Why complain about CBC spending when our Minister of Heritage James Moore loves ‘em.  He probably attended the party.  I’m guessing they had more than a few balloons and a massive cake.

Another thing, why can’t we know how much Peter Mansbridge is being paid for his services?
His job is one any trained journo could do so he’s not indispensable.

Another thing, why can’t we know how much Peter Mansbridge is being paid for his services?
His job is one any trained journo could do so he’s not indispensable.

Three questions:
- how much do YOU think he’s getting paid?
- how much do you think he SHOULD be getting paid?
- how much do you think Lloyd Robertson was paid?

Take your time.

At this point I’d be willing to bet James Moore’s Bernese Mountain dog, Jed ,would make better decisions than his master. Don’t get me wrong, I like James, he’s a fine fellow, but, he seems to have been taken in by CBC types.  He needs to soon show us his Conservative side maybe with a little help from the PM who seems to be on a sabbatical.  Normally politicians don’t reward enemies.

Yeah, I’ll take my time, thanks.

As for Lloyd Robertson, my tax dollars do not pay his salary and that’s a consideration that should figure into the equation.

So let’s see where we’re at:

- you want to know Peter Mansbridge’s salary. Presumably because you suspect it’s absurdly high
- but when asked to quantify your expectations, you demur
- I didn’t ask you whether Lloyd Robertson’s salary should be public, I simply asked you to guess what it was, since he’s someone in the private sector doing a job that’s roughly equivalent.

…you really don’t care what Mansbridge makes. You just like ragging on the CBC.

Still, it’s always impressive to see a gotcha game in the hands of a master.

Seems the only non-negotiable qualification for being a Canadian Conservative is an uncritical hate for the CBC.  The other stuff – fiscal prudence, accountability, open government, individual rights – pffft, you can fake that.

Poor Kenn2. If you and your friends give me a large sum of money every year, but $0 to Liz, because someone else is paying her salary, but both Liz and I do the same kind of work, which of the two are you gonna be most concerned about? Don’t you think you, as the payor, have a right to know how much I’m eating from the trough you and your friends keep having to fill up?

Suppose you fear that Liz may be making a lot more than you’re paying me and you are afraid I might bolt and go over to the same company that Liz works for, or any of the competition, and what you’re offering is so low that you have difficulty recruiting a replacement for me. Since you are paying, don’t you think you have a right to know how much you are paying?  As one of the people who’s footing the bill, isn’t it your right to know how much that bill is and whether or not it is either excessive or too lean or just right?

It’s a good management practice to be aware of what the average price of labour in your field of employment is at any given time. If you don’t know that you can either get screwed or screw your employees and risk losing the best people you have.

“…with the only strings attached being the responsibility of serving the entire country’s population.”

At which they are failing, miserably.

This issue here is one of public perception. The Cons don’t want to be seen as censoring or punishing the press. That’s what happens in dictatorships and it’s one of the most fundamental problems with the whole concept of a “public” broadcaster. Not only does it make the politicians leery of interfering or denying funding, but it tends to make the public broadcaster feel the need to favour/shield from criticism the political party most likely to reward it most generously.

After 75 years, I would think it’s time to rethink the underlying reason d’etre of a publicly funded media organization. At least the private sector can cater to whatever demographic is willing to consume its offerings. The better they are at that, the larger their audience, and the larger their audience, the bigger revenue they can realize from advertizing. Expecting to be all things to all people can be a bit of a recipe for failure.

“…fiscal prudence, accountability, open…”

Precisely what CBC is not.

You lost me.

1) any idea what a crown corporation is, how they work?
2) you do realize we still (for the moment) have a free labour market? Crown or private, a corporation has to pay market rates to retain employees.
3) same three questions to you as I posed to Liz. If you have no idea what the industry pays, or should pay… then you have no practical use for the salary info, do you?

Just about all the modern, successful democracies you could name have an arms-length  publicly-funded national broadcaster. The exception: the US – the place where people have the highest distrust of media. Coincidence?

To borrow a phrase from Harper, Canada punches well above her weight, and is internationally recognized in broadcasting, broadcast journalism and media production, due almost entirely to the CBC, NFB, TVO, etc … whether directly, or indirectly, through the talented people who cut their teeth there. And you wanna screw with this.

Don’t like it? Don’t watch. But realize that you’re in the minority.

You lost me.

1) any idea what a crown corporation is, how they work?
2) you do realize we still (for the moment) have a free labour market? Crown or private, a corporation has to pay market rates to retain employees.
3) same three questions to you as I posed to Liz. If you have no idea what the industry pays, or should pay… then you have no practical use for the salary info, do you?

Just about all the modern, successful democracies you could name have an arms-length  publicly-funded national broadcaster. The exception: the US – the place where people have the highest distrust of media. Coincidence?

To borrow a phrase from Harper, Canada punches well above her weight, and is internationally recognized in broadcasting, broadcast journalism and media production, due almost entirely to the CBC, NFB, TVO, etc … whether directly, or indirectly, through the talented people who cut their teeth there. And you wanna screw with this.

Don’t like it? Don’t watch. But realize that you’re in the minority.

And how would you know? Auditors say they’re managing their money reasonably well.

And if your desire is for  “…fiscal prudence, accountability, open…”, start with the Harper government. They spent the equivalent of the CBC’s ENTIRE annual gov’t contribution on a poorly managed weekend (G8/G20) the same sort of meeting that other countries have pulled off successfully, for less than half of that. Hard to say ‘successful’, either, with heavy-handed handling of peaceful protest, and they still managed to lose a sure-fire seat on the UN Security Council. Where are you on that shining carbuncle of fiscal prudence?

And how would you know? Auditors say they’re managing their money reasonably well.

And if your desire is for  “…fiscal prudence, accountability, open…”, start with the Harper government. They spent the equivalent of the CBC’s ENTIRE annual gov’t contribution on a poorly managed weekend (G8/G20) the same sort of meeting that other countries have pulled off successfully, for less than half of that. Hard to say ‘successful’, either, with heavy-handed handling of peaceful protest, and they still managed to lose a sure-fire seat on the UN Security Council. Where are you on that shining carbuncle of fiscal prudence?

 And how would you know? Auditors say they’re managing their money reasonably well.

And if your desire is for  “…fiscal prudence, accountability, open…”, start with the Harper government. They spent the equivalent of the CBC’s ENTIRE annual gov’t contribution on a poorly managed weekend (G8/G20) the same sort of meeting that other countries have pulled off successfully, for less than half of that. Hard to say ‘successful’, either, with heavy-handed handling of peaceful protest, and they still managed to lose a sure-fire seat on the UN Security Council. Where are you on that shining carbuncle of fiscal prudence?

“and is internationally recognized in broadcasting, broadcast journalism and media production, due almost entirely to the CBC, NFB, TVO, etc”

I’m calling 1-800-BS on that. Even if it were true, I’m still against forcing people to pay for it. Nice final argument there-WE OUTNUMBER YOU. Spoken like a true statist bully.

“and is internationally recognized in broadcasting, broadcast journalism and media production, due almost entirely to the CBC, NFB, TVO, etc”

I’m calling 1-800-BS on that. Even if it were true, I’m still against forcing people to pay for it. Nice final argument there-WE OUTNUMBER YOU. Spoken like a true statist bully.

Very simple example – google up the number of Canadians who’ve made it big in Hollywood. First, there’s LOTS.  Second, find out for yourself how many of them worked with or at the CBC, NFB, etc, and what part it played in their career path.

Then you can google up the awards.

If Canadian broadcasting was 100% private… it wouldn’t exist. There’s just be small affiliate stations playing non-stop US programming with a handful of staff to read the weather twice a day.

Don’t believe me?  Ok, name one Canadian car. There’s your fully privatized industry at work.

You may not care about the existence of a unique Canadian voice, or what it’s done for the country, but many do…

Nice final argument there-WE OUTNUMBER YOU.

Have someone explain democracy to you.

Don’t like it. Don’t watch it. Don’t for it. There I fixed it for ya.

Besides that, you argue with Liz that Peter Mansbridge’s salary is none of her business and then you argue with me that people should know what industry salaries are. Which is it? Either the people responsible for paying the salaries should know what those salaries are, or they should just blindly hand over the money. You can’t have it both ways.

And the minority thing? Hah! by CBCs own admission, only 10% of the Canadian public watch or listen to it. I guess minority means something different to you.

Don’t like it. Don’t watch it. Don’t for it. There I fixed it for ya.

Besides that, you argue with Liz that Peter Mansbridge’s salary is none of her business and then you argue with me that people should know what industry salaries are. Which is it? Either the people responsible for paying the salaries should know what those salaries are, or they should just blindly hand over the money. You can’t have it both ways.

And the minority thing? Hah! by CBCs own admission, only 10% of the Canadian public watch or listen to it. I guess minority means something different to you.

That should be “don’t pay or it”.

That should be “don’t pay or it”.

“Auditors say they’re managing their money reasonably well.”

