Why we leak

I want to take a minute to talk about some ‘dispiriting’ survey results that were leaked last night.

First off I take full responsibility for the leak, as I was the one who did the leaking. Or rather, someone gave them to me, and I put them online. Why did I do it? Quite frankly, I like leaking shit on Scribd. Here’s some others I did.

Earlier today Inside the CBC talked to Cathy Perry, the Executive Producer of CBC News and a woman who helped make the HUB.

Perry said that the management team within news is reacting to the survey. She said they had a conference call about it, and they’re trying to make some immediate changes to address the concerns of the radio reporters. She said there are ongoing discussions about other changes.

Word is also leaking out about that conference call. One reporter described it as “like throwing a snowball into hell.” Is that fair? Not for me to decide. That’s partly the point of all this.

Because if CBC reporters felt like they were not being listened to before, they sure are now.

Perry said that she thought it was unfortunate that the survey ended up online. “I think we just hurt each other here,” by doing that, she said. “We should be able to have these debates and share opinions without having it go out on the internet.”

Jennifer McGuire, the head of CBC News sent out a memo today condemning me and “unconscionable” comments made on the blog. She says that by bringing these things out into the open, we’re causing irreparable damage to the CBC.

Cathy Perry and Jennifer McGuire are trying to make me feel guilty for telling people what’s going on. They’re also blaming their journalists for telling the truth. And they’re trying to make you feel guilty for reading it. They think we should keep these things in the family, you see. Keep them all behind closed doors.

But I’m not having any of it. And neither should you.

I’m stunned that the people running Canada’s public broadcaster would prefer to keep discussions concerning the public’s interest – not to mention money – locked away in a boardroom in Toronto. And who’s allowed to dial in? Me? You? Who decides who? Richard Stursberg, of course.

We leaked these documents because we thought it would spark a discussion worth having. We leaked these documents because we thought people should read them, and because we wanted to hear what you thought about them. And we wanted Cathy Perry and Jennifer McGuire to hear what you thought, too.

We leaked these documents because going down the same paths will lead us straight to the same places. And we leaked these documents because we love the CBC and we believe in it.

The general idea on this web site is that discussion is good. So let’s talk.

That’s all there is to it, Jennifer.

177 comments:

  1. Anonymous
    Posted May 3, 2010 at 6:59 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    “Great fun!” indeed, but could we perhaps create a few basic Teamakers streams to allow everyone to focus on their particular concern:

    -one for people who want there to be a CBC (or some form of publicly-supported, not-for-profit media), but better;

    -one for people who don’t want a CBC (or some form of publicly-supported, not-for-profit media) at all;

    -and one for those obsessed, pro or con, by Jian and/or George and/or their dates.

  2. Posted May 3, 2010 at 2:40 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Great fun!

    Ouimet, you have created the forum for a real discussion of the CBC. It helps to have Kate.

    Whether you love the CBC – or bits of it – or hate it, the fact is that talking seriously about its continued existence is important. Thanks for giving us a place to have that conversation.

  3. Anonymous
    Posted April 30, 2010 at 11:20 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Marshall McLoogan reference to “fake” bloggers implies that such creatures are somehow inferior to, I suppose, the “real” thing. Given that both claim anonymity on this site (self included) the distinction is, at best, moot.

    As for CBC Communications’ alleged failures: since most of the Mother Corp’s spin cycle was long ago contracted out to a private sector braintrust, its faults can hardly be blamed on an internal bureaucracy that barely exists. Truth is, the dearly departed in-house publicists were about 1000 times better at their jobs than the Media Profile crew of grammar-challenged blondes-in-black-dresses.

    Come on TeaMakers: there are so many deserving targets. Why so focussed on those who don’t much matter?

    • Marshall McLoogan
      Posted May 1, 2010 at 1:15 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      Nice fucking pedantry on you there, anonymous. You from the Annex by chance?

      All’s I asked is – is CBC communications using fake bloggers to defend CBC on this site? Because some of the defenses of late seem pretty fucking fake.

      You kind of sound like Joe Clard

      • Anonymous
        Posted May 1, 2010 at 11:38 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        Don’t live in an Annex.

        Don’t think CBC Communications would waste bloggers, fake or otherwise, on this little-known site.

        Who’s Joe Clard?

  4. Anonymous
    Posted April 30, 2010 at 7:09 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    ALLAN CHECK: He argues “podcast success is meaningless too, no more a measure of achievement than handing out free baseball caps with the CBC logo on it.”

    ————————–

    CBC isn’t in the ugly headgear business. It’s in the public service of delivering media productions of various sorts to the Canadians who pay for it.

    Podcasting — audio & video — is simply a new(ish) means of making ‘radio’ or ‘TV’ shows available so that people can listen/watch at their convenience.

    Some CBC/SRC podcasts are downloaded more than others, but, overall, the technology is an additional, hugely successful system for getting programs to people who would otherwise miss the 9pm terrestrial broadcast of Ideas, or Peter’s nightly wander around The National set.

    Allan, do come join us here in 21st century (where 8-cents-a-day buys more than ever before)!

    • Marshall McLoogan
      Posted April 30, 2010 at 9:54 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      Can we now add planting fake bloggers to CBC Communications’ list of failures?

    • Allanjoined April 10, 2009
      Posted April 30, 2010 at 11:53 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      Waiter, CHECK please. Mr. Strursberg will take care of it from his $80,000 annual expense account:

      Podcasting.
      Where have I heard that before?
      Isn’t that the thing Tod Maffin invented?
      And just can’t seem to stick with because it’s such a waste of time?

      Of course our anonymous apologist for the CBC misses the point of my remark and chooses to pretend that the issue is to podcast or not, and then talks down to me with that smug attitude so many long-term CBC’ers become afflicted with.
      I happen to live in an iPhone world (soon, hopefully an iPad world). It’s ridiculously expensive, and two newer models have already come out since I bought it.
      And I’m grateful to the CBC that it’s a part of that world, and got there surprisingly quickly.
      And you know what? If you take content that’s crap, and digitize it, it’s still crap.
      But that’s not the point I was making.

      Tod Maffin did lots of podcasts, all of which have disappeared.
      What Tod did was take the radio bits he was being paid to do for the CBC, and post them on a web page.
      Anyone can do it, and that’s not really podcasting.
      Nor is taking productions made for and used by commercial broadcasters the thing that was originally envisioned when Apple came up with both the platform and the idea.
      The idea was to let joe average add his voice to that of the mass media.
      And not really simply to let mass media dominate the field, as has become the case.
      Today, podcasts appearing on iTunes are approved and virtually contracted by Apple.
      So much for revolution.

      But let’s move over to that other incredible success story for which you claim the CBC deserves applause.
      Satellite.
      We’re talking Sirius, right?
      ” … satellite subscriptions are just three of the many other delivery systems which must be included in any calculation of CBC/SRCs success.”
      Satellite.
      Let me see if I can paraphrase your Gillianiesque trumpeting of CBC satellite success …
      Howard Stern brought a lot of new subscribers to Sirius radio, though his program was initially not available to Canadians.
      Millions of people in the US bought the service just to hear his show. All other channels were the gravy. Howard was the meat.
      (or potatoes if you’re vegetarian).
      But you, (Geurgis staff member using your maiden name to post a letter to the editor), contend that the CBC service, in all its Radio 1,2 and 3 glory, actually propelled people to buy and install a subscription service in their cars and homes.
      That’s a curious if not outright absurd notion.
      Are we to believe that people would rather pay $12 a month to hear the CBC on satellite radio than turn on their old, but still functioning, conventional radio receivers and listen to it for free – anywhere!?

      You contend that podcast downloads “must be included in any calculation of CBC/SRCs success.”You
      So you say.
      And I’ve heard that BS from others at the CBC as well.
      It means nothing. There’s no success about it that could EVER be credited to the CBC.
      None.
      I’ve heard George say, thinking that we should be impressed, The Hour was the 3rd most popular podcast on iTunes.
      I cannot, to this day, understand why my own national television show where I interview really cool, really famous people, and then have an intern post them, isn’t beating George.
      Oh, that’s right, I don’t have a national television show that Hulk Hogan wants to use to sell his daughter’s disco CD that Hogan paid a million dollars to have produced and which she’s already given up on.
      And neither does anyone else in this country.
      Advantage – Strombo!
      I’ve heard where “Q” has finally reached 10 million hits on YouTube with that illegal CBC channel, Bold.
      And noticed that Lady Ga Ga has 200 million hits with one video.
      What does it all mean?
      Not a lot. Not any more.
      You need to take several factors into account when giving credit for the number of hits and downloads of a broadcast.
      If I’ve still not conveyed to you how meaningless your self-congratulatory factoids are, let me pose one question to you.
      Not to get an answer, but to offer you something upon which to meditate. Deeply.

      (and note, I haven’t even touched on your inference that Denise Donlon and current CBC management should be taking credit for As It Happens and Quarks!)

      Over the course of a few days in April, I noticed this:

      The Hour – guest – Eddie Izzard

      The Current – guest – Eddie Izzard

      Q – guest – Eddie Izzard

      Based on that, my question is not who, at the CBC, do you think will get the highest number of downloads?
      My question is, what difference does it make?

      • Anonymous
        Posted May 1, 2010 at 11:36 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        Allan accuses me of suggesting “that Denise Donlon and current CBC management should be taking credit for As It Happens and Quarks!”.

        Never said it, never thought it. My point was merely that the CBC-bashing on this blog tends to tar the Corporation’s entire output with the same brush.

        Also, never said CBC was the sole reason for Sirius’ success (selling about 2-to-1 over XM Canada), but many retailers reported that customers wanted the satellite service “with CBC on it”. Maybe they were just embarassed to ask for the one “with Stern on it”?

        One other thing: the hostile reaction to the notion that 90% or more of Canadians regularly use one or more CBC/SRC services. Guess it’s because the stat tends to contradict Allan & Company’s depressingly negative narrative.

        For the record, I think there’s a lot wrong with the current regime — Radio 2, overexposure of Jian Ghomeshi (see today’s Toronto Star HOMES section), overuse of consultants and focus groups — but the enterprise isn’t the total screwup many TeaMakers seem to think.

        • Posted May 6, 2010 at 11:50 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

          “but the enterprise isnt the total screwup many TeaMakers seem to think.”

          Then it should do just fine as a privately financed broadcaster.

  5. Allanjoined April 10, 2009
    Posted April 30, 2010 at 2:41 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    This is the bullshit that the CBC peddles.
    The talking points that float around in memos and pep rallies at the CBC.
    Does anyone think that someone not employed with the CBC is going to drag out this chesnut:
    “The Corporations overall audience is actually quite amazing: by one estimate 90%+ of Canadians use at least one of its services at least once a week.”
    That obscure factoid is truly a reach, to justify the CBC.
    And really, what does that mean?
    Nothing.

    And podcast success is meaningless too, no more a measure of achievement than handing out free baseball caps with the CBC logo on it.

    8 cents a day helps pay for the flack who wrote the stuff above.
    “We want to hear from you” says the CBC. “Tell us what you think.”
    Except for the blind, trollish CBC-haters. They can piss off.

