While disagreement over CBC funding is as old as the broadcaster itself, the more uncomfortable discussion for the CBC is its coverage of the current election campaign - particularly its approach to national debates and political party advertising – which raises troubling questions about its relevance in the current media environment.
The CBC’s odd coverage choices are not limited to the missing debates. Its use of video clips from the debates has also been unnecessarily restrictive. For example, before analyzing the recent Munk debates on the “At Issue” panel, host Peter Mansbridge warned viewers that “we are limited with the excerpts with the amount we are allowed to show.” A similar warning preceded the discussion at other debates.
Yet the reality is that there was no need to be restrictive in the use of video clips. Canadian copyright law permits the use of copyrighted works without permission as part of the fair dealing clause.
In fact, the CBC’s misreading of the law is not limited to the use of clips within its news broadcasts. Just prior to the election call, it asked YouTube and Facebook to remove a Conservative campaign advertisement that used clips from a CBC interview with Liberal leader Justin Trudeau. To support its takedown claim, the CBC argued that “no one – no individual candidate or political party, and no government, corporation or NGO – may re-use our creative and copyrighted property without our permission. This includes our brands, our talent and our content.”
That too is wrong. The law features important limitations on the rights of all copyright holders and all media organizations regularly rely on them in their reporting. The limits of copyright extend to campaign commercials and there is little that the CBC (or anyone else) can do about it.
Read the full story.
cbcexposed is all about exposing the waste of the CBC ... over 1 billion dollars a year of taxpayer money funds the cbc and a lot of that taxpayer money is wasted.
When does NO mean NO to the CBC
The complainant, Chris Miller, said that attempting to interview a Memorial University professor when she had already said no was harassment. He strongly objected to the reporter showing up at the university and interviewing the reluctant subject. CBC policy allows for such interviews, and in this case the policy was followed and the technique justified.
I agree with you it is regrettable and shocking that publicizing the story led to threats and racial comments. That too is an issue of public interest. Journalists are told to minimize harm, and those threats are an unintended consequence. But CBC news staff did not incite those threats nor could they turn away from a story when that ugly side of society reared its head. It is a sad reality that in the age of social media the ability to shame, threaten and harass is an anonymous click away. The response, however, is not to retreat from legitimate journalistic endeavours.
Read the full complaint here and see if you agree with CBC policy.
I agree with you it is regrettable and shocking that publicizing the story led to threats and racial comments. That too is an issue of public interest. Journalists are told to minimize harm, and those threats are an unintended consequence. But CBC news staff did not incite those threats nor could they turn away from a story when that ugly side of society reared its head. It is a sad reality that in the age of social media the ability to shame, threaten and harass is an anonymous click away. The response, however, is not to retreat from legitimate journalistic endeavours.
Read the full complaint here and see if you agree with CBC policy.
Exposed - CBC double standards
Evan Solomon is out at CBC. Given that my views on CBC are well known you would think I’d be happy correct?
No, not really.
If there is more to this story, then neither CBC nor CTV are letting it out, and based on that, I don’t see why Solomon was fired.
He wasn’t being paid to trade political secrets. He wasn’t selling access. He wasn’t padding his expenses.
He was doing something outside of his day job and while he appears to have been paid fairly well, up to $300,000 in commissions, he also struck out often, according to The Star.
Let’s look at how CBC has treated others though, starting with CBC President Hubert Lacroix.
A few years ago, when he found I was about to leak the news about what he'd been doing, he quietly made things right, and kept his job.
And then, of course, there's David Suzuki...
When CBC brought out their new speakers fee policy it clearly did not apply to Suzuki because he continues to take paid gigs.
See the full story and video on The Rebel.
No, not really.
If there is more to this story, then neither CBC nor CTV are letting it out, and based on that, I don’t see why Solomon was fired.
He wasn’t being paid to trade political secrets. He wasn’t selling access. He wasn’t padding his expenses.
He was doing something outside of his day job and while he appears to have been paid fairly well, up to $300,000 in commissions, he also struck out often, according to The Star.
Let’s look at how CBC has treated others though, starting with CBC President Hubert Lacroix.
A few years ago, when he found I was about to leak the news about what he'd been doing, he quietly made things right, and kept his job.
And then, of course, there's David Suzuki...
When CBC brought out their new speakers fee policy it clearly did not apply to Suzuki because he continues to take paid gigs.
See the full story and video on The Rebel.
Exposed - CBC In House Research Challenged
Among its revenue sources the CBC receives $946 million in its annual funding from the federal government, as well as $60 million in “one-time” supplementary funding for programming. However, this supplementary funding has been repeated annually for a number of years. This combined total is just over a billion dollars annually and is a source of heated debate.
