gv
The CBC may be gutted but we shouldn't make its death easy
Sat, 2009-03-07 10:00
#1
The CBC may be gutted but we shouldn't make its death easy
Fri, 2009-03-06 18:27
#2
FM:
"Ah, so to get the CBC to represent us, who are to defend it, we must first change the government from the parties that have governed the nation for the past 140 years to a party that is all but entirely invisible to the public broadcaster. Yes, that makes sense.
So, how do we get Canadians to recognize this party we all love is the one for which they ought to rally behind and vote? I know! Get the public broadcaster to give them equal treatment, or, at least coverage that equitably represents the proportion of their voter support, say, just 18% of the coverage given to those other two parties. That would be fucking great!
And to do that, all we need to do is to ... oh, yeah, change the government ... "
-------------------------------------------------------------
Much that the CBC does represents me. Helping to bring down the CBC by an ignorant act of childish spite because it is underfunded and under the thumb of conservative administrators would be very easy, FM.
Don't really know how that would help us.
Buck up! Spring and the revolution is on the way.
Fri, 2009-03-06 19:10
#3
And you find no pleasure in it now?
And it's death would end it's suffering and ours?
Can't grasp that reasoning, given the drool in its absence.
Or am I corresponding with, with.............offended taxpayers?
Fri, 2009-03-06 19:36
#4
Frustrated Mess
Much that the CBC does represents me. Helping to bring down the CBC by an ignorant act of childish spite because it is underfunded and under the thumb of conservative administrators would be very easy, FM.
Childish, spite, George, is stubborn adherence to an idea that holds no substance. Finally you say the CBC represents you. Good. How? Previously you said it didn't. But now if it does, I would be most interested in what way?
And it's death would end it's suffering and ours?
Hoplessly hoping is suffering, George.
Fri, 2009-03-06 19:51
#5
I agree with George.
Fri, 2009-03-06 21:39
#6
Sell it off to US ownership like everything else that's gone south. And pretty soon, one in three Canadian kids wont be able to afford to play table hockey.
Fri, 2009-03-06 22:37
#7
Frustrated Mess
I agree with George.
What do you agree with? That as the left we should support and defend an institution that doesn't represent us? I am curious why? Would you defend market capitalism in the same manner? If not, why not? It too can be reformed, or at least they have been saying and trying for almost as long as I have been waiting for the CBC to give equitable coverage to the party I vote for most often or the perspectives I share. How 'bout you? Just from watching or listening to the CBC, what is Canada doing in Haiti? Are dead Canadians in Afghanistan victims of a poor foreign policy that doesn't represent Canada's interests nor democratic interests or are they our heroes?
Fri, 2009-03-06 22:52
#8
I dunno, FM, maybe it's just emotional. Of course I can't stand the content of CBC news/information programming. But I still see it as potential, rather than its present reality. It's the same way I prefer crown corporations to private ones.
Fri, 2009-03-06 23:06
#9
Frustrated Mess
After 70 years you'd think we'd understand it ain't gonna happen.
Fri, 2009-03-06 23:31
#10
I agree with George.What do you agree with? That as the left we should support and defend an institution that doesn't represent us? I am curious why? Would you defend market capitalism in the same manner? If not, why not?
Because no matter how bad CBC sucks now, US news media conglomerates would transform CBC into a real propaganda tool of the vicious empire?
Sat, 2009-03-07 02:30
#11
Lard Tunderin Jeezus
Essentially, the CBC has already been gutted, particularly during the fiscal restraint of the Chretien(PM) years, (w/Martin as Finance Minister).
During the prosperous Martin years following no effort was made to re-fund it, though much effort was put into compromising the CBC's integrity and turning it into an official mouthpiece of the government.
This was accelerated of course by Harper - as was the de-funding as well.
How much effort should be made to keep its corpse on life support now?
Sat, 2009-03-07 08:48
#12
What?! Ceeb radio is having a hard time representing an anonymous radical environmentalist - time for it to go, then.
I don't really think the Ceeb represents me either. Why the fuck would I want redneck radio? I want to learn about other Canadians. We can, naturally, argue whether it's doing that job well or not. It doesn't always, but it is trying, I think.
I would kill to have a look at how that billion dollars is spent. That's still a lot of money, plus whatever ad revenue the corp salespeople can drag in.
LTJ, I actually don't think the Harper Cons have cut any CBC money. In fact, I think they gave the corp a one year boost.
