Pride in the CBC: A Musical Request and Challenge

A challenge - which I'm crossposting on several net.venues today:

A friend of mine in the UK recently pointed out a song to me by a gent name of Mitch Benn, "I'm Proud of the BBC". It's been making the rounds across the anglophonic portion of the Net, and quite possibly beyond that corner for a few months now. It's even generating some spin-off merchandise of its own.

And I like listening to it.

And it got me thinking.

It's no secret I have a pro-CBC/Radio Canada bias. Have had such for a longish while now. Some of you reading this posting - wherever you're reading it - share in that bias, and rightly so.

The point: I'd like to see a fan-song extolling the historical and present virtues of the Ceeb. I don't quite know what rules to set on the thing so we don't run afoul of any laws or lawsuits. I just know I don't have the lyrical talent we need for this.

HELP!!!

CBC News Sunday Earns Misplay of the Week

Back on February 24 I pointed out that, apparently, more journalists need media literacy when it comes to 'scientific studies.' Today on CBC News Sunday I learned that the problem runs far deeper than that. Aside from bad health and science reporting - arts reporting was today called into serious question.

On News Sunday today Evon Solomon and Caole MacNeil along with two guests (didn't get names, I think one of them was from cbc.ca) were discussing Susan Boyle's appearance on Britain's Got Talent. There were three chief points in this discussion that I think are meaningful.

• 1. That we were set up for the reaction to Boyle's performance because reality television is heavily scripted.


• 2. That we expect our musical performers to be better packaged - pretty, well groomed, well dressed and well marketed


• 3. That we are not used to natural talent - we are used to people who sing with digital enhancement etc.,

Point one is obvious. I just hope that journalists repeat it more often. There is very little that is real about reality television. It is just as scripted and packaged as comedy and drama. There are no surprises in reality tv.

Points two and three are deeply troubling and call into question whether arts journalists are actually doing journalism anymore. It was unclear who the 'we' they were referring to was but it obviously included themselves. It certainly does not include the people at CBC Radio - who have been doing an excellent job of covering Canadian music (especially Radio 3 and the new Radio 2). If the people at CBC sunday expect or are used to pre-packaged artists, who use digital enhancement and have large marketing teams then they have no idea whatsoever what is going on in Canadian music. It indicates that they are relying solely on press releases and marketing contacts for information and that they aren't actually practicing any journalism (in the sense of going out and doing their own research and finding things out for themselves.)

This wouldn't really be surprising. Canadian television does, on the whole, an incredibly poor job of covering the arts in this country. They are far more likely to cover the latest American blockbuster, the latest U2 tour, and anything that enables them to say "Hannah Montana" than they are to cover Canadian film, music, art, literature etc. They will say that this is because they have to appeal to a mainstream audience but that in itself is appalling. The 'mainstream' as it is called, is just another niche audience and they know it. The group referred to as mainstream is, due to audience fragmentation, no larger than the gay community in Canada - it is probably not that big (9.5% of the country at the best of times.) That everything on television is intended for less than 10% of the country may help explain the current financial woes of Canada's broadcasters.

Taken all together, the bad (or lack of) arts reporting combined with the narrowness of focus, it is certainly the "misplay of the week"

Canwest's Ship Starts to Sink

Yet another reason why a fully funded CBC is necessary: the CBC was originally created as a uniting force in a large and sparsely populated country. Even today there is very little that unites this country from coast to coast to coast and reminds us that we are not part of the United States. Some will argue that that we no longer need the CBC, that it's function has been taken over by private broadcasters. Those people are wrong. First of all the private broadcasters primarily show American programs, second of all they are not financially viable: BMO Capital Markets analyst Tim Casey wrote in a note to clients today that CanWest's stock is essentially worthless and, whether his analysis is correct or not the company is so deeply buried in debt that its survival in its current form is nearly impossible.

"Canwest has another debt deadline looming Tuesday, by which time it must pay $30.4 million (U.S.) in interest to holders of its 8 per cent senior subordinated notes. The payment was originally due March 15, but the company missed it.

