Parsimonious Punditry

Only one of the four people here knows exactly what’s wrong with the CBC.
And he’s not talking.

8 comments:

  1. Paul Sham
    Posted March 22, 2009 at 1:02 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    This debate is too big to be had in an 8 minute television segment. But as Chantal mentions, there is no debate, just a slow strangling of the CBC by the Conservative government.

    I like what Alan said about public broadcasting creating better citizen. But, the dichotomy lies between either creating programming that as many people will watch, or trying to justify a public broadcaster that does not appeal to a wide range of people. I know a lot of people who complain that the CBC does not have anything for them. If they move even farther away from “popular” programming, will that push more people away from CBC and, therefore, create a public broadcaster that less people will watch/listen? This will mean less ability to create better citizens, right? I’d love for everybody to want to be a better citizen, but it’s still got to be programming that will appeal to people.

    The CBC is having an identity crisis, and I really hope it comes out of it stronger and more relevant.

  2. Anonymous
    Posted March 21, 2009 at 7:45 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Not a single mention of CBC Radio One, Two and Three?

  3. Anonymous
    Posted March 21, 2009 at 6:14 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    I was in TV 55 the night this “At Issue” was broadcast”, The one who did not comment did have this to say off camera after “At Issue” was finished, “They Get 1 Billion Dollars For God Sake”

  4. Anonymous
    Posted March 21, 2009 at 11:41 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Dosen’t Following the American example,lead to the same destination?

  5. Anonymous
    Posted March 21, 2009 at 10:30 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Either way….the problems at the CBC stem from top level executives being treated like top level executives of Fortune 500 companies!! This is public broadcasting people!! I think we are all getting a little “TOO HOLLYWOOD”….both CEO-wise and talent-wise (hint, hint!!)

  6. Anonymous
    Posted March 21, 2009 at 6:09 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Coyne was just being intellectually lazy, pulling his tired ideological solution out of his pants. Economies of scale prohibited pay services like HBO existing in Canada. Even in the States, with easy access to global markets it’s tough for them. In the end they couldn’t afford to make “Deadwood”. Coyne should stick to subjects about which he knows something.

  7. Anonymous
    Posted March 21, 2009 at 4:36 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    You are so correct Alan!! He knows and that’s why he’s not talking!!

  8. Amanda
    Posted March 20, 2009 at 11:52 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Chantal Hébert is the best thing going on The National. Even if she crossed the picket line during the Quebec/Moncton technicians strike.

    It’s nice to see Andrew Coyne is a clueless dick as usual.


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