King, you must not have watched Saturday Night Live in the runup to the election if you don't think our politicians are held up to significant ridicule. And you probably haven't heard of The Capitol Steps either.
One difference between this country and others, where the media is concerned, is that historically at least--we can debate whether it continues to be true--media outlets were considered to be politically neutral. That is, one election they might endorse the Republican candidate for president; the next one, the Democrat. In many foreign countries, on the other hand, media outlets--newspapers in particular--are known by their readers to be the semiofficial mouthpiece of such and such a political party. This was obviously carried to an extreme in the Communist countries back when there was only one political party, but it's also true in Western democracies. And obviously, the paper that's in the hip pocket of the Liberal Party is going to savage the candidates from the Conservative Party--and vice versa.
And speaking of self-censorship, does Canada have the equivalent of Great Britain's Official Secrets Act? Some of the material that's come out in the American media since 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq, had it happened in England, likely would have brought about action by the government which, under the Official Secrets Act, can prosecute reporters who knowingly reveal classified information, as well as editors, publishers, and owners of those media outlets. Here in this country, a reporter can knowingly reveal classified information and a newspaper can publish it, and there's not a darned thing the government can do about it other than stomp their feet and fume.