CBC’s funding differs from that of the public broadcasters of many European nations, which collect a licence fee, or those in the United States, such as PBS and NPR, which receive some public funding but rely to a large extent on voluntary contributions from individual viewers and listeners.
An Abacus poll from August 2011 showed that approximately one out of two Canadians would like to see the CBC’s funding switched to the PBS/NPR model, while one out of three Canadians want Parliament to sell off or privatize the CBC. This independent survey flies in the face of the CBC’s own in house research claiming 92% of Canadians consider the CBC an essential service which they use to justify their continuously desperate need for more tax dollars.
Read the full story here.
CBC’s funding differs from that of the public broadcasters of many European nations, which collect a licence fee, or those in the United States, such as PBS and NPR, which receive some public funding but rely to a large extent on voluntary contributions from individual viewers and listeners.
An Abacus poll from August 2011 showed that approximately one out of two Canadians would like to see the CBC’s funding switched to the PBS/NPR model, while one out of three Canadians want Parliament to sell off or privatize the CBC. This independent survey flies in the face of the CBC’s own in house research claiming 92% of Canadians consider the CBC an essential service which they use to justify their continuously desperate need for more tax dollars.
Read the full story here.
Exposed - CBC tries to hide its happy face
“A new Liberal government will invest $150 million in new annual funding for the CBC,” said the Liberal leader as the Montreal crowd around him cheered.
Somewhere among the spectators, a CBC reporter or two tried to look nonchalant: It’s always hard to look objective when a politician has just promised to give you millions of dollars.
And while CBC president Hubert Lacroix named no specific party, he was at a public broadcasters’ conference earlier this month arguing that the likes of the CBC needed to reverse the “vicious circle” of funding cuts.
“If we don’t work together to turn this around … we risk becoming so weak that we will no longer be able to provide what our citizens need from each of us and, in turn, it will be harder to justify their investment in us,” he told the Munich gathering.
All of which doesn’t help the usual accusations that the CBC is tainted by political bias.
Read the full story.
Somewhere among the spectators, a CBC reporter or two tried to look nonchalant: It’s always hard to look objective when a politician has just promised to give you millions of dollars.
And while CBC president Hubert Lacroix named no specific party, he was at a public broadcasters’ conference earlier this month arguing that the likes of the CBC needed to reverse the “vicious circle” of funding cuts.
“If we don’t work together to turn this around … we risk becoming so weak that we will no longer be able to provide what our citizens need from each of us and, in turn, it will be harder to justify their investment in us,” he told the Munich gathering.
All of which doesn’t help the usual accusations that the CBC is tainted by political bias.
Read the full story.
Honest Reporting Canada Keeps CBC in Line
Faced with an unrelenting Palestinian terror wave that has seen eight Israelis brutally murdered and dozens maimed, our news media have sympathized with terrorists, downplayed and at times justified their violence, and assigned blame to Israel.
In this crisis, HonestReporting has been working round the clock to ensure that our media report the unvarnished truth about what is actually taking place: How Palestinian incitement has encouraged Palestinian terror.
A recent example of our effectiveness came when CBC News' website turned Palestinian terrorists into victims of supposed Israeli aggression, as seen in the following headline on October 17:
This headline made the guilty party innocent and the innocent party guilty.
HonestReporting Canada pleaded with CBC executives to amend the headline to point out that the 4 dead Palestinians were in fact terrorists who stabbed and tried to murder Israelis. Following our intervention with the CBC, the following amendment was issued which acknowledged, albeit in attribution only, that Israel claims these Palestinians "we're trying to stab them":
This is the impact of HonestReporting and as you can see, our work produces results and our news media are aware that they're being vigilantly watched and are not immune to criticism.
At this time, they need your support to enable their continued efforts. When you give a donation to HonestReporting Canada, you're providing them with the tools they need to expose the lies and to promote the truth.
See more here!
In this crisis, HonestReporting has been working round the clock to ensure that our media report the unvarnished truth about what is actually taking place: How Palestinian incitement has encouraged Palestinian terror.
A recent example of our effectiveness came when CBC News' website turned Palestinian terrorists into victims of supposed Israeli aggression, as seen in the following headline on October 17:
This headline made the guilty party innocent and the innocent party guilty.
HonestReporting Canada pleaded with CBC executives to amend the headline to point out that the 4 dead Palestinians were in fact terrorists who stabbed and tried to murder Israelis. Following our intervention with the CBC, the following amendment was issued which acknowledged, albeit in attribution only, that Israel claims these Palestinians "we're trying to stab them":
This is the impact of HonestReporting and as you can see, our work produces results and our news media are aware that they're being vigilantly watched and are not immune to criticism.
