a Canadian official would indulge in such blood lust. It sounds like she’s trying to give Canadians an even more Neanderthal image around the world than they already have,” said Dan Mathews, vice-president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.

After this video was taken, Jean was invited to join an Inuit tribe on a seal hunt. Jean cordially accepted the invitation. PM Harper, who will be heading up north later in the year, chose to take a different approach when questioned whether he intends to consume seal meat.

“Let’s say the Prime Minister is not a vegetarian,” said a spokesperson on behalf of Stephen Harper.

Related posts:

1. reView: Canadians to Pay $16 Million for Mulroney Commission

Is waterboarding torture? This is what Mancow Muller, the conservative radio host of Mancow’s Morning Madhouse, decided to find out.

During the Bush years, those who condoned the use of waterboarding on terrorist suspects in Afghanistan, Iraq, and secret prisons in Eastern Europe and around the world felt it was not appropriate to call the act torture. This is because Bush continued to contend that the “US does not torture”. Therefore, waterboarding could not possibly be torture, right?

Finally this debate has a case study that will close the obnoxious traps of those who have attempted to deny waterboarding as torture.

Related posts:

1. Why a Fatal Car Accident is NOT News
2. Obama Deception

‘Trial’, ‘commission’, ‘inquiry’; call it whatever you like, cause we Canadian taxpayers are all stuck with the $16 million tab. Fellow Canadians and global citizens, I am outraged at the wishy-washy details of the proceedings being held for former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney.

The Toronto Sun reported May 21 that the tuition for all four of Brian Mulroney’s children were paid through his private dealings with Karlheinz Schreiber. This includes Canadian Idol host Ben Mulroney’s History and Law degrees from Duke University and Université Laval respectively. I am sure you have heard some vague details including the words Brian Mulroney, Karlheinz Schreiber and money, but let us find out what is really going on.

Karlheinz Schreiber is a German-Canadian linked to controversy in both countries. In 1991, he donated DM (Deutsche Mark) 1 million to then German Chancellor Helmut Kohl’s party the Christian Democratic Union. These donations were put into ‘shadow accounts’ which were not reported by CDU. The scandal was discovered a year after Kohl had been defeated in the 1998 election although much of the affair was never fully explained.

In Canada, Schreiber is the reason behind the current Oliphant Commission inquiring into his dealings with Brian Mulroney.

Airbus Affair

The original allegation was corruption in a transaction between Airbus and Air Canada.  Boeing and Airbus had a bidding war to supply Air Canada with new aircrafts. Airbus won and supplied 34 Airbus A320s, as well as the sale of some of Air Canada’s existing Boeing 747 fleet. The 1988 controversy is that Schreiber, on behalf of then Airbus Chairman and Bavarian politican Franz Josef Strauss, gave commissions to Brian Mulroney to ensure that Airbus would receive the contract. All parties denied the RCMP allegation. In 1997, Brian Mulroney vehemently denied accepting money in this occurrence and fired back with a $50 million defamation suit against Canada.

Mulroney, who claimed to barely know Schreiber, won the case and received $2.1 million and an apology.

T4

The second part of this tale is apparently unrelated to the first according to the parties involved – you can be the judge. Schreiber claims Mulroney accepted $300,000 to help build a factory. The project never commenced yet Mulroney claimed the income on his taxes a whopping eight years later and still insists the total was $225,000.

Schreiber spoke to the Ethics Commission insisting that funds were also given to former PM Joe Clark to help usher in the Mulroney era by holding leadership conventions, to secure other Conservative party members and to promote the interests of conservatism in governments around the world.

Allegation

In an interview on The National with Peter Mansbridge on Dec. 11, 2007, “Schreiber said he had met with Mulroney and cabinet minister Elmer MacKay at the prime minister’s residence, 24 Sussex Drive, in March 1993, to discuss the Bear Head project. This contradicted Mulroney’s sworn statement made at his 1996 libel trial that he had had no business with Schreiber. Schreiber said that no receipt or invoice was issued at the time for the $300,000 deal with Mulroney.”

Confusion

Currently, Brian Mulroney is testfying at the Oliphant Commission. This story has gone into multiple bureaucratic directions that are difficult for even the most attuned individual to stay above. You can keep up-to-date with the official proceedings as the details of my simple explanation sink in.

Related posts:

1. UN Appoints Iran to Women’s Rights Commission!

Prince Charles is escalating his campaign to build awareness for the rainforest. Now I am not the greenest of individuals in that I do believe we can sustain environment with technology, but I do also know that we cannot gain without first saving.

So I can certainly applaud his effort in a new YouTube video where celebrities give their spiel about the rainforest while lounging next to a frog.

What I do wonder then is how much Charles has spent himself to raise awareness? He has acquired over £270 million ($420 million USD) since 2001 in his property dealings alone. This is quite a hefty sum but just a drop of the vast wealth his royal family possesses.

At a speech held May 12 for the Royal Institute of British Architects, Prince Charles spoke about returning to “real British heritage” and many architects in attendance found this view prehistoric. The architects, who created 21st century marvels like the London Eye and the Gherkin, initially planned to boycott the conference because of Charles’ ‘twisted vision’. Others in attendance felt differently.

“I thought it was inspirational,” said Manchester architect Neal Charlton. “It’s interesting the way he ties traditional aspects to sustainability. It’s an olive branch, a way forward on reducing emissions and all those key things.”

So will people choose to embrace his rainforest campaign or will Charles face scrutiny similar to that of the architects? Are his intentions sincere or for publicity?

From the YouTube video, a similar mixed response has arisen:

dystopikk
it’s easy to give lectures about how important is to save the rain forest form your own palace. If this is such a huge resource we all use, we should be paying the countries that have this resource, just as we buy the oil.

Nachtjager
Yeah, they’re great, Britain is better than ever, and you know what else you can do to save the world? Die.

“one of Gordon Browns leading green advisers, is to warn that Britain must drastically reduce its population if it is to build a sustainable society. The trust will release research suggesting UK population must be cut to 30m if the country wants to feed itself sustainably”

Go Prince tampon! I mean, Charles.

DeLyonUK
Prince Charles is making a great impact on the United Kingdom as well as the entire world. What a great cause !!!
God Bless the Prince of Wales !!!

No related posts.