    • Unanimous
      Posted April 30, 2010 at 7:29 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      They’re probably getting that “90%+ of Canadians use at least one of its services at least once a week. crap by adding up their total viewer, listener and website traffic numbers per week. Good thing that it still adds up to less than the total population, otherwise they’d be saying something really stupid like “115% of Canadians use at least one of its services at least once a week.

  6. Anonymous
    Posted April 29, 2010 at 7:27 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Allan says: Popularity is not the measure of quality, or character or ethics. The CBC is the faint hope for something better, and not just something that is popular.

    ===

    PERCEPTION CHECK: Nor is popularity restricted to cheap crap. As it Happens, The Current, Sunday Edition, Quirks & Quarks, Ideas and most other Radio One national shows are well-endowed with quality, character and ethics.

    And many of the local shows are equally worthwhile, especially considering their meagre resources. Even Q (however some bloggers feel about its host) has its moments, as do a few of the stronger Radio 2 programs: The Signal, Bachman, Inside the Music and elements of Drive come to mind.

    Likewise, some of CBC TV’s programming is worthy of the taxpayers’ investment and–let’s be frank–wouldn’t get made without it. Sure, some shows don’t work so well, but that’s true for private networks as well.

    One other thing: conventional off-air ratings are only one metric of contemporary media success. Podcast downloads, live-stream hits and satellite subscriptions are just three of the many other delivery systems which must be included in any calculation of CBC/SRC’s success. And they’re going gangbusters.

    The Corporation’s overall audience is actually quite amazing: by one estimate 90%+ of Canadians use at least one of its services at least once a week.

    Mother Corp has her faults for sure, but the trollish CBC-haters who lurk about on this site (mostly trashing Jian Ghomeshi and Light) seem completely blind to her virtues.

    8-cents-a-day? I’ll cheerfully refund it myself if they’d just piss off.

    • Posted April 30, 2010 at 1:36 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      “CBC TVs programming is worthy of the taxpayers investment andlets be frankwouldnt get made without it”
      =================================
      How can something “worthy” “not get made without it”? If something is “worthy” it should be able to stand on its own merit and be able to generate the funds to pull it off. That’s the only genuine test of worthiness there is.

      • Anonymous
        Posted May 1, 2010 at 10:16 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        Louise is apparently of the school that knows the price of everything, but the value of nothing. By her measure, all roads should be toll roads and only the children of the rich should be educated.

        And, for the record, what I actually said was that SOME of CBC-TV’s programming is worthy of the taxpayers’ investment.

  7. Allanjoined April 10, 2009
    Posted April 29, 2010 at 12:24 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    REALITY CHECK: Popularity is not the measure of quality, or character or ethics.

    The CBC is the faint hope for something better, and not just something that is popular.

    • cbc ottawa
      Posted April 29, 2010 at 2:41 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      True Alan true! All the nay sayers and haters who say the CBC should pay it’s own way should remeber this. Popularity is not to be confused with quality; McDonalds, gambling and pornaography are all very, very, popular.

  8. Anonymous
    Posted April 29, 2010 at 8:11 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    FACT CHECK: CBC Radio One has never before been so popular; in fact it’s the leading radio station in most markets and its mornings shows are #1 in several and #2 in most others.
    CBC TV is also achieving historically high ratings for many of its shows, no small task in the modern multi-channel universe.
    And SRC radio and TV continue to succeed big time among francophones.
    So, much of the overall griping that characterizes the “debate” on this blog is based on faulty information.
    However, it is true that the new National does seem to be shedding viewers and that the new Radio 2 is an abject failure.
    Perhaps its time to replace the generic Teamakers bitchery with a more focussed look at what those two projects have in common. Or, rather, who they have in common.

    • cbc ottawa
      Posted April 29, 2010 at 9:37 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      Wow! A voice of reason!

    • Anonymous
      Posted April 29, 2010 at 12:57 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      j.e.n.n.i.f.e.r m.c.g.u.i.r.e

      bulldozer of both services.

    • anon
      Posted April 29, 2010 at 2:36 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      All tv numbers look higher this year because of a new measuring system. Dragons Den and Heartland are genuine numbers successes but the rest of schedule is performing much as it did before and worse. You bought the spin.

      Are the total numbers up for radio or its position? What does Q draw on an average day … and not those cumulative numbers … the average number of listeners at any point in the show?

  9. Posted April 28, 2010 at 1:33 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Perhaps we’re seeing here a consequence of university liberal arts degree coupled with a Ryerson journalism shingle. Deadly toxic, that combination.

    The medium is NOT the message, people. Grade D productions are Grade D productions whether they are televised over the boob tube or over the computer screen. I think I’m going to write a letter to some MPs and Senators and make some suggestions. Now would be the time, considering the announcement in the House demanding an investigation of the relationship between Graves, the Liberal Party and the CBC. You can check out my blog post if you want to know roughly what I’m going to say.

  10. Posted April 27, 2010 at 9:03 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Stursberg may as well be working for Kate McMillan. He’s driven the CBC into the ground with one wretched, bone-headed decision after another, including the lockout.

    For me, CBC has always been radio. CBC-TV has never been anything special. But deep-sixing Barbara Budd is the last straw. May as well privatize ’em. Precious little difference now between MotherCorp and ugly radio anyhow. Why do I get the idea this was planned?

    PS: I was at Carleton with Stursberg. The stories I could tell.

    • cbc ottawa
      Posted April 28, 2010 at 11:45 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      TV strapped Radio to it’s leg! Kill TV (which almost nobody cares about ) and you’ll have to kill Radio too…

  11. Posted April 27, 2010 at 7:52 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Ouimet, this is all pretty simple. Nobody is watching CBC. You guys who work there are the only ones who care what’s on CBC TV. In fact the only people in Canada other than employees who care a damn about the CBC are the “legion of losers”, the “not exactly a preferred demographic”.

    We care because we’re pissed we have to pay money for a TV operation no one watches.

    That is not a good position for you boys and girls to be in. Assuming audiences continue to erode, and there is nobody out there betting they won’t, I would guess that the Mother Corp is getting -at least- a major downsizing in the next five or so years. By major I mean being slashed down to something on the order of CTV or CITY-TV operating budgets.

    It doesn’t take an MBA to read these tea leaves. You’ve got computers in every home playing movies and shows in hi-def downloaded off the web, to the point where video stores are closing in every town. You’ve got 2,000 plus downloaded songs on every kid’s ipod playing in shuffle mode, to the point where the only music outfit making decent money these days is ITunes. Coming on-line in the next ten years is fiber-to-the-home, which will make the changes to date look like nothing.

    If the CBC wants to survive, you people need to find 1) a paying audience and 2) something worth showing them, something they want to pay for.

    Rush Limbaugh and Fox News are making money right now, they have a paying audience. Maybe you should look at what they are doing and try it. Which would of course mean giving up your hate of everything that isn’t Liberal Party of Canada approved.

    Or, you could retrain I suppose. I hear they’re looking for welders in Ft. McMurray. Its kinda cold, but the money is good.

    • Not PoonGirl
      Posted April 27, 2010 at 8:01 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      Aren’t we a paying audience ? The problem is we don’t have a choice in the matter.

    • Lynne McDonald
      Posted April 27, 2010 at 9:52 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      I hate to break it to you Phantom but Ouimet left CBC ages ago.

      I don’t want to blow Ouimie’s cover. Let’s just say there are some Wild Rose Alliance MLAs who are *very happy with their new airbrush portraits!

  12. NoMoreCBC a.k.a ldd
    Posted April 27, 2010 at 4:41 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Well said Jay, well said.

    For all the bemoaning they’ve done in the past to respect women then they trun and do this …
    What’s left to say?

  13. grok
    Posted April 27, 2010 at 2:46 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    I haven’t watched CBC for years now, nor listen to CBC radio. The anti-American, anti-Conservative, anti-Christianity prejudice was overwhelming in everything they did. I used to listen to CBC radio all the time about 20 years back, it was on all weekend long. But they got what they wanted, an entirely ‘progressive’ audience. I would be fine with that, except I’m paying for a network which doesn’t just not serve me but actively promotes AGAINST me.

    God, I pray that Harper appoints a conservative head to the CBC (who would instantly be labelled Extreme Right Wing NeoCon Christian by CBC News).

    • grok watch
      Posted April 27, 2010 at 5:57 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      grok, louise et al: you guys are like seagulls on rotting fish-you all seem to mysteriously show up at the same place. Time now for you to disperse to shit somewhere elese.

      • Posted April 28, 2010 at 1:24 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        “…on rotting fish”

        Yup. You got that right. I guess there’s a few functioning brain cells still there, afterall.

        “…you all seem to mysteriously show up at the same place.”

        The magic of Small Dead Animals and new media. Nothing mysterious about it, sweetie. Kate has thousands of readers on any given post. I’m sure her American readers are fascinated to watch the death throes of the Canadian left on display wherever Kate sends the troops. Seems a few more brain cells might really help you to figure things out, but alas…

  14. Kate McMillan
    Posted April 27, 2010 at 2:31 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    I win!

  15. Posted April 27, 2010 at 1:58 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Dear Lord you people really are dim. You get an avalanche of traffic but are so shocked at what that traffic is telling you that you cleverly redirect to a booby shot.

    Everything anyone needs to know about the CBC and the idiots who run/work for it is capture in that one, juvenile, bit of idiocy.

  16. Ouimetjoined April 10, 2009
    Posted April 27, 2010 at 12:17 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    These Small Dead Animal types are so tightly wound, I figured they needed a little levity. Not to mention girlfriends.

    If you go to http://www.smalldeadanimals.com and click a link to The Tea Makers, you’ll see what I mean.

    Be careful, it’s not totally safe for work.

    • Allanjoined April 10, 2009
      Posted April 27, 2010 at 12:31 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      link under “I Have Seen The Asteroid …
      brilliant

    • Al the Fish
      Posted April 27, 2010 at 4:42 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      No thanks for the mammary.

      The boobs in the picture you linked appear to be as phoney as the claim of CBC’s impartiality.

  17. Posted April 27, 2010 at 1:25 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    I fear, Ouimet, that the natives are restless. Crappy product, crappy ratings, tons of money, voices from the Liberal enclaves: not a winning formula.

    The CBC has a few years left in its present irrelevant format. It can still piss off a few more people with lousy programming changes and appeals to the “youth market” (and, here’s a hint, the youth don’t listen to radio or watch TV (except sports)).

    It is little wonder CBC reporter morale is low – they know nothing and have long since ceased to matter.

    It’s endgame time. Privatize the thing? Set it up as NPR North? Or simply turn out the lights when the last listener or viewer in the enclave of Toronto tunes out for the last time?

    Sending hero-memos and having another couple of dozen focus groups is not going to cut it. The relentless leftism, the endless white people guilt, the crusade on global warming, the banal opinion journalism, the useless reportage by children who are there for diversity not smarts, is taking its toll.

    Most of all, Canadians, wherever they are, have broadband internet connections. They don’t need you anymore. They can watch brilliant stuff from all over the world, read newspapers that report news, listen to classical music or jazz or house, 24/7. Useless as your programming is that is not what dooms you; it is free choice exercised by millions of Canadians on the ‘Net.

    Good-bye.