At this time, they need your support to enable their continued efforts. When you give a donation to HonestReporting Canada, you're providing them with the tools they need to expose the lies and to promote the truth.
See more here!
CBC Insolent Election Bias
As Canada’s federal election is less than a month away, the CBC is now a full-fledged left-wing partisan mouthpiece. Canada’s public broadcaster—despite its cute mandate to reflect the views of all Canadians—has devoted itself to mocking Conservative Leader Prime Minister Stephen Harper, all the while lauding and defending Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau. (NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair hitherto received tepid coverage, but since polls consistently show him evenly splitting the 60-65 per cent of voters desiring change, he has lately been in the CBC’s crosshairs.)
The Mother Corp’s darling Trudeau is given affectionate Putinesque coverage by our state broadcaster. A minute-long video of Trudeau paddling down the Bow River was inexplicably tweeted by our state broadcaster. No commentary provided—no story to be told—just a rustic scene of a man enjoying the outdoors. The video coincided nicely with junior Trudeau’s pledge to give CBC an additional 150 million dollars to its annual billion dollar federal subsidy.
Conversely, the public broadcaster’s coverage of the CBC-cutting Harper has been marked by juvenile petulance.
Read the full story here.
The Mother Corp’s darling Trudeau is given affectionate Putinesque coverage by our state broadcaster. A minute-long video of Trudeau paddling down the Bow River was inexplicably tweeted by our state broadcaster. No commentary provided—no story to be told—just a rustic scene of a man enjoying the outdoors. The video coincided nicely with junior Trudeau’s pledge to give CBC an additional 150 million dollars to its annual billion dollar federal subsidy.
Conversely, the public broadcaster’s coverage of the CBC-cutting Harper has been marked by juvenile petulance.
Read the full story here.
Exposed - CBC Bias in 2015 Federal Election
CBC bias blatantly obvious during 2015 Federal Election campaign.
With the election campaign in full swing, the blatant bias of the CBC toward their preferred political party is reaching astronomical heights.
From incessant coverage of the Duffy trial, to the constant promotion of the Fin Donnelly lie, the CBC makes no bones about who they think YOU should elect.
$1 Billion a year for the state broadcaster to tell you what to think and who to vote for is abhorrent, dishonest, and should be illegal.
Share this petition with you family and friends, and perhaps this will be the last election that the taxpayer funds a broadcast entity hell bent on influencing the voter.
Full story and petition is here.
With the election campaign in full swing, the blatant bias of the CBC toward their preferred political party is reaching astronomical heights.
From incessant coverage of the Duffy trial, to the constant promotion of the Fin Donnelly lie, the CBC makes no bones about who they think YOU should elect.
$1 Billion a year for the state broadcaster to tell you what to think and who to vote for is abhorrent, dishonest, and should be illegal.
Share this petition with you family and friends, and perhaps this will be the last election that the taxpayer funds a broadcast entity hell bent on influencing the voter.
Full story and petition is here.
Another CBC Journalist Whitewashes Palestinian Terror
We (Honest Reporting Canada) recently took CBC News to task for its website’s failure to report on the recent Palestinian terror attacks.
Not isolated to the CBC’s website, we have serious concerns with the CBC’s reporting of the recent hostilities by way of the coverage produced by reporter Margaret Evans. A former Mideast Bureau Chief, Ms. Evans, who is now back in Jerusalem, produced several television and radio reports which not only whitewashed and excused Palestinian terror, her journalism deligitimized Israel’s right to self defense, and drew a false moral equivalence between Israeli victims and Palestinian perpetrators of terror and their respective families.
In an October 12 CBC National report, Margaret Evans drew a false moral equivalence between Israeli victims of terror and Palestinian perpetrators of terror and their respective families.
Read the full story.
Not isolated to the CBC’s website, we have serious concerns with the CBC’s reporting of the recent hostilities by way of the coverage produced by reporter Margaret Evans. A former Mideast Bureau Chief, Ms. Evans, who is now back in Jerusalem, produced several television and radio reports which not only whitewashed and excused Palestinian terror, her journalism deligitimized Israel’s right to self defense, and drew a false moral equivalence between Israeli victims and Palestinian perpetrators of terror and their respective families.
In an October 12 CBC National report, Margaret Evans drew a false moral equivalence between Israeli victims of terror and Palestinian perpetrators of terror and their respective families.
Read the full story.
CBC news online is glaring exception
It’s said that the most egregious form of media bias, is a bias of omission. When media outlets ignore important news stories and which thereby deprives readers, listeners and viewers of learning about noteworthy developments on a myriad of issues.
The most recent Palestinian terror attacks that killed four Israelis last week — two Israeli men stabbed to death in Jerusalem’s Old City and a Jewish couple gunned down in a drive-by shooting ambush in the “west bank” — in full view of their four now orphaned children, received considerable coverage in the Canadian and international media.
