It's 2018 and cbcExposed continues to hear from confidential sources inside the CBC about CBC management snooping on its employees, company waste, low employee morale, huge salaries and benefits for the President and other senior management, gender bias and other scandals and we will continue to expose their reports on our blog while we protect our sources. We take joy in knowing that the CBC-HQ visits us daily to spy on us and read our stories such as news bias, waste, the CBC Sunshine List, ongoing scandals including the epic Dr. Leenen case against The Fifth Estate (the largest libel legal case ever awarded against the media in Canadian history) where no one at CBC was fired and taxpayers paid the award and legal costs for this CBC Libel action. Writers and filmmakers take note-this is a Perfect story for an award winning Documentary!
cbcExposed continues to enjoy substantial visitors coming from Universities and Colleges across Canada who use us for research in debates, exams, etc.
We ask students to please join with us in this mission; you have the power to make a difference! And so can private broadcasters who we know are hurting from the dwindling Advertising revenue pool and the CBC taking money from that pool while also unfairly getting Tax subsidies money. It's time to stop being silent and start speaking up Bell Media-CTV, Shaw-Global, Rogers, etc.
Our cbcExposed Twitter followers and frequent visitors to cbcExposed continue to motivate us to expose CBC’s abuse and waste of tax money as well as exposing their ongoing left wing bully-like news bias. Polls meanwhile show that Canadians favour selling the wasteful government owned media giant and to put our tax money to better use for all Canadians. The Liberals privatized Petro Canada and Air Canada; it’s time for the Trudeau Liberals to privatize the CBC- certainly not give them more of our tax money-enough is enough!
The CBC network’s ratings continue to plummet while their costs and our tax- payer subsidies continue to go up! In 2018 what case can be made for the Government to be in the broadcasting business, competing unfairly with the private sector? The CBC receives advertising and cable/satellite fees-fees greater than CTV and Global but this is not enough for the greedy CBC who also receive more than a billion dollars of your tax money every year. That’s about $100,000,000 (yes, 100 MILLION) of our taxes every 30 days with no CBC accountability to taxpayers as they continue with their biased news service serving only the extreme socialists and anti-Semitics. Wake up Canada!
What does it take for real change at the CBC? YOU! Our blog now contains a link to the Politicians contact info for you to make your voice heard. Act now and contact your MP, the Cabinet and Prime Minister ... tell them to stop wasting your money, and ... sell the CBC.
Wednesday, September 30, 2015
CBC Exposed - serious defamation
In February 1996, the defendant CBC aired a one-hour documentary on the fifth estate on a controversial heart medication known as nifedipine, a calcium channel blocker ("CCB").
The plaintiff agreed to be interviewed for the program. When he asked what topics would be discussed, he was told that the interviewer would be interested in his views on the science of CCBs was well-known within the scientific community. He had written an article in which he concluded that there was clear evidence demonstrating short-term nifedipine to be detrimental to patients with coronary artery disease. The article pointed out that the evidence with respect to the longer acting formulation was limited. The plaintiff provided the CBC with a copy of this article. He gave a lengthy interview in which he discussed the science of CCBs. Most of that interview was not used in the program. The general tenor of the program was that an extremely dangerous drug was being prescribed for unsuspecting heart patients and that the plaintiff defended the drug and accepted perks from a pharmaceutical company.
In light of the systematic reporting of one side of the story, the significant omissions of important information which was contrary to the program's thesis, and the deliberate refraining from making inquiries or allowing the plaintiff a fair opportunity to defend himself, the defendants clearly acted maliciously and in bad faith towards the plaintiff.
When the program was broadcast, the plaintiff was a highly respected research scientist and also carried on an active clinical practice. As a scientist, his integrity and credibility were fundamental to his work. His reputation had been earned over many years and was precious. The program struck at the very core of his being in questioning his scientific credibility, his integrity and his commitment. He was shocked and devastated and felt that his reputation for integrity had been destroyed. It was significant that his accuser was the CBC and not a tabloid to which no one would have paid very much attention. The program reached over a million viewers and a further four hundred thousand when it was rebroadcast on Newsworld. Taking into account the seriousness of the defamation, the breadth of the publication and its source, the republication, the standing of the victim and the nature of his reputation at the time of the broadcast, this was as serious a libel as could be imagined.
Read the full judgement here.