My local CBC sounds like it's produced in Toronto. Surprise, it is. I'll complain about this endlessly because it annoys the shit out of me. But it's really the Ceeb fucking itself - if they actually had people in Hamilton-Kitchener-London (with respect to the three people working in London to cover an area that stretches from London up and around the GTA, to Cornwall), then I suspect the corp would have a much easier time using public pressure to keep their funding, or get that bridge loan. As it stands, as a businessperson, not giving any sort of meaningful coverage to nearly two million people strikes me as a very poor concept. If it's going to be a public broadcaster, then it really should serve the public in at least raw numbers, especially now that private local news is basically disappearing.
My humble suggestion: move Windsor's Radio Station and TV department to London and cover everything but Toronto. Dedicated morning and drive home shows on radio, and a six o'clock tv newscast. I doubt that will happen, but it makes sense to me.
Sat, 2009-03-07 09:25
#13
Frustrated Mess
I don't know, FP, I would be happy if they gave a modicum of time to mainstream envioronmentalism so long as they spoke to real environmentalists. I don't think you've been reaqding these threads so I'll assume you really have no idea what argument I've been making. You must be a CBC fan - informed but not about what's really going on.
My local CBC sounds like it's produced in Toronto. Surprise, it is. I'll complain about this endlessly because it annoys the shit out of me. But it's really the Ceeb fucking itself - if they actually had people in Hamilton-Kitchener-London (with respect to the three people working in London to cover an area that stretches from London up and around the GTA, to Cornwall), then I suspect the corp would have a much easier time using public pressure to keep their funding, or get that bridge loan.
You, see, that was one of my early arguments had you chose to read from the beginning. The CBC, despite a mandate to provide local and regional news, has never mentioned the towns or places where I live being a whole hour away from London and therefore on the periphery of civilizatiuon. And I mentioned that on my way home from work, as I travel down quiet country roads, I can listen to Toronto traffic reports.
But I thought you were a redneck, FP.And here you are defending a network you agree doesn't represent you but because you want to learn about other people. Well, I'd suggest a Ham Radio, and I would ask if you seriously believe Canada is populated by no more that Kevin Docherty, Dennis DeRosiers (could they not find a more anti-union auto analyst?), a few business school profs, and the odd has-been Liberal and Tory. Because I'm damned sure I've seen more people than that.
But, hey, if that irrigates your corn, they are your taxes ...
Sat, 2009-03-07 10:02
#14
Oh, I get it - you can't edit the opening post, that's why.
Okay. That explains it. Sorry, continue.
Sat, 2009-03-07 10:05
#15
I am looking SO FORWARD to Andy Barrie returning. I have not enjoyed Jane Hawtin at ALL. Not that Andy Barrie is all that lefty, but geez, at least with him there's some balance. I find Hawtin awful - if her politics aren't centre-right, then she sure does a good job of making it seem like they are, and the whole show is tainted by it.
Sat, 2009-03-07 10:05
#16
The Baron gets around.
Sat, 2009-03-07 10:08
#17
CBC Toronto's morning radio man, Barrie, is back on Monday. Just learned the other night that a friend of mine did penance with him as a fellow draft dodger in Vietnam days.
They did not get to know each other in that jailhouse experience, but I've always felt that, hey, we have retained some freedoms up here as a result of acceptance of public inroads into the private world.
"But, hey, if that irrigates your corn, they are your taxes ..." FM?
That did have to be the only rational explanation for your position, although I would not have put you among the Canadian Taxpayers crowd. But, hey, radio will soon be forced to carry advertising and then I will not be able to claim I enjoy any part of it.
And purity of purpose will have won out. You have been attracted to Baron Munchausen at some point.
Sat, 2009-03-07 10:13
#18
Frustrated Mess
That did have to be the only rational explanation for your position, although I would not have put you among the Canadian Taxpayers crowd. But, hey, radio will soon be forced to carry advertising and then I will not be able to claim I enjoy any part of it.
You have never questioned any of the rational arguments I have made so far, George. In fact, you appear to agree with all of them but hold on to a sort of religious like faith that after 70 years of the CBC the old mothership, as they call it, will suddenly discover there are more than Liberal, Conservatives, and corporate spokespeople in Canada. That, my friend, is wholly irrational. It is the "wish upon a star" approach not unlike the technological silver bullet for climate change.
And purity of purpose will have won out. You have been attracted to Baron Munchausen at some point.
So now, being represented in exchange for your support, financial, moral, and activist, is purity of purpose? As I said, no wonder the left is irrelevant in Canadian politics. We don't really expect anything for our involvement.
I suppose you throw cash at the grocery store register and head home empty handed hoping they will someday deliver some produce ...
