Click here to view the embedded video.

Sure, it was not much of a post at all. In fact, it was pretty awful. But the point is, it was one of the smartest things I ever did.

So happy birthday, wherever you are. We couldn’t have made it this far without you.

Magid’s role is downplayed. Ian Morrison has a say. The Hub is explained. Jennifer McGuire is “considered by many to be a loyal, ambitious, competent employee.” Longtime Tea Makers’ favourite Jeffrey Dvorkin makes an appearance, telling the story of how he was rejected by Stursberg in 2008:

“You’re a good journalist and programmer and all that, but that’s not what we’re looking for.”

“What are you looking for?”

“Well, we’re looking for someone with experience in the music industry because we think CBC Radio is underperforming as a marketing agency,” said Stursberg.

“What do you mean?”

“Well, CBC Radio could do better in marketing for its products, like music.”

“You mean like iTunes?”

“Exactly.”

I’m still not sure what they’re talking about. The CBC selling music in iTunes? Or giving away podcasts? But weren’t CBC podcasts already at the top of the charts in 2008?

Stursberg looms large in this article, like he did in the last one the RRJ wrote. But Burman looms larger. Stursberg was never any Burman, but he can’t win to save himself in 2010:

“What Stursberg wants—a network that isn’t just surviving but thriving—is the dream shared by everyone at CBC, and it’s ironic that it was Burman’s study that opened the door for the news renewal, as Burman is revered while Stursberg is vilified.”

Canada gets the CBC it deserves. And if people like Stursberg are left to run the CBC, that’s who we have left to run the CBC. The piece concludes:

“CBC News can either continue, underfunded and struggling to compete for shorter attention spans, or be burnt to the ground.”

I guarantee that the end, when it comes, will not be so dramatic. Or violent. Or hot.

It will be cold and quiet. And we will hardly notice.

(ps – is Twitter back up yet?)

One truth about the Truth Farm is that it’s built on a separate system than the rest of the Tea Makers site. It looked like it was integrated, but in fact it lived in its own silo. It was always second tier. This distinction was artificial, technical, unnecessary, cumbersome, and was a drain on resources.

If the CBC has taught me anything, it’s that user-generated content is king, and silos must be destroyed.

So now this site works differently. Anyone can post to The Tea Makers. There is no Truth Farm. Simply go to http://www.theteamakers.com/write/ and type. If you want your own byline, you must log in, but you don’t have to.

UGC is lovely, but we can’t forget CBCGC. CBC employees know that a prime source of intel is the CBC job postings, so I’m syndicating these jobs in a new section, which makes them easier to find and allows us to discuss them openly.

It may surprise you to know that The Tea Makers gets more traffic now than it has in any time in its history since the 2005 CBC Lockout. It’s more popular today than it’s ever been.

This, at a time when the blog as a format is supposed to be waning. This, at a time when no website save Small Dead Animals will dare to link to us. This, at a time when hardly anyone with a job wants to publicly acknowledge we exist. This, at a time when CBC management dares not call us by name, not even when they chastise us.

You can make of this what you want. I have a few ideas of my own. But there’s no denying that people are reading The Tea Makers because people are writing The Tea Makers. As time goes on, this is rarely me. So I want to thank our writers and commenters, sources and supporters for all their work, encouragement, and enthusiasm.

In a very real way, this site would not exist without you, I tried to kill it a few times over. You convinced me to do otherwise.

This site has always been about discussion, and now, after all these years, I’m inviting you to come in from the cold, into this house, and sit down and talk like an equal. Part of me is nervous and hopes you motherfuckers behave and wipe your shoes.

And part of me hopes you don’t.

So it goes that we write under pseudonyms or anonymously with hubris, style, grace, and honor.

These thoughts floated through my mind as I made my way home from the secret underwater lair in which the Tea Makers party was recently held.

Despite worries to the contrary, the party was exactly as advertised. CBCers and Tea Makers editors, authors, commenters and readers drinking and talking. It was a masquerade party in reverse. The masks came off. There was nary a laptop in sight.

Amazingly, no one was knifed.

There was a lot of ground to cover. Entire years’ worth. I’m not going to go into who was there or what was said. Initially we had a strict no-blogging no-tweeting no-photos policy but by the end of the evening we agreed to relax it. You can find snippets online if you look hard enough.

But as I went through those streets on my way home it became clear to me that what we have are the makings for some kind of Toronto Media salon, in the classic sense. Or maybe a Salon des Refusés? It was hard to tell. History is still unwritten.

Years ago, Jesse Brown and some of his friends started something they were calling Nonfiction. It was not perfect, but it was better than nothing.

