What to do with Radio Canada and the CBC?

[Doug]

Originally Posted by esquire

Crazy story out of Winnipeg about a CBC reporter who got in trouble for tweeting his displeasure with Don Cherry's insensitive comments in 2019... his boss and a toady fellow reporter engaged in some reprehensible behaviour when they tried to "get him".

The said toady reporter is getting dragged HARD in social media. It's quite something if you have the patience to wade through this.

https://www.canadaland.com/cbc-fired...stemic-racism/

He deserved to lose his job with cause for both:
1) Code of conduct violation
2) Stupidity

I also laugh at the ignorance of people who believe narratives about people being "muzzled" by their employers (ex. the Harper government "muzzling" scientists who must of course have inside knowledge on climate change). Any organization within even the slightest sense of HR awareness requires employees to acknowledge a Code of Conduct which usually includes non-tolerated behaviors such as:
-making any official statements about the company financial results, strategy or other policies unless fully vetted by the employer's communications function
-discussing any HR related activities with any party other than the company's HR dept, their union rep or a lawyer
-disclosing any proprietary information

If the Code of Conduct violation weren't bad enough, this person had the incredibly poor judgement to make statements through social media using traceable accounts.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by shreddog

The show "Schitts Creek" is the one you mentioned. Unfortunately (or not) it just ended its run, so not much for CBC to capitalize on. Too little too late??

It's on Netflix (and became much more popular after S3 when it began appearing on Netflix) so its re-watchability is there. CBC gets whatever Netflix is paying in rights, I guess.

Originally Posted by esquire

Crazy story out of Winnipeg about a CBC reporter who got in trouble for tweeting his displeasure with Don Cherry's insensitive comments in 2019... his boss and a toady fellow reporter engaged in some reprehensible behaviour when they tried to "get him".

https://www.canadaland.com/cbc-fired...stemic-racism/

Originally Posted by CANADALAND

“There was also,” Slotnick wrote, “a WhatsApp exchange between Mr. Khan and 10 of his friends with what could charitably be described as nonsense banter, in which Mr. Khan used the phrases ‘fAWKING FAGGG YO’ and ‘WHAT A FAG YOOOOo,’ among a group of other messages that would unlikely be understood by anyone except by that group of friends.”

Khan testified that those messages, which predated his employment at the CBC, were part of a joke in which he and pals were “mocking the patter of thugs from Surrey, B.C., and Brampton.”

I can hear this so vividly in my head.

[memememe76]

Originally Posted by shreddog

This - you're aware that something from CBC did well (as gauged by Americans) but unclear of it's name or details. (BTW, no offense intended, just using this as an example of CBC's relevancy).

The show "Schitts Creek" is the one you mentioned. Unfortunately (or not) it just ended its run, so not much for CBC to capitalize on. Too little too late??

I am very much aware of Schitt’s Creek. I watched every episode. Yes, it ended which CBC supports. An American network may not have been so agreeable to that. While the show ending may not allow the network to capitalize on that success, it props up their reputation as a network that allows for creative control.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

I agree with you only in the sense that the left wing agenda of the CBC has been hijacked away from traditional socialist causes such as expanding the welfare state and protecting medicare, and instead has been supplanted by victimology and identity politics. This sort of shift in coverage is really divisive and pits people against people. The CBC should return more to the more inclusive aspects of traditional socialism (such as maintaining the social welfare system), which, in it's own way is just as much a form of nation building as is building highways or pipelines.

Identity politics is just purely toxic in any form..........

Amen!

[MolsonExport]

Two Women!

[Architype]

^ Perhaps it's the Dunning–Kruger effect that has lead the CBC potentially down this path, having to give voice contentiously and democratically to all, regardless of content validity. It's a flaw of the internet driven media environment where social justice for all can be easily sidelined by social justice for the few.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Doug

He deserved to lose his job with cause for both:
1) Code of conduct violation
2) Stupidity

I also laugh at the ignorance of people who believe narratives about people being "muzzled" by their employers (ex. the Harper government "muzzling" scientists who must of course have inside knowledge on climate change). Any organization within even the slightest sense of HR awareness requires employees to acknowledge a Code of Conduct which usually includes non-tolerated behaviors such as:
-making any official statements about the company financial results, strategy or other policies unless fully vetted by the employer's communications function
-discussing any HR related activities with any party other than the company's HR dept, their union rep or a lawyer
-disclosing any proprietary information

If the Code of Conduct violation weren't bad enough, this person had the incredibly poor judgement to make statements through social media using traceable accounts.