With one glaring exception.
Though CBC News’ Radio and TV programs featured reports about the terror attacks, CBCNews.ca had altogether failed to provide coverage of these attacks.
Read the full story.
The most recent Palestinian terror attacks that killed four Israelis last week — two Israeli men stabbed to death in Jerusalem’s Old City and a Jewish couple gunned down in a drive-by shooting ambush in the “west bank” — in full view of their four now orphaned children, received considerable coverage in the Canadian and international media.
With one glaring exception.
Though CBC News’ Radio and TV programs featured reports about the terror attacks, CBCNews.ca had altogether failed to provide coverage of these attacks.
Read the full story.
CBC cuts nose to spite its face
CBC’s debate coverage approach raises questions about value of public broadcaster
The CBC seems to have cut its nose to spite its face by doing its best to prove its critics right.Hubert Lacroix, president of the CBC, recently placed the future of Canada’s national public broadcaster on the electoral map with comments aimed at sparking a renewed debate on future funding models. Lacroix disputed claims that low ratings are to blame for the CBC’s financial struggles, instead pointing to the need to consider alternative fee schemes, including new levies on internet providers or supplementary charges on television purchases.
Read the full story here.
CBC CEO Hubert Lacroix Political Contrabutions
What do the head of the CBC, a former BlackBerry executive, and the president of The Asper Foundation have in common?
They can all find their names in a database compiled by left-leaning pressure group SumOfUs.org of political appointees who have donated to the Conservative Party.
According to SumOfUs.org campaign director Rosa Kouri, the organization found 356 political appointees who have donated more than $760,000 to the Conservatives’ coffers between 2004 and 2014.
According to the group’s data, the donations range from one-off contributions of $200 to almost $20,000 over 10 years. Some names on their list donated before their appointment, some after.
The data includes names like Hubert Lacroix, the CEO of the CBC, former Blackberry executive turned Sustainable Technology Development Canada Chair Jim Balsillie, and Gail Asper, a trustee at the Canadian Museum of Human Rights.
Read the full story.
They can all find their names in a database compiled by left-leaning pressure group SumOfUs.org of political appointees who have donated to the Conservative Party.
According to SumOfUs.org campaign director Rosa Kouri, the organization found 356 political appointees who have donated more than $760,000 to the Conservatives’ coffers between 2004 and 2014.
According to the group’s data, the donations range from one-off contributions of $200 to almost $20,000 over 10 years. Some names on their list donated before their appointment, some after.
The data includes names like Hubert Lacroix, the CEO of the CBC, former Blackberry executive turned Sustainable Technology Development Canada Chair Jim Balsillie, and Gail Asper, a trustee at the Canadian Museum of Human Rights.
Read the full story.
CBC shrugs off election debates
Even as their reporters were proving once again Monday night that CBC journalists are as good as any in the world by winning an international Emmy for coverage of the Ebola outbreak in Africa, CBC’s management was letting them — and the Canadian public — down once again by failing to broadcast yet another leaders’ debate in this election campaign.
Monday’s debate has been universally praised as one of the best campaign debates in more than 50 years. But CBC chose to put Coronation Street on its main network. On its news channel, there was chit chat about commodity prices.
Meanwhile on CPAC — god bless it — Stephen Harper, Thomas Mulcair, and Justin Trudeau engaged in two hours of lively, informative debate about some of the most important foreign policy, defence, and development issues of our time.
The organizers of the debate had offered the broadcast feed free to anyone who wanted to use it. And yet, CBC shrugged.
And so, by campaign’s close, CBC’s sorry record will be broadcasting just one debate out of five, and that was a French language one only offered in translation to its English-language viewers.
Read the full story.
Monday’s debate has been universally praised as one of the best campaign debates in more than 50 years. But CBC chose to put Coronation Street on its main network. On its news channel, there was chit chat about commodity prices.
Meanwhile on CPAC — god bless it — Stephen Harper, Thomas Mulcair, and Justin Trudeau engaged in two hours of lively, informative debate about some of the most important foreign policy, defence, and development issues of our time.
The organizers of the debate had offered the broadcast feed free to anyone who wanted to use it. And yet, CBC shrugged.
And so, by campaign’s close, CBC’s sorry record will be broadcasting just one debate out of five, and that was a French language one only offered in translation to its English-language viewers.
Read the full story.
Time we sell off CBC
CBC’s mandate says “…the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, as the national public broadcaster, should provide radio and television services incorporating a wide range of programming that informs, enlightens and entertains.”
Wouldn't showing a national federal election debate fit within that mandate?
