gilles-duceppe

We demand transparency!

News broke yesterday about the CBC’s Radio Canada hiring former separatist leader Gilles Duceppe to host a show on the french-language network. Canadians are outraged and the story led the front pages of a number of Sun newspapers this morning.

When Mr. Duceppe was working to split up Canada from the House of Commons for twenty years in Ottawa he was collecting a paycheque from the Canadian taxpayer. Now that he’s a “retired” politician, he collects $141,000 per year in his gold-plated pension — also paid by the taxpayer.

If this isn’t outrageous enough, Duceppe has landed a gig at the state broadcaster. For a man working for independence for so many years, he’s always the first in line for a cheque from the Government of Canada.

This shows that the CBC isn’t even holding true to its mandate of being a supposed unifying cultural force for all Canadians. But leave it to the twisted logic of our state-run broadcaster to seek unity through division. And to think that’s what the cultural elites said what Sun News would do!

The final outrage? CBC won’t disclose what they’re we’re paying Duceppe as a state employee.

We here at the National Citizens Coalition are calling upon Heritage Minister James Moore to extend federal accountability to all Crown Corporations including the CBC. The Ontario Government has a “sunshine” law compels the disclosure of salaries of all taxpayer funded positions over $100,000. We’re calling for the same sort of law to be instated federally.

The CBC collects $1.1 Billion worth of taxpayer subsidy every year. How much of this are we using to further subsidize one of Quebec’s most visible separatist leaders?

Will you stand with us at the NCC and demand transparency? Click the recommend button if you want the CBC to account for the taxpayer dollars it’s wasting on separatism.

UPDATE: Gilles Duceppe has resigned!

Comments

comments

  • http://www.facebook.com/bastewart Bruce Stewart

    I am less concerned about Gilles Duceppe dipping again into the Canadian public trough, or even his putting forward his political views (even if only as an implication in his interactions on air) on Société Radio-Canada broadcasts, as I am about the lack of public visibility into what we are paying for with federal institutions, which includes the CBC.

    Accountability (as I recall) was one of the five pillars of the first Harper Government way back in 2006. I hope it remains one, and thus that a federal “sunshine law” will be put forward post-haste.

  • http://twitter.com/lhopcraft louis hopcraft

    I agree!!

  • ebt

    Duceppe only led the Quebec caucus in Parliament for years. He’d be a very valuable commentator on federal politics for the Quebec audience, ie, the only audience who will hear him. You don’t like his politics? Maybe he doesn’t like yours. His audience clearly likes his politics just fine.

    Sorry, no scandal here. Nothing the least bit objectionable in this. Except for the underlying scandal that the CBC gets taxpayers’s money, which would be  just as wrong if they hired monarchists with it.

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    Deceppe has been hired to talk about sports, not politics.

    No joke.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Shawn-Blankinship/676438656 Shawn Blankinship

    Gilles Duceppe is a good speaker, and I’ve always found him quite entertaining. So what if he’s got a job with the CBC. Do you expect him to crawl into a hole and never be seen or heard from again?

    Your call for transparency is misplaced, because Duceppe’s pension, pay, and CBC position are all PUBLIC knowledge! No offence, but you seem to be making an issue out of nothing.

  • Beauger

    Espousing the separatist meme is good business.  The gravy train called Canada delivers every time.  Cheers.

  • Gabby in QC

    Stephen, doesn’t your objection to Duceppe being hired by the CBC run counter to your two previous posts about “freedom of expression” etc.?

    Not that I have ever agreed with anything the man has said … plus, I find some of his mannerisms, such as  his nasal twang when he speaks English, plus the haughty upward thrust of his chin to recognize a question from the floor, or the false grin when he thinks he’s bested the answer to a reporter’s REALLY irritating … but shouldn’t Radio-Canada be free to hire whomever it pleases AND the man in question be free to accept whatever job is offered to him? Should broadcasters hire people based on their political POV?

    OK, some may point out that SUN NEWS presents the conservative POV and SUN NEWS has decided to fill that market niche, but SUN nevertheless hires some non-conservatives.