  18. Fake Fucking Meta Fake Saskatch-a-fuck
    Posted April 26, 2010 at 11:16 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Get well soon, Todd!

  19. gimbol
    Posted April 26, 2010 at 9:40 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Back many years ago when the CBC was created, its mandate was to provide service where none existed so that canadians could get a well regulated canadian product in those places where it was not commercially viable to do so.
    Since then markets have developed in Canada in the large urban centers, but yet those areas that are commercially unviable the CBC if its still available in those areas, seems to provide a Toronto centric POV.
    I’m not about to advocate that the CBC be privatized, but if the big thinkers at mothercorp want to pay homage to their original mandate, they should sell that behemoth in downtown TO and distribute the budget across the country to the underserviced areas.
    However, if they don’t want to do that, and instead want to be in competition with the other national networks, fine, but do so on a level playing field and be a private broadcaster.
    If the content was so good, wouldn’t it naturally follow that the CBC should be able to operate without tax payer support?

  20. Posted April 26, 2010 at 8:48 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    If you folks love the CBC so much then why the problem with having to pay for it?

    Privatize the CBC. Let it stand on its own merits.

  21. NomoreCBC
    Posted April 26, 2010 at 8:03 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Privatize the cbc.
    We watch nothing of it any longer.
    For all the great points Louise made, dismantle it, sell it, dump it. I don’t care just stop wasting Canadians money on it. 1.8 Billion a year? Unreal.

    Everyday Canadians don’t relate to cbc news and that’s why everyday Canadians are turning off in droves and many more are turning to the internet for real information and make up their own minds. I don’s sit and wait for my news to come on at a slotted hour via TV to misinfrom me any longer; now I”ve long been informed of the days events and then some by just reading on the internet daily.
    The money we’d save would serve our country much better IMHO.

  22. Lee
    Posted April 26, 2010 at 7:41 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    I can remember when CBC TV News (pre-National) was the best information source in North America. Not as good as the BBC before it too became a festering pile of $__t, but far and away the best on this side of the pond. Earl Cameron was an old-school broadcaster who actually delivered NEWS, and viewers didn’t have to use their bullshit filters to figure out what was actually being reported.

    Like most of the posters above, I find the new National format very hard to take. They tried to polish the turd but ended up breaking it instead.

    Sell the damned thing! It no longer serves any useful purpose.

  23. Prairie Boy
    Posted April 26, 2010 at 6:56 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    The sad part is there are stories to tell. There are real Canadians living their lives that are much more interesting than the current pap. Why is it so tough to talk to them without an agenda? How many have talked to a farmer, a trapper, a mortician or a cab driver? People no longer buy what you sell, it is like a victim competition and how wonderful it would be if everything were perfect. Life has winners and losers and that is reality. Our mission is to accept that reality, help when we can and not be used.

    • dmorris
      Posted April 26, 2010 at 7:25 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      Yep,PB there ARE lots of good Canadian stories to tell but instead we get crap about fictitious Islamic families in small Prairie towns.

  24. Lori
    Posted April 26, 2010 at 6:53 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Actually, after a very long (and repetitive) back and forth discussion, I think the comment at the bottom right now, by Garth Wood at 6:43, cuts to the “bottom” line.

    The CBC, and most old-style news media outlets, are increasingly irrelevant.

    The difference is that the private broadcasters are accountable financially, and must evolve or die. Some are evolving, many are dying. Those that survive will do so because they have some sort of merit.

    Broadcasters sucking at the public teat have no incentive to evolve, and many dis-incentives (when was the last time a management downsized itself). They cannot evolve because they face no selection pressure. As with the dinosaurs, they inevitably will become extinct. Whatever the specific event that triggers this I will be, I cannot say, but once it happens, it will be with the suddenness of an asteroid hitting the earth. One year the CBC will be there. One year it will not – at least in no form that current employees and managers can recognize.

  25. Garth Wood
    Posted April 26, 2010 at 6:43 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    I don’t hate the CBC.  I just think it’s irrelevant.

    And it’s a damned waste of money to dump a billion loonies a year into something that’s irrelevant.

  26. Posted April 26, 2010 at 6:41 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    I am one of the millions of Canadians who doesn’t watch the CBC. I don’t watch the other Canadian channels either. You all report the same not-news, with the same spin, the same day. When the talking points change, your reportage changes. Things which actually ARE news, Like Dalton McGuinty’s windmill scam, are never mentioned.

    That is why I do not watch the CBC. I’m not paying for cable so I can get disninformation from the Soviet-style state propaganda organ. If I want to be disinformed I can listen to CBC radio for free.

    If I want to know what’s going on, I check different sources on the internet. I do what CBC reporters are supposed to be doing, but don’t. You are a drag on the public purse. You should all be fired.

    • Frank
      Posted April 26, 2010 at 10:31 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      Well said.

    • Moses Zzzzzzz
      Posted April 27, 2010 at 11:22 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      I read a lot of comments about CBC programming by people who claim to not be watching.

      • Posted April 27, 2010 at 7:00 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        Well Moses, when you go read the interwebs you find all manner of blog posts mocking hell out of this or that -idiot- thing which has been said or done on CBC TV, CBC radio, or sometimes CBC interweb thingy.
        Suffice to say I know pretty much what you lot are doing at CBC, but your two remaining advertisers aren’t getting any eyeball time from me.
        Note to remaining, lonely CBC advertisers, cut you losses dudes.

        • Moses Zzzzzzz
          Posted April 29, 2010 at 12:29 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

          I would say that you don’t seem to know anything. Which is one of the main lines of comment from a group of people who seem to be fans of this Kate person. Some of you start with a reasoned comment, but most seem to drift into rhetoric and bile, claiming knowledge of things you can’t possible know. You seem to enjoy making yourselves look like idiots.

          Most of the bias I have read comes from you people. I suppose if you lean too far to the right everything seems left.

          Can the CBC be run more efficiently? Probably, though I have seen some incredible work from some very dedicated people. Does it make content that is of interest to all Canadians? Absolutely not.

          The issue I suppose is why must people pay for things they don’t use or benefit from? Insulting people or making things up to make your argument negates it.

  27. Monica
    Posted April 26, 2010 at 6:15 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    In order to fly a bird must have two wings, currently CBC has one wing and it’s lefthanded, it will become an obsolete media outlet in five years if the management continues to try and fly with one wing only. Canadians have abandoned CBC because it’s abandoned Canadians in favour of liberal propaganda, look at the online news at CBC they can’t be bothered to write stories where the journalists actually research and partake of due diligence or do the journalists partake of professional journalism standards and does the management water it down so it’s Lib friendly NEWS?.

  28. reil deil
    Posted April 26, 2010 at 5:43 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    “Anonymous says:
    April 24, 2010 at 6:13 am
    Kate (if this is actually Kate from Small Dead Animals), I know you hate the CBC. But, millions of Canadians do not”

    Guess you posted prior to seeing this:
    April 25, 2010 6:16 pm

    Read em and weepthe CBC News story
    – Medium Close Up

    I am one of the millions who do not hate but rather am very “turned off” to the point of tuning out. Cant remember the last time I watched a program on CBC, oh wait yes the hockey game but changed channels during the commercials so it really doesnt count.

    RD

  29. Revnant Dream
    Posted April 26, 2010 at 5:42 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Kate McMillan Is the bomb.
    You are the target.
    She will leave you squealing like pigs.

    You have just started ( I almost pity you) to getyour ass kicked by a girl.
    You seem to have no ratings because no one believes you anymore. Problem is ,you let this Nation rot for 14 years while the Liberals pillaged this Nation with cons like Abscam . Most folks think you knew the whole time or where part en parcel of this Elitist feed on the tax payer. Ask how many CBC veterns are in the Senate?
    The Mother Corporation (creepy name) are seen to plagiarize than twist stories. I mean most of us have seen the product
    Everyone including the town dummy knows the CBC sounds just like a liberal shill or is that shell. One an empty profession, the other an empty shell.
    Most folks resent the tax to pay for what they precive as the garbage channel, that has a fixation with Marx. Anti-Americanism, pro-terrorist, hate the West group hugs, that beats the drum of totalitarianism consistantly. From HRC’s to no Private property.
    People to get REAL news not filtered would pay for a TV media program like that. So far including a lot of Fox, we don’t get nothin.
    CBC has nothing but distain if not malice towards Consrvatives, or anyone not in love with IGGY or Layton. It offends many. Which of course leaves out a hudge chunk of the REAL Canada. Now because of that attitude you have only just the Ottawa -Toronto -Montreal corridor watching. Hell even the Liberls In Toronto would rather watch American, because any smart ones know the CBC is pure propaganda for progressives, not media.
    Latte Socialists usually only tune into anti-American screeds on CBC.
    Start reflecting the real Canada as normal people live it, & stop believing BS as reality because it fits your sensibilities. Ask Canadians what they want. But hey, that would be soiling ones hands with the Helots.
    Most folks now have literally millions of outlets to get news. Right from the regions.
    With instant anylysis by none or expert comentators. Hard to BS with thousands reading your post.
    JMO

    I do think this is Kates way of saying “Its on!!!” but I can’t speak for her.
    I Have Seen The Asteroid And It Is Us”
    … all I can say is “Over to you, Shotgun Boy”.

    http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/

  30. wallyj
    Posted April 26, 2010 at 5:27 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    The cbc has a place in Canada. However,they should expend as much effort promoting Canadian culture,all Canadian culture,as they do promoting their progressive idea of what Canada should be. Their political leanings are a shame. FIRE.THEM.ALL. and start over.

    • dmorris
      Posted April 26, 2010 at 7:22 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      I agree Wallyj. If the CBC can’t stand on it’s own two feet, fire the managers first,then if new people can’t turn the network around, sell it off to whoever wants it.

      Maybe Al-jazeera will show some interest.

    • Posted April 26, 2010 at 7:41 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      “The cbc has a place in Canada”

      They just haven’t dug it yet.

  31. John R. Macdonald from Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
    Posted April 26, 2010 at 5:03 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    I would love to see the CBC lose its funding. Biased reporting, boring tv shows, no accountability, & lazy employees. If these people actually had to CONVINCE someone to pay them by exhibiting MERIT, they would go broke within days.

  32. Old & Grouchy
    Posted April 26, 2010 at 4:51 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    The last time I watched CBC Peter Mainbridge still had hair.

  33. Derrick
    Posted April 26, 2010 at 4:43 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    those that bite the hand that feeds them will lick the boots that kick them

  34. Posted April 26, 2010 at 1:20 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    So if I understand Kate’s sycophants correctly, the entire CBC should be shut down, and all it’s funding put into the gun registry. Right?

    Also, STOP TROLLERING ME!

    • Posted April 26, 2010 at 4:14 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      No. You’re wrong. Quelle surprise! The CBC should be privatized where market share has a real bottom-line impact.

    • Fred
      Posted April 26, 2010 at 5:14 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      No !

      Give their appropriation to our long suffering military. They deserve the funding and it drives oh so latte liberal progressive crowd crazy.

      Its fun to watch them get all twisted up when the topic of our military comes up.

      • Posted April 26, 2010 at 6:14 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        bryanf, the CBC should be shut down and its appropriation RETURNED to -me-, and all the other poor, long suffering Canadians who have had to put up with your crap since time immemorial.

