The CBC’s First Quarter Update
At the CBC English Services first quarter update this afternoon in Toronto, Kirstine Stewart, Interim Executive Vice President of English Services, said the corporation is “doing very well,” it’s ahead of revenue targets, while underlining the importance of content.
This was Stewart’s first quarterly update following Richard Stursberg’s departure, and it had a distinctly different tone.
Although Stewart kicked off the presentation with an update on the revenue picture, the discussion quickly turned to content.
“The CBC is here to reflect Canadians, and what it is that they want to talk about,” she said before turning over the microphone to the heads of the radio, television, news, and the regions to elaborate on the content picture.
Denis Donlon, the general manager of English Radio, said radio is still on a roll “virtually all of our morning shows, which is prime time on the radio, are top three in their markets.”
Donlon added that CBC Radio now has 13 shows that are broadcast internationally, and radio is well positioned to respond to the new multi-platform world. “The Debaters is going to television in January,” Donlon said, and Canadians are downloading 1.2 million podcasts every week. “We will thrive in the world of choice.”
Christine Wilson, the interim general manager of CBC Television, said the TV side has had a number of big successes recently, pointing to Dragons’ Den, Battle of the Blades, Being Erica syndicating in 40 countries, the Nature of Things’ 50th anniversary season and the upcoming premiere of the the Queen in 3D, on September 20th.
Jennifer McGuire, the general manger of CBC News, also focused on the content, “enterprise journalism defines us as a public broadcaster,” she said, noting that the news department had broken an unprecedented number of stories this spring and summer.
Concerning the news renewal process, McGuire acknowledged how difficult it has been, calling it a “tremendous upheaval,” that had challenged all the assumptions about how the department operates.
McGuire said “It was necessary to take a good hard look at what we do,” and “work on ways to better serve our audiences.”
She added that there are still tweaks to make as part of the renewal process, “but the emphasis this year for CBC News now shifts to content.”
In response to a question about the ratings for The National, McGuire said “Specifically with News we need to shift the narrative not only to an audience-revenue narrative, but also in terms of the value of the journalism.”
McGuire said CBC News set the news agenda a number of times recently, and that contribution needs to be acknowledged.
|
Email This Post |
| Behind the Scenes, Executives |
So is McGuire saying (some would say admitting) that the quality of The National has suffered? That’s encouraging. When did “value of journalism” become a lesser “narrative” (aka “priority”?) than “audience-revenue” (aka “advertising dollars”?)?
McGuire’s comment is excellent. The National’s presentation style has improved in the last few weeks, and lately The National’s journalism can’t be beat. For a while though, quality was taking a backseat. Those Wendy Mesley segments were not the best last season. The return of Diana Swain and the virtual un-retiring of Brian Stewart (he’s been doing a lot of stories lately) will serve the show well.
On the radio front, the quality of Radio 2 still needs to be improved. It doesn’t matter what genre is being presented, the quality of the broadcast needs to be exceptional. Unfortunately, Tempo, R2 Drive, and sometimes R2 Morning still have trouble with this, largely because the first two programs have hosts that aren’t expert broadcasters.
For the most part CBC content may fare well, but in the future world of internet radio in vehicles I have a hard time seeing how Radio 2 will survive unless its quality and cohesion across programs improves. (And endless talk of Song Quest is not the way to go.)
I am fully aware that this won’t be a popular opinion, but the news renewal, for me, has been very meaningful and positive. I don’t work for, nor am I associated with, the CBC. I am a lowly listener/viewer. Before, getting news from CBC, particularly local news, meant going to several platforms to get a complete picture, which honestly didn’t happen…I went elsewhere. Now I can get a quick snapshot from the source that fits my schedule, be it online, tv or radio. An increased focus on content should only make this better. Keep up the good work!
CBC R 1 dropped to 5 percent from 7 percent in the Vancouver Market.
Saying in the top 3 doesn’t mean much when bbm.ca shows how dull Q and the national afternoon “fill” is.
Radio-Canada has localized their Radio 2, and their Radio 1 is top-notch.
Maybe Donlon should step out of the way and let SRC run all radio in both languages.
No mention of their hatred for CBC Overnight that they have saddled it with soporific PRI and CBC snore shows.
Judy Maddren, Barbara Budd where are you?
“In response to a question about the ratings for The National, McGuire said “Specifically with News we need to shift the narrative not only to an audience-revenue narrative, …”
====================
Alert!! Alert!! Alert!! Bureaucratese spoken here.