    P.S. Duceppe will not be commenting solely on sports.
    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1040277–gilles-duceppe-gets-new-gig-at-radio-canada 
    “… Duceppe will appear once a week on the show Medium Large hosted by Catherine Perrin. Pichette said it is a magazine show dealing with topics of “social and cultural interest. Most of the program is devoted to live interviews with guests from all fields.”Duceppe’s role is “to bring to our attention recent accomplishments in culture, science, sports or social work,” he said. …”

  • Gabby in QC

    Revision …
    “to a reporter’s REALLY irritating …” 
    should read
    “to a reporter’s question …”

  • Gabby in QC

    Anyway, this should reset fluttering hearts to their normal rhythms …
    http://www.globaltvbc.com/canada/former+bloc+leader+duceppe+and+cbc+radio+part+ways+even+before+new+job+starts/6442465666/story.html 
    “Former Bloc leader Duceppe and CBC radio part ways even before new job starts
    The Canadian Press : Wednesday, August 17, 2011 4:25 PM

  • Anonymous

    How much was paid for Duceppe to leave the CBC?

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    “Stephen, doesn’t your objection to Duceppe being hired by the CBC run counter to your two previous posts about “freedom of expression” etc.?”

    No, there’s a difference between not paying someone to speak, and the state removing one’s ability to speak using one’s own means.

    ie. Gilles Duceppe ability to be paid a bunch of money to be a host on CBC is not the same as my right to use social media to discuss politics. The government has nothing to do with the latter and everything to do with the former.  Gilles is free to use Twitter, just don’t ask me to pay him to do so.

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    There is an edit button on the comments! But not if you’re replying to these via email (which you can do — it’s sort of fun how fast one can do this to respond to others)

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    CP is reporting that the CBC is claiming a glitch in their press release but won’t say what it was.  I guess they’re trying to figure out the wording.  We still don’t know exactly why this happened.

    But we are so far under the impression that Duceppe will NOT be at the CBC.

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    Espousing right wing ideas, not so much.  Odd how that works isn’t it?

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    Please tell me what Duceppe was to be paid. This is the transparency I’m calling for.

  • Gabby in QC

    Where’s the edit button? I don’t see it. All I see under my initial comment is “flag” “like” and “reply.”

  • Jon_s38

    Remember when the CBC took such pleasure post prorogation at the gov’t having to submit quarterly report cards to the Lib-led opposition, seeing if it past Iggy’s sniff test and whether the Lib leader would allow PMSH to survive another day? I’d like to see changes by the gov’t on the regulatory side of the CBC, not just cuts to it’s funding (I would like to see it privitized but it’s a sacred cow and that’s never going to happen… hope I’m wrong)

    Just imagine after the CBC loses it’s court appeal against the Information Commisioner and PMSH changes things, making the CBC submit quarterly reports itself on it’s spending among other things, really emasculating them, turning the tables and making them the PM’s b*tch… dark days ahead for the CBC and I will be enjoying every moment of it.

  • Gabby in QC

    “No, there’s a difference between not paying someone to speak, and the state removing one’s ability to speak using one’s own means.”
    The question of payment is irrelevant, IMO. 

    The issue you raised in your two previous posts had to do with “the freedom of expression” — which some interpret as an absolute freedom. If one accepts that tenet, then Radio-Canada has the right to offer jobs to whomever it wishes and Duceppe has the right to accept, regardless of the money attached to the contract. The fact that you as a taxpayer contribute a tiny portion of his salary may be grating to you and many others, but irrelevant to the issue of “freedom of expression.” If you and others like you disapprove of funding the CBC, you can try to convince the government to stop funding it, but if the government does not accede to your requests, then it’s just too bad, isn’t it? That’s the way the cookie crumbles — or, as a local radio talk show hostess often says, suck it up, buttercup.

    Let me be clear … I don’t personally subscribe to the absolute “freedom of expression” espoused by some, so if a duly elected government — regardless of the number of seats, the % of the votes it has garnered, or even its political stripe — decides that some rights have to be temporarily suspended for the greater good, e.g. to maintain public order, then I support that. And I’m talking about the kind of governments whose tradition harks back to the Magna Carta, which you alluded to in one of your previous posts. Comparing David Cameron’s possible course of action to “…  the absolute power practiced unblinkingly by governors in Libya and Saudi Arabia” is rather extreme on your part, IMO.

