CMG doesn’t care about blogging people

I guess it’s great to have em around when you need em.

Pat em on the head, and reprint what they write ad infinitum. Sic em on management and the company they work for, and marvel at their passion.

Let em do a bit of your dirty work and legwork. Under their real names.

Also nice to have em for your Lockout Archive Project, especially when that stuff is safely part of history.

But it’s a funny thing about bloggers. They don’t like to be told what to write.

Or what to erase.

Keep em up, guys, no matter what they encourage.


  1. Swiv
    Posted October 10, 2005 at 7:48 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece


    It’s a bit of a leap from “encourage to remove” to “CMG does’t care.” Events subsequent to the agreement – including the archive project – don’t bear out what you’re saying. The time for being inflammatory is past.

  2. Anonymous
    Posted October 6, 2005 at 9:07 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    “Encourage” is the operative word in the clause. By definition it implies the person being encouraged retains the right to make his/her decision. You can encourage me to stop smoking, jump off a cliff or be nicer to my dog, but I am under no obligation to do any of those things. It seems clear to me CMG quite deliberatly chose to go with that verb: not force, demand or insist, but encourage. Read between the lines people.

  3. Cin
    Posted October 6, 2005 at 8:14 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    My blog was a personal one, not a journalistic one. For those two months, I was a picket, not a reporter, and my blog relflected that.

    I’m glad I blogged, and I’m glad I kept it personal.

    I still beleive the personal is political, even though it sounds naive. And I still believe I wasn’t covering a story, I was part of the story.

    My blog stays up until Monday night, as I always planned to take it down before going in the building. Hey, call it a goodwill gesture to local management.

    But I’m sending it into the archive.

    Tod is right. Erasing history is stupid and defeatist.

  4. John Gushue
    Posted October 6, 2005 at 5:04 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    I see some rush to judgment in all this – from Ouimet herself, and definitely from some of the comments posted above.
    For what it’s worth, Dan Oldfield of the CMG answered questions about the policy for On The Line. The story is at:

    Among Oldfield’s points:
    “I certainly understand and appreciate that people are just plain angry. We haven’t decided how we might go about encouraging such action. We hope that once people return to work they will gain another perspective and can decide on their own what is the best course of action.”

    It also seems likely that On The Line itself might have some trimming done for archival purposes:
    “It seems that one website that could see content removed, however, is a planned online archive of material that appeared on CBC On The Line.”

    As for me, I’m leaving everything I posted about the lockout online. I seldom expressed my own opinions, preferring instead to gather information from as many sources as I could. Yes, I linked to material that could be perceived as “negative,” although I would like to point out that some of the strongest material that I referenced was published in newspapers, not in blogs.

  5. Anonymous
    Posted October 6, 2005 at 2:35 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Desperate AND dumb.

  6. Anonymous
    Posted October 6, 2005 at 9:44 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Me thinks that some CMG folks just said “shove it”.

  7. Anonymous
    Posted October 6, 2005 at 9:41 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Just pulled this off

    In the weeks ahead we will be revamping the Toronto website with a swanky more user friendly format. Let me assure you that NONE of our content will disappear. You will still be able to view archived issues of our lockout newsletter On the Line.

    Guess that settles that!

  8. Anonymous
    Posted October 6, 2005 at 9:05 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    All the replies are correct Ouimet. The CMG doesn’t give a crap if people keep their blogs up. That’s why they didn’t make it mandatory to an agreement. It’s like when you ask someone to ask someone else a favour and they say “well, i’ll ASK”. It means you don’t have a chance in hell of getting that favour. I’m not sure if you actually believed that line (in which case you must be a manager in a non-journalistic department) or whether you’re schilling for management. Either way, the blogosphere will continue. Encouragement or no encouragement. The only warning I have for people is that they might want to check out copy right laws on using the CBC pizza logo, altered or real. Cause I can see these bastards trying to legally shut people down for copyright infringement. They’re kind of shitty like that.

  9. Anonymous
    Posted October 6, 2005 at 7:41 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Don’t be so quick to say that CMG sold out the bloggers and podcasters. The paragraph says that CMG will “encourage” CMG members to remove “negative references” as much as possible . . . consistent with . . . accepted journalistic standards.

    It’s not possible to “remove” what’s been published on the Internet. And it’s not possible to grab back the podcasts. More important, rewriting history is not consistent with CBC and CMG “accepted journalistic standards.”

  10. Anonymous
    Posted October 6, 2005 at 7:34 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    C’mon Ouimet,
    Right from the beginning I’ve heard managers say “both sides have to compromise” — So CMG makes a compromise to end this thing and now they are the bad guys?