Somewhat off-topic but I think the issue with scientist is when they are conducting public funded research the overall principle is public research should at the end of the day go through a international peer review and be published into a journal. That does not mean the publication is a statement of government policy. It is simply the results of a study.

I would agree the government of the day has every right to limit and control something that is published as defining a government policy or position. The same for any information that is protected under law. If the public paid for the research, the public should get to see it and preferably after it has passed through a peer review QA process. Keeping it muzzled simply means it has not benefited from peer review but is still accessible under a freedom of information request.

Private industry has no requirement for public disclosure under a freedom of information request because the public did not pay and own the work.

[SaskOttaLoo]

Originally Posted by Acajack

In a variant of this, I've long thought that both the English and French networks should subtitle all of their programming in the other official language. This does not preclude either from doing what you suggest, of course.

Subtitling is pretty cheap and easy these days.

I am realistic enough to admit that there won't be massive amount of viewers tuning into to the other solitude's programming on a regular basis, but at least it would open things up to the possibility of some programs getting a "buzz" about them, as you often have with Netflix series these days.

So instead of "hey guys, you gotta watch this Norwegian series on Netflix, it's awesome", you might hear "hey guys, you gotta watch this awesome Quebec series on SRC..."

At the moment even if some bilingual person in Toronto is really into a Quebec program, there is no real way to share the discovery with their entourage if those people aren't bilingual.

This is so so true. What low hanging fruit and a way to reduce the two solitudes. A personal example is that I really loved the french Canadian version of 19-2 (much much better than the english Canadian remake). So different than your average american cop show with excellent character development. Buy try as I might, including visiting a bunch of stores in Montreal, I could never find one with English subtitles that I could use to introduce the show to my friends and family. The show has a lot of joule that would be tough even for someone with decent French to we l understand. Netflix carried it for a while, but that was the only place I found it with subtitles.

[whatnext]

Anyone notice how sad The National has become? It is like 15 minutes of news followed by about 45 minutes of "xx groups grievance of the week" stories.

[thurmas]

I heard recently the National's ratings are now down to 350,000 viewers a night while CTV news is at 1.4 million a night. When Peter was host of the national they were doing 850,000 viewers a night. CBC English tv is just a venting platform for woke lesbians now it hates men with a passion and as a result their ratings are garbage and they don't seem to care as they know the Liberals will keep their funding up. Radio Canada on the other hand is a million times better and actually has strong informed hosts with quality journalism that delivers it in a professional calm dignified manner.

[Ducharme78]

The National's ratings probably also took a hit from the disastrous experiment with the multiple hosts from a couple years ago.

Although I personally find myself flipping over to Global a lot more now. I find CTV's on-air appearance dated. I've always preferred CBC but yes it does seem to be something of an identitarian echo chamber this past year. It seems like every newscast is Covid-Racism-Covid-Racism on repeat. Sure the pandemic is top billing, but yes the racial grievances in every other story have increasingly driven me away.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Ducharme78

The National's ratings probably also took a hit from the disastrous experiment with the multiple hosts from a couple years ago.

Although I personally find myself flipping over to Global a lot more now. I find CTV's on-air appearance dated. I've always preferred CBC but yes it does seem to be something of an identitarian echo chamber this past year. It seems like every newscast is Covid-Racism-Covid-Racism on repeat. Sure the pandemic is top billing, but yes the racial grievances in every other story have increasingly driven me away.

CBC dicks around with their format way too much. Not just for The National but for local newscasts too. The problem is that it always changes on a whim based on the federal budget or other political factors. For example, CBC used to dominate the local supper hour news slot in Winnipeg in the 80s... then cuts happened, the local news became a shadow of itself, and viewers drifted away. Even when more resources went into the show, the viewers didn't come back.

Same with The National. Anyone remember when they completely blew it up in the 90s and turned it into 'Prime Time News'? The viewers went away and it was never the same when they reverted to the old format. And then they kept messing around with it. Compare with CTV National News which has had the exact same format for as long as I can remember, which in my case is 30+ years.

Maybe I'm old and cranky but I'm convinced that the best format for The National was when it was divided into The National and The Journal. 21 minutes for all the daily news reporting you need to know, then the rest of the hour for documentaries, interviews, whatever else. It was the greatest. Peter Mansbridge would read you the news, and then after that you'd get a solid 24 minute Terence McKenna documentary on life in post-communist East Germany or something equally interesting.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by esquire

Maybe I'm old and cranky but I'm convinced that the best format for The National was when it was divided into The National and The Journal. 21 minutes for all the daily news reporting you need to know, then the rest of the hour for documentaries, interviews, whatever else. It was the greatest. Peter Mansbridge would read you the news, and then after that you'd get a solid 24 minute Terence McKenna documentary on life in post-communist East Germany or something equally interesting.