    Those who use social media for inciting rioting or looting, as in the now “fashionable” flash rob mobs, should have that right suspended and suffer the consequences, just as those who abuse their right to drive a car should lose their license for repeat DUI or other driving infractions. That’s the deal a civil society works under. You abuse, you lose. I’m OK with that.

  • Liz J

    Guess we’ll have to wait to hear the full account of what happened, I use the words “full account” loosely, not so sure the hierarchy at the CBC would know how to fully account for anything.

    As for the freedom of the speech thing, yeah, Duceppe can speak freely on his own time and his own dime, we as supporters of the CBC, no matter how small the amount on a per capita basis, shouldn’t be paying him to do so. Canada has been way too lenient with a tribe whose reason for being in politics is to separate themselves from Canada.  What more do we need to hear from Duceppe and his lot?

  • Anonymous

    Accountability (as I recall) was one of the five pillars of the first Harper Government way back in 2006.

    Harper  has since taken Canada to new lows, with his government’s utter indifference for openness and accountability. He likes it when we know less. So, y’know, don’t hold your breath.

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/auditor-blasts-lack-of-transparency-in-doling-out-generous-g8-funds/article2053372/

    http://mediarelationsincanada.wordpress.com/2009/04/18/gomery-blasts-feds-on-lack-of-transparency/

    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1034803–environment-canada-cuts-put-public-at-risk-critics-say

  • Anonymous

    And the CBC hate marches on…

    First, your undisguised distortion of the facts: Duceppe was not hired to host, he  was ” recruited as one of about a dozen regular contributors“.  And of course you failed to mention that ther CBC insists on a 2-year cooling off period before former politicians are permitted to comment on-air about politics.  Which is why Duceppe has decided to back out.

    Canadians are outraged and the story led the front pages of a number of Sun newspapers this morning.

    Sorry, those statements are contradictory. The fact that the SUNs led with this non-story usually means that most of Canada is ok with it, or indifferent to it. Or there wasn’t a lurid sex-murder that day…

    Now that he’s a “retired” politician, he collects $141,000 per year in his gold-plated pension — also paid by the taxpayer. If this isn’t outrageous enough…

    Any former CPC MP who is equally outraged is cordially invited to refuse his/her pension. Line forms over there…

    Snipe at Duceppe all you want, you’re pissing into the wind. Above all, he was an able representative for the interests of Quebec as a whole, not just for separatistes, which is why he and the Bloc were re-elected so often. He and the Bloc did a good job for Quebec and paradoxically his competence undermined the seperatiste cause.

    I listen often to people I may disagree with but I often find their personality and viewpoint to be engaging. I very much like listenening to Preston Manning. I even read Connie (the con) Black on occasion. What’s your problem, that you need to launch a distorted attack on someone’s access to employment and right to free speech? I mean beside the CBC hate…

    Accountability starts at home. Who funds the NCC? What are you making, Mr Taylor?

  • Anonymous

    Gilles Duceppe ability to be paid a bunch of money to be a host on CBC

    Factually inaccurate.

  • Anonymous

    …making them the PM’s b*tch

    Funny how you think this is a Good Thing. That’s what this is all about, really; the Canadian media in general has been critical of Harper, usually when he deserves it. He hates that, and he’s taking it out first on the broadcaster that he has the most ability to injure.

    There are countries where the state broadcaster is indeed the ruling party’s b!tch – Cuba, China, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Iran… Thanks for helping us get there.

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    ah, that’s only if you sign in with an account.

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    You think a private organization and it’s employees are somehow accountable to you?

    Duceppe is accountable to us because we were to pay his salary with our tax dollars.

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    Hey Gabby, I’m not suggesting that those that use social media to commit crimes shouldn’t be restricted; I’m suggesting that blanket draconian killswitching of the tools of democracy is never in our interest. Inciting a riot is illegal in any medium. Shutting off the internet (and the news networks?) is what Lybia or China would do.Free speech is: being able to speak with one’s own means without govt saying “no” Free speech isn’t: my tax $$$ for a separatist’s TV platform

    You must understand that as a stakeholder (employer), I have a right to input into how my investment is spent.