        After a few years, should it develop that the country cannot survive without a nationalized, publicly funded Liberal echo chamber we can always start a new one. But I think we can probably do it cheaper than a billion bucks a year. Maybe you could have a bake sale.

  35. Anonymous
    Posted April 25, 2010 at 8:11 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    April 25, 2010 6:16 pm

    Read em and weepthe CBC News story
    – Medium Close Up

    We have been hearing an amazing amount of self congratulations from CBC management about how the new National is doing well or its on the right track. There has been a series of hero-grams sent to staff pushing them to keep up the good work. The bosses maintain that the changes in the newscast are a work in progress and that staff is busting their butts.

    All this blather in spite of the fact that I have never met a single viewer who thinks the changes in the newscast were anything other than awful. In fact many media friends, including some who still work for The National tell me they have stopped watching the program. Non media friends complain about the set, Peters walks, the dumb reporter interviews that add nothing to show, but really, would they notice any of this if the quality of the stories and storytelling was high enough to keep them interested in the content? I suspect not.

    It has been too easy to blame criticism on unhappy former employees who are disgruntled because they were pushed out. It has been too easy to point fingers at older viewers who dont like change. It has been too easy to fall back on its a work in progress excuses. The truth is, and the numbers are all too clear, the new National is an abject failure that has not resonated with the viewing audience and worse, has turned many loyal news junkies away.

    With the help of a mathematically inclined friend who has access to the ratings I put together a table that clearly shows how poorly The National is doing. But first an executive summary of our findings:

    We used 70 programs (Monday-Friday) in 2009 from the beginning of January to the second week of April. The National average was about 804 thousand, while CTV News got 993 thousand.

    This year, 2010, we looked at 59 programs during the same period. (The Olympics made 11 weekdays not applicable.) This time the National averaged 644 thousand, CTV News 1257 thousand. Thats almost exactly double. Using last years system if you reasonably assume CTV News didnt gain viewers, their ratings jump can be attributed to the new people meters that would mean that The National has averaged less than 500 thousand in 2010 using the pre-people meter numbers, a ratings fall of almost 40%! Incredible and embarrassing

    Two other small observations. Last year, there were 9 days when The National actually got higher numbers than CTV. This season, it never got close. The other thing is that we picked a period when The Nationals ratings were actually UP! If you were to look at the September-December stretch, CTVs numbers were regularly more than double, sometimes, even triple those of CBCs flagship news program The numbers are even more startling than we expected.

    A few more facts to ponder. During the study period in 2009 the lowest rating at CBC was 615 thousand. In 2010 the lowest rating was 451 thousand. In fact the CBC failed to reach 500 thousand viewers four times. During that same period CTV News had four nights with over 1.5 million viewers.

    Heres the actual numbers for you to ponder:
    2009 2010
    Monday Jan. 5 Monday Jan. 4
    CBC 681 CTV 1033 CBC 553 CTV 1057
    Tues. Jan. 6 Tues. Jan. 5
    CBC 857 CTV987 CBC 514 CTV 1137
    Wed. Jan. 7 Wed. Jan. 6
    CBC 713 CTV 855 CBC 659 CTV 1268
    Thurs. Jan. 8 Thurs. Jan. 7
    CBC 976 CTV 986 CBC 689 CTV 1147
    Fri. Jan. 9 Fri. Jan. 8
    CBC 843 CTV 855 CBC 547 CTV 1067
    Mon. Jan. 12 Mon. Jan. 11
    CBC 971 CTV 933 CBC 543 CTV 1175
    Tues. Jan. 13 Tues. Jan. 12
    CBC 807 CTV 943 CBC 733 CTV 1435
    Wed. Jan. 14 Wed. Jan. 13
    CBC 731 CTV 1289 CBC 675 CTV 1314
    Thurs. Jan. 15 Thurs. Jan. 14
    CBC 719 CTV 1013 CBC 729 CTV 1211
    Fri. Jan. 16 Fri. Jan. 15
    CBC 771 CTV 987 CBC 578 CTV 1231
    Mon. Jan. 19 Mon. Jan. 18
    CBC 808 CTV 1119 CBC 629 CTV 1140
    Tues. Jan. 20 Tues. Jan. 19
    CBC 1003 CTV 967 CBC 667 CTV 1070
    Wed. Jan. 21 Wed. Jan. 20
    CBC 959 CTV 903 CBC 685 CTV 1374
    Thurs. Jan. 22 Thurs. Jan. 21
    CBC 806 CTV 1087 CBC 703 CTV 1532
    Fri. Jan. 23 Fri. Jan. 22
    CBC 880 CTV 929 CBC 685 CTV 1327
    Mon. Jan. 26 Mon. Jan. 25
    CBC 928 CTV 918 CBC 628 CTV 1164
    Tues. Jan. 27 Tues. Jan. 26
    CBC 907 CTV 926 CBC 571 CTV 1195
    Wed. Jan. 28 Wed. Jan. 27
    CBC 907 CTV 1002 CBC 640 CTV 1004
    Thurs. Jan. 29 Thurs. Jan 28
    CBC 909 CTV 1050 CBC 678 CTV 1152
    Fri. Jan. 30 Fri. Jan. 29
    CBC 587 CTV 923 CBC 603 CTV 1026
    Mon. Feb. 2 Mon. Feb. 1
    CBC 827 CTV 983 CBC 528 CTV 1069
    Tues. Feb. 3 Tues. Feb. 2
    CBC 947 CTV 850 CBC 492 CTV 1183
    Wed. Feb. 4 Wed. Feb. 3
    CBC 1007 CTV 907 CBC 571 CTV 1477
    Thurs. Feb. 5 Thurs. Feb. 4
    CBC 885 CTV 1089 CBC 665 CTV 1272
    Fri. Feb. 6 Fri. Feb. 5
    CBC 615 CTV 694 CBC 537 CTV 1000
    Mon. Feb. 9 Mon. Feb. 8
    CBC 805 CTV 1061 CBC 670 CTV 1112
    Tues. Feb. 10 Tues. Feb. 9
    CBC 872 CTV 941 CBC 820 CTV 1174
    Wed. Feb. 11 Wed. Feb. 10
    CBC 716 CTV 863 CBC 791 CTV 1542
    Thurs. Feb. 12 Thurs. Feb. 11
    CBC 903 CTV 902 CBC 669 CTV 1320
    Mon. Mar. 2 Mon. Mar. 1
    CBC 686 CTV 883 CBC 707 CTV 1256
    Tues. Mar. 3 Tues. Mar. 2
    CBC 706 CTV 878 CBC 451 CTV 1113
    Wed. Mar. 4 Wed. Mar. 3
    CBC 809 CTV 996 CBC 550 CTV 1248
    Thurs. Mar. 5 Thurs. Mar. 4
    CBC 828 CTV 994 CBC 666 CTV 1272
    Fri. Mar. 6 Fri. Mar. 5
    CBC 731 CTV 909 CBC 492 CTV 1268
    Mon. Mar. 9 Mon. Mar. 8
    CBC 658 CTV 1108 CBC 623 CTV 1350
    Tues. Mar. 10 Tues. Mar. 9
    CBC 833 CTV 1023 CBC 645 CTV 1426
    Wed. Mar. 11 Wed. Mar. 10
    CBC 832 CTV 1273 CBC 709 CTV 1618
    Thurs. Mar. 12 Thurs. Mar. 11
    CBC 728 CTV 1045 CBC 669 CTV 1663
    Fri. Mar. 13 Fri. Mar. 12
    CBC 727 CTV 881 CBC 551 CTV 1269
    Mon. Mar. 16 Mon. Mar. 15
    CBC 742 CTV 940 CBC 705 CTV 1481
    Tues. Mar. 17 Tues. Mar. 16
    CBC 754 CTV 974 CBC 548 CTV 1456
    Wed. Mar. 18 Wed. Mar. 17
    CBC 953 CTV 1141 CBC 714 CTV1382
    Thurs. Mar. 19 Thurs. Mar. 18
    CBC 933 CTV 1221 CBC 778 CTV 1374
    Fri. Mar. 20 Fri. Mar. 19
    CBC 623 CTV 898 CBC 595 CTV 1161
    Mon. Mar. 23 Mon. Mar. 22
    CBC 837 CTV 1107 CBC 635 CTV 1308
    Tues. Mar. 24 Tues. Mar. 23
    CBC 875 CTV 1027 CBC 462 CTV 1341
    Wed. Mar. 25 Wed. Mar. 24
    CBC 826 CTV 1162 CBC 778 CTV 1240
    Thurs. Mar. 26 Thurs. Mar. 25
    CBC 900 CTV 1110 CBC 722 CTV 1238
    Fri. Mar. 27 Fri. Mar. 26
    CBC 735 CTV 882 CBC 545 CTV 1101
    Mon. Mar. 30 Mon. Mar. 29
    CBC 680 CTV 1097 CBC 936 CTV 1119
    Tues. Mar. 31 Tues. Mar. 30
    CBC 930 CTV 921 CBC 645 CTV 1219
    Wed. Apr. 1 Wed. Mar. 31
    CBC 849 CTV 1025 CBC 634 CTV 1347

    It is pretty obvious from the numbers, The National is getting killed since the new format kicked in. Only five times in three months did the newscast have higher ratings than one year earlier, this even though the people meters have buoyed the numbers of all the big networks. Only once did the rating approach the million mark, this was after the second night of the Don Cherry movie. All in all, a most dismal showing. At this point it is fair to question the changes made at The National and the people responsible for those changes. Anywhere else in the real world the people behind this sort of failure would be looking for new jobs

    • Anon
      Posted April 26, 2010 at 5:30 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      Thanks for posting this. Have a few questions:

      1. Are these national or regional numbers? (I am guessing national, but if regional, which region?)

      2. What is the demographic: 2+, 18-59, 25-54, etc?

      3. How do the numbers compare with the other national newscast, Global National? (IIRC, Global National was once the most watched national newscast in the country.)

      Thanks in advance!

  36. Cogito ergo sum
    Posted April 25, 2010 at 6:02 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Jeez Louise,
    Time to take your pitchfork and head for the wading pool. This one’s too deep for you. Your “citizen journalism” has taken a beating here. (See posting re: R.B. Bennett above)

  37. robert quinn
    Posted April 24, 2010 at 6:18 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    @Scratching My Head. Worthy defense. I would like to address some points you make. Sadly, bloody work is crooking a finger. Perhaps later.

  38. Posted April 24, 2010 at 2:46 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Ouimet writes of Kate’s audience “not exactly a preferred demographic”. I am assuming she/he/it is channeling CBC/Liberal pollster Graves wonderfully goofy perception of Canada beyond the Annex.

    Keep digging kids.

