Bozzo vs. Ryan

Who actually reads the shitty TV guide they give you for free in the newspaper?

John Bozzo, apparently.

Even worse, who actually writes the shitty TV guide they give you for free in the newspaper?

Why, Andrew Ryan, of course.

Ryan writes, Bozzo disagrees.

John, it’s not even worth taking the time to answer. And by taking him seriously you only encourage him. Did you read the article? He’s not even trying.

Just ignore him and he’ll go away.

13 comments:

  1. Allan
    Posted August 25, 2006 at 9:16 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Since when was a television newspaper columnist worth paying attention to any more than the average viewer/listener?
    What school did they attend that made them “experts”?
    Is there a lower rung on the journalism ladder?
    TV columnists are the biggest joke in any daily edition.
    I used to think that Doyle was amusing, until he went full-time, and then it became too often about himself, his family and Irish roots. Who asked?
    None of these bottom-feeders have given Canada a media column of any substance. Do you think you couldn’t be a TV columnist – starting tomorrow?
    Their contribution is so silly, and worthless. Make it your next career, Ouimet.

    The CBC is in danger? The CBC is entirely the creation and product of a number of people you can count on one hand?
    Take a step back and try to see the forest.
    The only threat is the same faced by all current media in light of our new addiction to all things on-line, and the growing demand for frankness and relevance.
    Andrew Ryan wiil never concede publicly that his cage has been rattled, but the more serious obstacle to progress is the ego and competence of the person who hired him.

  2. Anonymous
    Posted August 25, 2006 at 4:45 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    There was little lockout programing that could match the banality of “Freestyle”.

  3. Anonymous
    Posted August 24, 2006 at 9:08 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Dwight: pt1 and pt2

  4. Dwight
    Posted August 24, 2006 at 7:46 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Amen on the accusations against Prairie Giant themselves constituting a load of horsehockey. That mini-series was a perfect exercise in docudrama in action, and the ratings help confirm the fact. Producing, airing and then retailing it were and are the right things to do with this project.

    Ryan’s wrong on this one.

    Now when do we get to see an unexpurgated rerun of Prairie Giant? I want no selective editing to satisfy any of the complaints, please.

  5. Effete Lad
    Posted August 24, 2006 at 5:55 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Isn’t “effete” a code word for “gay?”

  6. Ouimet
    Posted August 24, 2006 at 5:35 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    I can usually tell the bashing from the concern, but I get your point.

    And make no mistake, these are not rosy times for the CBC.

    But last year at this time, the Canadian citizen was being ripped off, pure and simple. The programming was so shoddy many of us in the building wondered if we were witnessing the end of the CBC altogether, if the lockout might destroy it.

  7. Anonymous
    Posted August 24, 2006 at 4:51 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Not for the salaried, for the citizen, for the Canadians that imagine the institution vital to the national identity. Sometimes I worry that what is mistaken to be “CBC bashing”, coming from those ideologically opposed to the very idea of the Corp. is, in fact, concern voiced by supporters. I, for one, want the CBC to thrive. That ain’t happening under the current watch. The people at the helm today are pouring buckets of gas on the fire. The evidence is irrefutable. Turn on your radio any weekday afternoon.

  8. Ouimet
    Posted August 24, 2006 at 4:37 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    A year ago today?

  9. Anonymous
    Posted August 24, 2006 at 4:17 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    When, pray tell, has it been bleaker? Not being flip here, real question.

  10. Ouimet
    Posted August 24, 2006 at 3:37 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    On any given day the newspapers in this country print boring, misinformed, sniping, and sometimes incorrect articles about the CBC. I hold the Globe to a higher standard because when it’s good it’s brilliant, and also because I pay for it. My choice, I know.

    Ryan’s crimes are those mentioned above, plus his entire oeuvre at teh Globe consists of repetitive CBC-bashing.

    But let’s take a look at the article in question:

    “As with the weather, everyone has an opinion on the CBC, yet nobody does anything about it.”
    False.

    “There’s no question our publicly-funded broadcaster has seen its ups and downs over 70-odd years of existence — but rarely has the CBC’s future seemed so bleak.”
    False.

    “CBC simply couldn’t catch a break last season. The Tommy Douglas miniseries was a bust.”
    False.

    Etc.

  11. Johnny Happypants
    Posted August 24, 2006 at 3:06 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    There is one error in the Ryan piece: He describes At the Hotel as “clever, though effete”. It was really unwatchable.

  12. Anonymous
    Posted August 24, 2006 at 11:18 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    I cannot find any errors in the Ryan piece. People are going to have to start facing the uncomfortable fact that, under current management, CBC television will not survive.

  13. Anonymous
    Posted August 24, 2006 at 10:44 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    It’s semi-baffling!


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