If it doesn't pay Tuesday, the investors can demand the repayment of about $761 million of outstanding principal on the notes. This could further exacerbate the crisis facing the company...
While critical, the looming interest payment is only the tip of the iceberg for Winnipeg, Manitoba-based Canwest, which has a debtload of about $3.7 billion (Canadian), some of it dating back to its 2000 acquisition of newspaper assets from Hollinger International."

Canada still needs a voice of it's own, and a uniting force for the country. A fully funded CBC is the only way to insure that we have that.

Plan B for the CBC

In theory the Government should support the public broadcaster and private advertisers should support the private broadcasters but in the bizarro world of Stephen Harper's Canada the Government is ignoring the will of parliament and the will of the Canadian people

and refusing to provide additional funds to the CBC while, at the same time contemplating a bailout of private broadcasters

So it appears that things need to be done backward. Since the Government will not fully fund the CBC this new Facebook group will urge Canadian and international companies to shift ALL of their television advertising dollars to CBC television and away from the private broadcasters.

Please join and tell a friend (or 100)!

Jian and the Burn Out

With all of the talent in Canada you have to wonder why Jiam Gomeshi decided to have the Boxmasters on at all. The Boxmasters, in case you don't know, are a thoroughly mediocre country-ish band headed by burned out actor Billy Bob Thorton. It turns out that Thorton is not only burned out as an actor but is pretty burned out in general and is still egotistical/douchy enough to think that he deserves credibility as a musician without having to mention his acting career.

Jian if you ever need suggestions I can give you 100 bands who will do the show, answer any questions you may have about their current or previous jobs (waiting tables etc) and will actually perform with their bands. If you happen to be going to see the boxmasters in Toronto, Montreal or London please throw things, they like that (preferably at them, try mashed potatoes and gravy.)

Do Canada's Private Broadcasters Need a Can of Whoop-Ass?

With over 121,000 people petitioning the government people rallying in Sudbury, Cape Breton and other Canadian cities in support of the CBC it is almost unthinkable that the government would bail out the private broadcasters and not help the CBC.

The CBC is Canada's national public broadcaster. It is owned by and paid for by Canadians. Why would any government even contemplate give taxpayers money to private corporations but fail to help the broadcaster owned by those taxpayers? It may not make any sense but it is apparently being contemplated. The government has not actually said, at this point, that the bailout wouldn't include the CBC, they just haven't indicated that it does include the CBC either.

What is truly appalling though is that the private broadcasters, according to the Canadian press, are vigorously lobbying the government not to include the CBC in the plan. That means that private companies are telling our government that they are more deserving of Canadians tax dollars than the public company we own. I would strongly urge the private broadcasters to start lobbying hard in the opposite direction.

If there is a bailout for private broadcasters that does not include help for the CBC I will once again rally supporters of the CBC and start a campaign aimed at the private networks advertisers: A letter writing / email campaign urging those advertisers to abandon the private broadcasters (and all of their associated properties) and shift their ad dollars to the CBC. I won't even urge people to boycott the private networks, people are not the customers of commercial TV, advertisers are their customers so I'll simply urge people to watch the privates and boycott the products advertised on them.

The CBC is Cool Again in Rural Ontario

Take note Mr. Harper: The Conservatives, having all but given up on Quebec seem to have miscalculated on the reaction to their passive-aggressive attack on the CBC. The loudest cries against the recently announced CBC cuts are coming - not from Toronto (where Conservatives aren't even serious contenders) but from rural ridings that Conservatives will need if they have a payer of even seeing another minority.

In Sudbury hundreds rallied on Sunday including many young people (not the CBC's core audience in recent years. From the Sudbury Star:

"On Sunday, however, scores of teenagers and young adults, such as Holson, represented one of the largest demographics in a boisterous rally at Sudbury city hall, where more than 400 people demanded a reversal of proposed cuts to CBC Radio service in Northern Ontario.
"Half the people I hang out with are in bands and in the arts and they're connected to and supported by the CBC," Holson said during the rally at Tom Davies Square.
"CBC is the voice for a lot of Northern Ontario," he said. "And it's extremely important to keep local news intact in Sudbury and the rest of Northern Ontario, because (private) radio stations don't cut it."