What I experienced that night was something else entirely, and again, not perfect. But nothing like it exists in Toronto right now. Maybe it should?

What form this should take and how it should work is something that I still need to figure out. But there will be more of these parties and I encourage you to come. We won’t bite. You will be welcomed.

Conversations about The Tea Makers web site offered me clarity. Nights later I awoke soaked in sweat, in a strange bed in a strange land and in my mind’s eye I saw the path before me that I needed to take, laid out perfectly.

The Tea Makers will be changing again. I’m not going to openfile myself here and brag about how it will alter everything we’ve come to know and love and cherish, but it kind of will. We have a track record. Our wake is scattered with the bones of forlorn douchebags.

It should be finished by the time Do you think Jian Tweets because he is Lonely? reaches the unprecedented milestone of 1000 responses.

Depending on how fast we can work and how lonely Jian gets.

“Replace Mansbridge with that dashing elfin metrosexual, Ian Capstick. The man exudes CBC Toronto style.”

- BL@KBIRD on Small Dead Animals

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.

Well, one thing it is is a way for CBC News to allocate resources to journalists. Say you need an interview for a story you’re doing. You would submit your needs to the HUB and content would be doled to you in priority.

Who knows, you might not need that interview at all. Maybe a TV voiceover would do. Or perhaps a vintage 7-UP commercial?

The CBC News HUB is also a step closer towards the IKEAization of news. When you’re building an IKEA bed, you need some screws. You don’t need your own special screws, you just need some screws that will work on your bed. Who cares where they come from? IKEA sorts out the screw thing, you concentrate on making the bed.

And IKEA, in its wisdom, might realize that those screws will also work in a night stand. IKEA might reuse that kind of screw, but the point is: you get screwed.

At the same time, the CBC News HUB is a way to concentrate money, time and resources on what really matters: breaking news. Breaking news, above all else, comes first. This is what the Magid consultants told us Canadians want.

So how’s this working out, then?

We can see for ourselves. Results of an internal survey of national CBC radio reporters were leaked to The Tea Makers today. What do these journalists think of the HUB?

I see. But what about the news? Is the broadcast better?

Although surely your Tweets can’t be beat?

But there must be something good to come out of all of this?

Now, I’m sure some of you are saying: “So what? These old guys will complain about anything,” and you might be right. These geezers enjoy their complaining. So does anyone who works at the CBC. It’s only natural.

But a lot of these written responses ring true to anyone who has spent any time in any part of the Corp:

I, like many other CBC Radio people I talk to, have never been so discouraged and dispirited. My skills are being wasted, and the only challenge in my working life now is dealing with the incredibly increased stress level. I don’t see opportunities to do strong journalism. I feel I work for a corporation that no longer understands public broadcasting, that cares about ratings and revenue more than content, that no longer understands that CBC has done such amazing work in the past because smart people wanted to work here, could feel proud of the work they were able to do. That’s no longer true, and I am now planning my exit strategy, along with a lot of other smart people. I never thought I’d leave CBC, was proud to be a part of the best journalistic team in the country. I no longer feel that way.

If you ever wondered what a national radio news service in its death throes looked like, just skim this report, there’s plenty of blood and confusion there:

Worst time in my years as a National Reporter. Strike that. It was briefly worse when they locked us out, gambled our credibility with the audience, and sullied the reputation of journalists by taking out full page ads declaring us to be “unreasonable”.
But this is a close second.

CBC National Radio News Reporter Survey – Full Report

11am April 21 update – More details on this at Now the Details.

An exchange between Kris Krug, new media visionary in his own mind, and Steve Billinger, new media manager of the CBC, at some kind of new media fest:

Krug: “What are some of the factors unique to Canada in the digital media landscape?”

Billinger: “It’s highly regulated, there’s no money, and people don’t like to innovate.”

Delivered with a satisfied grin, he goes on to explain why no one ever does anything interesting in the “new media landscape” in Canada. People need to feel warm and fuzzy through consensus, and then after a lot of discussion, nothing ever happens. Probably too many managers? It all sounds achingly familiar to anyone who has been to a meeting at the CBC.

It’s amazing the excuses CBC managers will come up with to explain “why the CBC sucks,” besides the obvious ones that uncomfortably point back to CBC management. Now, the last time we checked, the internet was hardly regulated at all. Also, some people were actually making money on it, as crazy as that sounds! And finally, people love to innovate. People in the CBC building, even. It’s true.

Which begs the question: as a new media manager at a major Canadian media company, which doesn’t even need to generate revenue, what is Billinger doing to become part of the solution, other than shooting the breeze with douches like Kris Krug?