The Sun Keeps Shining
The back and forth between Greg Weston of The Ottawa Sun and the CBC continued today, when Weston wrote a follow up to his original article titled: ‘CBC’S err time: Beloved public broadcaster corrects the record — or does it?’
The whole thing started when Sun newspapers splashed Weston’s article on the front page last Sunday:
The article was based on a draft of a letter from CBC President Hubert Lacroix. Weston wrote:
While most Canadian media outlets are slashing jobs and other costs to stay afloat in a sea of bad economic news for the industry, the CBC is once again rattling its tin cup for more handouts from taxpayers.
After the article was published, Lacroix said Weston had “horrendously distorted the facts.” The CBC also send a letter to the editor saying “Almost all assertions in the article are either a distortion of facts or are flat-out wrong.” Today Weston responded:
A senior federal official involved in broadcasting said there is no doubt in government circles what Lacroix’s letter means — CBC is looking for more dough from taxpayers.
Now I’m hardly an economist, but to me there’s a difference between a handout and a loan. Whereas a handout implies extra money, as CBC spokesperson Jeff Keay says “A loan is something that gets paid back in full… We’re not asking the government for extra money.”
And that’s the point here. The CBC is not asking for more money from taxpayers. The request for bridge financing, if it ever happens, would have no effect on taxpayers at all.
I’m sure Greg Weston realizes that, and in the interest of accuracy he could have pointed that out, but it wouldn’t sell as many newspapers.
|
Email This Post |
The Sun will never change its distorted view on things. I think the 8 cents a day that the CBC costs folks is a bargain.
The Conservatives will use this as a chance to dump on the CBC, don’t be gobsmacked when Harper & Co take away the extra 60 million the CBC gets every year, plus a whole lot more.
That would be a mistake. But then, as a regular viewer and listener, I would believe such things.
Glad – do you think that the CBC should be the only organization immune from the recession? The government will have shrinking revenues due to less taxes as people lose their jobs and corporations lose profits. The government will spend more through higher EI payments and the “stimulus” spend fest. The CBC gets their money form the government. Do you expect the government to take their dwindling funds from another recipient and actually raise the amount paid to the CBC?
So, two questions:
1 do you think that the CBC should be the only organization immune from the recession?
2 Do you expect the government to take their dwindling money from another recipient and actually raise the amount paid to the CBC?
CBC will not win a war of words with sun media or the public. layoffs where do we sign up
So the CBC doesn’t consider 8% more money from the taxpayers an increase because the money went for wage and salary increases. Hmmmm!!!?? From the article:
“The CBC’s own figures supplied to the federal regulator state the agency received a “parliamentary appropriation” of exactly $1,033,585,000 in 2008, an increase from the previous year of $77,049,000 — or 8%.
No way, writes the CBC spin department. “Contrary to Mr. Weston’s statement, our parliamentary appropriation was not increased by 8% this year over last year. Our appropriation was exactly the same as the previous year, save for a 1.5% salary increase.”
(CBC breaking news! General Motors is having a banner year, save for a crash in sales.)”
How come the web master missed this little nugget? I’m sure the webmaster could have included that item in his summary, but that wouldn’t support the CBC elites’ position that they are ‘above’ reacting to the recession like the little cake eaters with no bread.
Over $1Billion a year off the taxpayers. Shame!
Maybe if the Corpse didn’t blow so much on schlock American shows such as Jeopardy – with the perfectly foreseeable consequence that ad revenues can tank – we wouldn’t have these problems.
The CBC has no business running a money losing bad imitation of a commercial network.
If it stuck to its mandate and was run by professional broadcasters, it could do a good job with a manageable subsidy.
Which it did until the last few years.
I didn’t miss the nugget. I read it as well. I just didn’t want to get into the weeds. My argument is that overall Mr. Weston didn’t write a fair representation of what’s happening.
One man’s weed is a taxpayer’s ripped off flower.
Let them eat cake!
Paul: I agree. If you don’t believe someone deserves the benefit of any doubt – regardless of the facts – you’re not going to cut them any slack and you’re going to demand that the game be rigged to prevent any cutting of slack.