Sudbury, as far as I know, is the only place with street protests but the editorials are turning against the conservatives in places like Guelph

"Over the past 25 or 30 years, so many public institutions have been forced to conform to a business model: public art galleries, universities, school boards, municipal governments, hospitals, and the CBC. But these institutions are not businesses. They are essential social entities, things we collectively need for our sense of identity, for our health, for our knowledge, for our life.
We pay for these things through our taxes. We have a right to expect they will be available to us when we need them. And we have a right to expect governments will rescue them when they falter."

and Brantford

"The Canadian wing of the Fox News crowd can't wait for the demise of the CBC. These folks prefer to focus on pure cost and ignore all value that comes from a well-funded, truly national, public broadcaster. The Foxes really want control of news and commentary to pass from the professional editors and their staffs to the purveyors of advertising revenue. No thanks, Mr Gutfeld.
So if you were, in fact, having too good a day and counting on another rant against the CBC, you're probably disappointed. On the other hand, if you were looking to hook up with fellow supporters of public broadcasting, try the website www.friends.ca. These folks are pretty serious and well organized. Good luck to them. The sheer size, geography and history of our great country makes nation-building a complex and challenging enterprise. CBC/Radio Canada with committed long-term funding is the best vehicle we have to do this, warts and all."

The Conservatives, if they are going to have any chance in this country are going to have to get used to the idea that arts and culture are important to Canadians, that we value them and believe in government subsidies for them and that the CBC is an important part of the Arts and Culture spectrum in this country.

Proposal to Fix the CBC Being Debated in Parliament

Now might be a good time to write, or re-write your Member of Parliament

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Parlinfo/Compilations/HouseOfCommons/MemberByPostalCode.aspx?Menu=HOC

and Heritage Minister James Moore

Hon. James Moore
Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
15 Eddy Street
Gatineau QC K1A 0M5
(819) 997-7788
moorej@parl.gc.ca

Via Inside the CBC: Ministers are currently debating an opposition motion that would prevent the current round of cuts to the CBC and fix it for the long term. The motion address' specific points in terms of CBC content and would provide considerable additional funding for the public broadcaster.

The text of the motion can be found here but just in case it should disappear someday it reads (in total):

RECOMMENDATION 1.1

The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage recommends that the CBC/Radio-Canada continue in its role as Canada’s public broadcaster, an institution at the center of cultural, political, social, and economic life in Canada, and a key component of Canada’s broadcasting system.

RECOMMENDATION 1.2

The Committee recommends that CBC/Radio-Canada continue to be predominantly and distinctively Canadian.

RECOMMENDATION 1.3

The Committee recommends that prime-time hours, from 7:00 p.m. to 11:00 pm, Monday to Friday, on the CBC/Radio-Canada’s television networks, should be reserved for Canadian productions.

RECOMMENDATION 1.4

The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage recommends that when services cannot be distributed directly, CBC/Radio-Canada should negotiate fair and equitable agreements with its affiliates to ensure that all Canadians have access to their national public broadcaster.

RECOMMENDATION 1.5

The Committee considers that CBC/Radio-Canada should increase the number of programmes that reflect all regions of Canada, including prime-time programming.

RECOMMENDATION 1.6

The Committee recommends an increase in the variety, drama, news, public affairs and documentary programming produced by the regional CBC/Radio-Canada stations and independent producers.

RECOMMENDATION 1.7

The Committee recommends that CBC/Radio-Canada devote a greater share of its programming to the arts (music, books, film, dance and theatre performances) and that these programmes reflect the cultural diversity of the regions.