So what? All that means is they’re not lining their own pockets or taking cruises by the Riviera.  It says nothing about whether public funds should be directed towards a broadcaster so it can, among other questionable practices, compete with private sector broadcasters whose taxes contribute to those very same public funds that the public broadcaster gobbles up. The whole thing is a racket.

“Auditors say they’re managing their money reasonably well.”

So what? All that means is they’re not lining their own pockets or taking cruises by the Riviera.  It says nothing about whether public funds should be directed towards a broadcaster so it can, among other questionable practices, compete with private sector broadcasters whose taxes contribute to those very same public funds that the public broadcaster gobbles up. The whole thing is a racket.

Like Dalton McGuinty’s reign in Ontario, the party’s over.  As the CBC marches on to it’s own tune, what else is new in the Dominion?

Just about every successful democracy in the world has a publicly-funded national broadcaster. In just about every instance, the public broadcaster sets the journalistic bar higher, and puts the national interest above corporate ends.

The biggest exception to the above? The US, where competing private broadcasters slant and sensationalize the news, and snipe at each other to draw viewers. The country where viewer distrust and dissatisfaction is highest? The US. Any guesses why their politics are increasingly polarized and dysfunctional?

The Harper government spent the equivalent of the CBC annual funding on FOUR DAYS (G8/G20). Where are you on that waste of funds?

Conservatives need to focus on being genuinely conservative, not simply dismantling Canada.

Just about every successful democracy in the world has a publicly-funded national broadcaster. In just about every instance, the public broadcaster sets the journalistic bar higher, and puts the national interest above corporate ends.

The biggest exception to the above? The US, where competing private broadcasters slant and sensationalize the news, and snipe at each other to draw viewers. The country where viewer distrust and dissatisfaction is highest? The US. Any guesses why their politics are increasingly polarized and dysfunctional?

The Harper government spent the equivalent of the CBC annual funding on FOUR DAYS (G8/G20). Where are you on that waste of funds?

Conservatives need to focus on being genuinely conservative, not simply dismantling Canada.

Besides that, you argue with Liz that Peter Mansbridge’s salary is none
of her business and then you argue with me that people should know what 
industry salaries are. Which is it?

C’mon it’s not that hard. The whole point with that salary  BS is that you wanna know, except you have no standard (public or private) by which to judge whether a salary’s appropriate. therefore the request for salaries is simply sh!t-disturbing, with no real end.

You hate the CBC. (more specifically, you just hate their TV news dept and are indifferent or ignorant of all the other ways they contribute). I get it. Feel free to keep the pressure on, to demand changes, to demand better value, even. Killing it isn’t the answer; Canada cannot fall into the same journalistic snake-pit as the US.

Thanks for the knee-slapper.

Well don’t give up hope. Stephen Harper’s conservatives may just privatize the CBC towards the end of their 18 year term. 

“The whole point with that salary  BS is that you wanna know, except you
have no standard (public or private) by which to judge whether a
salary’s appropriate.”

Total BS. Most industries and professions do salary surveys on a regular basis (annual, bi-annual,etc.) in order to know what the going rate is.  Even if the broadcast industry doesn’t, journalism and broadcasting schools likely do it. You think organizations would make these decisions in the dark? And besides, what I said above, is a big driver of salaries. If you don’t compensate your people appropriately, you lose them and have great difficulty recruiting quality people and that’s a pretty powerful incentive to pay the going rate.

I suspect you know nothing about management. It shows.

Oh, and as far as hating the CBC is concerned, it’s not just their pathetic excuse for news, it’s the whole notion that a country needs a publicly funded broadcaster and the particular way in which the CBC is organized and governed – the board of directors, for example, is a prime landing pad for political patronage appointments. And this idea of forced “Canadian” content is a farce. You think people want to watch TV just because the sit-coms (which aren’t funny) and dramas (which are cliche ridden copycats of American shows) are produced by and about Canada. If the CBC actually broadcast a quality product, I might watch it occasionally. But government fiats cannot ensure that Canadians will watch what the CBC produces.  Governments should stay out of broadcasting and let the viewership decide. A  broadcaster that cannot appeal to a wide audience will have a very hard time raising money from advertizing revenue. That’s the only way to ensure an audience. Give ‘em what they are willing to watch rather than what the gubmit thinks is good for them.

The CBC is audited annually, by people who know better than you or I whether they are paying industry-normal salaries.

You haven’t supplied any example of what you consider good “news” or good programming. That’s probably a wise move on your part.

You continue to ignore the fact that just about all successful democracies have a national broadcaster. Why? Or that the US, without a national broadcaster, has instead a bunch of private companies battling for viewership with sensationalized info-tainment and market-driven bias. And higher viewer distrust and dissatisfaction, btw.

The CBC is audited annually, by people who know better than you or I whether they are paying industry-normal salaries.

You haven’t supplied any example of what you consider good “news” or good programming. That’s probably a wise move on your part.

You continue to ignore the fact that just about all successful democracies have a national broadcaster. Why? Or that the US, without a national broadcaster, has instead a bunch of private companies battling for viewership with sensationalized info-tainment and market-driven bias. And higher viewer distrust and dissatisfaction, btw.

  the board of directors, for example, is a prime landing pad for political patronage appointments.

What? Which right-wing blog told you that? Look for yourself. Or maybe you can enlighten us how any/all of these people are not suitable for a seat on the board of any major broadcasting corporation,  and what political service they’ve rendered to be given this plum posting?

Governments should stay out of broadcasting The ARE out of broadcasting (and the CPC hates that they can’t control the message). Have a grown-up explain the concept of crown corporations and arms-length funding.

“Government fiat”, as you put it, has helped ensure that Canada has a distinct, independent made-in-Canada message, as well as a healthy broadcast/production industry. Including the private sector part of those industries.

Thanks for the insightful comment.

Why should anyone have to guess what I’m-Peter-Mansbridge-and-you’re-not makes? It’s public knowledge what government employees and politicians make and it should be public knowledge what newscasters at Canada’s state broadcaster pull in every year.

I’m sure Mansbridge’s salary is obscenely high but what’s more obscene is that even though we pay a good part of his income, we’re in the dark as to what it is. Hasn’t the CBC refused to open its books under the Freedom of Information Act, something they’re always demanding of others?

Freedom of information for me but not for thee, quoth Peter.

Are you joking: “You’re in the minority”?

Rather, Louise is in the majority. Hardly anyone in Canada watches the CBC! I think it’s got about 6% of the viewer share when it comes to news broadcasts — and, as for their other shows, too many of them are re-runs of American shows — or Coronation Street. (I know that the Queen likes Coronation Street and I like the Queen but that doesn’t translate into my liking Coronation Street.)

Without the taxpayers’ billion bucks a year, I’m pretty sure the CBC would be floundering. (I also don’t understand how it’s fair that the CBC, in addition to the $1.1 billion they get from the government every year, also pulls in substantial revenue from advertising. They have a completely unfair advantage over their private-companies competition.)

So, if all of these former CBC-types are so successful in the States — and you seem to think this is good stuff — how come the CBC is so anti-American? As per usual with petty nationalists, they bite the hand that feeds them.

And, look, the CBC plays lots of American stuff. I have to admit, I don’t watch the American stuff or, God-forbid, the Canadian-content stuff. When channel-surfing and coming across CBC dramas, I pretty much know it’s the CBC before looking. Very quickly, I find something else, turn the TV off, or go back to my computer.

And, as for Little Mosque on the Prairie, it’s neither indicative of what really goes on in Canada, nor is it funny. Please pass my smelling salts …

When my tax dollars pay for someone’s services I have a right to know what they’re being paid. In the case of Mansbridge, I do not watch him so I’m paying an undisclosed amount  for nothing. I have a choice but still have to pay.   Talk about getting screwed!

When my tax dollars pay for someone’s services I have a right to know what they’re being paid. In the case of Mansbridge, I do not watch him so I’m paying an undisclosed amount  for nothing. I have a choice but still have to pay.   Talk about getting screwed!

CBC TV’s ratings are quite respectable. It’s too hot to sit here and point out how fragmented the video market is.  You of course forget about CBC Radio, Radio-Canada (Quebec) and RCI.

A billion spent on the CBC is better value than a billion (mis-)spent on a 4-day police overtime spree. Or billions spent on inapproipriate fighter-planes. Or billions in subsidies to tarsands development.

CBC TV’s ratings are quite respectable. It’s too hot to sit here and point out how fragmented the video market is.  You of course forget about CBC Radio, Radio-Canada (Quebec) and RCI.

A billion spent on the CBC is better value than a billion (mis-)spent on a 4-day police overtime spree. Or billions spent on inapproipriate fighter-planes. Or billions in subsidies to tarsands development.

 Boo hoo. You must REALLY hate money spent on docks in the Maritimes, or Coast Guard cutters, or roads in the Arctic you’ll never drive on, or flu-shots for children not your own, or mens’ washrooms, or a bazillion other things you personally will never use…

(dumb argument, LJ…)

….aaaaaand we’re back to Square 0. You haven’t the faintest interest in his salary, you wouldn’t know if it’s under/over the industry norm. You only yell about this for the sh!t-disturbing potential.