Glad – when you say the “extra $60 million a year”, where do you think it comes from? What’s *extra* about any of the Canadian taxpayers’ money? Do you have *extra* money that you earn in your job that belongs to someone else?
Mike: You’re still demanding that we resent and undermine each other here.
Firstly, I agree that the CBC has become too commercial in an attempt to grab ad dollars. What a silly strategy in a time when advertising is shrinking and viewers are dispersing. Blame a couple of people in the corner office for this attitude, but the head honcho overall.
That being said, I don’t understand why all of these infrastructure and stimulus packages do not include more for an organization like CBC. We spend on bridges but not on culture, as if Canada is not filled with people who work in the creation of content and ideas for a living.
Here’s a plan: use this mess to clearly determine the commercialization rules for the CBC, one-time some spending to reorganize along those lines and keep people in the country employed, with the focus more public broadcasting content and services, with sustainability in mind.
And no, it would not be hard to do.
Mike – what’s to be ashamed of???? CBC is a Crown Corporation with a mandate set by the Government – it’s NOT a privately-run institution that can do as it pleases. Therefore, the Government has to provide funding. And, as someone else said – 8 cents per person is a bargain.
That being said, there’s still too much money being spent on the umpteen-million managers, their unnecessary travel and other costs…
Mike – what’s to be ashamed about???? CBC is a non-profit Federal Crown Corporation with a mandate set by the Federal Government. Therefore, they have to provide some funding – it’s not even the entire budget. And, as Glad said, 8 cents per person is a bargain.
That being said, there’s still too much money spent on too many high and mid-level managers and their respective travel and other expenses…
CBC is not a for-profit, private broadcaster that can do as it pleases, so if the Government holds them to a mandate, they must provide some funding to allow for that.
anon – how much is enough? $2Billion a year?
1 – Do you think that the CBC should be the only organization immune from the recession?
2 – Do you expect the government to take their dwindling funds from another recipient and actually raise the amount paid to the CBC?
What’s to be ashamed about? An attitude of entitlement. When Canadians are suffering and sacrificing during a terrible recession, people who feel that the CBC is immune from sacrifice should be ashamed. Especially when they feed so lustily at the trough.
wow. Nobody said they shouldn’t sacrifice, or be immune. But, there’s also nothing to be ashamed about for simply trying to fulfill the mandate they’ve been charged with by the Feds. Or, maybe a Canadian cultural icon such as the CBC should be killed because we’re in a recession – is that what you think, Mike? Then all those taxpayers can have their $34/year back – maybe that’ll help them get through the recession better…
If you think the CBC isn’t making sacrifices, you’re wrong. We’re short-staffed across the board. The hiring freeze that was instituted last summer (and that is part of the reason we’re going to just about break even this fiscal year) didn’t just apply to new hires, but to replacements as well. I can’t speak for the organization as a whole but the team I work with has been down one regular member for that period, and missing a team lead for a year. Meanwhile our workload has been ramped up, even as project budgets have shrank to effectively zero.
I don’t think this is isolated to us either, at least not going by the stress I see on a lot of faces. The people at the coal face, the ones who are now facing the specter of “downsizing”, have been working harder for longer, and dealing with reduced management support, for quite a while now.
But feel free to keep crying shame and employing pig metaphors in your description of the staff. After all, the CBC isn’t your personal ideology channel, and therefore in your world it shouldn’t exist.
There are people who work at the CBC, and many many more who work as a result of the CBC being in existence. All those independent producers and third party organizations who benefit from the CBC just being there as an outlet for content.
Everyone is suffering in this recession. And all are Canadians – well most of them.
I don’t get any sense of overall entitlement from employees at the CBC. But what I don’t see is layoffs of the people *responsible* for a lot of the economic mess, and by that I mean the ones at the top of the television network responsible for the direction.
Wordsmith: the head of the CBC Sales department recently left: http://www.insidethecbc.com/dave-scapillati-fired
that is one instance of someone at the top of the television network.