  39. Honest Hal
    Posted April 24, 2010 at 12:48 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    I don’t think this is a political issue at all. All politicians are crooks. Even if they don’t start out that way, they always end up towing the line. So, I don’t think this has anything to do with being on the right or on the left or even if you sit with the fench post lodged completely up your asshole. (That’s my opinion of course and no one has to agree with it, but that’s what I think.) The problem with the HUB, as well as every other part of CBC (radio, TV, news, arts, and on and on) is management. There are too many managers getting too much money for either 1) doing nothing at all or 2) making bonehead ideas which awful results. They never have to be held accoutable. As one person said earlier, they make dumb decisions that cost millions of dollars that fail miserably and then they run and get their big fat bonuses. Management (low level, middle, and senior level) are all living in a big bubble where they pat each other on the back. It’s like a fairy tale land where you romp and play and make mistakes and you never are held accoutable and money grows on trees. The problems at the CBC all stem from the management line. Sure, governments can be idiots and sure, employees can be idiots. But, that is everywhere you turn. The difference here is that CBC is so top heavy with management that it is toppling over. They are the people who should have trouble sleeping at night. They are taking a staple of Canadian culture and beating it until there is nothing left. Shame on you managers.

  40. robert quinn
    Posted April 24, 2010 at 8:10 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    To expand on a previous poster’s suggestion, I think many Canadians would be agreeable to the idea of a split CBC. (I would argue reasonable Canadians recognize any claim that the Corp. is “scrupulously impartial” to be risible, not to mention easily refuted.) It would never happen, but providing 31% of the budget (one that floats on a quarterly basis, depending on the polls, if you wish) to support a news outlet that is clearly partisan/Right might be a novel experiment in genuine representative media. I suspect enthusiasm from disaffected reactionaries, racists, homoanimus boosters, and other black shorts like myself that comprise the Tory base will more than compensate for interference or sabotage from bitter Box 500, Station A sorts. It would take time to find its legs, but ponder the invigorating effect on CBC creative minds once the new signal began attracting serious listening/viewing numbers. Think that unlikely? Let’s try it and find out.

    • Scratching My Head
      Posted April 24, 2010 at 12:57 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      Robert,
      I think you have fallen through the intellectual trap door that a lot of people trip over when they equate the journalist’s role with that of siding with a particular party. Journalists understand that their job is not to tell people what to think, but what to think about. This role, by its very nature, is about the old saw “comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable”. In particular, by virture of their salaries, CBC employees are part of the bourgeoisie. They don’t want to see wholesale change or the overthrow of the state. They play their role within pretty well defined boundaries of the relative status quo. I think, on balance, that you would find them, relatively speaking, fiscal conservatives. They don’t want the state spending so much money on social programs that there’s no money left over for the CBC. I think you would also find that, like a lot of journalists working for the private sector, they’re suckers for the underdog. I th;ink where they get uncomfortable with the Conservatives is on social issues espoused by the “dinosaurs lived at the same time as humans” wing of the party. The positions-such as getting tough on crime or detention without warrants- fly in the face of the data of the efficacy of the policies or the broad concensus on the meaning of the rights espoused in the Charter of Rights. The worst thing the CBC ever said about Joe Clark’s government, for example, was that he couldn’t keep track of his luggage and that he couldn’t play his Parliamentary cards very well. (See Federal Gas Tax). Otherwise, I think you would have found CBC journalists pretty comfortable with Red Tories. I don’t think, and you shouldn’t, that CBC journalists favour the Liberal Party. They’re as pissed as anybody about the Sponsorship Scandal. They question Iggy’s leadership. They’re pretty comfortable with a Harper minority government and like most others a little spooked about what might happen in a Tory majority. On balance, I think you’d find CBC types pretty typical of most Canadians: by no means homogeneous in their opinions, but mostly liking where the country is right now and wanting to make it a better place for themselves and their great-grandchilren.

      • Posted April 25, 2010 at 3:29 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        Journalists understand that their job is not to tell people what to think, but what to think about.
        ===========================
        Is that what they teach you in journalism school? That you have to tell us what to think about??? Good lord, no wonder you’ve lost so many viewers.

        • Scratching My Head
          Posted April 25, 2010 at 9:50 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

          This one is simple. In the CBC’s case, its journalists are paid by taxpayers to spend the time looking into policy issues, questionable practises and examples of outstanding citizenship, among other things, that most of us in our workdays don’t have the time and opportunity to investigate. Journalists provide a “heads up” to the country’s citizenry that they’ve discovered something worthy of their attention. They are not the pundits who pontificate about what people should do with the information.

          • Posted April 25, 2010 at 12:14 pm | #

            Before I quit listening to/viewing CBC, I rarely found they covered stories that interested me, and when they did, the left-wing spin and salacious gossipy nature that characterizes it left me disgusted. All of it pandered to the lowest denominator on the left. All of which makes this statement rather pathetic: “In the CBCs case, its journalists are paid by taxpayers to spend the time looking into policy issues, questionable practises and examples of outstanding citizenship” .

            You seem to have forgotten there is this thing called the Internet. Thanks to that, and to other more traditional sources, such as private sector talk radio, I would argue that ordinary citizens can do that gatekeeper function as well as journalists, and perhaps even better (witness Steve McIntyre and the infamous hockey stick, which CBC science reporters still, apparently, believe along with all the other AGW Koolaid) and as far as individual preference or interest is concerned, we can do it much, much better. Credible experts as well as ordinary Joe citizens who act as eye-witnesses have websites, too, and they can comment on others’ blogs as well as their own. The number of times these kind of folks have exposed error and deliberate outright cover-up on the part of the media is growing almost daily. And then there’s the world YouTubers and similar streaming video outlets, many of whom are also intrepid sleuths who have quite handily called out fraud and deliberate misrepresentation (and cowardice!) in the Main Stream Media.

            Every morning I read the headlines thrown up for viewing by Google News and I can read stories that interest me written in newspapers from all over the globe, including Europe, the Arab world, India, and Southeast Asia and the obsessively-hated by CBC, United States.

            You are no longer gatekeepers, folks, and as I said at the beginning, that is the crisis that you, for some reason, don’t want to acknowledge. We don’t need ya and your left-wing tripe. Good riddance.

            As far as the funding is concerned, I could support a matching grant type of formula for public funds. Whatever CBC raises in year one from private sources (subscriptions, fundraising campaigns and donations of various sorts) could be matched the FOLLOWING year, not the same year. That would make budgeting and staying within budget a lot easier. It would also provide an incentive for the lefties to pony up and actually pay what they think their media-god is actually worth. If you want to sustain what you’ve got or even get more of it, you’ve got to pay for it.

            And since I won’t be a contributor in any way, I’d be satisfied that none of the dollars being “matched” are mine, too.

            It must really pi$$ off private sector media and their employees, that their taxes are going to prop up the competition, perhaps even forcing some of them out of a job as an individual employee if the company they work for has to cut costs to survive or is forced into receivership if the corporation for which they work goes belly up partly because of unfair competition.

            Yet, for some reason, I seems that most CBC journos see nothing wrong with using taxes – paid for by the private sector media and their employees – to compete with the private sector.

            And why? Why it’s because the CBC is morally superior. How dare we unwashed plebeians with pitchforks question that!! I guess we should just gGo away and eat cake!

          • Maureen
            Posted April 26, 2010 at 5:47 pm | #

            nonsense – I turned off CBC TV news with Peter Mansbridge, during on of their many revamps, informed the audience that his job was to not only tell me the news, but to tell me what it means to me! At that point I said to myself as I was flipping the channel “I will tell me what the news means to me, not some fop based in Toronto!” And I have never watched CBC TV news since. BTW CBC Radio news may be heading in the same direction for me .

            And as for Kate’s demographics – I’m an avid reader of smalldeadanimals – my profile – single, middle aged, graduate degree, self-employed woman earning between $100,000 and $150,000 annually. I think CBC might what a piece of my demographics!!!!

      • cbc ottawa
        Posted April 27, 2010 at 3:57 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        Bang on Scratching! Maybe you actually work for the CBC instead of sitting in a basement drinking too much Red Bull?

  41. Posted April 24, 2010 at 7:40 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    This will make some heads spin – Michael Coren’s program on CTS draws larger ratings than “The National”.

  42. Anonymous
    Posted April 24, 2010 at 7:02 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Traffic down a little, Kate? So why not whip on the CBC and hope you get some viewage back on SDA. It’s almost as if you’re using the CBC to make money…

    • biff jupiter
      Posted April 26, 2010 at 4:36 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      Kate’s traffic is hardly ever down, at least not by the standards of most blogs, particularly this one. And if she’s making money by talking about the CBC, well, so what? It’s better than confiscating tax dollars to promote her ideas and opinions. She pays for her soapbox.

    • realyawesomehandle
      Posted April 26, 2010 at 9:08 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      Anonymous says:
      April 24, 2010 at 7:02 am
      Traffic down a little, Kate? So why not whip on the CBC and hope you get some viewage back on SDA. Its almost as if youre using the CBC to make money

      That’s supposed to be an insult…

      MAKING money’s a bad thing, actually creating wealth is frowned upon by CBC defenders, but taking other peoples money through threat of force by the gubmint, that’s noble.

      Please sell the CBC , totally defund it, lock the doors.

  43. Posted April 24, 2010 at 1:37 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    When I send my readers here, I don’t think of it as “linking”.

    I think of it as “pity traffic”.

    • Anonymous
      Posted April 24, 2010 at 6:13 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      Kate (if this is actually Kate from Small Dead Animals), I know you hate the CBC. But, millions of Canadians do not. Does it have some issues that need to be resolved promptly? You bet. But, you don’t get to pick and choose where your tax dollars go. A good thing too, because I’d be mortified if you and your readers were making the choices. The CBC should be a public broadcasting service. It has lost its way, moreso under financial pressure. But, the CBC still provides among the most responsible journalism in the biz. I can, on any day, read your page and realize that facts and responsible journalism mean nothing to you. While it is your right to write whatever you choose, your opinions about journalism are not credible and will remain marginalized for the simple fact that you don’t even attempt to present truth or facts most of the time. You spin for partisan purposes and sometimes in a very ugly, nasty and completely false way. Your mere presence on the web is a solid argument in favour of public broadcasting.
      As for biting the hand that feeds, I agree as a taxpayer you have every right to your opinion. Blather away. However, I don’t recall you bitching and being outraged when Kory Teneycke was hired by CBC as a regular political contributor. I guess you’re one of those people who posts only the things that cement their own views and who wants to hear only what they already believe, rather than being informed by all angles. Your loss.

      • Anonymous
        Posted April 24, 2010 at 7:20 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        “you dont get to pick and choose where your tax dollars go. A good thing too, because Id be mortified if you and your readers were making the choices.”

        -” I can, on any day, read your page and realize that facts and responsible journalism mean nothing to you.”

        – “you dont even attempt to present truth or facts most of the time. You spin for partisan purposes and sometimes in a very ugly, nasty and completely false way.”

        Nope, no bias here. Just a superb example of CBC journalism at its best!

        “I dont recall you bitching and being outraged when Kory Teneycke was hired by CBC as a regular political contributor.”

        CBC’s pollster of record is an admitted Liberal Party of Canada supporter who encourages the party he supports to create a culture war, and you’re outraged that Kory Teneycke is present to call him on it? What fatuous nonsense! This is why CBC doesn’t receive the financial support you think it needs to be a public broadcaster.