My dog likes barking at night. At least he’s more honest about the reasons he’s barking.

So, if all of these former CBC-types are so successful in the States —
and you seem to think this is good stuff — how come the CBC is so
anti-American? As per usual with petty nationalists, they bite the hand
that feeds them.

So much ignorant crap, so little interest in rebutting.

You hate CBC. We get it. Don’t watch.

So, if all of these former CBC-types are so successful in the States —
and you seem to think this is good stuff — how come the CBC is so
anti-American? As per usual with petty nationalists, they bite the hand
that feeds them.

So much ignorant crap, so little interest in rebutting.

You hate CBC. We get it. Don’t watch.

So apples are the same as oranges?

I don’t usually. But, seeing as my tax dollars are paying for it, I like to check it out every once in awhile.

‘Too bad I don’t, as Louise mentions, have any say in their programming, seeing as I’m one of their shareholders.

Your dog talks to you?

At least the oil sands bring in revenue for Canada and provide jobs for Canadians from across the country — who don’t have to be related to someone at the CBC to get a job.

The CBC doesn’t bring in revenue, they just spend it.

So, how do I or Liz or Louise benefit?

Another load of rubbish. What would you have them do differently (aside from not existing)?

He doesn’t lie to me, he’s upfront about his intentions, let’s put it that way.

So, how do I or Liz or Louise benefit?

You already have, whether you appreciate it or not.

You’re incapable of or unwilling to make that distinction.

(They’re all apples, btw)

Kenn2, your entire defence of the CBC is a real knee-slapper. But since you want me to be more specific, I will. It was the “public broadcaster is more responsible than…” line that got me. And it wasn’t really a knee-slapper per se; more of a buckling-at-the-waist-and-falling-off-your chair-inducing laughter to be precise. 

Sorry, Kenn2, but when Solomon and the CBC deliberately padlocked the door to the P&P studio to prevent the Information Commissioner from issuing her annual report card of them live and on-air, one in which she gave them a failing grade on openness and transparency, I don’t call that behaving responsibly. Do you? Seems so.

She was interviewed on CTV’s PP on the matter BTW. And as you know, Kenn2, the guests on there usually appear on P&P too…. Not this time, though. Hmmm, why do you suppose that was, Kenn2?

Who knows? Perhaps you don’t see the inherent irony of the CBC disagreeing with her findings, denying they lack openness and transparency as she claims, while not filing a report on her criticisms of them, but I certainly do.

And perhaps, Kenn2, you don’t see it as being hypocritcal when the CBC accuses the Harper gov’t of, let’s say, withholding un-redacted versions of documents from public view (and really playing that one up not only on P&P but throughout their newscasts) while doing precisely the same themselves, even appealing a court ruling that demanded they turn them over to the IC, but I most certainly do.

Finally Kenn2, perhaps you need to be reminded that it was in Nov 2005, in the dying days of 12 years of Liberal rule, that the CBC begged the Martin gov’t to bring forth a bill to give the CBC 10-year block funding that could not be undone by an incoming gov‘t, modelled on the health care accord that is set to expire in 2014. Yes, Kenn2, The CBC is not beholden to corporate interests, just those of the LP and, coincidentally, your own.

Kenn2 is fine with that, of course. Even if it means he’s has to be intellectually dishonest in his of defence of them. That seems to be a trade-off he’s willing to make and the most effective tool he feels that can help return his Libs to power — even if that means he has to reach into our pockets to do so. Sad, really sad.

So your dog does talk to you then? His night barking could mean it’s the only time he can  get a word in.

Anyway, keep on defending the indefensible, it provides us with a few head scratchers and laughs.

Rubbish? I don’t think so!

For a start, ‘cover issues of importance to all Canadians and in a balanced way, not just those on the left side of the aisle. I’ve been monitoring the CBC for over 30 years and they do a terrible job on this file.

I’m a news junkie and the CBC barely ever scratches my itch. They’ve become very good at not covering issues. They’re masters at ignoring and leaving out of the media loop opinions with which, and commentators with whom, they disagree. They leave out a whole range of opinion — guess on which side of the political spectrum? — and it’s become so tiresome, that I venture over to The National only very occasionally. They never fail to disappoint.

And I’m paying for it. You’d think the CBC would have more — or even some — respect for the Canadian public. The decisive majority won by the CPC seems to have only galvanized the CBC towards more Liberal-/NDP-/Bloc-opinions and coverage and never-ending criticism (so, what else is new?) of Prime Minister Harper and his CPC government — far more criticism than was ever leveled at the Liberal$ when they were in power.

I’d like a rebate, please!

I’d love to know the real identity of kenn2! I figure he’s a Liberal operative, put on this detail to refute every factual anti-Liberal, pro-CPC, on-the-right-side-of-the-aisle, opinion. He’s a rabid and devoted follower of the Librano$ — and their lapdog, the CBC — and, IMO, the lad doth protest too much.

I very much want to hear his rebuttal to this latest comment by Jon_s38.

 I’m here simply to prove that the hateful crap spewed in many fetid corners of the “conservative” blogosphere is usually wrong, and most importantly to show that there are Canadians who  have a  more open-minded appreciation of how Canada works.

And I’m not Liberal, I’m progressive, currently lacking a party to call ‘home’, and still mad at the tiny minds that drove the progressive out of the PCs.

 I’m here simply to prove that the hateful crap spewed in many fetid corners of the “conservative” blogosphere is usually wrong, and most importantly to show that there are Canadians who  have a  more open-minded appreciation of how Canada works.

And I’m not Liberal, I’m progressive, currently lacking a party to call ‘home’, and still mad at the tiny minds that drove the progressive out of the PCs.

Why don’t you start a “Progressive” party then,  you  seem know ALL the answers to All matters pertaining to the running of the country?  Too bad to let all your talent go to waste trolling this blog. You might be wise to let your dog advise you and do some of the talking as well with a woof, woof here and a woof, woof there………

Of course your post is link-free; that would involve research, which comes dangerously close to understanding.

I can’t find any online reference to ” Solomon and the CBC deliberately padlocked the door to the P&P
studio to prevent the Information Commissioner from issuing her annual
report card”. Didn’t seem to stop the Commissioner’s report from coming out.

The CBC got an F for it’s response to Access to Information requests. Not good, I agree. (Note that this doesn’t mean they didn’t respond at all, just that they were late in most cases, and they also sought and used many loopholes. Sound like anyone you know?)

Given the CPC’s success at harnessing your vitriol, I wonder how many of the FOI requests were simply nuisance requests.  I remember a previous call here for the CBC’s death by a thousand cuts… you are maybe helping it along a bit?

But an F is an F.  So… is that it? I mean besides the fact that they don’t blow perfumed smoke up Harper’s a$$ at every opportunity?  Or that you think that whatever Mansbridge is getting is too much, but you’d love a number to play with anyway, regardless of whether it’s on par with private broadcasting?

Speaking of Fs, A new study ranks Canada dead last in an international comparison of
freedom-of-information laws — a hard fall after many years being judged a
global model in openness. Dead last. You must all be so proud. The Harper legacy – making Canada mean, cheap, and mute.

The original paper… not free unfortunately.

CBC begged the Martin gov’t to bring forth a bill to give the CBC
10-year block funding that could not be undone by an incoming gov‘t,
modelled on the health care accord that is set to expire in 2014.

Harper seems intent on dismantling anything progressive, with your loud applause to egg him on. No wonder the CBC wanted to lock in the funding. Harper’s reasons for attacking the CBC are slightly different than yours. He hates  and has shunned the press, especially the CBC, because they refuse to dance merrily to every CPC press release, and because they called him out on all his early ham-handed over-use of the tools of power. The lettering’s just about worn off of the “Prorogue” button…

The CBC is not beholden to corporate interests, just those of the
LP

“LP”? what LP? There hasn’t been a viable LP for a while now. Explain how the CBC is beholden to a rudderless, toothless party.

Kenn2 is fine with that, of course. I always love it when people tell me what I’m thinking. Saves all that pesky research and learning. Is this the secret to the right-wing blogosphere – don’t think, just read and agree?

Back to the matter at hand – the CBC got an F for FOI requests. Is that sufficient to warrant their demise?I’m dying to know, cos there’s a certain government that could be killed with the same hammer.

Kenn2, I watched CTV’s PP back in March when they found a time slot for the IC to be interviewed on their 1-hour program but Solomon could not (would not) find time for her on his, um…. 2-HOUR program? Gimme a break!

Listening to her criticize the CBC was such a breath of fresh air, especially on the set of a consensus media member (it was about time, I bleated!)…. As I said, she was not interviewed by Solomon on HIS program, even though guests that appear on PP appear on P&P as well, whether they be MPs, party reps, strategists or, like her, independent officers of parliament. And considering the topic was about the CBC itself, Solomon, more so than Don Martin of PP, had an obligation to do a segment on the issue but avoided it.