Mike: I don’t see this “sense of entitlement” either. What I see is a bunch of people – many of whom are relatives, friends, neighbours to the rest of us – who have a responsibility, want to fulfill their end of the deal with us out here in the wider country – if not the world, even though most of them don’t even see the front page of cbcshop.ca – and are being prevented from having the means to do so to the best of their ability.
This isn’t just. It isn’t right. Shutting down the CBC doesn’t solve the problem. Keeping it alive and properly funded could help solve several problems. I don’t see what’s so wrong with admitting and believing this.
@Wordsmith: Also – to play devil’s advocate – if it is a general recession, can we really blame senior management for that? If they’re not fulfilling mandate, or they’re failing to advocate effectively for the organization to the government, sure. But for failing to keep ad revenues up in a market that went south very very quickly, not so much. Assigning blame right now isn’t as important as coming up with a survival plan, and finding the resources to do it.
Dwight – Who said anything about shutting down the CBC? Will no one answer these two simple questions?
1 – Do you think that the CBC should be the only organization immune from the recession?
2 – Do you expect the government to take their dwindling funds from another recipient and actually raise the amount paid to the CBC?
Mike:
1- I don’t think anyone thinks that the CBC should be immune, either inside or outside the CBC. It’s not immune, nor will it be. That’s why this whole issue has come up.
2- As the Financial Post said today the option between discussed wouldn’t necessarily impact another recipient, it “would be for the government to agree to bring forward appropriations so the CBC can, in effect, borrow money from its appropriations in future years”
Paul – so you are saying that the CBC should NOT get more direct funds from the taxpayer? Borrowing is one thing, and getting more “handouts” is another. Your answer to question #2 is that the taxpayer should NOT raise the level of funding. I agree completely. Me thinks this board of CBCers disagrees with me and you though.
What say you Glad? Dwight? More funding?
Mike, that’s what’s getting lost in this whole debate. It’s not about asking taxpayers for more money. No-one at the CBC has asked for that. As I understand it, what the president is asking for, and what the Financial Post reported, is that this is a request to “to bring forward appropriations” from future years. It’s essentially a loan or a line of credit. But it wouldn’t impact taxpayers.
Kev,
I think if you’ll check, the shortfall was already nearly 40 million in August. Before the effects of the recession hit.
My point is more about relying so heavily on advertising in a clearly fragmenting, challenging market. This was bound to happen – the recession makes it worse.
I’m with Paul. No more taxpayers’ money to the CBC. Thank you for a straight answer after all the avoidance of the issue. $1Billion a year is enough. Right Glad? Dwight?
It hasn’t been enough for 35 years, Mike.
sigh. so much for trying to set the record straight.
I’m not saying wether the CBC is getting enough or not enough. That’s up to the voters. What I’m trying to do is present the facts. And the fact is that this request: Would. Not. Cost. Taxpayers. Extra. Money.
Duly noted and understood, Paul. The facts you’ve presented have simply been used as a relaunching point for the longstanding argument/feud/whatever you want to call it, is all.
Right, Paul. Mike, you’re trying to stir things up with two totally different issues:
1. The base budget the CBC received yearly from the Feds – 1 billion, as Dwight said, hasn’t been enough to keep up with inflation for years, yet they have improved many services. This has nothing to do with the current situation, though.
2. The current situation is asking for, essentially, a line of credit, which all private broadcasters can do with banks, but the CBC isn’t allowed to, being a Crown Corporation. A line of credit will be paid back in future, once we’re out of recession and revenues start building again.
Okay, why can’t someone at CBC get around to producing some decent shows that people will watch.
If this is a #’s game the pardon my pun, then imported already bad game shows WILL NOT boost ratings.
As far as radio is concernedm for Radio 2, go back to the old format, that was better.
I would like to see CBC return to it’s former glory that it was back in the 60′s’ 70′s and 80′s . To me That’s when CBC was at it’s best..
I have some ideas being a once long time supporter until recently of CBC I’d like to bounce off someone.
CBC should be a venerable, repected public broadcaster, not a laughing stock, that it once was.
I’m serious!!!
Do we need a news outlet that lacks integrity and provides daily Sunshine Girls in HD?
Look how long the drive through is at Timmy’s and you’ll get your answer.