        • Anonymous
          Posted April 24, 2010 at 8:02 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

          I have no problem with Kory Teneycke calling out Frank Graves inappropriate comments. I have no problem with Kory Teneycke being a voice on CBC at all. He is good at what he does and his views represent approximately 30% of Canadian views. He represents legitimate view points. There have always been Conservatives on CBC. But, no one ever mentions that in their straw man argument that the CBC is a wing of the Liberal Party. That would be the same party that, when they held government oversaw the largest cut to the CBC budget. There is no Liberal Party love-in at the CBC. But, see that fact doesn’t fit in with the spin that the CBC is beholden to the Liberal Party. Nor, do the many, many stories the CBC have run on Liberal governments over the years that have done them no favours. Those facts don’t fit your stereotype, therefore they are not mentioned. THAT is my point. I am no Liberal (or any other party supporter for that matter). I don’t believe in falsehoods from any side of the political spectrum and I would be happy to call out a Liberal or NDP blogger who manipulates the facts if they were on here too.

          • Al the fish in MB
            Posted April 26, 2010 at 7:24 pm | #

            When the Liberals did make their big cuts to the CBC, the main cuts were to local news programming , and non-Canadian shows. The CBC actually consolidated more power at the Mother Station in TO, reinforcing the central Canada/Liberal bias.
            And to those who keep raising the canard of Kate’s website design, I find it interesting that you are only able to critizie form rather than content. You want pretty pictures, go to an art gallery.

      • Stan
        Posted April 24, 2010 at 9:03 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        Responsible journalism and the CBC in the same sentence, that’s a laugh.
        How about Peter Mansbridge and Neil Macdonald’s smear of Sarah Palin when they reported the rumour that her daughter Bristol was the real mother of 4 1/2 month old Trig?
        The rest of the media knew that Bristol was 5 months pregnant, and reported that, and had reported it, but that didn’t stop the CBC from running that story on their flagship newscast 2 days after the rest of the world reported it was BS.
        Or is it possible to be the mother of a 4 1/2 month old baby and be 5 months pregnant?
        Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?
        There are only two possible explanations, they are either the most biased journalists on the planet, or the most incompetent.

        How about Christina Lawand, how’s she doing in her new career after she blatantly lied in a CBC report during the 2006 Lebanon war?
        Heather Mallick, need I say more?
        Now we see Graves is just another liberal hack.
        If you want to support this garbage, bust out your cheque book and go crazy, but there is no reason in the world for this to be funded by taxpayers.
        It’s just a bunch of pigs at the trough spreading their far left nonsense.

      • Posted April 25, 2010 at 3:21 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        “But, the CBC still provides among the most responsible journalism in the biz.”

        Which says a lot about the MSM, doesn’t it.

    • Ouimetjoined April 10, 2009
      Posted April 24, 2010 at 11:11 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      Kate, your legion of losers are not exactly a preferred demographic. To be totally honest it’s better to keep them in the echo chamber on smalldeadanimals.com. Whenever you link here the IQ of the comment section drops considerably.

      You seem touchy over this. I guess we all are. Look, you’re welcome to comment here any time. You can write whatever you want, and there’s no reason to censor yourself with asterisks. You can write “fuck” straight out and no one will stop you.

      Glad we got that sorted out.
      Now, shouldn’t you be airbrushing a unicorn on something right about now?

      • Harl E. Davidson
        Posted April 24, 2010 at 11:47 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        [George]: The unicorn looked sharp on its jet black gas tank …

        http://www.katewerk.com/airbrush.html

      • Posted April 24, 2010 at 12:44 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        “Kate, your legion of losers are not exactly a preferred demographic.”

        I had to return to the top of this page to remind myself – and apparently, you – why I linked here in the first place.

        Ah, yes – it was that CBC National Radio News Reporter Survey in which 95% of respondents checked
        [x] “I have a gun in my mouth” under”Morale”.

        • Fake Mel Blanc
          Posted April 25, 2010 at 3:12 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

          Better a gun in the mouth than an airbrushed Tasmanian Devil on the helmet.

          • Simon
            Posted April 26, 2010 at 6:08 pm | #

            Believe it or not, Kate has actual talent developed through a strong work ethic. Allah forbid that she advances on merit and quality performance, rather than through feigned victimization and public protest for more of the taxper’s teat. The “entitlement syndrome” plaguing the CBC’s sub-quality employees reflects in their dwindling market share of unwatched, taxpayer-paid minutae which litters our airwaves. Phone your MP. If the CBC truly presents quality material, they will easily convince donors via a pledge drive. I’ll keep MY money, thank you very much.

          • scf
            Posted April 26, 2010 at 10:26 pm | #

            I beg to differ. I’ll take the helmet. You take the bullet. And take the CBC with you.

      • Posted April 25, 2010 at 3:40 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        Oh my. And who is you’re “preferred demographic”? Are the ovens hot enough yet? Must be just about time now that the peasants with pitchforks are at the doors.

      • Posted April 26, 2010 at 6:05 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        Those of us who visit and comment on SDA don’t use outright profanity because that is what low life folks do. There will always be readers who still have some morality left in them, particularly older readers. It’s an effort to be non offensive and generally considerate of others.

        Something you barbarians on the left have long forgotten about long ago.

        When you use profanity as a regular part of your language, those four letter words lose their impact. Just like too much sex becomes nothing more than sawing logs. Then one becomes jaded, unhappy, bored, depressed, malcontent and then try to control and run the lives of others because you not long have a life of your own, just a droning pulse waiting for something to happen … anything … even a change to communism starts looking good.

      • Steve Smith
        Posted April 26, 2010 at 9:18 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        You say “Kate, your legion of losers are not exactly a preferred demographic.” Not preferred by whom? People who love the CBC and believe in it?
        The absolute horror of such a notion! Say it ain’t so.

      • derek
        Posted April 27, 2010 at 11:34 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        Oh my. I’ll throw in another tipping point for me.

        Anna Marie Tremonti, in 2004, fall, US elections. A couple of weeks after the faked documents. She said ‘allegedly faked’.

        Must close the ranks, keep all those rogues at bay.

        I stopped listening to that show ever since. Sorry, I’m patient and quite tolerant, but not stupid.

        Derek

  44. Posted April 24, 2010 at 1:22 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    The CBC. Liberal Party propaganda order since its inception. I would prefer the privatization option, if anybody in their right mind would buy it. In the private media network world, they have to solicit advertising to pay their costs and have a profit. Advertisers have to compete for audiences. If it’s true that nobody listens to CBC (I know I quit listening year ago), privatization will prove once and for all whether Canadians pay any attention to it. No audience. No advertisers. No revenue. Game over.

    • Scratching My Head
      Posted April 24, 2010 at 12:20 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      Er, the CBC was created by a Conservative government.

      • Posted April 25, 2010 at 3:17 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        To correct the typo in my first sentence, that should be “organ”, not order.

        Scratchinging My Head, CBC Radio began in 1936 when William Lyon MacKenzie was PM. He was Liberal. I don’t know what you’re thinking about.

        I’m with those here who haven’t listened to or watched CBC in a number of years. There’s much more interesting and informative stuff out there that doesn’t insult me and drive me as mad as the left-wing drivel and patronizing pap that characterizes too much of CBCs output today, thank you very much. I don’t want to have to pay for it. Let those who like it pay for it via subscription and let advertisers and corporate and foundation donors make up the rest. If you can’t convince enough people to watch or listen, or if donor’s aren’t sufficiently impressed, then let it die. All organizations go through a life cycle and eventually fade into the sunset. Perhaps it’s just time for CBC to face the facts that they have far too much competition and they have lost. Bye bye.

        • Scratching My Head
          Posted April 25, 2010 at 3:57 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

          On the creation of a national broadcaster by Conservative Prime Minister R.B. Bennett in 1932.

          From the Calgary Herald website- an article by John Boyko:

          Bennett boldly led an activist government that provided immediate relief to those in need, and then restructured the economy in ways that would mitigate the worst of future economic calamities. His government increased trade with a host of countries and hammered out a trade deal with the United States. He oversaw negotiations that would lead to the construction of the St. Lawrence Seaway. Bennett’s government modernized unemployment insurance, established a minimum wage and limits on work hours, extended federally backed farm credit, enacted fair-trade and antimonopoly legislation, and created a revamped Wheat Board. Withstanding withering pressure from the corporate elite, he wrestled control of Canada’s monetary policy from the banks and created the indispensable Bank of Canada. Bennett formed the Canadian Radio Broadcasting Commission that became the CBC. Bennett’s bold challenges and actions led to a re-evaluation of the role of government and the establishment of new powers that allowed for the creation of the social policies that Canadians now proudly proclaim as their birthright. His contemporary, Franklin Roosevelt, was America’s R.B. Bennett.

          Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/Calgary+Bennett+deserves+place+Hill/2747328/story.html#ixzz0m8xD1L5w

          • Posted April 25, 2010 at 6:11 pm | #

            Although some local stations in Canada predate CBC’s founding, CBC is the oldest existing broadcasting network in Canada, first established in its present form onNovember 2, 1936.”

            William Lyon MacKenzie King, leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, became Prime Minister on November 23, 1935, almost a year earlier and was still in office on November 2, 1936 and for a good time after that. Google it if you don’t believe me.

            Although the Bennett government created the act that led to the restructuring of Canadian broadcasting, it did not receive Royal Assent until November 2, 1936, hence, November 2nd was CBCs birthday and it happen on the Liberal Party watch.

            The Liberals remained in power until June 10, 1057, when Diefenbaker came to power. They regained power five years later under the leadership of Lester B. Pierson, through to the Trudeau, Chretien and Martin eras.

            Although the Conservatives managed to win a few minority governments in the latter years, they have not been successful in gaining a majority SINCE BENNETT. Coincidence?

            If you add to that the fact that CBC is run by a Board of Directors who are appointed by the Cabinet,I think you can see what any fool can see. Over the many decades since its inception, the CBC has been heavily influenced by the Liberal Party agenda. CBC employees from the big brass on downward have a vested interest in keeping their cash cow in power. They can keep that cash cow happy by creating erroneous perceptions about Conservatives, you know those knuckle-draggering hay seeds, those fundi Christians who subscribe to creationism, those homophobes and bigots, etc, etc. etc. ad infinitum for decades on end.

            The result, Liberal rich Ontario has been so thoroughly brainwashed they have no idea that they are even brainwashed. I rest my case.

          • Posted April 25, 2010 at 6:14 pm | #

            Should have mentioned the Mulroney years, but the point still stands. The Liberal Party has dominated Canadian politics since WLMK, precisely the same period of time that CBC has been with us.

      • cbc ottawa
        Posted April 26, 2010 at 1:08 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        True.

    • Anonymous
      Posted April 24, 2010 at 4:18 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      A Conservative government founded the CBC.
      Don’t let the facts get in the way of your theory though.

  45. Posted April 24, 2010 at 12:39 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    You mean I could have my blog ridiculed too? Sweet — it’s advertiser supported.

  46. Posted April 24, 2010 at 12:29 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    My site is way prettier than this one (which is kinda cute in a templately sort of a way). Of course my site gets about a tenth the traffic that Kate does and, I suspect, ten times the traffic our kind host does.

    In due course the CBC will sink beneath the waves of its idiot management and its remarkably dumb chase after the youth market at the expense of the market which actually still listens to radio. The disaster which is CBC2 demonstrates how genuinely goofy management is.