That’s called not being accountable to the taxpaying-public, Kenn2 and, most certainly, not setting the “journalistic bar higher” as you claim the public broadcaster does as opposed to the evils of the private corporate media….. Ironically, it was the private corporate media in this instance that you so rail against that did a public service, not the CBC you so cherish.

So effectively Kenn2, she WAS locked out. She has to be invited. She can’t invite herself.

Solomon was well aware of her criticism of the CBC (nothing gets past this guy) and that she was on the Hill that day, giving interviews in the foyer and elsewhere, blasting the CBC, saying she is frustrated with having to fight them in court for their refusal to (get ready for it) hand over un-redacted documents into how Canadians’ tax dollars are being spent (sound familiar, Kenn2?). 

Sorry, but you can’t trust Solomon and the entire CBC News staff who also ignored her report (nothing on The National, either). 

The CBC shuffling off a quiet rebuttal to her via email and away from public eyes doesn’t cut it, Kenn2. Nor would their claim that it would be unfair to mention her report until the CBC’s appeal of the initial ruling is exhausted….. that didn’t stop them from hammering the gov’t on the ruling that went in EC’s favour on the so-called “In-and-Out scheme”, EVEN THOUGH the gov’t said they would appeal THAT decision. No need for the CBC to wait for that appeal to be heard, hey Kenn2?

Kenn2 likes to smile and toss popcorn in his mouth, watching the CBC bash PMSH’s gov’t as they do, winking and giving them his thumbs up as he does, laughing at the rest of us who have to subsidize his propoganda.

If he had even a shred if integrity, he’d be feeling the sensation of bugs crawling on his skin right about now. But he doesn’t of course….. for obvious reasons: He’s a CBCer.

Her inability to name a “Good” news source does not prove your point that we should all fund a crappy news source.  You’ve created a strawman.

The reasons why conservatives are generally opposed to the cbc are the reasons why conservatives are generally opposed to government intervention into an otherwise fair market.

If the CBC gets 1.3B a year, without having to ‘earn’ it; what effect would that have on private broadcasters?  I would assume (as any econ 101 couch jockey would assume) that spending money on public broadcasting raises the cost of private broadcasting…. exactly where innovative ideas from non-politically connected Canadians come from.

Funding the CBC hurts Canadian broadcasters and reduces the incentive to create privately funded Canadian TV shows.

All successful democracies also suffer from a lack of tiger attacks (jokingly serious) and sharia law (seriously joking?)…. does that mean we should strive to kill all tigers, ban Islamic law and fund public broadcasting?

Correlation does not equal causation… you know this, and are better than to argue with such pithiness.  How many third-world tyrannies have state-funded broadcasters?  I took a few trips to Myanmar and that’s all they had, same with Laos and North Korea… does this mean that all countries with state-broadcasters are gassing ethnic minorities?  

Furthermore (in response to your reply below):

You need to stop the charade that funding (even “arms length funding”) has no influence in the politicization of organizations.  Do you know why most CF personnel vote Conservative?  I’ll let you stew over it for a second, but I’ll assure you it’s not because of military opposition to the Wheat Board, Carbon Accountability or National Day-Care… it’s because the Liberal party defunded the military.  People in the military can no more trust the funding of Canada’s left than people in the CBC can trust the funding of Canada’s right.

What would have been more apt for Louise to write: The government needs to stay out of competing with private business, even if that business is news.

Seriously… this is getting stale.  Tar comes from trees…  Arguing this way makes you seem like a single minded ideologue. 

Also just because we have been spending 1.3B on the CBC does not mean we need to find another place to spend it, or continue to spend it. That money is ours (as taxpayers), and there is nothing that I get from the CBC that I couldn’t get from any private news source.

Kenn2 likes to smile and toss popcorn in his mouth, watching the CBC
bash PMSH’s gov’t as they do, winking and giving them his thumbs up as
he does, laughing at the rest of us who have to subsidize his
propoganda.

If he had even a shred if integrity, he’d be feeling
the sensation of bugs crawling on his skin right about now. But he
doesn’t of course….. for obvious reasons: He’s a CBCer.

Thanks for speaking on my behalf. BS and fabrications are  so much easier to spread than reason.

Know who else the IC is down on? your Dear Leader.

Seriously, if this is all u got, that gets you het up enough to demand the CBC be killed… overreact much?

It’s not your place to decide which requests are nuisance requests.  Nor is your speculation helpful.

The issue at hand is why a publicly funded organization is refusing to comply with a court ruling re: FOI.

If a politician does this there is a system for simple removal (it’s called an election).  How does one “vote against” the CBC when they behave as they are?

First, I’d like to apologise that they woke you from a well deserved nap to get embroiled here. We both have better things to do, but her we are anyways.  So, sorry.

Funding the CBC hurts Canadian broadcasters and reduces the incentive to create privately funded Canadian TV shows.

Bullsh!t.

Not enough column space to get into why government funding of Canadian media has been and continues to be essential. You perhaps recall that this funding takes many forms; besides funding the CBC there’s the NFB, Telefilm Canada, provincial grants. Did you know that the CBC commissions and buys productions from independent producers?  In total, they aren’t the bane of Canadian private broadcasting, they’re the cornerstone of a well-managed policy that has ensured a  (relatively) healthy Canadian broadcast and production industry. And FFS, TV is but one part of the CBC output.

The right’s demonization of the CBC as some sort of unaccountable lefty sinkhole is the strawman here.

The tiger-bane analogy is amusing, but c’mon, take a real stab at it – why do the vast majority of successful democracies each have and continue to fund, at arms-length, a public broadcaster? Are they ALL dupes?

Read Mr Taylor’s recent tweet on the US debt crisis?

We’ll see a US government shutdown before we’ll see default. Cable news
driving the drama.I wonder what investments are on sale as a result?

It’s arguable that the fractured US news scene has it’s countepart in their insanely divisive and partisan politics. You really think that a US-style media landscape would be an improvement to what Canada has now?

First, I’d like to apologise that they woke you from a well deserved nap to get embroiled here. We both have better things to do, but her we are anyways.  So, sorry.

Funding the CBC hurts Canadian broadcasters and reduces the incentive to create privately funded Canadian TV shows.

Bullsh!t.

Not enough column space to get into why government funding of Canadian media has been and continues to be essential. You perhaps recall that this funding takes many forms; besides funding the CBC there’s the NFB, Telefilm Canada, provincial grants. Did you know that the CBC commissions and buys productions from independent producers?  In total, they aren’t the bane of Canadian private broadcasting, they’re the cornerstone of a well-managed policy that has ensured a  (relatively) healthy Canadian broadcast and production industry. And FFS, TV is but one part of the CBC output.

The right’s demonization of the CBC as some sort of unaccountable lefty sinkhole is the strawman here.

The tiger-bane analogy is amusing, but c’mon, take a real stab at it – why do the vast majority of successful democracies each have and continue to fund, at arms-length, a public broadcaster? Are they ALL dupes?

Read Mr Taylor’s recent tweet on the US debt crisis?

We’ll see a US government shutdown before we’ll see default. Cable news
driving the drama.I wonder what investments are on sale as a result?

It’s arguable that the fractured US news scene has it’s countepart in their insanely divisive and partisan politics. You really think that a US-style media landscape would be an improvement to what Canada has now?

 Ah. We’re back to the “I don’t use it, so I’m not a-payin fer it” argument. Brilliant strategy.

 Ah. We’re back to the “I don’t use it, so I’m not a-payin fer it” argument. Brilliant strategy.

It’s not your place to decide which requests are nuisance requests.  Nor is your speculation helpful.

Uncomfortably close to the truth, am I? So sorry.

The issue at hand is why a publicly funded organization is refusing to comply with a court ruling re: FOI.

Are you on a different thread? This one’s entitled “CBC’s 75th Birthday”, launched by our genial host to help freshen up the CBC-hate that is so core to CPC values. Need any more straw?

It’s not your place to decide which requests are nuisance requests.  Nor is your speculation helpful.

Uncomfortably close to the truth, am I? So sorry.

The issue at hand is why a publicly funded organization is refusing to comply with a court ruling re: FOI.

Are you on a different thread? This one’s entitled “CBC’s 75th Birthday”, launched by our genial host to help freshen up the CBC-hate that is so core to CPC values. Need any more straw?

You should note I didn’t argue against any of the funding apparatuses, only the public station that competes with private ones.  If we get to a point where we have a competitive bid market for Canadian TV, I would be down with shuttering NFB, Telefilm etc.

You can also note that I’m not against public broadcasting, just the unfair competitive advantage we give the bureaucrats who manage the public money going into the CBC over the private stations which are funded largely with the pensions and investments of Canadians. 