    Separately, in the broader democracy, everyone has a right to speak (even Duceppe).  Just don’t ask regular Canadians to pay for his views. Furthermore, one’s right is not restricted by others wishing to withdraw their compelled financial support. 

    If I were to suggest that a media company which I do not invest in should be prevented by the state’s authority from airing Gilles Duceppe, you’d be right to call me a censor.  But I would not do so. Anyone that wants to pay for Duceppe’s POV is welcome to do so in our free society.

    Let’s not confuse the concepts of state intervention in our natural born rights with that of our right to say that we’d like nothing to do with Duceppe or his views.

    What sort of twisted society would we live in to think that we are entitled to each others money in order to have a “right” realized?

  • Liz J

    It’s coming to light the CBC has a “policy” regarding the hire of ex-politicians. Apparently they can’t do commentary on political matters until they are out of politics for a period of two years.  That would pretty much render them silent even on social issues, politics touches a lot of bases.  How could they possible even question a person like Duceppe, who is known for his politics, on much of anything?

    Would he  be on our payroll had this not been brought to public attention by Sun TV?

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    The cooling off period seems to be a convenient excuse.

    Why else would they hire him but to talk about politics? To do the morning cooking segment with Gilles?

  • Liz J

    He could talk about fromage, he did once tour a cheese factory. As for sports, I really don’t know.

    If a contract  was signed he was hired, so how much did he get for being fired before he started the job?

    I can’t believe the personnel people at CBC didn’t know the rules regarding  the hiring of ex-politicians. I think they simply got caught. They get away with so much, they probably thought this one would be the same. 

    I don’t think we should have to pay to hear a separatist’s views, to give him a platform,  given their mandate is to break up Canada.  Duceppe and his band got trounced, if he aspires to get up off the ground what better way than have  Canadians pay to hear his message?

  • Anonymous

    You think a private organization and it’s employees are somehow accountable to you?

    If a private organization’s goals are to influence government policy, and to assist a specific party to get and retain power by helping do end-runs around election law, and if one of its senior execs is comfortable with whipping up said party’s base against a long-serving federal MP with a hyperbolic and factually inaccurate post… I think we all need to know a bit better who/what’s behind this and where the money’s coming from. This is why we register lobbyists.

    Unless you’re ok with plutocracy, of course.

  • Anonymous

    So you crossed out the host part. Whee. You’re still using words like “hire” and “salary”, when you don’t have any knowledge of what the arrangement was between M Duceppe and the CBC.  It’s most likely that any arrangement was contractual – an appearance fee, maybe even just an honorarium, and not a ‘hire’.

    You’ve appeared on SUN TV. Therefore you must be a SUN employee, right?

    Quebec residents pay into the CBC just like the rest of us. The french-language Radio Canada’s audience is mainly in Quebec. Duceppe is still popular in Quebec, even among non-separatistes. Why should the ROC dictate to Quebec who they can/cannot see?

    It’s insults and ignorance like this from the ROC that helps keep separatism alive.

  • Gabby in QC

    1. “blanket draconian killswitching of the tools of democracy”

    “Killswitching”? 

    I had to look that up, since I’d never come across the expression. Thanks for “learnin'” me a new one.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kill_switch 

    “Often, they [kill switches] are used to protect people from sustaining an injury or being killed, in which case damaging the machine may be considered to be acceptable.”

    Yeah, so kill switching is an appropriate means to abort a harmful operation.. I’ll drink to that.

    You appear to be operating under the premise that all those with access to social media have nothing but good intentions. Maybe under normal circumstances, when there’s been no manifestation of civil disobedience and outright lawlessness. But abnormal circumstances call for abnormal measures. 

    “Shutting off the internet (and the news networks?) is what Lybia or China would do.”

    Creating an atmosphere of mistrust of our DULY ELECTED GOVERNMENTS with such overblown rhetoric is much more harmful to our democracy than shutting down your TwitterVerse for a few days.

    2. “You must understand that as a stakeholder (employer), I have a right to input into how my investment is spent. … Just don’t ask regular Canadians to pay for his views.”