All three debates should have been broadcast in full on radio and TV across CBC. Instead the debate was shown on TV by CPAC, and by Hamilton’s little independent station CHCH TV, a station that while seen across many parts of Canada doesn’t have the reach that CBC does.
CBC has been acting like petulant child since the Conservatives decided that they wanted a new debate format rather than the one English and one French organized by the consortium of broadcasters.
If CBC can’t be bothered showing something as important as an election debate, why should we subsidize them?
It's time we sell off CBC.
See the video and full text here.
Exposed - CBC failing the public
There’s an old saying in journalism that you should never let yourself become the story. These days the CBC has failed too many times on that front.
The public broadcaster used taxpayer dollars to go to court to fight having to disclose documents to the information commissioner.
The Jian Ghomeshi saga is an HR, PR and management disaster — and that’s not including the alleged harm suffered by his accused.
CEO Hubert Lacroix apologized last year for claiming $30,000 in expenses to which he wasn’t entitled.
For an organization that’s supposed to be dedicated to talking about Canada and Canadians, Canada spends far too much time talking about it.
The CBC continues to fail the people it’s supposed to serve.
Read the full story.
The public broadcaster used taxpayer dollars to go to court to fight having to disclose documents to the information commissioner.
The Jian Ghomeshi saga is an HR, PR and management disaster — and that’s not including the alleged harm suffered by his accused.
CEO Hubert Lacroix apologized last year for claiming $30,000 in expenses to which he wasn’t entitled.
For an organization that’s supposed to be dedicated to talking about Canada and Canadians, Canada spends far too much time talking about it.
The CBC continues to fail the people it’s supposed to serve.
Read the full story.
Former CBC Host pleads not guilty
 |
| Former CBC radio host Jian Ghomeshi, centre, appears for a pre-trial hearing for his sexual assault case with his lawyer, Marie Henein, second from right, in Toronto, on Thursday, Oct. 1, 2015. (/Michelle Siu / THE CANADIAN PRESS) |
The former host of CBC Radio's cultural affairs show "Q" is facing five charges including four counts of sexual assault and one count of overcome resistance, choking.
See more here.
CBC President Hubert Lacroix hitting back
The head of the CBC is hitting back at Conservative Leader Stephen Harper over comments the national broadcaster is floundering because of low ratings rather than a lack of funding.
CEO Hubert Lacroix says the CBC has healthy ratings, but is crippled by a broken funding model.
Harper told a private radio station in Quebec that the CBC's budget crunch isn't due to government cuts, but because of its low ratings.
"The reason for the difficulties aren't the cuts," Harper said in an interview broadcast Monday. "There aren't cuts. The reason is the loss of [CBC's] audience. It's a problem for the CBC to fix."
There is a limit to state subsidies, he added.
Lacroix wouldn't answer when asked whether he thought Harper's comments were fair.
"But I'm going to tell you it's not because of our ratings that we have a problem at CBC-Radio Canada."
Read the full story.
CEO Hubert Lacroix says the CBC has healthy ratings, but is crippled by a broken funding model.
Harper told a private radio station in Quebec that the CBC's budget crunch isn't due to government cuts, but because of its low ratings.
"The reason for the difficulties aren't the cuts," Harper said in an interview broadcast Monday. "There aren't cuts. The reason is the loss of [CBC's] audience. It's a problem for the CBC to fix."
There is a limit to state subsidies, he added.
Lacroix wouldn't answer when asked whether he thought Harper's comments were fair.
"But I'm going to tell you it's not because of our ratings that we have a problem at CBC-Radio Canada."
Read the full story.
CBC Exposed - serious defamation
Leenen v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp., 2000 CanLII 22380 (ON SC)
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.
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.
CBC should find new funding options
A Senate committee is calling on Canada's public broadcaster to publicly disclose how much employees make and ensure non-executives aren't getting paid more than their peers in private broadcasting.
The Senate's communications committee is also calling on the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. to find new ways to fund its operations in order to limit the amount of funding it receives from the federal government.
The committee says it's time to update the Broadcasting Act, noting the legislation hasn't been updated since the "pre-smartphone, pre-multi-platform" era of 1991.
The Senate report also references scandals involving former radio host Jian Ghomeshi and business correspondent Amanda Lang in calling for stricter policies to prevent problems, rather than having to react after they become public.
Read the full story.
The Senate's communications committee is also calling on the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. to find new ways to fund its operations in order to limit the amount of funding it receives from the federal government.
The committee says it's time to update the Broadcasting Act, noting the legislation hasn't been updated since the "pre-smartphone, pre-multi-platform" era of 1991.
The Senate report also references scandals involving former radio host Jian Ghomeshi and business correspondent Amanda Lang in calling for stricter policies to prevent problems, rather than having to react after they become public.