Funding of Canadian media does not equal funding the CBC (especially TV).  Much like earlier, they are correlated but not causal.  I’ve worked on many projects with government funding and I understand that, like the aviation industry, there are so many positive externalities that it makes sense to provide SEED investment to draw projects, however, that still does not justify a state broadcaster.

Why do the majority of democracies have mountains and fields?  The majority of democracies have smog and mass killings as well.  Look at the killings in Norway… are we to assume Social Democracy causes mass murder?  or is it oil revenue that causes mass murder…. maybe the world is too complex to attribute “good democracy” with public broadcasting.  I would argue that the good ol’ USA has been at the front of media accountability.  Ask Dick Nixon what he thought of Bob Woodward (private news organization btw)…  

A private news organization always has the impetus to follow a story (ratings) whereas a public broadcaster is beholden to the political party from whom they receive the largest grants.  Bias in inherent in any news gathering, at least with private broadcasters you affect change by not watching.

Just because CNN is driving US drama doesn’t mean that the CBC doesn’t drive Canadian drama, mostly for the same reasons… the only difference is that CNN will be off the air if no one watches… CBC on the other hand….

//Because I don’t want to post all over the place I’ll just continue my essay here:

If I don’t use it I will still pay for it in Canada… that’s never been the issue.  I don’t have cancer but I pay for long term care in hospitals.  This is $1,300 MILLION dollars.  How many people can be cured of AIDS for that much?  How many people can go to University for Free for that much.  I’d rather not pay those taxes at all… but if I have to pay them at least let the money go to something of use…. 

Here’s a list off the top of my head of things I would prioritize over giving 1.3B the CBC:

1) Elimination of Malaria Worldwide
2) Reduction of Malnutrition in Africa
3) Funding the “Charter City-State” of Haiti under Canadian laws and governance
4) $40 tax break for each and every Canadian
5) Give 50,000 undergrad students $30,000 a year to study sciences. 
6) Developing a program to send the Polar Bear from Sesame Park to Space.
7) Cyborging Don Cherry to ensure Coach’s Corner never ends. Buying 1.4 billion frozen burritos from superstore and eating them until my stomach is fully distended and I explode.

I really doubt that our grip on democracy is so tenuous that cutting the CBC will have us spiral into chaos.  Have faith in your fellow Canadians that we can do without the constant mothering of the CBC.

You can also note that I’m not against public broadcasting, just the
unfair competitive advantage we give the bureaucrats who manage the
public money going into the CBC over the private stations which are
funded largely with the pensions and investments of Canadians.

You don’t think contributions from tax revenue are as worthy as those from a pension fund? All pensioners want is ROI; whereas the government investment (yes it has and continues to be an investment) gives a return in the continued existence of a uniquely Canadian voice, a leader in integrity and quality output, a benchmark for private broadcasting, and a journalistic organization that has the ability to pursue stories without the worry of whether it will lose viewers to a story on jello-wrestling on the competing channel.

And, absolutely no private radio company could (or would bother to) begin to match the journalistic and documentary output of CBC Radio.

Why do the majority of democracies have mountains and fields?

Ok, I get it, you don’t have an answer. Apparently for lack of trying. Your loss.

Ask Dick Nixon what he thought of Bob Woodward (private news organization btw)… 

Sure. Nearly 40 years ago, when newspapers roamed the earth…where are the next Woodward and Bernstein now? Not in the US newsrooms; they’ve been massively scaled back since ’73. Not on CNN, nor MSNBC. Certainly not on Fox. US journalism is mostly a shadow of its former self. This is what you wish for Canada?

I really doubt that our grip on democracy is so tenuous that cutting the CBC will have us spiral into chaos.

If killing the CBC is a viable option to you, then your grip on history, progress and service to Canada is extremely tenuous. Why do North American “conservatives” need to wreck stuff that works? What won’t you give away to save a measly $40/yr? You could have started with the G8/G20.

We both know that all this CBC bashing is just a right wing sideshow, anyway. It’s a catechism, a way to recognise the True Believers.

Oh yeah. Howard the Turtle and Michelle Finney really enhanced my education.

I’m left wondering if you know your ass from your elbow never mind apples from oranges.

When a publicly funded entity like the CBC, which reaches across Canada appears to follow a particular political bent, or if we find that  journalists in our employ  skew facts to manipulate opinion, we have a right to complain at the very least and we sure as hell should know what we are paying the trumpeters who work for us.

I don’t care how many bridges, roads or buildings our tax dollars go to fund across this country, that’s what this country is all about, sharing the wealth, it  doesn’t compare to the PUBLIC broadcasting corporation which has IMO systematically, over the decades,morphed into a tool of the Left.

Hey, batb, Coronation Street is about the only thing many people watch on CBC, myself included.

Not only our Queen watches it but I understand our Prime Minister watches it as well.

Just because you disagree does not make the CBC news dept biased. You paragons of rational thought routinely call me a liberal partisan, when I’m neither. You kind of suck at analysis.

The CBC is much larger, diverse and engaged than the handful of newspeople you disagree with.  Your stock portrayal of the CBC as some politicized cabal, deliberately slanting the news to fit a political agenda is better directed at SUN TV, who are gleefully, self-admittedly biased.

It’s hilarious to think how your bias fantasy must play out…  how you think the evil CBC political overlords worked their message into… the Friendly Giant (“…those raccoons are playing JAZZ! Cover the children’s ears!!!”), Mr Dressup (“ooo, they’re sharing. That’s socialism!”), or Chez Hélène (…nuff said). Or how CBC FM subverts young minds with…. the classics… and OPERA (aaaaugghh!).  CBC Radio One wants people to read and discuss…books! I wonder what perverse message was weaved into the heady opium of the Beachcombers. Or Hymn Sing. Or that Lenin and Trotsky of comedy – Wayne & Schuster.

One of my fond memories is DougM challenging me to listen to CBC for bias, and the very first thing on CBC Radio was David Suzuki and Preston Manning having a one-on-one 30-minute discussion on climate change and realistic, business-friendly options for addressing it. You won’t get that anywhere else; other outlets don’t have the interest, knowledgeable staff or time for that sort of thing. Sorry you missed it.

Preston doesn’t need to delude himself that the CBC is anything else but a publicly-funded national broadcaster. What’s wrong with you?

 So Preston and Fig Leaf Suzuki had a conversation on CBC and that means they’re never biased?

The CBC of today is entirely different than the CBC of the era of Wayne and Shuster and for that matter Suzuki when he did his series called “The Nature of Things”.

 Most of the Canadian press wouldn’t parrot Harper’s press releases like they were Moses’ tablets, and you lot have since decreed that the whole MSM is left-biased.  So it’s a fairly safe bet that you’re also out to lunch about the whole CBC being biased.

Fig Leaf Suzuki  Do you always insult people you don’t agree with?  BTW, you’re kind of in the minority on that topic, too.

I understand how your petty spite could keep you warm over the winter, but isn’t it a problem in the summer?

Hey, Liz, I’m glad you like it. Lots of people do.

It’s too bad it was wasted on me, but when my family and I were in England, we went to an amusement park in Manchester, part of which was the set of Coronation Street. We have photos of us outside the pub and the grocery store!

Now, put me on the set of Mad Men …

I believe I’ve cited this study before, kenn2, about the leftward bias of the CBC, by two professors at Ryerson, hardly a bastion of rightward thinking:

Ryerson
University professors Marsha Barber and Ann Rauhala explored the
demographic and political leanings of Canada’s television news
directors. The results of their survey were published in 2005 in the
Canadian Journal of Communication. The researchers found that the
news directors, whom they describe as the people “with the most
direct responsibility for programming the news on any given day,”
were more politically and socially liberal than the rest of the
Canadian population. Broken down by network, those working for the
CBC were the most left-leaning. …

When
the researchers turned their attention to television news alone they
found that coverage
by the CBC was most harsh against conservative positions.

Journalists,
particularly
those working for CBC TV, used omission, exaggeration or
misrepresentation of information to present evangelicals and the
positions they held in the worst possible light.
So, please, no trying to call us stoopid because of a leftist bias in Mr. Dressup, The Friendly Giant, Razzle Dazzle, et al. We’re not saying that. We’re talking about CBC news and commentary, of which there’s very little distinction.

At least I’m getting some little pittance from CBC. Watched it long before CBC  got incestuous and inflicted with Liberalosis.

About being in the minority of Canadians who, apparently, “trust” David Suzuki: Big deal. There’ve been lots of people “trusted” over the centuries who turned out to be less than trustworthy.

Revenue Canada is on its third audit of his David Suzuki Foundation. He’s come out and endorsed Duh – lton McGuilty as Ontario premier (hmmm … ‘wonder what deals he’s got going with him …  ‘something, no doubt, to do with endorsements, advertising, or big bucks, either way) and it’s required by law that foundations with charitable status cannot engage in partisan political activities.

Endorsing McGuinty’s Ontario Liberal$ hardly comes under the rubric of not engaging in partisan political activity. In fact, Suzuki’s always got his finger in the political pie. I’m surprised his Foundation hasn’t been audited before.