Sat, 2009-03-07 10:20
#19
Hope springs eternal, FM
At least, I have to play that one for my descendants.
Sat, 2009-03-07 11:05
#20
FM, I have read all your posts on this, thank you. And we've chatted about the Ceeb before, I believe, especially the lack of any meaningful programming for us here in SWOnt, so I didn't think we needed to do a personal history lesson of something we both understand quite well. Your positions are consistent enough that I didn't think we needed to rehash.
You made some weird analogy about health care, high fructose corn syrup, in the original thread. To wit: the Ceeb does nothing for FM and the people who think like him (have any numbers, by way?), so it therefore its not deserving of support.
I haven't been to a doctor in years. I'm healthy, fit... am I calling for cheaper health care? User fees wouldn't bother me much. Canadian health care is only costing me -and people like me - money to fix the problems of people who haven't taken care of themselves (thinking obesity, mainly; and drinkers of high fructose corn syrup aka, soft drinks). Does that analogy sound familiar?
Yes, CBC radio often has a repetitive format, with the same guests and talking heads. But there's still enough there to draw me back in, mainly in current affairs and specific shows... less and less so straight news.
Like George keeps repeating, and which you keep ignoring (I suggest reading all the posts) - what's the alternative? If you think you can do a better job, then get the fuck at it. I respect your opinions, FM, but aren't you getting tired of the soap box?
Sat, 2009-03-07 11:45
#21
The biggest problem I have with the CBC is that they appear to be trying to sound more like corporate radio, and have forgotten what made them good in the past. This trend exists both in programming and in the choices of whom they hire as announcers. I don't know if the local CBC wants to sound "folksy," but CBK has a particular fill-in/afternoon announcer who ought to go back to doing helicopter traffic reports.
I agree that the CBC is flawed, but I think some of its flaws reflect an attempt to be everything to everybody, so it's spread too thin in some areas.
If you don't like the CBC, consider the corporate broadcasting alternative. Your political spectrum would range from "Adler on line" to "The [insert animal, landscape or weather feature here], all hits, all the time, over and over, until the commercials become a relief from the 'music'."
Sat, 2009-03-07 14:40
#22
The CBC no doubt seemed flawed to some people. It can't be all things to all people. I have lived in remote isolated places in Alberta and the north all my life and the CBC has gone there with me. It went to the islands off the BC coast with my cousin when he went there to teach. It has entertained me and informed me and has not always pleased me in every single way, expecially not lately, but all things can be mended. And until we can devise some way of giving each person in the country his or her own personal kind of programming every moment of the day, its what we've got. If you know of anything better please let me know.
CBC needs to be properly funded and placed at arms length from the government. Write some letters, send some emails. Don't just bitch.
Sun, 2009-03-08 01:13
#23
Lard Tunderin Jeezus
I am looking SO FORWARD to Andy Barrie returning. I have not enjoyed Jane Hawtin at ALL. Not that Andy Barrie is all that lefty, but geez, at least with him there's some balance. I find Hawtin awful - if her politics aren't centre-right, then she sure does a good job of making it seem like they are, and the whole show is tainted by it.
I loathe Andy Barrie. A slow talking, condescending Yanqui-liberal, I couldn't believe it when the CBC hired him away from CFRB. At least on CFRB, he really did provide some balance to their right-wing talk radio. At the CBC, he became just another wishy-washy middle-of-the-road Liberal in the mix.
The biggest problem I have with the CBC is that they appear to be trying to sound more like corporate radio, and have forgotten what made them good in the past.
The hiring of Andy Barrie is a good example of this problem.
Sun, 2009-03-08 01:42
#24
Sven
I dunno, FM, maybe it's just emotional. Of course I can't stand the content of CBC news/information programming. But I still see it as potential, rather than its present reality. It's the same way I prefer crown corporations to private ones.
Why don't progressives start their own media company? Personally, I don't want a government organ promoting any political ideas.
_______________________________________
[b]Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!![/b]
Sun, 2009-03-08 07:08
#25
I'm also thrilled about Andy Barrie returning. Probably the only thing about CBC I'm thrilled about.
Overall, though, I'm content to see the CBC die. I'm speaking as someone who has listened to essentially nothing BUT CBC for my entire life, and whose default station remains CBC, no matter how much I hate it. But there is nothing salvageable from it now, as far as I can hear. The people running it are certifiable. (And this has nothing at all to do with the Harper gang, who have actually increased CBC's budget.)
For me, I'm content to get my radio over the internet and podcasting, listening to shows like This American Life (irony of ironies!) and hitting their tip jar. I wouldn't spend a penny on CBC content.