Read the full story.
CBC Amanda Lang should resign
Here’s an idea that’s probably going nowhere but let’s try it anyway – CBC’s Amanda Lang could get down off her high horse and resign. Enough with the haughty umbrage.
CBC could help her down from the high horse and achieve some closure on the matter of Lang’s allegedly compromised reporting and interviewing. But that’s another idea that’s going nowhere. CBC’s umbrage is even haughtier than Lang’s. It changed its regulations too late. Barn door closed after the horse left.
Read the full story.
CBC could help her down from the high horse and achieve some closure on the matter of Lang’s allegedly compromised reporting and interviewing. But that’s another idea that’s going nowhere. CBC’s umbrage is even haughtier than Lang’s. It changed its regulations too late. Barn door closed after the horse left.
Read the full story.
Exposed - CBC to sell everything
The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), Canada’s financially troubled public broadcaster, has plans to sell all of its properties and buildings across the entire country.
Every single property will be sold – no stone will be left unturned. This includes the Toronto headquarters, Montreal studio, and the recently renovated and expanded Vancouver studio.
If the fire sale plan moves forward, the CBC would have to pay rent for the remainder of its existence – it might provide a short-term reprieve, but it would drastically increase its already tight annual operating budget.
The plan to sell off all of its property across the country is a last-ditch attempt for the broadcaster to save itself.
It is clear that the CBC is putting all cards on the table to save itself: there is nothing to lose.
Read the full story.
Every single property will be sold – no stone will be left unturned. This includes the Toronto headquarters, Montreal studio, and the recently renovated and expanded Vancouver studio.
If the fire sale plan moves forward, the CBC would have to pay rent for the remainder of its existence – it might provide a short-term reprieve, but it would drastically increase its already tight annual operating budget.
The plan to sell off all of its property across the country is a last-ditch attempt for the broadcaster to save itself.
It is clear that the CBC is putting all cards on the table to save itself: there is nothing to lose.
Read the full story.
CBC is promised millions MORE of taxpayer dollars
 |
| Disclaimer: Photo is not associated with the National Post story below. |
With his ex-broadcaster wife at his side, Justin Trudeau adopted his best “looking into the future” expression and pledged a king’s ransom to Schitt’s Creek and Definitely Not the Opera.
“A new Liberal government will invest $150 million in new annual funding for the CBC,” said the Liberal leader as the Montreal crowd around him cheered.
Somewhere among the spectators, a CBC reporter or two tried to look nonchalant: It’s always hard to look objective when a politician has just promised to give you millions of dollars.
And such is the endless quandary faced by the national broadcaster when covering elections. Unlike CTV, Global or pretty much any other media outlet covering the 2015 election, it is empirically in CBC’s best interest if the Conservatives lose on Oct. 19.
Read the full story National Post story here.
PS - Did you know the CBC now gets over $1 BILLION/year in taxpayer funding already?
CBC Special Examination
Under section 138 of the Financial Administration Act, federal Crown corporations are subject to a special examination once every 10 years. A special examination could be done earlier than the 10-year timeline, as a result of a request by the Office, the Minister, the Board, or the Governor in Council.
A few interesting observations from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation Special Examination Report—2013 by Canada's Auditor General:
- We looked at whether CBC/Radio-Canada has a formal security management process in place. We found that although the Corporation has key systems and practices in place, it does not show consistency in the way it handles sensitive information that is normally considered to be classified or protected under federal government policy.
- Frequent movement of senior personnel in People and Culture poses the risk of loss of corporate memory and inconsistency in approaches, including adjustments in strategic plans and attention to performance management. In our view, the lack of consistent management could adversely affect the Corporation’s ability to implement and advance its human resource initiatives.
- Since 2008, the Corporation has had four different human resources strategic plans. It is appropriate to update plans in response to changing conditions. However, the lack of stability regarding strategic direction over a relatively short period increases the risk that the organization spends more time and energy on planning instead of implementing initiatives and moving forward.
Read the full audit here.
Exposed - was NHL a CBC Cash Cow?
The following numbers were taken from the most recent quarterly financial reports as published by the CBC (for the 3 months ended June 30, 2015):
Revenue:
$118,521,000 - same period in 2014 was $192,592,000 ... a decrease of 38.5 %
Excuse: After Rogers acquired the NHL broadcast rights in June 2014, no revenue was generated from hockey playoffs during the first three months of this year, largely contributing to the decrease in English Services’ revenue.
Operating Expenses:
$364,808,000 - same period in 2014 was $469,521,000 ... a decrease of 22.3 %
Reason: English Services incurred rights and production costs related to the hockey playoffs during the first quarter of last year. No such costs were incurred in 2015-2016, as our contract with the NHL ended at the end of June 2014.