    With all due respect, you’re taking that “stakeholder” bit too literally and too far, IMO. Home owners who have no children pay for education and municipal sports arenas through school taxes, people who don’t own cars pay for roads and infrastructure, people who are healthy and hardly ever have recourse to hospitals or clinics help pay for healthcare with their tax dollars, people who are pacifists help pay for our military through their taxes, people who’ve never skied down a hill or been on a pleasure boat help pay for search & rescue, etc. It may suck that some of that tax money is used for a purpose one disagrees with, but that’s part of our social contract, we all have some “compelled financial support” extracted from our wallets at one time or another. One can always try to change the situation one dislikes through legal & civil means. 

    Who knows? you may even have been instrumental in having Radio-Canada & Duceppe re-think their deal, without any threats or violence erupting. Now, that’s a good thing (in my best Martha Stewart voice).

    3. “What sort of twisted society would we live in to think that we are entitled to each others money in order to have a “right” realized?”

    I’m not sure I understand what you mean by this. I’m unclear on whose “rights” you appear to be questioning, since the word is within quotes. As for “each other’s money” — see my point 2 above.

    Regardless … IMO, we citizens “surrender” part of our wallets in order that the governments we elect implement certain policies we‘ve mandated them to implement. Thus far, those policies do not include that someone whose political opinion is unacceptable to part of the population be barred from hiring by the public broadcaster. 

    No government can ever hope to use tax money in a manner that satisfies ALL citizens. Even if I tend to be a bit Pollyannish, there’s some things I wish my governments — be they Liberal, Conservative, or Other — not fund. But, until the situation I dislike is changed through some kind of consensus, I’ll have to suck it up, buttercup.

    P.S.: whether it’s Kenn2 asking you to divulge your salary or people asking for Peter Mansbridge to reveal his — it’s a tacky question in my books. I’m free to say that, I hope.

  • Gabby in QC

    Aw, rats! Too much spacing in my previous reply. I composed my reply off-line in my own word-processing application, but my single lines appear as double or even triple here.

  • http://harebell.wordpress.com/ harebell

    A Harper guy wants transparency?
    Wasn’t that a main promise on the platform?
    Shouldn’t we ask Tony about transparency?
    Transparency would be nice I agree

  • Jon

    “the Canadian media in general has been critical of Harper, usually when he deserves it”

    “usually when he deserves it”

    So by implication, better yet by your own acknowledgement (by far the sweeter of the two, of course), the media attack PMSH even when he’s UNDESERVING of it… hence “usually” when he deserves it. The other times are, what, for kicks? Just because they can, right? 

    Thanks for acknowledging — albeit unwittingly — that the media IS out to get PMSH. Much appreciated.

    But really. I know, Kenn2, I get it… really, I do. It’s a primal thing for you and them, isn’t it? He’s just… well, just because… well, because he’s Stephen Harper… he’s just one of those guys. Yeah, one of those guys… Know what I mean? One of “those” guys: a conservative, right wing… a real hard-liner, a real nazi, a real fascist kinda guy. Someone that’s easy to hate, heck someone you LOVE to hate. 

    It must suck for you and the media to have watched him get his long sought-after majority… which made it all the more satisfying for guys like me.

    The worst is yet to come for you guys too… when the gov’t balances the books and does so without major cuts to health care. Suddenly Paul Martin’s record doesn’t look so good any more, does it? Good to know that when that day arrives the media will be gloating about it, will really play up the compare and contrast thingie too… one guts health care to balance the books, the other doesn’t. Um, then again, maybe they won’t… A storyline that wouldn’t fit their narrative, something that wouldn’t quite fit in.

    Oh, and I see what you and they meant when it was said that PMSH had a scary hidden agenda which included “Americanizing” Canada (a staple of numerous Lib campaigns). 

    By putting “Royal” back into our AF and navy, clearly he’s well on his way to that. Libs and media… caught lying again. 

  • Liz J

    But then,  when he found out he couldn’t talk about politics he quit.  Is this the one we’re to believe ?