Sorry, it's just all so depressing.
Sun, 2009-03-08 08:34
#26
Whazup is "content" with This American Life, thrilled with Andy's return, careful with the brass and depressed ; Sven would not want a "government organ" to interfere with his private, vacuous world where the media tell him he's perfect because he's American, and Andy Barrie's not LTJ's favourite.
But nothing's perfect, guys. Surely one among you pick your nose, refuse to eat broccoli ?
Perhaps, raising the concern a smidgin, it fails as part of the great Canadian experiment in attempting to gain cultural independence from its perfect neighbour?
Political meaning for the Canuck collective is just going to appear anyway?
We in Ontario shouldn't be concerned because the kids got TV Ontario?
Sun, 2009-03-08 09:56
#27
The CBC no doubt seemed flawed to some people. It can't be all things to all people. I have lived in remote isolated places in Alberta and the north all my life and the CBC has gone there with me. It went to the islands off the BC coast with my cousin when he went there to teach. It has entertained me and informed me and has not always pleased me in every single way, expecially not lately, but all things can be mended. And until we can devise some way of giving each person in the country his or her own personal kind of programming every moment of the day, its what we've got. If you know of anything better please let me know.
CBC needs to be properly funded and placed at arms length from the government. Write some letters, send some emails. Don't just bitch.
Well, I have to support that post.
Sun, 2009-03-08 10:06
#28
"And until we can devise some way of giving each person in the country his or her own personal kind of programming every moment of the day, its what we've got" [laughing..!]
guess i should learn how to use smilies eh, ok, here goes,
Sun, 2009-03-08 12:11
#29
Sven
Sven would not want a "government organ" to interfere with his private, vacuous world where the media tell him he's perfect because he's American
That is obviously inaccurate. I like having my ideas challenged by those who have ideas that differ from mine.
But, I no more want a government organ giving me the news than I want the government to create music or other art.
_______________________________________
[b]Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!![/b]
Sun, 2009-03-08 12:29
#30
How about the government teaching your kids?
Sun, 2009-03-08 13:10
#31
Sven:
"But, I no more want a government organ giving me the news than I want the government to create music or other art."
--------------------------------------------------
I'll bet you're a closet Fox fancier. There's freedom for you.You see, Sven, your position IS "American". At least, recent American. Has nothing to do with Jefferson who thought government had its uses.
Sun, 2009-03-08 13:19
#32
How about the government teaching your kids?
How about the government healing your kids?
Sun, 2009-03-08 15:28
#33
Sven
How about the government teaching your kids?
Yeah. Good example. The government has been real successful at that. Just ask Barak Obama (with his kids in private school) and just about every other progressive politician in Washington (there are even plenty of public school superintendents who send their kids to private schools).
_______________________________________
[b]Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!![/b]
Sun, 2009-03-08 15:35
#34
Sven
I'll bet you're a closet Fox fancier.
Well, don't bet too much of your money, cuz you'll lose it. I watch virtually zero TV "news".
You see, Sven, your position IS "American". At least, recent American. Has nothing to do with Jefferson who thought government had its uses.
Of course Jefferson "thought government had its uses" (but, that's akin to saying all of the Founding Fathers thought water was useful). It's one thing to say that Jefferson "thought government had its uses" and it's quite another thing to claim that Jefferson, therefore, supported (or would support) government-run media.
_______________________________________
[b]Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!![/b]
Sun, 2009-03-08 17:12
#35
How about the government teaching your kids?Yeah. Good example. The government has been real successful at that. Just ask Barak Obama (with his kids in private school) and just about every other progressive politician in Washington (there are even plenty of public school superintendents who send their kids to private schools).
So where did you go to school?
[ed.]
Hang on, are you advocating privatised education?
Sun, 2009-03-08 19:13
#36
I'm talking about the repulsive "new American" that has given you folks much to think about in your material nirvana, Sven.
There have been civilized moments in the past, as when the American jurist Oliver Wendel Holmes, "the Great Dissenter", differed from his conservative colleagues in that he willingly paid his taxes as the price for life in "civilized society".
A Globe and Mail columnist who had just moved to Washington a couple of years back had to concede the above point after insisting that the conservatism of the Bush regime had flowed through American history. Know what he offered in reply?" Good rebuttal. (Though it was easy enough for Holmes--he inherited his wealth.)"
You and John Ibbitson would get along like a house on fire, Sven. You probably never knew what "civilized society" looks like.