‘Thought you’d be interested in this Web site, kenn2, and others: CBC Exposed

http://cbcexposed.blogspot.com/

Maybe “Terry1″ incarnated? 

No I don’t believe you cited that yet, but thanks. Link? There’s alot of unqualified statements in your quote that I’d like to explore. I’ll only tackle one, for the moment:

 The researchers found that the
news directors, whom they describe as the people “with the most
direct responsibility for programming the news on any given day,”
were more politically and socially liberal than the rest of the
Canadian population.

1) Well, duh. News directors are typically better-educated than the general population, and it’s generally acknowledged that the higher the education level, the more likely the person is to hold socially liberal views.  In other news… accountants are usually good at math.

2) Personal opinion does not necessarily translate to biased work. There are very few truly neutral people. Yet every day, people perform competently as doctors, lawyers, cops, arbitrators, soldiers, firemen/women… Having an opinion does not automatically equal biased job performance.

SUN TV had to hire a bunch of people to staff up for their new operation. Do you you think they found enough near-rabid right-wing true believers to staff the whole operation? Or do you think they have the usual mix of broadcast employees, including not a few dope-smoking techs who just needed another frigging TV job? Do you think all the SUN TV news directors are unswerving blue-blooded true believers? or without their own bias (might even be lefty)?

Evangelicals – hard-core evangelicals can be as loopy and dangerous with their pronouncements and policies as hard-core Muslims with sharia law etc. The evangelicals as a group have helped make the US political landscape as treacherous and divided as it currently is.  “Fundamentalist” religious thought, from any direction, has no place in setting public policy, and doesn’t deserve kid-glove treatment from the press. My opinion, obviously.

So, please, no trying to call us stoopid because of a leftist bias in
Mr. Dressup, The Friendly Giant, Razzle Dazzle, et al. We’re not saying
that. We’re talking about CBC news and commentary, of which there’s very
little distinction.

I’m calling you stoopid for your incessant demands to de-fund the whole CBC just because you disagree with their news dept. All right-wing groups call the MSM “biased”. It’s in all your hymn books, right near the front. You’re simply focussing on the CBC because of its’ vulnerability to political whim as a crown corporation.

It takes two to tango, and Harper has been famously disdainful and disrespectful of the media. Also, to date the CPC has had great success with saying very little of substance, while conducting their US-style campaigns with attack ads, vapid feel-good pronouncements, and token panders to various parts of the loyal base.

Maybe, with experience and the confidence of having a majority, Harper will become more media-friendly. Who knows.

 Revenue Canada is on its third audit of his David Suzuki Foundation.
He’s come out and endorsed Duh – lton McGuilty as Ontario premier (hmmm
… ‘wonder what deals he’s got going with him …  ‘something, no
doubt, to do with endorsements, advertising, or big bucks, either way)
and it’s required by law that foundations with charitable status cannot
engage in partisan political activities.

Endorsing McGuinty’s
Ontario Liberal$ hardly comes under the rubric of not engaging in
partisan political activity. In fact, Suzuki’s always got his finger in
the political pie. I’m surprised his Foundation hasn’t been audited
before.

Distortion and hateful propaganda. The person “David Suzuki” is not equivalent to “the David Suzuki Foundation”.  Dr Suzuki the person can endorse whomever he pleases. Why is it that in your little world, only right wingers are simultaneously capable of having views AND performing competently?

If as you say this is audit #3… must have passed the first two, huh? (What’s the NCC btw, – a bridge club?)

(hmmm … ‘wonder what deals he’s got going with him …  ‘something,
no doubt, to do with endorsements, advertising, or big bucks, either
way)

He probably has a black cape and a top-hat and ties maidens to the tracks, too. Muah-ha-ha!

Seriously, if you’re capable of parroting such rubbish without a shred of evidence… you’re the one with a bias problem. Or worse.

Not in the least.

Except to note that they’re down on Terry Miliewski for essentially being a meaner conservative than Harper. Interesting.

“The person ‘David Suzuki’ is not equivalent to ‘the David Suzuki Foundation’”.

Are you kidding?

He’s the C0-founder of the Foundation, Tara Cullis, David Suzuki’s wife, is the President and co-founder of the Foundation, and Severn Cullis-Suzuki, their daughter, is a Board member.

That’s not what I call arms-length — and, therefore, when David Suzuki endorses a political party, especially one which will be advantageous to Dr. Suzuki’s agenda — as all Liberal$ are, both provincial and national –  who would know that “the person … is not equivalent to the David Suzuki Foundation”? It’s rather difficult to separate the two.

BTW, I’m not parroting anything. Where do you get his idea? Prove to me that I’m “parroting.” I’ve got eyes to see with and ears to hear with — and a brain to think with.

Show me where the DSF endorsed McGuinty. Go on.

http://www.ontarioliberal.ca/NewsBlog/News/ArticleDetail/tabid/130/ArticleId/311/David-Suzuki-I-m-offering-an-endorsement-of-what-Mr-McGuinty-has-done-absolutely.aspx

David Suzuki: “I’m offering an endorsement of what Mr. McGuinty has done, absolutely”
July 21, 2011
David
Suzuki’s endorsement of Dalton McGuinty shows the Ontario Liberals are
the only party committed to a healthier environment said Liberal MPP
Laurel Broten.

Read the rest at the link above. ‘Pretty unequivocal.

It’s unequivocal that the David Suzuki Foundation is not mentioned ONCE.  The DSF has NOT endorsed McGuinty.  David (the person) did. Why is this so tough for you to grasp?

“Most of the Canadian press wouldn’t parrot Harper’s press releases like
they were Moses’ tablets, and you lot have since decreed that the whole
MSM is left-biased. ”

Ya, like tell us something we don’t know.

“Just about every successful democracy in the world has a publicly-funded national broadcaster.”

There was a time, in the distant past, when European monarchies and the nobility were sustained with sumptuary taxes meant to prevent ordinary rabble from gaining access to the houses of royal and nobility: http://www.stephentaylor.ca/2011/07/cbcs-75th-birthday/#disqus_thread

There was a time when society was organized  in a system known as feudalism which was close to slavery.

Nothing lasts forever, Kenn2. In this day and age with multiple media formats and things like blogs and twitter, and google news, there is no need for a publicly funded broadcaster.

It’s time to assign that monster to its proper place in history ie) the dustbin of discarded ideas.

Your arguments sound eerily similar to the ruling elites of Europe and their futile attempts to keep the peasants from the gates. Get over it. Your  time is up.  The CBC will be history within a generation or less. You can bet on it.

 Time for another thread, this one appears to be running out of bandwidth, among other things.

We have  Troller Kenn2/Terry1  inadvertently proving the CBC is  Liberal/Left biased by singing it’s praises, defending it’s costly existence, so case closed.

“You lost me.”

Ya, reading is hard, isn’t it Kenn2?

“If Canadian broadcasting was 100% private… it wouldn’t exist.”

BS. Even if that were so, there’s nothing Canadian broadcasters can do to compel us to watch their Canadian produced garbage.

“There’s (sic) just be small affiliate stations playing non-stop US programming
with a handful of staff to read the weather twice a day.”

And wouldn’t that be awful. Who cares where it’s produced. Garbage is garbage.

“If Canadian broadcasting was 100% private… it wouldn’t exist.”

BS. Even if that were so, there’s nothing Canadian broadcasters can do to compel us to watch their Canadian produced garbage.

“There’s (sic) just be small affiliate stations playing non-stop US programming
with a handful of staff to read the weather twice a day.”

And wouldn’t that be awful. Who cares where it’s produced. Garbage is garbage.

It’s not their qualifications that are the issue, Kenn2.  It’s the method by which they get the positions. They are appointees of the PM, regardless of which party the PM leads. Ipso facto, they are political appointees and they will ensure their tenure on the board will please those who appoint them.

And anybody who believes that political appointees are not selected from the Party of the PM is too naive to be arguing for it’s continuance.

Hehehehehe.  In the July 2011 issue of Readers Digest, there’s an article about myths about Canadians. One of those myths is we are all hockey crazy and we tune in like mad to Hockey Night in Canada.

Apparently, HNC is CBC’s flag-ship program.  According to a sociologist at the University of Lethbridge, Canadians are not tuning in. He did a study of how close Canadians conform to five of our cherished myths about ourselves. This is what he says about HNC:

“…if CBC gets two million viewers for a Hockey Night in Canada telecast–a typical number–it means 94 percent of the people in the country found something else to do with their time.”

Imagine what that percentage would be for all of CBC’s other programs.

Your defense of CBC also reminds me of the doctrine of the Divine Right of Kings.

It will soon be over and we’ll be free of this monstrosity.

What the Lib/Left CBCers don’t talk about is the fact  there’s a huge percentage of people who do not watch the hockey games but do tune in to the Don Cherry  segments, including Quebecers. It’s the better part of the game, we get dazzled by his outfits and his down home persona as he mangles the English language.  I think it’s purposeful pretense, he’ll have the last laugh at his detractors.  There have been many calls over the years, from the usual sources, for the CBC to can Don but they wouldn’t dare, it’s ratings, bread and butter that trumps their ideology in this case.

