And you thought US media was corrupt... Check out Canada.

Yes, it is an international problem. So, we the people, can turn off the television and mainstream media, and be our own media - this is what we are doing here on current, and undoubtedly being spied upon and our notes recorded.... more the reason for more and more people to join in!

Americans do take so much for granted......on the whole it is a great country....if they would just start counting the votes....it would catapult light years forward...the same group that controls Canada controls America and the world.....and world media..it is a game.....but they put Bush and Blair in power...so the wheels seem to be wobbling....Golden Ruler...Johnnie Hargrave

welll nader cant do the same here either..

Considering all major Canadian political parties holding seats in parliament are represented, it would be very difficult to include every minor party in national debates. Note the Green Party ranks a respectable 6th, ahead of the Marijuana Party and the Marxist-Leninist Party. Including those would certainly "enliven" debates, as though it were not difficult enough to figure-out what the french guy from Bloc Quebecois is talking about...

Yeah! Were less evil in one aspect of a country that's known for its syrup!

yes that sucks no green party at debates on t.v. compared to the silence of the media on Ron Paul who had huge support in the u.s. no green party at some debates is like night and day. you americans should repay your debts you've built up since ronald reagan,even if you have to vacate several states and put the assets up for auction

To yeti...

The thing is... it's all about how you count the votes. In terms of popular vote the Greens really should be there. In terms of their representation on the ballots they really should be there.

The Bloc, (a very fringe party who wants the province of Quebec to separate from the Country) only runs in the province of Quebec. They are NOT a national party, and have no business being in a nationally televised debate... they can take part in the Quebec debates.

When will we find truth in our media..? Or will it forever be just a means to manipullate the masses..?

we're all gonna die!

same thing here in the USA

especially in the primary elections. Kucinich? Gravel? naw, we'll just bloc them out-- or we'll let them in, but they can't speak.

Unfortunately this is happening around the world. Governments, political parties, and corporations are running the media these days, which means that they can sensor and twist the news or completely block it out.

The context of any content is all bull.
Start reading books people.

Like another person pointed out, Nader and anyone not part of the Democratic or Republican party gets zero mainstream press coverage. The situation is basically the same it seems.

"Just a note the Bloc Québécois does NOT run for seats outside of the province of Quebec, yet they are included in NATIONAL debates. The Green Party runs candidates in EVERY riding (district) yet they will not be included."

Quebec is THE only province in the Canada confederation with veto powers in the parliament, this is a fact since the patriation of the constitution in 1982. The Bloc Quebcois is the party with the largest minority (I think 50 or 52 seats) that gives them the power to make alliances with the liberals and democrats to form government that elects the prime minister, without them there will be NO deal. On the other hand the Green party has only ONE representative in the house of commons.

They can allied with the Quebeckers or stand alone, that is probably why they are not call into the debates.

Well they only had won one seat in parliamentary elections, they also have equal time for tv advers according to the law. In parliamentary systems such as the Canadian, such minority would produce absolutely no changes, because the house is divided in three or four large forces (as opposed to the US 2 party system, where one seat may derange a vote) That's why it would be irrelevant to have them on debates. At the very best they would produce one more seat, but even that could not be enough to produce strong alliances with the other parties, however they could tilt the balance in legislation.

Parliamentary systems IMHO are usually much more balanced than presidential systems, because coalitions, that are selected by the people directly, can vote out or keep in a good government any time they deem necessary.

If they aren't allowed in the debates, they'll never get more than on seat either.

It's a dragon eating it's own tail.

In the December 2005 debates that preceded the 2006 election, Jim Harris - then leader of the Green party - was excluded because his party had no seats in the House of Commons.

Representation in the House of Commons is an "indisputable" criterion for inclusion in the national debate, said the CBC ombudsman in a 2006 report responding to Green party complaints.

Former Independent MP Blair Wilson, who was elected as a Liberal, joined the Greens last month as the party's first member of Parliament.

we are not fighting a war on art, we are fighting a war on ideals. smart people practice liberal arts. art is not a four letter word. the election this year...

http://putyourendtowar.livejournal.com/46578.html

pyetw