RECOMMENDATION 1.8

The Committee calls upon the television and radio services of CBC/Radio-Canada to meet the needs of official-language minority communities more fully and to offer programming that better reflects their reality.

RECOMMENDATION 1.9

The Committee calls upon CBC/Radio-Canada to develop an accountability framework, in conjunction with official-language minority communities, setting clear qualitative and quantitative objectives for CBC/Radio-Canada for content of news, drama and variety programming.

RECOMMENDATION 1.10

The Committee wishes to stress how important it is for CBC/Radio-Canada to contribute to shared national consciousness and identity, as stipulated in subparagraph 3(1)(m)(vi) of the Broadcasting Act.

RECOMMENDATION 1.11

The Committee supports CBC/Radio-Canada in its efforts to reflect Canada’s cultural diversity and gender balance. We encourage the Corporation to pursue new initiatives allowing contemporary Canada to be represented among all its creators and contributors.

RECOMMENDATION 1.12

The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage recommends maintaining the current provisions of the statutory mandate of the CBC/Radio-Canada as set out in paragraphs 3(1)(l) and (m) of the Broadcasting Act, notwithstanding recommendation 2.3, which adds the role of the new media.

RECOMMENDATION 1.13

The Committee recommends the ratification of a seven-year memorandum of understanding between the Government of Canada and CBC/Radio-Canada, setting out the respective responsibilities of the signatories. The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage would be responsible for reviewing the memorandum of understanding and will conduct public consultations as required.

RECOMMENDATION 2.1

Recognising the need for Canadian public spaces in the online environment, the Committee recommends that CBC/Radio-Canada continue to develop its Internet presence and to make its content accessible online for Canadians.

RECOMMENDATION 2.2

The Committee recommends that CBC/Radio-Canada build on its new media foundations and continue to pursue new and innovative ways of connecting Canadians of all ages to each other and to their national public broadcaster.

RECOMMENDATION 2.3

The Committee recommends that the Government of Canada should amend the Broadcasting Act to include digital media and emerging technologies as an integral aspect of achieving CBC/Radio-Canada mandate and reaching out to Canadians.

RECOMMENDATION 2.4

The Committee recommends that the Government of Canada include a clear role for digital media and emerging technologies in achieving the CBC/Radio-Canada mandate as part of the proposed seven-year memorandum of understanding.

RECOMMENDATION 2.5

The Committee agrees that innovative use of new media is fundamental to the future relevance of CBC/Radio-Canada. We therefore recommend that CBC/Radio-Canada develop a digital media strategy to be submitted to the Department of Canadian Heritage. The plan should include cost estimates for the development and expansion of the Corporation’s new media endeavours relative to the goals of its mandate.

RECOMMENDATION 2.6

The Committee recommends that, in consideration of CBC/Radio-Canada’s global funding needs, the Government of Canada recognise the need for increased funding toward the development of new media initiatives to pursue the objectives of its mandate.

RECOMMENDATION 2.7

The Committee notes the ongoing New Media Initiative undertaken by the CRTC. We recommend that, in its review, the Commission give consideration to the social and cultural, as well as the economic impact of internet broadcasting on the objectives of the Broadcasting Act.

RECOMMENDATION 2.8

The Committee recommends that, in its New Media Project Initiative, the CRTC give consideration to the role of public broadcasting and of CBC/Radio-Canada in particular, in the delivery of Canadian content across all platforms, and the extent to which public broadcasting should contribute to the development of a vibrant, sustainable Canadian programming environment.

RECOMMENDATION 2.9

The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage recommends that the CRTC, as part of its New Media Project Initiative, consider the need to protect the neutrality of carriage of Canadian public broadcasting content, and of CBC/Radio-Canada content specifically, over new media platforms.

RECOMMENDATION 2.10

The Committee recommends that Canadian Internet services Providers be encouraged to voluntarily embrace the spirit of Section 3(1)(t)(i) of the Broadcasting Act in their approach to Canadian public broadcasting content delivered over the Internet.