Bottom line: There is a whopping 38.5 % decrease in revenue (contributed to loss of NHL) and a corresponding decrease in Operating Expenses of a much lower 22.3 % (again associated with the loss of NHL).
Was the NHL as big a cash cow for the CBC as this indicates? Why sell it?
Read the full report here.
Revenue:
$118,521,000 - same period in 2014 was $192,592,000 ... a decrease of 38.5 %
Excuse: After Rogers acquired the NHL broadcast rights in June 2014, no revenue was generated from hockey playoffs during the first three months of this year, largely contributing to the decrease in English Services’ revenue.
Operating Expenses:
$364,808,000 - same period in 2014 was $469,521,000 ... a decrease of 22.3 %
Reason: English Services incurred rights and production costs related to the hockey playoffs during the first quarter of last year. No such costs were incurred in 2015-2016, as our contract with the NHL ended at the end of June 2014.
Bottom line: There is a whopping 38.5 % decrease in revenue (contributed to loss of NHL) and a corresponding decrease in Operating Expenses of a much lower 22.3 % (again associated with the loss of NHL).
Was the NHL as big a cash cow for the CBC as this indicates? Why sell it?
Read the full report here.
Exposé of CBC Manager Politics
I contacted Mike Fegelman of HonestReporting Canada and he sent me a USB stick with 120 clips from a variety of CBC shows. We spent hours searching YouTube, and several bloggers sent us ideas and video. We spent the whole summer watching, downloading and editing videos, adding titles and subtitles and writing commentary. By the time fall had arrived, we had produced a 50-minute documentary, This Hour Could Have 10,000 Minutes: The Biases of the CBC.
With revenues of $1.9 billion, of which 60 per cent comes from government, the CBC and Radio-Canada maintains more than 100 stations (88 radio and 27 TV). But specialty TV is the fastest growing broadcast category. Internet advertising now exceeds all television advertising. Residential TV subscriber numbers are in decline. A huge fragmentation of audiences is under way. Of the top 100 TV programs in Canada by 2014, only 23 were Canadian-produced and one-third of Anglophone Canadians had embraced Netflix.
The Broadcasting Act of 1991 mandates its two “primary tools,” the CBC and the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission. Section 3 of the Act covers the CBC, and part of its mandate is to “reflect Canada and its regions to national and regional audiences, while serving the special needs of those regions.”
That is where the CBC is losing sight of its mission. The ivory tower on Front Street in Toronto not only makes the CBC Toronto-centric, but it blinds them to the needs and requirements of people across the country.
To see more and get a copy of the book please click here.
CBC consistently losing market share despite taxpayer subsidy
I believe that when the CBC began, it was absolutely essential at almost any cost. It was one of the only mediums of communication, and for many parts of Canada it was the only television available. It was undeniably a key means of getting information out from coast-to-coast, and held great cultural value in terms of defining Canada a country. I believe it certainly justified its fairly high cost to the public purse in times past… wait for it… *sound of other shoe dropping*… Unfortunately for the CBC, the world we live in today is not the world of yesteryear.
The CBC has consistently lost market share to their private rivals that do not benefit from a taxpayer subsidy. This fact alone dictates that people have voted with their television remotes already.
I have several friends in the journalism industry, and they all report the same reality – that everyone wants a CBC job because they are better-paying and much more cushy in terms of benefits and expectations. While this might be great for the unionized workers at CBC, it is definitely not advantageous to the average Canadian. Nor is it fair to the other networks that compete with the CBC. Why should the Canadian taxpayer fit the bill for salaries that are driving up costs in the market? It is the classic private-public dilemma, and balance desperately needs to be restored.
Read the full story here.
The CBC has consistently lost market share to their private rivals that do not benefit from a taxpayer subsidy. This fact alone dictates that people have voted with their television remotes already.
I have several friends in the journalism industry, and they all report the same reality – that everyone wants a CBC job because they are better-paying and much more cushy in terms of benefits and expectations. While this might be great for the unionized workers at CBC, it is definitely not advantageous to the average Canadian. Nor is it fair to the other networks that compete with the CBC. Why should the Canadian taxpayer fit the bill for salaries that are driving up costs in the market? It is the classic private-public dilemma, and balance desperately needs to be restored.
Read the full story here.
CBC accused of attempting to reverse decades of settled law
On March 16th, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) heard oral arguments in CBC v SODRAC . The issue centers on whether broadcasters should be required to pay royalties on ephemeral or incidental copies of audiovisual works that are created during the process of making a final copy for broadcast.
CBC submits that SODRAC is the first copyright holder to “attempt to monetize broadcast-incidental copies…[which is] a subversion of the purpose of the Copyright Act in an attempt to generate economic rents through a layer licensing scheme.