What does that mean in plain English? As journalists you ought to be able to use plain English, so please interpret.
Hey Bill,
What time range are you referencing for the drop?
And, I’m surprised you say that about Q. Last I heard that was the top rated show in that timeslot in radio history. But that was about a year ago, so maybe it’s changed?
“but the emphasis this year for CBC News now shifts to content” -Denise Donlon
What was the emphasis on before?
^ er… I should have attributed that quote to Jennifer McGuire.
ok Louise, since you asked, it means we need to stop looking at ratings and dollars alone.
It’s not really a fair report since the CBC is still hiding details.
Maybe by “value of the journalism” and “shifting the content”, these newspeakers are trying to say that CBC will broadcast something that is *not* left-wing g20-protester hippie “Canada doesn’t give enough money to Africa” nonsense, and concentrate on issues that actually matter to a majority of Canadians. Like high taxes, crime on First Nations communities, and high turd world immigration.
In all fairness, Evan Soloman / Power & politics seems to be one decent CBC show: he actually sometimes has a tell-it-the-way-it is commentator: Ezra Levant; someone who is *not* a left-wing tax-loving socialist.
I guess we’ll see?
Evan Soloman is over his head at Power and Politics. He is a great interviewer for feature interviews, and especially on topics related to literature, media, arts, and religion; but at P&P he only frowns and stumbles over questions.
Well, I happen to really like Q!
On another note, this Q1 update had next to no information on the actual quarter – I would’ve liked to have seen more business info. Instead, it was a rah-rah thing about programming, which is what almost every all-staff ends up being….
Paul Mcgrath says:
ok Louise, since you asked, it means we need to stop looking at ratings and dollars alone.
==============
Let me be more specific. Does the bolded part mean they do that now or they do not do that now? It seems to me it’s saying they do not do this now since it says “Specifically with News we need to shift the narrative not only to an audience-revenue narrative, …”
Or does the CBC employ Greek Oracles to write and interpret their reports? The way it’s written, it could be interpreted in more than one way.
My gosh, the CBC is biased to the left. I’m watching ‘At Issue” with Peter Mansbridge and a bunch of other liberals. One segment dwelled on Baird’s “Toronto elite”, pummeling him for it. (No mention from the Liberal party leader’sa comment about Sun readers being illiterate….)
Anyways, the next segment showed how kind and visionary Ignatieff is, and gave him 90 seconds to bash Harper. Then Peter Mansbridge and his left wing loons talkd about how someday Comrade Ignatieff might become PM.
And what’s with the CBC’s love for this Somali criminal? Send him back to Africa. Case closed.
Then they talked about how Kory Teneycke’s departure from SUN tv means that the new station is in deep trouble. And that hopefully the CRTC won’t allow it.
CBC is the most biased, dangerous media company in the western world.
Hey, Truth, kinda makes you wonder what CBC has to hide, doesn’t it. Put that together with their refusal to comply with Ontario’s Access to Information Act requests, and it makes one very curious. There’s no telling what some really good investigative journalist who is not afraid to step outside the liberal/left thin straight line might dig up, but CBC is sure acting like there is something to hide.
I’m still waiting for clarification on the meaning of the bolded words in my previous comment, too. Because there seems to be more than one way to interpret those carefully chosen words, I gotta wonder if it means they finally got the hint. The hint being, you aren’t doing your job if the only folks you p*ss off are those on the right side of the aisle.
This whole thing about Teneycke is such a baldfaced farce, it’s hilarious. First Grandmother’s Corpse plants the Fox News North meme, or at least capitalizes on it by vigorously fertilizing, watering and cultivating it, with the the generous contribution of b*llcrap from the leftards in their comments sections, which she is always too happy to post.
And in no time flat everyone and their dog who hasn’t watched a minute of Fox News South is repeating the memes about how evil it is and are 100% convinced SunTV will be a Fox News South clone, without a shred of evidence to back it up.
(And BTW, although I don’t have cable or TV, I do watch the occasional YouTube video of segments from Fox News and find it rather refreshing, except for Megyn whatever her name is, but that’s alright. CBC have five or six like her at the opposite end of the spectrum) O’Reilly is really good, IMHO. I really like it when he and Dennis Miller get together. Not at all the hate monger the leftards who have never watched him make him out to be.
Next, CBC never, not even once, that I’ve seen, refers to Teneycke without prefacing his name with the words such as “Former Harper…” blah, blah, blah.
In other words, it’s the media which has created the “narrative” out of straw and sand and all the usual suspects lap it up as though the entire line is nothing but bare facts and truth.
