Let me say from the outset that I am a great admirer of Margaret Atwood and only partially for her internationally esteemed literary efforts both fictional and non-fictional, both prose and poetry.

There is however something I admire her for much more than her esteemed writing abilities and that was for co-signing (and perhaps authoring) a letter to Dalton McGuinty in 2005 decrying the planned introduction of Sharia law into the Family Law courts in Ontario. She co-signed this letter with the likes of the late and great June Callwood as well as great Canadian activists such as Maude Barlow. It was this timely letter in conjunction with protests from the moderate Muslim community that at the last minute stopped the introduction of that abomination which is Sharia law into Canadian jurisprudence.

I will always be grateful to Ms. Atwood for that singular act of courage and action on behalf of gender equality, as well as freedom of speech, human rights in general and democracy. By the non-virtue of its creeping and insidious nature Sharia law would have eroded all that.

For me therefore Ms. Atwood has a lot of credibility as a free speech advocate and a true feminist who despite the limitations of her lib-left political bias was able to transcend those limitations out of dire necessity to protect the common good. You are a hero of mine Margaret Atwood.

I will also be forthcoming and mention that I am a conservative and therefore admittedly biased towards conservative media of which we have so very little in Canada, the National Post being the marked exception and the CTS (faith) Network which tends to be socially conservative by definition but very inclusive nonetheless.

I therefore applaud Sun Media’s desire to introduce a “Fox News North” into Canada to balance the equation somewhat and provide Canadians with an alternative to the usually politically correct, leftist biased pap that passes for news in most of Canada’s media outlets.

As a result I ask Ms. Atwood not to buy into the demonization of “Fox News” which emanates from the leftist press from our neighbour to the south nor the “right wing conspiracy” decriers like Hilary Clinton who believes that everyone who disagrees with her politically is out to get her as well as her husband, former President Bill Clinton. How soon the leftist mainstream press in the U.S. overlooked the eight years of demonization they inflicted upon George W. Bush when he was President.

I ask instead that Ms. Atwood transcend once more her lib-left bias and do so in the defence of free speech because she must understand that free speech involves a variance of often contradictory opinion, and cannot be said to be free speech if it merely mirrors one’s own opinion.

Margaret Atwood, please do the right thing.

Did you not read this part? “Of course Fox & Co. can set up a channel or whatever they want to do, if it’s legal etc”

One question is that why do we need a news network to lean right or left? The problem with having networks that cater to certain viewpoints is that they can quickly shield the viewer with uncomfortable points — points that they probably need to know. A Fox News network in Canada wouldn’t counter the biases in other networks as much as it would just introduce its own.

Plus, partisan networks aren’t really known for informing the public. (See the link for the percentages on health care reform–a large proportion of the Fox audience is misinformed about what’s involved in the bill.)

Anyway, reality isn’t right or left, so why should the reporting of it be? We need more accuracy in our news.

Of course I read it. My point was that I would wish that Ms. Atwood would do more than acknowledge the legality of setting up a “Fox News Channel North” but support the spirit and necessity of it as well, even if her political biases are different. I would also hope she would drop her unwarranted paranoia about Stephen Harper and his alleged dictatorial agenda. That paranoia from the Left is yesterday’s news and is completely erroneous.

My dream is a news channel that reports the news and doesn’t try to tell you what to think. Canadian reporting has always been bad in this respect. I cant speak for other countries but I do prefer the BBC.

The question is not whether we need a new news network, but rather, whether the SunTV proposal is being fast-tracked–which seems to be the case–and, more important, whether this channel should both receive a Category 2 specialty license AND have “mandatory access”. i.e., be mandatory on cable or satellite so that a viewer can’t avoid it even if s/he wants to. Sure, I can avoid TV altogether, or just avoid turning to the egregious channel. But what do you bet I’d have to pay for this channel I don’t want–because it would be mandatory!