Amen to that.

It's been all downhill since, especially since Mansbridge has retired.

Right now the National is hard news for about 10% of the newscast followed by identity politics, victimology and woketarianism for the remaining 50 minutes. I therefore do not watch the National any more, but on the rare occasion I do tune in, I invariably feel depressed and riddled with white male guilt afterwards. I don't need that crap every night thrust upon my fragile ego and have thus tuned out.

I prefer CTV News both nationally and regionally, but I do still tune into the CBC regional newscast at 11 most evenings just because it provides a different take on regional events. I feel fully informed by watching both CBC and CTV regional news.

The National however is a lost cause, and I don't think it's ever, EVER coming back...……..

[MolsonExport]

The National began going downhill way back when they forced viewers to see Pamela Wallin alongside coanchor Peter Mansbridge. Man, back in the good old days, when it was "The National...with Peter Mansbridge....and on the Journal, with Barbara Frum..." it was the best newscast hour on the continent. And Wendy Mesley was really easy on the eyes back in those days.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by thurmas

I heard recently the National's ratings are now down to 350,000 viewers a night while CTV news is at 1.4 million a night. When Peter was host of the national they were doing 850,000 viewers a night. CBC English tv is just a venting platform for woke lesbians now it hates men with a passion and as a result their ratings are garbage and they don't seem to care as they know the Liberals will keep their funding up. Radio Canada on the other hand is a million times better and actually has strong informed hosts with quality journalism that delivers it in a professional calm dignified manner.

Radio-Canada has long been a holdout but it seems that it's getting nibbled at by the same disease. Not so much the news and public affairs (either TV or radio) which is still mostly hard-hitting and balanced but a lot of the "talk" programming (esp. on the radio) that focuses on society and culture is increasingly woke-infused as well.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

The National began going downhill way back when they forced viewers to see Pamela Wallin alongside coanchor Peter Mansbridge. Man, back in the good old days, when it was "The National...with Peter Mansbridge....and on the Journal, with Barbara Frum..." it was the best newscast hour on the continent. And Wendy Mesley was really easy on the eyes back in those days.

She is still pretty good looking at 65 IMO. (Close to 15 years older than me.)

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by esquire

Maybe I'm old and cranky but I'm convinced that the best format for The National was when it was divided into The National and The Journal. 21 minutes for all the daily news reporting you need to know, then the rest of the hour for documentaries, interviews, whatever else. It was the greatest. Peter Mansbridge would read you the news, and then after that you'd get a solid 24 minute Terence McKenna documentary on life in post-communist East Germany or something equally interesting.

That was on when I first started travelling the world, and being Acajack I'd always check out the equivalent programming everywhere I went, and I felt and still feel it was something pretty special that we had back then.

As Molson said, it was the best news and public affairs combo in North America, and dare I say it was "world-class" and comparable with the top-level of what was out there around the planet.

I have mentioned before that SRC had the same set-up with Le Téléjournal at 10 and Le Point (same concept as The Journal) coming on at 10:20.

Today we still have Le Téléjournal but they've always had a single anchor. They have a panel that takes up a lot of show time as well. Chantal Hébert is often on it. Last night Paul Wells from Maclean's was on it. Tasha Kheiriddin used to be a regular but she has moved on to other things.

I think The National-The Journal era played in a role in the (More) Worldy Canadians myth or stereotype that much of the planet had about us. Not because anyone around the world paid attention to the shows, but how it shaped the world-view and outlook of so many Canadians of multiple generations.

Sadly, I think we're a "dumber" Canada now when it comes to such things, and increasingly so. Which is ironic because we've never had access to so much information.

Before anyone gets excited, I think it's a global trend and not just us.

[MolsonExport]

^I concur. Yes, SRC had a good equivalent. I was a news junky during the eighties. Politicians were more articulate, and there was a lot of political things going on that affected the lives of average Canadians (Meech, Free Trade, etc.). Back then, in my mid-teens, I had a major crush on Wendy Mesley.
• Video Link

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Acajack

She is still pretty good looking at 65 IMO. (Close to 15 years older than me.)

She can't hold a candle to Lisa LaFlamme (pun intended).

[MolsonExport]

that's sort of Measly (pun intended)