All of this makes me wonder, what does the CBC have to fear? Are they afraid of some good, competent investigative journalist doing what they have heretofore refused to do? Does the refusal to comply with the Access to Information Act mean there is some paper trail providing evidence of some sort of under the table compact with the Libs that might be exposed?
Are they afraid some of the skeletons in the closet might come falling out? Another Liberal Party scandal, perhaps?
It almost seems like it. Why else would they be so stark raving terrified if they and their devotees seem so convinced the SunTV enterprise will be stillborn? Why are they trying so hard to ensure it will be stillborn? Is CTV doing the same thing? I don’t think so. Something is very suspicious here.
Louise, you created quite the narrative yourself.
As for your bolded words, I can’t clarify them any further than I already explained, anything else would be inference and speculation.
Paul Mcgrath says:
Louise, you created quite the narrative yourself.
To the extent that I created it rather than reported it: Goose – Gander. The MSM’s reports are full of speculation when there is no hard evidence, the CBC, no less than any others.
Even leftie bloggers have noticed it: “Sun Sets on Fox News Conspiracy Theory”
(http://unrepentantoldhippie.wordpress.com/2010/09/08/sun-sets-on-fox-news-north-conspiracy-theory/)
And as far as creating a narrative is concerned, take a look at any of the comments threads following any CBC New’s website story that has anything to do with Harper and the Conservatives (or Sun TV). Someone working for CBC has approved these comments for publication and a rather large number of them are full of extreme vitriol and hatred (and, I might add, rather devoid of reasoned argument). If CBC’s approval for publication of these kinds of statements isn’t “creating a narrative”, I don’t know what is.
I can only presume it’s also an indication of who CBC’s constituency is, since comments on the left side of the so-called “narrative” outnumber comments from the right side by a substantial margin. And that can only mean that CBC speaks for, and reflects, opinion on the left.
And tell me why CBC would pro-actively raise awareness of the Avaaz.org/Margaret Atwood petition? (http://www.cbc.ca/politics/insidepolitics/2010/09/question-of-the-day-186.html) If they are so neutral on the issue, why raise the subject? Why not just keep out of it altogether?
And by the way, wouldn’t it be refreshing to see CBC post a poll asking readers to state how many hours per week they spend watching the real Fox News channel. It would be interesting to see how many are actually using real, current, up-to-date observation and experience over a sufficient duration of time – rather than just repeating what they have been told – when casting their worn out aspersions. To date, the most of the comments from lefties I have seen about Fox News south, seems to indicate they have never watched the thing.
And finally, I challenge you or any of CBC’s loyal fans to find a single CBC published piece (which includes reader comments) about the proposed SunTV that:
a) Does not refer to it somewhere, either in the article itself, or in the comments, as Fox News North.
and
b) Does not mention Kory Teneycke’s name with a reference to his association with Stephen Harper or at the very least the Conservative Party, either in the article itself or in the comments.
I’m prepared to apologize for my mistaken assumptions if any are found, but please provide links to back up your claim. Good luck. I’ll be checking back.
Paul Mcgrath says:
As for your bolded words, I can’t clarify them any further than I already explained, anything else would be inference and speculation.
Okay. What’s this then? “ok Louise, since you asked, it means we need to stop looking at ratings and dollars alone.” (Your words, not mine.) Does that not infer that CBC is now, at least up until today’s date, looking at ratings and dollars alone? And if so, then the words “shift the narrative not only to must mean CBC intends to continue looking at ratings and dollars, but not only that?
You see, that’s the thing about oracles. They leave open the possibility of multiple interpretations as in “plausible deniability”.
But if you really want to know what my speculation is about the oracle’s wording, it’s that the CBC brass has decided that to ensure CBC’s continued existence as a tax funded corporation, it would be better if they were to p!ss off a few of their most loyal leftie fans than continue with the current one-sided 24/7 Liberal-left bias. If that’s the case, then hallelujah! They finally admitted it.
Maybe that’s why someone at CBC has been reading my blog and maybe that’s why they seem to be walking back from their strident attempt to silence and kill the new kid on the block before it’s even out of the womb. They’ve been caught red handed attempting to censor.
Oh. And they’ve already expressed concerns about the vitriol in the comments (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2010/09/10/pei-cbc-comments-anonymous-584.html?ref=rss&loomia_si=t0:a16:g2:r1:c0.0269939:b37229784) They’re starting to catch on. And yes. That is speculation.