  • Anonymous

    You’re off arguing with your fantasy opponent, and I really shouldn’t interrupt you two, except you did reply to me…

    It’s flattering that you’ve made me spokesperson for the entire left, and that my small utterances carry such weight. Even so, it’s no deep secret that the right wing on this continent has taken as an article of faith that the MSM is biased, right up there with the Free Market Can Do No Wrong.

    btw I’m perfectly OK with fiscal discipline. Wake me when corporate subsidies and tax giveaways make it to the table. Martin did well fiscally, and didn’t need to rewind Canada’s social policies back to the 50’s. Just sayin’.

    Oh, and I see what you and they meant when it was said that PMSH had a scary hidden agenda which included “Americanizing” Canada.

    It’s no secret, it’s right out in the open. Our foreign policy pronouncements come off a telex from Washington. We ‘sell’ reams of oil to the US yet Alberta still has a provincial
    deficit. Not a peep from anyone about refining tarsands oil in Canada, we’ll just pour the lovely stuff into Texas where they’ll get the jobs and refining profit.

    Sewing the word ‘Royal’back onto our military uniforms. woo, bold move. what’s next – horses and swords?

  • Gabby in QC

    Aha! It appears Conrad Black agrees with me ;-)

    http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/Street%2Bfighting/5281759/story.html 

    “… To strengthen societies and eliminate the anything-goes sense of entitlement that has led to the current political climate of violence and street theatre, Western nations should … devise a uniform, staged series of police responses to disorders that include the incapacitation of social networks used to co-ordinate violence. …”

  • Liz J

    Read Conrad’s column this am Gabby. I agree with you both! 

    Speaking of Conrad, anyone here think it’s time our Conservative PM goes to bat for the man who is a native born Canadian, who has contributed to the country, was a victim of Jean Chretien’s vindictiveness ?

    Sadly the Liberal Left in this country gave more consideration and gnashing of teeth to the likes of Omar Khadr and the Taliban prisoners.  

  • Liz J

    Maybe we should be wondering how many of it’s rules the CBC overlooks/breaks to feed  an agenda?

    Are all the hiring policy rules  of the CBC available to the people of Canada who support it?

    One thing we do know, salaries paid out to people like Mansbridge to read the news are not given out to the public. 

  • Anonymous

    Conrad Black is a convicted criminal, tried in open court in the US.  He renounced his Canadian ctitzenship to wear a funny robe and hat in England. Which they took back when he was convicted. And he’s still a very rich man, with no shortage of work. Canada should do what for him, exactly? A telethon?

  • Jon_s38

    Watching the major developments in Libya and the fall of Tripoli, the story having been on the air for about an hour now. CNN, BBC covering events LIVE… CBC News Network running some documentary on something no one cares about. 

    Major events unfolding and have been for an hour… CBC not live.

    Not bad for a billion.

    Kenn2, of course, will find some way to spin that… expect more of the same, a bumper crop of non sequiturs and red herrings.

  • Jon_s38

    BBC, a public broadcaster, is covering events LIVE from their studios in London where it’s after 1AM on a Sunday night… experts interviewed, some of which are in the studio itself. Impressive considering not just the late hour there on the slowest late night in the news biz but to have them there so quick, complete with such in-depth, wall-to-wall coverage as this historic event is unfolding.What’s the CBC’s excuse? Why is there not a news reader in studio anchoring this live from the desk, going to the phones, interviewing experts in studio, one after the other, looking busy and justifying that billion dollars?! Why back-to-back documentaries from years ago?I guess they’er like teachers’ unions… it’s their time off at the mo.CBC staff I’m sure cross their fingers, hoping that these types of historic events never happen on a Sunday night and cause major disruption to their Sunday evenings during their summer holiday period.I didn’t even know there was a holiday period for those in the news biz… but thanks to the CBC, I now know there is. 

  • batb

    Check out “My CBC is …” which points out, as you have, Jon_s38, how irrelevant the Continually Bulls**tting Canadians network is to most of us. So far, there are 320 comments, most of them critical of the CBC, its biases, and the $1.1-billion it costs taxpayers every year — for a state broadcaster that very few Canadians watch or listen to.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity/2011/08/my-cbc-is.html

    I’m sure the CBC is disappointed that they’re not getting the giant pat
    on the back they’d been expecting for “bringing Canadians together.”
    Many are pointing out, in fact, that the CBC is a divisive force, with
    which I agree. We don’t need the CBC to bring us together. It’s far out-lived that claim.