Sun, 2009-03-08 23:08
#37
Sven
Ah, what about Jefferson and government-sponsored media, George Victor?
_______________________________________
[b]Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!![/b]
Sun, 2009-03-08 23:16
#38
Sven
So where did you go to school?
I went to public school. But, what I did is nothing but anecdotal evidence.
But, back to government-sponsored media, why is it important to have government-sponsored news media? What content should it contain and who should control that? Must it present representative opinions from across the entire political spectrum in roughtly equal proportions?
_______________________________________
[b]Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!![/b]
Mon, 2009-03-09 00:07
#39
I went to public school. But, what I did is nothing but anecdotal evidence.So where did you go to school?
Your evidence against public schools was an anecdote about Obama. My obvious post is obvious.
Mon, 2009-03-09 00:31
#40
Sven
Your evidence against public schools was an anecdote about Obama.
The fact that Obama's kids (and the kids of pretty much every Senator or member of Congress) go to a private school is not evidence of public schools being bad. But, it would be interesting to hear why they are sending their kids to private schools.
_______________________________________
[b]Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!![/b]
Mon, 2009-03-09 00:40
#41
Sven
why?
The Democrats, in particular, boast about being "strong supporters of public education"...yet, for some reason, they don't want their own kids going to public schools. At best, their behavior is hypocritical. I'd like to know why they support public schools for poor people but not for people like themselves.
_______________________________________
[b]Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!![/b]
Mon, 2009-03-09 00:42
#42
The fact that Obama's kids (and the kids of pretty much every Senator or member of Congress) go to a private school is not evidence of public schools being bad. But, it would be interesting to hear why they are sending their kids to private schools.
why?
Mon, 2009-03-09 00:42
#43
That's a good question, but what does it have to do with us?
Mon, 2009-03-09 00:43
#44
But, back to government-sponsored media, why is it important to have government-sponsored news media?
Because the BBC is ten times the news agency that CNN or Fox is.
"The media serve the interests of state and corporate power, which are closely interlinked, framing their reporting and analysis in a manner supportive of established privilege and limiting debate and discussion accordingly."Noam Chomsky "The enormous gap between what US leaders do in the world and what Americans think their leaders are doing is one of the great propaganda accomplishments of the dominant political mythology."Michael Parenti
We need a press that is doing its job, and it isn't, that is why we have the principle problem with democracy. There's two big failures. One is all the corporate money that's going into our election process, and the second failure is that we have a negligent and indolent press in this country that has simply let down American democracy. . .We had a rule in this country that was passed in 1928 at the dawn of commercial radio that was called the Fairness Doctrine, and that rule said the airwaves belonged to the public, that broadcasters can be licensed to use them, but only with the proviso that they be used to promote the public interest and to advance democracy. [url=http://www.opednews.com/articles/Robert-F-Kennedy-Jr--Me-by-sherry-clark... Jr.[/color][/url]
Mon, 2009-03-09 00:47
#45
Sven
Fidel, important questions remain, as I noted above: Why is it important to have government-sponsored news media? What content should it contain and who should control that? Must it present representative opinions from across the entire political spectrum in roughtly equal proportions?
_______________________________________
[b]Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!![/b]
Mon, 2009-03-09 00:57
#46
Fair and equal sounds good to me. I cant stand CBC as it is though. It's garbage. Our two stoogeocratic old line parties were instructed decades ago on how to scoop out our public institutions and prepare them for privatization at some point when people like me become so disgusted.
Otoh, we can have corporate sponsored news media or democracy, but we cant have both.
Mon, 2009-03-09 00:57
#47
The government should see that the CBC is adequately funded, then back off. No government should have a say in content, especially when it involves partisan politican considerations.
Why is it important to have government-sponsored news media?
Why is it important for you to have General Electric as your news provider?
Mon, 2009-03-09 00:57
#48
Sven
The government should see that the CBC is adequately funded, then back off. No government should have a say in content, especially when it involves partisan politican considerations.
So, if the CBC became a government-funded right-wing bullhorn, that would be okay?
_______________________________________
[b]Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!![/b]
Mon, 2009-03-09 01:00
#49
The CBC mandate ought to prevent this from happening.
Mon, 2009-03-09 01:03
#50
And we'd like the CBC to make mention of our obsolete electoral system a little more often, and maybe even give a little air time to the NDP once in a while, or at least as often as they interview our old line party stooges.
Mon, 2009-03-09 01:13
#51
Sven
Otoh, we can have corporate sponsored news media or democracy, but we cant have both.
Of course. Government funded news media is essential to democracy.
_______________________________________
[b]Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!![/b]