This morning on AM, it was a long, tall soapbox with soft ball questions for David Suzuki. No troubling questions of leaked e-mails or “did you really want to throw people you disagree with in JAIL?” Nothing but a fawning host.
At least CKNW let in a couple callers who gave Suzuki a chance to rant again. He’s much more entertaining when he’s teetering on the thin edge of what’s left of his sanity.
Kinch pushed out?
In a remarkable career, defined by change, comes a change for one of our best-known leaders. Cynthia Kinch has decided to leave CBC News and start a new chapter of her life.
Cynthia’s decision is a loss for all of us. In her more than 30 years with the organization, she has been a leader, a trailblazer and a mentor. She has set an example for all of us– seize challenge, envision possibilities and celebrate success.
The National, Newsworld, CBC News Network, Canada Now, Mansbridge One-on-One, Meech Lake, the Gulf War, federal elections, September 11th, the death of Princess Diana are all among the projects and stories to which Cynthia contributed, and left her mark. These CBC milestones are underscored not only by her leadership but by Cynthia’s passion for journalism and her commitment to engaging Canadians.
Most recently Cynthia tackled the massive project of rebranding, relaunching and renewing Newsworld, now called CBC’s News Network. This was a monumental task that involved a complete change to the programming schedule, significant staffing and workflow changes, new sets, and the list goes on and on. The network launched cleanly and brilliantly. There are few leaders who could have pulled this off so seamlessly. It was a great achievement.
But one of Cynthia’s most important and lasting contributions to CBCNews and journalism generally, has been her tireless and generous commitment to mentoring. An unfailing source of praise and behind-the-scenes support, especially of young journalists, has defined Cynthia. And this legacy will live on.
Cynthia has decided to move into a consulting role in media and the broader world of communication. We are hopeful that she will continue to include CBCNews projects on her “to do” list.
Cynthia will continue to work with Jonathan Whitten on establishing a first alert news desk and enhancing our content units until the end of October. Her last day with us is October 29.
Please join me in thanking Cynthia for her service and dedication.
Jennifer McGuire
General Manager and Editor in Chief, CBC News
Funny you should mention that That other Bill. This is yet another way in which the CBC displays it’s bias. There is a place in broadcasting for hosts to allow their guests to expound at length on whatever expertize they may have on a given subject, without the hard questions or rude and disruptive sho that often passes as “debate”. That role helps to educate the viewing and listening public.
The trouble is, at the CBC, time slots for that sort of program is reserved for those who espouse the cause celebre de jour of the left. It will be a cold day in you know where, when we see hosts regularly giving equal opportunities to those who espouse cause celebre de jour. Normally those who oppose the CBC cause celebre are given the opportunity to show up at one of the regularly scheduled shouting matches, and they’ll be lucky if there is a neutral host who doesn’t frame the debate in favour of the left’s opinion – and that’s about it.
Are you listening Kirstine Stewart? Maybe you need to budget for some re-education camps so your staff understand the full depth and breadth of what fair and balanced really means and how it can and is being sabotaged at the CBC.
That should be “or rude and disruptive shouting match”
And the second “cause celebre de jour (middle of second para) should read “cause celebre de jour of the right”.
LOL, Louise. You don’t watch or own a tv but you certainly have a solid opinion on the outrageously leftie Corpse.
Perhaps you’d like to explain what you mean by “leftie”, hmmm.
Obviously advertising dollars are great for business, but every time I watch a video on the Web do I need to be subjected to a 30 sec commercial?
Anonymous: There’s no doubt in my mind that Louise’s definition of “leftie” is anyone who doesn’t hold EXACTLY the same views as her. And yes, how is it that someone who doesn’t watch or own a TV thinks that they can offer an informed opinion on anything related to television?
Anony-mouse asks me to explain what I mean by “leftie”. Here, with my apologies to Arbthnot, is my definition:
“That portion of the political spectrum that eventually dies from swallowing its own lies.”
Oh, and to be perfectly accurate, I do own a TV. It’s in storage. I listen to the radio and access all types of media via the web.
That explains a lot.
I haven’t cracked a science book ever, but I would like to revise the educational curriculum too. We need to teach creationism!
Oh, and I’ve never been on an airplane but I am sick and tired of Nav Canada favouring the pro-flight people who think man was meant to fly in big metal birds.
I will not rest until CBC reflects these views.
And stop showing teh gays too!
i must admit i dont personally know any right-wingers like louise but from reading them in comments on various sites they seem so irritable, mean and unhappy. why are they so angry? they’re the ones in power.
also isnt the term “MSM” an american sarah palin-like reference? i think she watches more fox news than she lets on.
tkillian, the letters MSM were out there long before Sarah Palin became a familiar name. Long, long before.