The SODRAC factum on the other hand contends that CBC is attempting “to reverse decades of settled law” and does not mince words in its opening paragraphs:
This appeal amounts to an attempt by CBC to persuade this Court, through a misuse of the principle of technological neutrality, to upset the existing statutory balance in relation to broadcast-incidental copies and to substitute its own policy preferences for those of Parliament, enabling CBC to escape liability for copies it is making and deriving benefits from, and that it has been making and paying for, for decades.
Read the complete story here.
CBC submits that SODRAC is the first copyright holder to “attempt to monetize broadcast-incidental copies…[which is] a subversion of the purpose of the Copyright Act in an attempt to generate economic rents through a layer licensing scheme.
The SODRAC factum on the other hand contends that CBC is attempting “to reverse decades of settled law” and does not mince words in its opening paragraphs:
This appeal amounts to an attempt by CBC to persuade this Court, through a misuse of the principle of technological neutrality, to upset the existing statutory balance in relation to broadcast-incidental copies and to substitute its own policy preferences for those of Parliament, enabling CBC to escape liability for copies it is making and deriving benefits from, and that it has been making and paying for, for decades.
Read the complete story here.
Exposed - CBC appeared to be editorializing in a news piece
The complainant, Marc Poitras, objected to the characterization of a platform speech by the Liberal Party leader as “striking hopeful notes.” He’s right – there was no justification and it appeared to be The complainant, Marc Poitras, objected to the characterization of a platform speech by the Liberal Party leader as “striking hopeful notes.” He’s right – there was no justification and it appeared to be editorializing in a news piece.
The difficulty here was that since the whole sentence was unclear, it might not have been obvious to you that this was in fact a quotation. It compressed so many thoughts into one short sentence that it lost clarity. It left the impression of bias. I think more likely it is a case of bad writing and editing.
On this score, the article fails. I recommend CBC news managers review how this happened so that those involved can learn from the mistake.
Read the full complaint and review here.
The difficulty here was that since the whole sentence was unclear, it might not have been obvious to you that this was in fact a quotation. It compressed so many thoughts into one short sentence that it lost clarity. It left the impression of bias. I think more likely it is a case of bad writing and editing.
On this score, the article fails. I recommend CBC news managers review how this happened so that those involved can learn from the mistake.
Read the full complaint and review here.
Exposed - CBC and Canadian defamation law
Tort law surrounding defamation law does not directly curb your right to free expression; it is not illegal per se. Rather, defamation is generally about paying damages to people that have been harmed by your speech. You can still say whatever you want, but you may have to pay for it (and you may have to pay a lot).
Key rulings in Canadian defamation law:
In Leenan v CBC and Myers v CBC , the CBC was ordered to pay damages to two cardiologists who were wrongly portrayed in a negative light on a CBC program, showing that both Crown corporations and broadcasters of defamatory content, including broadcasters of content created by others, can also be liable for defamation.
Read the full story and see more examples here.
Key rulings in Canadian defamation law:
In Leenan v CBC and Myers v CBC , the CBC was ordered to pay damages to two cardiologists who were wrongly portrayed in a negative light on a CBC program, showing that both Crown corporations and broadcasters of defamatory content, including broadcasters of content created by others, can also be liable for defamation.
Read the full story and see more examples here.
CBC drops more TV stations
CBC has ended its relationship with a number of local over-the-air television stations, exposing deep rifts in Canada’s broadcast landscape.
The CRTC announced Thursday that CHEX-TV in Peterborough, Channel 12 in Oshawa and CKWS-TV in Kingston would be ending their affiliation with CBC and entering into a “program supply agreement” with CTV beginning Aug. 31.
Gregory Taylor, a University of Calgary researcher and expert on over-the-air television, said the CBC has rapidly been moving away from free over-the-air programming and towards online mobile content as part of its digital-first strategy.
As the CBC continues to drop local over-the-air affiliates, private networks are picking them up. Taylor said private broadcasters like CTV stand to gain more by airing their programming in local networks.
Read the full story.
The CRTC announced Thursday that CHEX-TV in Peterborough, Channel 12 in Oshawa and CKWS-TV in Kingston would be ending their affiliation with CBC and entering into a “program supply agreement” with CTV beginning Aug. 31.
Gregory Taylor, a University of Calgary researcher and expert on over-the-air television, said the CBC has rapidly been moving away from free over-the-air programming and towards online mobile content as part of its digital-first strategy.
As the CBC continues to drop local over-the-air affiliates, private networks are picking them up. Taylor said private broadcasters like CTV stand to gain more by airing their programming in local networks.
Read the full story.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)