Ah. You mean like Harper appointed Peter Milliken (L, Kingston) as Speaker so that he would ensure that his tenure in the house would, ipso facto, please those who appointed him.

 No-one ever appoints people on qualifications, and once appointed, said appointee must, ipso facto, kiss ass forever. 

And, according to you, Canadian TV sucks.

De facto, you’re a nutbar. And a not very Canadian one.

 ´And, absolutely no private radio company could (or would bother to)
begin to match the journalistic and documentary output of CBC Radio´

I´ll take quality over quantity thank you. I´ve seen some of this garbage in the form of an ´investigation´ into the Tea Party which was shallow liberal agitprop. They actually had a guy with his face shadowed out explain that there is big money behind the TP as if the existence of the Koch brothers was something to be revealed.

If you want to watch a LiberalNewsNetwork and dramas with TERRIBLE costume design, be my guest. If you want to violate my individual rights by forcing me to pay for it, go to hell.

Kenn2 demonstrates that when obsession meets desperation, it´s ugly. Worse than the massive commercial breaks the CBC has in its movies. Seriously, time it. You can have thirty seconds movie to two minutes commercials at some points.

The point is, Kenn2, Canadian TV has to compete with the rest of them. Just because you haven’t caught up with technology, doesn’t mean the world hasn’t changed because of it. There was a time, long, long ago, when all you could get on TV was one or two channels and, if your reception was lousy, you could always fall back on radio, or, better yet, just entertain and inform yourself with family games played around a card table, or reading a book or a magazine. Now, not only are there hundreds of options to choose from, but a very vibrant and growing amount of new media which is just as good, if not better than, old style TV and radio. You’ve lost the battle, kenn2. You’re way behind the pack and the pack is not to blame just because you’re a bit slow, still sitting there waiting for your handout.

This isn’t just about what you watch/don’t watch while doing your ironing.

Canada must compete with the world, both in our living-rooms and internationally, and part of that  strategy is having a strong national voice, reporting from the Canadian perspective and a “platform” from which to speak. Remove the CBC, and CTV and Global and  that noisy little thing that throws $14 parties will shortly either wobble and fall over, or get bought out. “Canadian” broadcasting will resemble Rogers Cable 14 at that point.

You’re apparently Ok with subsidies to industry. Over $40/yr of your money goes to help those poor, struggling oil companies make a meager killing from the oilsands. Think of the CBC budget as part of a broadcast industry subsidy, except it’s for a broadcaster that is not subject to corporate pressures or the profit motive. (The private Canadian broadcasters also get subsidies btw, in the form of grants and tax breaks for buying or producing content from Canada, and from laws that limit foreign control of Canadian broadcasters.  Should we cut all those as well?)

There. Feel better about it?

I like the CBC, both as a national concept, and as an outlet for Canadian talent and our viewpoint. So sue me.

btw, buy a stopwatch, CBC isn’t putting in any more commercial minutes per hour than any other Canadian TV outlet.

It’s not your place to decide which requests are nuisance requests. Nor is your speculation helpful.

Riiight.

It’s no longer speculation.

From here

Thirteen of the 16 cases cited in the subpoena are requests filed by
Ottawa legal expert David Statham on behalf of Sun Media, which
publishes a chain of newspapers and has written numerous
freedom-of-information stories on the expense accounts of CBC
executives. Statham filed 399 freedom-of-information requests in a
three-month period in 2007.

…I understand now. When CBC or other media pester the government for info, it’s a gotcha game by the biased MSM. When an avowed right-wing broadcaster hires a lawyer to launch a blizzard of FOI requests at the CBC, it’s simply the citizen’s right to know.

Nice try. FOI cuts both ways, people.

I especially hate it when it’s poorly accounted for.
Ok. What aren’t you seeing here, that you need to?

We also have the following crown corporations:
- Bank of Canada
- Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation
- Business Development Bank of Canada
- Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation
… and many more.

Like the CBC they perform a service that is already available in the private sector. Do you know all their top salaries? Should we tear these down too and leave all their functions to the private sector?

 I’m beginning to think there’s a new definition for insanity:  Scrolling down one of these threads when you’re dealing with a troll who is determined to get the last word no matter what.  If he’s paid by the hour by some unnamed political source or on welfare we’re giving him too much of our time, either way we’re feeding him.

Don’t worry, I’ll have a new thread soon.

Not sure what your point is, Kenn2. SNN (Sun media generally too) make no bones about its position on the CBC. It’s a private company. Now, if say, TVO (a provincially funded broadcaster in Ontario) was demanding access to CBC’s docs while refusing to divulge its own, then you could make the case for hypocrisy.

It comes down to this fundamental question: do you, or don’t you, believe that the public should have access to the documents in question held by a “public” broadcaster, funded to the tune of $1.1 billion. taxpayers’ dollars and whose records are actually owned by the public as a result? Apparently you don’t. Instead, you want to focus on what Sun Media’s motivations are. 

Someone already posted on here that you can toss a gov’t from power…. you can’t do that with the CBC, Kenn2. So since we’ve established the difference, the critics of the CBC here, myself among them of course, are on solid ground. You, on the other hand, have just stated — unwittingly of course — that the CBC is just as bad on FOI as the Harper gov’t… at least as you see the PM and his gov’t as being. I beg to differ of course. But you are saying effectively that one is “just as bad” as the other.

Good one, Kenn2.

Me starting to think Kenn2 is an agent provocateur for our side…. cool!

BTW, Kenn2, that so-called “ad hominem attack” (if you can call it that… popcorn, bugs crawling on the skin, etc.) was just a sociological experiment, to see if you would continue the pattern of dropping red herrings and non-sequiturs on us all, which not only do you get caught doing each and every time when put in a position to defend the indefensible, but that even in that instance you repeated it.

And yes, Kenn2, you can reference A Clockwork Orange in defence of yourself being under attack…. don’t actually get to the crux of the matter. Why deviate from the pattern now?

you could make the case for hypocrisy

Hypocrisy is applicable here of course. The bigger concern to me is the FOI “attack” from QMI. It’s one thing if the CBC is rejecting legitimate FOI requests. A competing broadcaster launching an FOI blitzkrieg, then berating the CBC for taking a defensive posture on it is something else, isn’t it?

But you are saying effectively that one is “just as bad” as the other.

No I’m not. Just pointing out the hypocrisy implicit in demanding accountability from a crown corporation that we’re not getting from the government.

It comes down to this fundamental question: do you, or don’t you,
believe that the public should have access to the documents in question
held by a “public” broadcaster, funded to the tune of $1.1 billion.
taxpayers’ dollars and whose records are actually owned by the public as
a result?

1) Crown corporations are not gov’t departments per se, they are corporations “owned” by the government. As such… do you treat them like a corporation, or as a government department? If they were supposed to be like goldfish in a bowl, why were they set up as corporations?

2)I’m reasonably satisfied that the current CBC audit scheme  is sufficient accountability. The audit establishes their basic competency, and if they’re competent, that’s very good evidence that their salary policy is appropriate.

3) I’m for fairness. The CBC should be subject to the same visibility rules as other comparable crown corporations. Do you know all the salaries paid to the top execs in the Bank of Canada? CDIC?  Business Development Bank of Canada? Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation?

4) CBC, and other crown corporations such as those named above, operate in arenas and perform similar functions to private sector companies. As such, they have many of the same standards and policies as their private counterparts, including salaries and internal processes, needs for business confidentiality and the like.  Why should the CBC reveal business secrets when their private counterparts don’t have to?

We fund the military and the RCMP. Do we own their records and can have a peek at any time?

Calling something a “red herring” is an easy excuse for not addressing valid points. Your refusal to address something doesn’t make it “indefensible”. Carry on.

No pressure, there is life beyond blogging!

Can someone explain to me why the CBC needs as many Washington correspondents as they have? I understand they need to be swapped out from time to time so they can get times back home, to spend with family. I’m not talking about that. I’m talking about how they’ll have 4 sometimes 5 down there at ALL AT THE SAME TIME. Why do they need more than the one reporter CTV has based their to file reports for back home? Actually, CTV might have 2. 

But even that doesn’t explain the redundancy of the CBC on this matter. I mean, aren’t they both covering a national audience? So why does the CBC need more to do the same job? 

And I’ve noticed several reporters that I’ve seen in the recent past on other news channels in Toronto now working at the CBC yet I don’t notice anyone missing…. ie gone into retirement that these new ones have to be brought on as replacements. A guy named Karl Kabasele, whom just a few weeks ago it seems, I saw on CP24 Toronto, is now a medical reporter at the CBC. Kris Reyes, from Citytv, how now popped up on CBC…. who are these people replacing? And how many medical correspondents does CBC now have anyways? I believe CTV only has Avis Favaro doing all national reports. Again, why does the CBC need more than CTV if they cover the exact same national audience? Is this really wise for CBC to go on a hiring blitz knowing that austerity measures are coming? How brazen are they?