Lou Ese (cute), get your head out of the box. You’re preconceived notions/myths are an embarrassment to the folks on the Liberal-Left end of the spectrum and will be the death of it and the CBC. Let me set the record straight, so you can debate a bit more intelligently and not put your beloved CBC at risk:
Myth # 1: The study of evolution, especially human evolution was one of my favorite subjects in university. I still read whatever I can find about it as new angles on the theory and new fossil discoveries are made. I was reading about a newly discovered hominid fossil just the other day – a nearly complete skeleton of Australopithecus found in Australia, which was pretty amazing. I had no idea there were any of those creatures that far away from Africa.
And, this will really crush your hopes. I personally know many, many people who are on the right side of the political aisle but not one of them is a “creationist”. Extinctions happen all the time, except with organizations that are kept alive via artificial means (tax supported, that is) and folks who cling to myths that they themselves have created.
Myth # 2: I am not afraid of flying. I marvel at technology. I’ve traveled over (literally) and landed in, many parts of the planet via airlines as diverse as KAL, MEA, Air France, British Airways, Air Canada (the worst) and WestJet. I’ve traveled throughout most of Canada, several countries in Europe and the Middle East. I’ve traveled in the US and the Caribbean. So where you get that notion from, I don’t know, unless it’s another figment of your self-immolating imagination.
So just what are you trying to say? It’s not even marginally funny. It’s just vacuous and revealing, kind of in the same vein as what Stephen Colbert’s appearance before a Congressional committee on illegal immigration tells us about the current state of affairs within the Democratic party. (Has CBC News told you about that fiasco yet?) It’s fallen really flat and has backfired on the one who requested his appearance, and by extension, her party., just like you words here should do.
Myth # 3: I am not expecting CBC to reflect stupidity, although that has never stopped them from doing so. You’re comment was approved, after all and such approval reflects rather badly on our Grandmother’s Corpse.
Myth # 4: I have no problem with gays. Where on earth did you get that notion from? You seem to be in very deep trouble. In your warm and comfy little cocoon, you seem to have sheltered yourself so well you have no idea what it is that banging on your door hoping to wake you up. It’s folks like you that have themselves become a caricature.
Come to think of it, maybe the person who approves comments like yours has some ulterior motive. Could he or she actually want to sabotage the CBC? Hmmmmm. Sometimes I wonder about that when I read the comments below CBC News’ pieces posted on the web. They are all screened by a moderator but many of them are outrageously vitriolic and amount to just so much mutual congratulatory back slapping by leftwing loons.
Oh, and as for my reading interests, I just finished a massive tomb based on science called “Heaven and Earth: Global warming and the missing science” by Ian Plimer (403 pages, not including the index, and a total of 2,311 citations to published literature). He soundly demolishes the man-made global warming hysteria that CBC’s science guys are still pushing.
Although history is more my style, I have read other books pertaining to science. Although it’s a bit old now (published eight years ago) another fascinating title from the realm of science on my “finished reading” bookshelf is “Mapping Human History: Discovering the Past Through Our Genes”, by Steve Olson.
Yet another that has a goodly amount of science in it that read last spring is “Poison Arrows: North American Indian Hunting and Warfare” by David E. Jones. It’s a dangerous book, as it illustrates that germ and chemical warfare were well established among North America’s Aboriginal peoples long before the Europeans arrived and long before the infamous, but poorly documented “small pox” infested blanket incident that we hear about both incessantly, and often incorrectly attributed to Americans.
So Lou Ese, hopefully you’ll have a bit better understanding now of who your arch nemesis and namesake is, and what she really believes.
The CBC.. ha… what a laughable organization. Only Canada’s socialist left-wingers give it legitimacy.
While the Pot is challenging the credibility of the Kettle, this here “Leftwing Loon” favours the latter, because the Kettle is funny, while the Pot seems rather humourless.
I’m wondering how the recent judgement that forces the CBC to comply with access to information requests will change these reports?
I posted this on the CBC facebook page but they erased it and won’t let me comment anymore. Odd way to handle the news.
.09/27/2010
“The CBC is here to reflect Canadians, and what it is that they want to talk about,”
American pop culture and celebrities?
Gian Ghomeshi’s program.
Oh God help us. If I hear him slathering over one more
no-name nothing to say – lousy song and singing off key “band” I am going to wretch! Where do they dig this
goofs up?