    I’m sure if management knew who you were your job and your blog would be erased. Unless this is part of some crazy strategy (I’d believe anything at this point).

    The CMG negotiators did stick up for us on 100s of contract provisions but we had to compromise on lots of things in order to end this unnecessary lockout against a corporation that’s been taking things away from its employees for well over a decade now.

    They’ve only been asked to encourage members to take down these sites — no more than encourage.

    If CBC is so concerned about what’s on the web, maybe they should stop worrying about blogs and be more concerned with the fact that has had the “CP Online” logo on its front page for two months.

  11. Ouimet
    Posted October 6, 2005 at 7:07 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    “You’re saying that CMG wants the blogging shut down?”

    No. I’m saying management wants your (but not mine?) blogs erased, and that the CMG didn’t stick up for you and tell them to shove it.

  12. Justin Beach
    Posted October 6, 2005 at 6:18 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Well, obviously I’m not taking anything down, in fact I’m building on it ( for anyone who doesn’t already know). As for “negative references and material related to the work stoppage” – all in all I think I was fairly positive about the CBC. I was, and am, negative about senior managment (but not middle management – that would be counterproductive and misplaced in most cases), I was critical of the funding model and pointed out some things that could be done better, but very positive about the idea behind and mission of the CBC so I see no reason to delete a single word.


  13. Anonymous
    Posted October 6, 2005 at 5:23 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    You’re a rotten old sod, aren’t yah. Who are you anyway, Fred Buttocks?

  14. Me
    Posted October 6, 2005 at 4:57 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Don’t be a fucking idiot.

  15. Anonymous
    Posted October 6, 2005 at 4:32 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Wow. That was just pathetic. You’re saying that CMG wants the blogging shut down? Are you desperate or dumb?

  16. Anonymous
    Posted October 5, 2005 at 10:13 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Poor Ouimet,

    You are a tormented soul. Driven by a sympathetic heart to make contact with the unfortunate 5,500 locked out colleagues. Yet seduced by the brainwashed, priviledged world of CBC management. I suspect – judging by your blogs that your eyes are wide open and they see with piercing clarity the atrophy and rot that contaminate the once-inspriring nature of the CBC. But somehow you lack the courage to go forth and make some noise. The courage to change things in your own way – even if those changes only affect a tiny portion of the Toronto Broadcast Centre or wherever it is you actually reside. Take courage. Decide that you WILL make a difference. Try to inspire your underlings to take pride in their jobs. Welcome them back. Inspire the old timers to harken back to a day when shit actually mattered. Look beyond the “management favourites” when hiring for new positions. Think outside the box. Then we’ll respect you.

  17. Aigle De Nuit
    Posted October 5, 2005 at 9:35 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    You betcha I read it…and asked the available CMG People.

    Just like the radioactive hat…”from my cold dead hands”

    there is no definition of negative in the BTW protocol (or terms/definition of encouragement)…only 100 pages into the agreement, but haven’t seen anything yet.

    I’ve rarely listened to “shut up Mitch” before.._Most_ CBC Mgm’t won’t get me to listem ;)

    Sorry.( Not like I’m THAT evil.)

    Still here…”not gonna cave”

  18. Anonymous
    Posted October 5, 2005 at 4:39 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Oh Ouimet,

    You certainly are back on the management team or you simply don’t understand how these things work.

    The return to work protocol is as much of a negotiation as the rest of the contract.

    The real story, just so people are not thrown off by your inaccurate headline, is that I’m sure this request was made by CBC management.

    For those who are confused here is the passage from the return to work protocol that Ouimet is talking about:

    “CBC and CMG agree to the terms and conditions set out below…”

    “Upon ratification, CMG will encourage CMG members to remove, as much as is possible, negative references and material related to the work stoppage from web sites, podcasts, blogging etc. consistent with the CBC and CMG accepted journalistic standards.”

    The CMG probably agreed to this request in the usual spirit of compromise to get us back inside. I know damn well it wasn’t their idea!

    Don’t blame this on CMG.

    Please Ouimet, do not try and turn CMG members against the CMG negotiating team now.

    They do care about blogging people and every single one of their members. They busted their ass to get us a fair deal.

    Your team on the other hand locked us out for two months.

    Quit being a sore loser by badmouthing the winner.

    WE WON.

    Accept it.

    Take your ball and go home.

Post a Comment

Your email is never shared.

Upload Files

You can include images or files in your comment by selecting them below. Once you select a file, it will be uploaded and a link to it added to your comment. You can upload as many images or files as you like and they will all be added to your comment.

Write for us