There’s plenty of fat to cut at the CBC. They should be cut 10% at least, or by $110 million. And I wouldn’t restore it after the budget is balanced…. if they can survive without it, they can continue to after 2014.

Since there is no possible way to cut $110 annually without laying off on-air staff, it’s gonna be fun to see who stays and who goes…. stay tuned.

CBC seems to have endless “openings”. Recall recently when Tom Clarke quit CTV in a huff, assume he thought he would replace Lloyd Robertson, he suddenly popped up on CBC . Whether he’s actually employed by them or just a free lancer, who really knows?  We aren’t even privy to the salary we pay Mansbridge.

Does CBC ever fire or lay off employees if they become too controversial,  or merely shuffle them off to a different locale, out of sight, out of mind?

Yeah, I’m not sure about Tom Clark either…. saw him appear many times during the election and half the time it would read “Tom Clark, CBC News” on the graphic under his name, other times it would read “Tom Clark, Journalist”.

As for how the deal with those who become too controversial and what the CBC does with them?… Not much! Adler on SNN did a segment on the CBC’s so-called apology on the “JDL is a terrorist organization” remark by reporter Bill Gillespie…. as far as I know, Gillespie himself hasn’t apologized, only the network on his behalf… Shouldn’t he be the one? Or has he but I missed it?

Finally, how many CBC reporters cover politics on the Hill? A dozen? Why so much overlap? And often times they’ll all be there at the same time. 

Puts me in mind of a funny comment from Mike Duffy when he was host of PP when it was actually a pretty good program. Duffy, along with all the other networks, was covering a policy convention of one of the party’s about 7 or 8 years ago and he quipped, “You always know when the CBC contingent is here setting up for this weekend’s convention…. you’ll see 5 guys pulling a 10-foot cable along the ground” or spomething like that.

So much truth to it. There’s A LOT of fat to cut!

You see a few new faces, and CBC is on a “hiring blitz”? really?

“You always know when the CBC contingent is here setting up for this
weekend’s convention…. you’ll see 5 guys pulling a 10-foot cable along
the ground”

Um, unions (usually NABET) have negotiated all the working conditions and crew contingents in most broadcast and production. And all the majors have unionized techs, as well as most studio and location productions. Watch for the union logos in the end credits of most TV programs.

So if CBC requires 5 cable pullers, CTV will also require 5 cable pullers for the same situation.

Since there is no possible way to cut $110[m] annually without laying off
on-air staff, it’s gonna be fun to see who stays and who goes…. stay
tuned.

Don’t know where you pulled that out of. (or I do, I just don’t want to type it). Reaction to budget cuts,  like any organization, will start at the peripheries – reduced or eliminated local services, cancellation or deferral of facilities expansion or maintenance, scaling back or canceling new projects, etc etc.

Also, there’s such a thing as seniority, and talent, either of which will probably ensure that the very few CBC faces you know and hate won’t be affected, or worst case might be shifted around. Any cuts to CBC will mainly affect techs, junior production, local staff… as well as staff at their providers, suppliers… normal people with families, some of which you probably shop with or are in your softball league.

Yes… the one thing we need to do in this jobless recovery is… end more jobs. Bravo.

I take some comfort that you seem to be walking it back a bit, from “kill the CBC” to “cut the fat”.  I suspect you will find that, like Mayor Ford is now finding out in Toronto, that there really isn’t much fat to cut.

I see no reason to fart about with funding cuts. There are only two possible solutions to the problem. The first at least allows Kenn2 types to keep their source of indoctrination, and that would be privatization.  However, I read this morning that Rogers is bringing a new American cable network into Canada, so whether CBC could withstand the increased competition is questionable.  They’d be gone by now if they had to really compete.

The other option is simple rescind the act that created the beast, lay off the employees and sell it off.  However, that would require a government with some very substantial balls, and we haven’t yet got that kind of beast in Ottawa.

I see no reason to fart about with funding cuts. There are only two possible solutions to the problem. The first at least allows Kenn2 types to keep their source of indoctrination, and that would be privatization.  However, I read this morning that Rogers is bringing a new American cable network into Canada, so whether CBC could withstand the increased competition is questionable.  They’d be gone by now if they had to really compete.

The other option is simple rescind the act that created the beast, lay off the employees and sell it off.  However, that would require a government with some very substantial balls, and we haven’t yet got that kind of beast in Ottawa.

Good question. I recall two of them mysteriously showed up on Al Jazeera shortly after an aggreagious display of leftardedness, namely Avi Lewis and Tony Burman. I often wonder if they got canned. Lewis’ hostile and assinine anti-American screed er interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali was his final act with the CBC and IMHO CBCs lowest point ever. They’ve only succeeded in raising their standards ever so slightly since then.

You can pay for it then.

I don’t like the CBC either as a concept or and an outlet for Canadian talent, so stop taking my money from me to pay for what only a small percentage of people want. Don’t be a leech. Pay your own way.

Canadian talent, such as it is, heads south where the market is large
enough they don’t have to steal money from folks who aren’t interested in consuming whatever gifts they think they have to offer.

And what is this “our viewpoint”? Is that the Royal “our”?

Is your wrath reserved solely for the CBC, or should all crown corporations be privatized?

Well, that is a separate issue, but generally speaking, competition is normally very good for the customer, so yes, some crown corporations should be privatized and be forced to compete for customers. Air Canada hasn’t bitten the dust as a result of being privatized, yet, nor has Petrocan. Having lived in both Alberta and Saskatchewan, I think it’s safe to say that Telus does a heck of a lot better job than Sasktel does. But then, that particular example is not really comparable to CBC, since CBC does have viable competition, whereas Sasktel doesn’t. But then again, maybe it is a good illustration of what happens when a corporation (CBC) is artificially shielded from the consequences of having to measure up to or beat the competition.  I’m betting CBC will be let loose or disbanded within a decade.  We’ll see whether they can survive the same way all their competitors has to survive – paying their own way.

BTW Kenn2, you seem to have no faith in Mother Corpse’s ability to attract an audience. Why else would you be afraid of privatization?

Why else would you be afraid of privatization [of the CBC]?

many reasons:
- arts, culture and communications are national interests, not simply commodity markets. Like most civilized countries, Canada recognizes the importance of fostering and promoting Canadian culture, and presenting the Canadian experience to the world, and to ourselves. It’s a big diverse country, Louise.
- CBC Radio, like other national broadcasters (BBC, NHK, Radio Nederland, ets)  provide a level and quality of service that the private sector will not.
- private industry cannot be trusted to manage national interests. Recent history is littered with examples; privatize energy management, you get Enron; let industry manage healthcare… you get the US healthcare mess; let corporations manage finances… well, where have you been for the last 3 years?
- the private sector seldom aims high, they shoot for the minimum product quality that will generate revenue for the longest possible time. Having a public broadcaster to set the bar high, especially in journalism, means that the  private sector is not free to let these areas slide.

You can’t compare broadcasting to commodities like air travel, gas. Plus, you seem to have missed the fact that Canada is over-charged and under-served by the two big private corporations that control cellular communications and internet access. Telus may suck less than SaskTel, but they still suck.

Drop the CBC, and Canadian broadcasting will drop to hitherto unforeseen levels of suck. You may not care; I do.

Ever thought about writing comedy?  

Don’t be so shy. Go ahead and rebut the points.

“Having a public broadcaster to set the bar high, especially in journalism …

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha …

‘Splitting a gut. Oh, that hurts!

…  -shrug-

You have never proved the contrary. A loudly and frequently-expressed dislike is not exactly incontrovertible proof.  Even conceding a preponderance of left-leaning political coverage (which I don’t) , taken in total the CBC is still the best broadcast news outfit in Canada, and the private sector has to come close to the same standard or be irrelevant.

WHY THE CBC SHOULD BE AUDITED: The CBC rented office suites in the Empire State Building for decades (Nov. 26 1987 Order in Council)..CBC employees lost $616.2 million dollars  in pension benefits they were owed. Toronto Star reporter Rick Westhead was told the money “vanished”. (Into somebody’s bank account, I assume)…Robert Rabinovitch and Carole Taylor planned to sell  a billion dollars worth of CBC transmission towers, transmitters and transmission sites…Li ka Shing bought a huge CBC parking lot in Vancouver, and built high rise condominiums on the land…..Richard Stursberg held a public auction in Toronto sell CBC memorabilia, including a painting of Sir John A., television and radio artifacts…Most of the buildings owned by the CBC have been privatized, or demolished; billions of dollars worth of real estate, including the Jarvis Street Complex in Toronto and 2555 Douglas Road, Burnaby…The CBC receives a Billion dollars a year for programming , yet all I  see is constant repeats of Will and Kate’s wedding and their Royal Tour of Canada. The same J.K. Rowling documentary was on 2x last week.