  • Anonymous

    What’s the CBC’s excuse? Why is there not a news reader in studio
    anchoring this live from the desk, going to the phones, interviewing
    experts in studio, one after the other, looking busy and justifying that
    billion dollars?!

    Ah – you want bullsh!t news.

    You’re of course referring to that CNN-style of minute-by-minute coverage where they scramble to fill the airwaves, no matter what the angle (“We’re into our 14th hour of live coverage. We’re now going live to Dr Carl Bigpaws of Rutgers, a noted canine specialist… Dr Bigpaws, what will the effect of the rebels’ victory be on Tripoli’s large wild dog population?…”). You really want that? You think that’s good journalism?

    The BBC of course usually does it better, but I haven’t seen their recent coverage. As a Canadian, I want to know about the progress of the Libyan conflict, but I don’t think it’s compelling or important enough, to warrant that coverage. The outcome won’t affect Canada much. Hourly summary is sufficient, for this story; there’s a number of other stories in Canada deserving of more coverage. Goderich, anyone?

    CBC staff I’m sure cross their fingers, hoping that these types of
    historic events never happen on a Sunday night and cause major
    disruption to their Sunday evenings during their summer holiday period.I
    didn’t even know there was a holiday period for those in the news
    biz… but thanks to the CBC, I now know there is.

    You’re quite the 1diot. Not every story deserves the “drop everything, let’s do this 24/7″ coverage. CNN uses that style of coverage, because it’s actually cheaper to to than broader reporting, research, reframing and ANALYSIS. It’s also a style well-suited to taking peoples’ minds off other more important, difficult stories, like the fact that the US political system is currently dysfunctional.

  • batb

    ‘Looks like my unflattering portrait of the Shawinigan Strangler has bit the dust. Too bad.

    As I pointed out, Conrad Black — that’s Lord Conrad Black — did Canadians a big favour when he broke the hold that the incestuous Canadian MSM had on our print media. He exposed “the culture of corruption” (Judge Gomery’s assessment) rampant in the LPC through the National Post, something that Chretien seethed about and never forgave him for.

    ‘No wonder he refused to allow Conrad Black to accept a British peerage and retain his Canadian citizenship. Pure vindictiveness. But, that’s the modus operandi of le p’tit gar.

  • Anonymous

    Your filtered response was just too priceless not to make public, at least in part:

    Black renounced his citizenship because Chretien forced him to: He would
    not allow Lord Black to accept the peerage and remain a Canadian
    citizen. It’s not as though others hadn’t become members of the House of
    Lords and retained their Canadian citizenships — so Chretien was
    showing his true thuggish, vindictive colours.

    So sweet. Black is a victim because he didn’t get a cookie from the special, special jar. hee hee hee. priceless.

    In this case, Chretien was showing he was a superlative judge of character.

    As I pointed out, Conrad Black — that’s Lord Conrad Black

    Uh, no,  not any more, darlin’. Yes, you can buy a peerage; even so, the House of Lords has some standards. He’s #287645572091 Black, Conrad of a certain cellblock now.

    Liz and the bat – making Canada safe for convicted white ex-Canadian plutocrats.

    (I’m framing this set. Priceless. hee hee)

    You do know that Chretien was a successful lawyer, right?

    Conrad Black’s a “victim”. That’s rich (see what I did there?)

  • batb

    ‘Depends on the definition of “successful.”

  • batb

    BTW, kenn2, how do you have access to my filtered comments? How would I have access to my filtered comments?

    I’d like to know!

  • batb

    I want to contact Stephen about how kenn2 is able to access filtered comments — and find out how I can do the same thing! I didn’t keep a copy of my comment, because I was not expecting it to be deep-sixed!

    So, Stephen, how can I access you, as I don’t do either Facebook or Twitter? I used to be able to e-mail you directly. Is there some way I can still do that? If not, then my questions are: How did kenn2 access my unposted comments — and how can I do the same thing?