    The complete absence of even mildly right opinion on the CBC website, the endless regurgitation of lefty talking points and AGW hysteria on CBC1 means that the days of the CBC are numbered. Once you drop below 1% in major markets you’re toast.

    You are lucky to have a chickenshit CPC minority at the moment; but that will change as your ratings drop a little further off the cliff. Combine that with management by self important monkeys and I am not loving your chances of seeing 2020.

    Too bad, until the gutting of CBC2 we had you one from dawn til bedtime, switching stations only when the goofy “brought to you by Sheila Copps and Judy Rebick” news came on. Now we listen to NPR.

    • derek
      Posted April 27, 2010 at 11:26 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      I’ll include myself in the audience you have lost. I don’t watch tv, and if I do, it is hockey. But I listen to something on the radio. I’m in my vehicle for hours a day, and something is playing all the time.

      I try valiantly to listen to CBC from time to time. I think the tipping point for me was shortly before the Kelowna fires. Yes, the letter to the editor in the National Post on this was from me. Embers were falling in the city center. CBC was playing something about necrophilia.

      It isn’t mistaken. Or wrong. Or misdirected. CBC is irrelevant.

      Sorry. If you disappeared you would only be missed by yourselves. Sad really.

      How do I fill my hours in the vehicle? Podcasts. There are many, including one good one from CBC.

      Derek

  47. Stan
    Posted April 23, 2010 at 11:02 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    You poor naive fool.
    You really think the CBC heads care about you or Canadians?
    They are socialists, all they care about is getting a free lunch from the trough.
    There is no greed like socialist greed.

  48. K
    Posted April 23, 2010 at 9:10 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Fascist tactics? Lmao

    Do you even listen to yourself, do you have any concept, any inkling at all how deranged you sound? You throw words like fascist around so loosely that they begin to loose any real power or meaning, other than in your own tiny group, a group you imagine to be far larger than it actually is.

    Did your indoctrination occur at the hands of your parents, or did it occur in the educational system? “Indoctrination” would be an accurate choice of words, given the emotional excess you demonstrate when encountering criticism.

    • Anonymous
      Posted April 23, 2010 at 11:50 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      You’re right. I empathize with you.

      If I were in your shoes, I guess I’d say just about anything I had to if it diverted people from a discussion of how shoddy my site looked.

      Sorry I wrecked CBC.

  49. biff jupiter
    Posted April 23, 2010 at 8:56 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    “As a taxpayer you shell over 8 cents a day”

    What a silly defense. It’s always just a few cents a day for virtually every government program and yet, miraculously, it adds up to millions. Problem is the CBC does its best to promote political and cultural ideas which are, at best, dated and silly, and, at worst, biased and damaging to the political discourse.
    They receive government funding – as a result they want desperately to elect a party which will be as generous as possible, and this means slamming any person or party that isn’t to the left of the political spectrum.

  50. cbc otawa
    Posted April 23, 2010 at 7:35 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Hey it’s my money too! I pay taxes! Do you really think shutting down the CBC will improve your lot in life by on iota?

    As a taxpayer you shell over 8 cents a day…. how much money do you spend on much, much, more useless crap?

    • Had Enough....
      Posted April 23, 2010 at 8:17 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      Yes, the demise of the CBC will make my life better. Not because the TV will be gone, because I haven’t watched CBC TV news in 20 years, and certainly not because I’ll miss the other CBC TV programs. I can’t remember the last time I watched one. What will make my life better is the demise of CBC radio: the incessant left-leaning of CBC1, and the appalling mess the corporation has made of CBC2. It’s this last I think I resent the most: the lame pop music, the stupid chatter. Tell me someone–do more people listen to CBC2 now than five years ago?

    • Posted April 23, 2010 at 9:59 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      “Hey its my money too! I pay taxes!”

      No, you don’t. You just return some of it.

      • cbc ottawa
        Posted April 26, 2010 at 4:19 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        No man is an island… including you my dear. We all benefit from someone else’s labour… and I guess I benefit from yours. Thank you!

    • Anonymous
      Posted April 24, 2010 at 7:09 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      The very literate “CBC Otawa” (sic) says “As a taxpayer you shell over 8 cents a day. how much money do you spend on much, much, more useless crap?”

      Your statistic is only valid if every Canada were a taxpayer. But thank you so much for confirming the general consensus that this is money spent on useless crap. I would find it difficult to find “more useless crap” in my day-to-day expenditures, but if I were to do so, I would speedily stop spending my money in such a wasteful manner.

      And it’s the bloviators of the left, clearly CBC employees, who confirm my anti-CBC bias. None of you seem able, even when your own livelihoods and working conditions are under the microscope, to abandon your assumption that conservative values are code for misogyny, racism, and intolerance. Those of us who espouse those values have been waiting for the day when the evidence of your bias will finally lead to change. And here you are helping our cause. Thank you.

      • Scratching My Head
        Posted April 24, 2010 at 12:18 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        “If every Canada…..”. So that’s literate?

      • cbc ottawa
        Posted April 26, 2010 at 1:05 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        Sorry I didn’t take typing way back in the 80s when I was in public school.
        Typos are obviously a sign of low intelligence…

        CBC is not on the left.. the true left is too scary for the CBC. The CBC is Rosedale left, 50 something ladies, middle management civil service left. I should know… I actually work there but don’t worry I don’t type scripts.

        Have a nice day Anon!v :)

    • Posted April 26, 2010 at 4:00 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      It’s spelled “Ottawa”, darling.

    • loki
      Posted April 27, 2010 at 3:24 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      I see innumeracy is rampant in the CBC consuming crowd. Assuming a Canadian population of 35000000 with every child paying taxes, the amount is 14.1 cents/day. With less than 50% of the population paying taxes we’re up to over 28.2 cents/day/taxpayer which is way more than I think the CBC is worth.

      I don’t watch the CBC, but then I don’t watch any TV news. Listening to CBC radio is an absolute waste of time and I have a CD player in my vehicle which lets me chose what I want to listen to.

      The only thing worth watching on CBC is hockey night in Canada but I don’t have time to watch TV. The internet gives me the news I want and I can compare sources and also get a far more in-depth analysis from millions of blogs where people really do some in-depth research instead of the steady diet of statist propaganda one gets from the CBC. Even online Pravda is a more objective source of news than the current CBC.

      I’ve heard from other people that nothing was mentioned on CBC about climategate; only the most significant news story this century. If I want to get climate news I’ll go to wattsupwiththat.com or climateaudit.org. Anthony Watts and Steve McIntyre produce top notch climatologic work on a shoestring and the only thing CBC has on it’s side is that moronic “the sky is falling” non-climatologist Dr. Fruitfly.

      Privatize the CBC immediately as it is a total waste of taxpayers money.

  51. Posted April 23, 2010 at 2:45 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    As always nasty personal attacks from the left is ALL THEY’VE GOT!.. not a mention of the fact that it is clear the CBC shills for the left IS the HOME of the left and is funded by all taxpayers in this country. And that should stop and stop NOW. If we DE-FUNDED this scabby travesty of a ‘network’ they would have to survive on their own merit.
    Novel thought, eh!
    Commerical revenue alone without the never ending milk of honey from the government. I like Kate’s comment to paraphrase : just keep on biting the hand that feeds you.
    We like the way these things generally end.
    ( And the sooner the better in my view)

    • Anonymous
      Posted April 23, 2010 at 3:45 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      It’s not a question of left or right. It’s a question of ugly site Small Dead animals, versus non-ugly site Teamakers. Stop using fascist tactics to change the subject.

      Snowbunnie your garbage dump of a site site ain’t collecting any Webbies, either.

      Once you successfully shut down the CBC maybe I’ll call you to help me with my resume! In the meantime, you should see what I do with YOUR money! It’d make you puke.

      • Enkidu
        Posted April 23, 2010 at 7:24 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        “… you should see what I do with YOUR money! Itd make you puke.”

        We do. It does.

  52. Posted April 23, 2010 at 12:59 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Please, keep insulting the people who’ve been paying your wages. We like the way these things end.

    • Family Feud
      Posted April 23, 2010 at 1:05 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      By “people who pay your wage”, do you mean the taxpayers of Canada?

    • anony
      Posted April 28, 2010 at 1:58 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      the poster is a commenter on a public blog. it could be anyone (like Kate, for instance) and isn’t necessarily a cbcer. that’s the thing with anonymous online comments. they’re anonymous.

  53. cbc ottawa
    Posted April 23, 2010 at 11:46 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Feel the LOVE!

  54. jack
    Posted April 23, 2010 at 11:41 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    FIRE. THEM. ALL.

  55. Fred
    Posted April 23, 2010 at 11:15 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    “Im stunned that the people running Canadas public broadcaster would prefer to keep discussions concerning the publics interest not to mention money locked away in a boardroom in Toronto”

    You’re kidding right?

    Secrecy is the firstest and biggest rule for those senior snivel servants. It is how they protect their entitlements, their lip-lock on the public teat, their extravagant travel and entertainment, their sense of moral superiority.

    The CBC is a cesspool of wsted taxpayer’s money.

    De-fund it NOW.

  56. K
    Posted April 23, 2010 at 10:08 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Awwwh, someone seems a wee bit sensitive today, some left-wing a…

    Lol

    • Anonymous
      Posted April 23, 2010 at 11:45 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      Kate are these weird-ass trolls regulars from your site?

      Seriously, how fucked is that Aaron guy, who implies a physical fight over the use of a tried-and-true Frank magazine-ism?

      Anonymous 10:57, this isn’t a CBC sanctioned site — nice attempt to take 2 and 2 and add it up to 5, though.

      And as for you Kate, don’t hide from the real crux of the debate. Your site is visually ugly, especially compared to Tea Makers. The sophomoric design makes me not care to even read your jank-ass musings.

  57. Posted April 23, 2010 at 2:04 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    You talk about your work how your boss is a jerk
    You talk about your church and your head when it hurts
    You talk about the troubles you’ve been having with your brother
    About your daddy and your mother and your crazy ex-lover
    You talk about your friends and the places that you’ve been
    You talk about your skin and the dimples on your chin
    The polish on your toes and the run in your hose
    And God knows you’re gonna talk about your clothes
    You know talking about you makes me smile
    But every once in awhile*

    You might all just shut the f*** up and listen to your former audience.

    *With apologies to Toby Keith

    • Anonymous
      Posted April 23, 2010 at 8:35 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      Oh, just what we needed. Some cryptically un-funny doo doo from Small Dead Animals.

      You should concentrate more on fixing your own ugly-ass blog, lady. It’s like Fawny for right-wing assholes!

      • Aaron
        Posted April 23, 2010 at 10:47 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        Will you repeat the ‘ass-hole’ part in person?

      • Anonymous
        Posted April 23, 2010 at 10:57 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        Wow, good to know that the national broadcaster thinks that the 36% of Canadians on the right wing of the political spectrum. This commenter didn’t even have the intelligence to say “far right” so that they could claim that they weren’t talking about all right wingers.

        If we can’t cut all funding to the CBC, can we at least slash the 36% that represents the portion of the population that is ridiculed and scorned by the CBC staff?

      • Prairie Boy
        Posted April 26, 2010 at 5:05 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        Was that too cryptic? Ok add you’re a loser.

  58. Anonymous
    Posted April 23, 2010 at 12:38 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    You can’t blame the CBC and their higher profile employees for focusing their efforts on trying to win social networking popularity contests. It’s all they have left. The ratings and content wars have been lost. The CRTC bitch-slaps The Corp every chance it gets. A $1.7 billion budget only goes so far these days. Hubert had to fire his personal assistant’s personal assistant. These are dark days.

  59. PoonGirljoined December 31, 2009
    Posted April 22, 2010 at 11:09 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    I guess “Alphonse Ouimet stands on some moral highground” and Joe Clark is stuck at the bottom … again.

  60. SadMan
    Posted April 22, 2010 at 10:58 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    But CBC is relevant and Canadian. Hell, look what CBC News just posted on Facebook:

    CBC News: 1 more ‘like’ and we crack 6900! make our Thursday night people : )

    Wow! Way to tell stories about my home and native land. You rock, Gibraltar!

  61. PoonGirljoined December 31, 2009
    Posted April 22, 2010 at 10:55 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Why is nasty Joe Clard writing about me ? He best keep my name out of his mouth. At least when I hid for a while, it wasn’t in a closet.

  62. Patrice Norteljoined May 8, 2009
    Posted April 22, 2010 at 10:51 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Hey Ouimet! Great to see you back on the tea-n3tz, mon chum!

    Normally, I check out this guy Joe Clark’s w3b site 4 all tha coolest closed-captioning and w3bz usability stuff. This leak story is so big even he is talkin5 about it! And he’s been a blogger 4 twenty years, d00d!

    http://blog.fawny.org/2010/04/22/whyweleak/

    Maybe you should invite this guy to write some artikl3z for Tea-maker5!

  63. Duck Boy
    Posted April 22, 2010 at 9:01 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    What Anon said above.
    More transparent, news shift, less filling, mo’ money for Magid.
    Hub’s a dud
    Spears’r’us
    A former CBC NN big shot is now someone’s assistant. Sounds like success to me.

  64. Anonymous
    Posted April 22, 2010 at 8:00 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    The content on CBC is suffering because it hires and indulges National Reporters who might put in the odd day’s work (why do you think they have the time to conduct such a silly poll) and rarely file stories. The loudest complainers are reporters who have no desire to pursue the type of journalism they supposedly hold so dear. They simply want to be left alone to ‘work their sources’ and file the occasional story. Being a constructive part of the solution is much harder than the cowardly route taken here….which is to lob anonymous grenades. All of you hard-done-by reporters should peak up publicly. Don’t fear recrimination. You work for the CBC, you can’t be fired.
    All change is difficult. With federal funding stagnant, more has to be done with less.

    • Swirling Loosenuts
      Posted April 22, 2010 at 10:23 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      National reporters get where they are because they’re bright and ambitious. Their complaint is with the dilution of radio news in favour of the sucking vortex of resources that is television. Rabinovitch was told years ago the melding exercise had already been tried regionally and was an abject failure. I recall Rabinovitch also saying at a Radio Council meeting, when such things still existed, that after a year in the job he still hadn’t looked at the radio budget to determine its adequacy. ‘Nuff said.

    • Anonymous
      Posted April 23, 2010 at 3:49 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      Out of the mouth of someone who works 37.5 hour weeks and has no clue what they’re talking about. Most national reporters work 60 hour week on an average week and when there’s a big story that goes up to 80-100 hours. It is a committment that requires sacrifices you are clearly not familiar with. Your stereotypical comment demonstrates it is a job you will never be qualified to earn.
      If you think national reporters haven’t been doing more with less year after year, you don’t work for the CBC or you come to work high.

      • Doowleb
        Posted April 23, 2010 at 11:53 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        60-80 hours a week?
        Why does every story from the MSM appear to be pre approved and identical to every other MSM source? If you read the Globe and Mail, you’ve read every other legacy paper in Canada as well.
        60-80 hours a week?
        Sounds like the bleeting from the teachers unions about prep time. In fact they have been teaching and testing from the same play book for decades.
        Why is the parking lot basically empty at most schools hours before the real world gets home?

      • Anonymous
        Posted April 23, 2010 at 12:09 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        You’re right. I don’t work for the CBC (anymore). There are many dedicated and inspired national reporters at the corp. But there are many who, once they attain that position, bring down the batting average of the rest of the team. I know them, you know them. And they are the individuals that complain the most about workload issues.
        Every professional in the private sector works 60 hours per week. National reporters are professionals and are expected to work more than 37.5 hours.
        So while you might think that deserves a gold star at the CBC, the rest of working world yawns and rolls their eyes.

        • cbc ottawa
          Posted April 23, 2010 at 12:59 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

          Ya we should all work all the time since work is the only thing that makes life worth living; work and money, yeah money….

          Why do people come down so hard on employees who do not want to sacrifice their entire life to a corporation?

          If you want to work 60 hrs great! Doesn’t mean we all should!

          • KevinB
            Posted April 27, 2010 at 4:23 am | #

            Buddy,

            Work as little or as long as you like. But when fewer than 2% of Canadians watch you every night, PLEASE STOP TAKING MY TAX DOLLARS for your little wankfest, ‘K?

            I’m doing tax returns right now. How about a check box – I will give $2, $5, $10, other to the CBC? Do you have the stones to bet that total CBC will go up?

            Didn’t think so.

        • Anonymous
          Posted April 24, 2010 at 5:52 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

          Never said it deserves a gold star, but it certainly doesn’t deserve the disdain in some of these comments. Never said everyone has to or should choose such a work schedule either. But, honestly, the bitching about national reporters in some of the comments is completely undeserved (and it’s not just the national reporters either, especially in tv, where the producers and camerapeople often and usually work the same schedule). Are there are few lazy asses? Of course, there are a few lazy asses in every department. But, when I see people making disparaging comments about national reporters being whiners who only file here and there, I think a reality check is in order. It’s a bullshit stereotype that national reporters are spoiled and lazy and those comments are clearly made by those who don’t have a clue or do have an axe to grind. It’s simply not true for the vast majority.

      • Anonymous
        Posted April 25, 2010 at 7:56 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

        what a crock of shit. ar you implying that theses people work 60 – 80 hours a weeks because of their dedication to news? Let’s remember that they are all part of a Union and if they are not getting OVERTIME for the extra hours (many make well over $100,000 per year after all is said and done) they accumulate “LIEU” time and go on vacation during the summer (many accumulating weeks and weeks of lieu) over and above their alotted vacation. Cry me a river – these people are very well compensated but tend to be the biggest Whiners. Let’s all remember – it’s only TV and no lives would be lost if they don’t do their jobs well – which is the case in most instances.

  65. Anon
    Posted April 22, 2010 at 5:49 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    @Curb Your Enthusiasm

    Or more creatiivity in front of cameras.
    But radio hires Al Rae and a Winnipeg cabal to write (badly) comedy for radio and even perform. He was one of the few soi-disant “comedians” on The Master Debaters radio show to be openly booed by the audience numerous times.

    They don’t have a hook. Some of these bureaucrats and nomenklatura never get off the stage or removed from the wings.

    • Family Feud
      Posted April 22, 2010 at 7:28 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      Is this the consequence of nepotism and in-breeding in the CBC: Flaccid bureaucracy and a grim march to the american celebrity drum?

    • anony
      Posted April 23, 2010 at 8:27 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      What is most amazing is how long that Winnipeg unit has managed to stink. Years now without a laugh.

  66. Knowlton Nash the Slash
    Posted April 22, 2010 at 5:13 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Remember, gentle readers that Ms. McGuire previously cut her teeth on the Radio 2 revamp. She’s well skilled in Stursbergian ‘overhauling’ and other spooky doublethink tactics.

    The pattern – scapegoat critics as ‘cranks’ with an axe to grind. When ratings and reputation slide, it’s the fault of bitter ex-cbcers or the audience (who are obviously morons). It’s **your fault there’s trouble in the HUB, Ouimet! hahaha.

    It’s all presented as the growing pains of some type of tough love exercise in turning the place into a monetized, content-centric something-or-other that’s more viable.

    It’s a crock of shit.

    What made CBC work in the past is was a symbiotic relationship between creative shit disturber types wanting to tell Canadian stories, and the bureaucrats who keep the watercoolers filled and the paycheques signed. With a healthy layer of super-talented technical and artistic types in the middle.

    Management’s ranks grow as the product becomes more and more mediocre, and the abolitionist/de-funding types stand ready to twist the knife. Same old same old.

    • Curb Your Enthusiasm
      Posted April 22, 2010 at 5:24 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

      I don’t want to de-fund. I want less management and more creativity. I want more focus on Canadian culture, not American celebrities. I want my CBC!

      But…..if all I get is more management, less creativity, less Canadian culture and more American celebrities…..you see where we end up? De-fund, ’cause I’m going to watch CTV instead.

  67. Posted April 22, 2010 at 12:47 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    Bravo!

  68. cbc ottawa
    Posted April 22, 2010 at 11:58 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    At last a real discussion on a real issue! Thank you Ouimet!

  69. The CBC Is A Total Mess
    Posted April 22, 2010 at 11:47 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    I’m going to second that, wirehead – thanks for coming back Ouimet. I speak for many people when I say ‘thanks’. It’s time that this ‘web of corruption and chaos’ get out to the public – the people who truly own the public broadcaster. The changes at CBC are not working and instead of admitting that, upper management decides to live in their own little bubble pretending that the changes are good, sending out memos patting each other on the back. Instead of taking responsiblity for bad decisions, they pretend everything is great and run and collect their bonuses. But, yet in reality, everyday workers are getting laid off, the public is tuning out, and money is being wasted each and every day. It is time the workers speak up and it’s time the public know what is really going on with their money. Taxpayers are not paying for new programs or a better public broadcaster. Taxpayers are paying for the senior VP’s to fly around the world first class to attend media conventions; they are paying for renovations at the CBC to move studios and offices around for no reason at all; they are paying for upper management to allow George’s friends to get jobs at the CBC so that longtime staff can be booted out the door. I wonder how long it takes management to come up with these ridiculous reasons for axing people like Barbara Budd. It’s time to stand up and be heard. So, to the national reporters, thanks for taking a stand. And, to Ouimet, thanks for sharing it with us, the public, the real bosses of the CBC.

  70. wirehead
    Posted April 22, 2010 at 9:39 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    thanks for coming back Ouimet. this was worth it, hopefully you continue to be truly insidethecbc.

  71. Curb Your Enthusiasm
    Posted April 22, 2010 at 12:03 am | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    If it looks like censorship, and it feels like censorship, it’s censorship.

  72. Allanjoined April 10, 2009
    Posted April 21, 2010 at 11:56 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    More bon mots from

    Jennifer …

    ” It was gratifying to see people engage in making CBC News a better service.”

    “I totally understand the motivation of former CBCers with an axe to grind”

    Cathy …

    “asked her if these issues are growing pains, or something else. To which she replied its hard to tell. If were still having this conversation in 5 years, then well know.”

  73. Allanjoined April 10, 2009
    Posted April 21, 2010 at 11:39 pm | # | Reply to this masterpiece

    IT’S A NEW CBC NEWS … NOW … MORE TRANSPARENT!


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