RECOMMENDATION 2.11

The Committee recommends that CBC/Radio-Canada submit a revised plan for the conversion of its current system of OTA transmitters that includes options for possible partnerships and costing to extend its digital transmission signals free-to-air to all Canadians who currently receive its analogue transmission signals.

RECOMMENDATION 2.12

The Committee recommends that CBC/Radio-Canada prepare a detailed programming plan for the roll-out of its French- and English-language television HDTV. The plan should include the rationale and an explanation of how its plans connect with corporate objectives with respect to Canadian priority programming.

RECOMMENDATION 2.13

The Committee recommends that CBC/Radio-Canada submit an updated financial plan to the Department of Canadian Heritage for the transition to HD/DTV.

RECOMMENDATION 2.14

The Committee recommends that the Department of Canadian Heritage prioritize its response to the CBC/Radio-Canada plan and provide one time funding for the capital costs associated with the transition to HD/DTV and recurrent funding to cover the increased operational costs of transmission and distribution of HD signals.

RECOMMENDATION 3.1

The Committee encourages CBC/Radio-Canada to explore the possibility of developing partnerships with the National Film Board of Canada.

RECOMMENDATION 3.2

The Committee recommends that CBC/Radio-Canada play an increased role in the development, promotion and distribution of Canadian feature films.

RECOMMENDATION 4.1

The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage recommends that the Government of Canada commit to stable, multi-year funding for CBC/Radio-Canada, indexed to the cost of living. Funding should be for a period of not less than seven years and be established by means of the proposed memorandum of understanding.

RECOMMENDATION 4.2

The Government of Canada has approved additional one-time funding of $60 million annually since 2002. The Committee recommends that this parliamentary appropriation be permanently added to the Corporation’s core funding.

RECOMMENDATION 4.3

The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage recommends to the Government of Canada that any broadening of or addition to the mandate be appropriately reflected in CBC/Radio-Canada’s parliamentary appropriations.

RECOMMENDATION 4.4

The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage recommends that CBC/Radio-Canada’s core funding be increased to an amount equivalent to at least $40 per capita.

RECOMMENDATION 4.5

The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage recommends that CBC/Radio-Canada give the regions greater prominence in all its services.

RECOMMENDATION 4.6

The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage supports the strategic plan submitted to the Minister of Canadian Heritage in January 2007, which is designed to improve programming for local communities on CBC/Radio-Canada’s English- and French-language radio services.

RECOMMENDATION 4.7

The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage recommends that CBC/Radio-Canada retain guaranteed access to the various existing public funding sources, including the Canadian Television Fund, in order to support the production and broadcast of Canadian audiovisual content.

RECOMMENDATION 4.8

The Committee recognizes the current necessity and value of advertising revenues from television and on new platforms, and accepts that the CBC/Radio-Canada continue to pursue those revenue streams. However, the Committee also recommends that the Government of Canada and CBC/Radio-Canada work toward decreasing CBC Radio-Canada’s relative dependency on advertising revenues for television programming.

RECOMMENDATION 4.9

The Committee recommends, as part of the proposed memorandum of understanding, that negotiations between the Government and CBC/Radio-Canada should address the reduction of the Corporation’s relative dependency on advertising revenues for television programming, without compromising service.

RECOMMENDATION 6.1

The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage recommends that CBC/Radio-Canada develop qualitative and quantitative performance indicators and clear targets for all six priorities and strategic areas identified in its Corporate Plan.

RECOMMENDATION 6.2

The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage recommends that all financial and accounting information be reported in the same way by both the French and English language networks, to render comparisons between the two entities possible.

RECOMMENDATION 6.3

The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage recommends that CBC/Radio-Canada take inspiration from the British Broadcasting Corporation’s accountability model, rooted in results-based management. It would include the publication of an annual report and financial statement reporting details, both qualitative and quantitative, on all activities of public interest and its budgeting plans. In these documents, CBC/Radio-Canada would provide a comprehensive report on its programming and financial information for each of its individual services. This would facilitate objective, rigorous and transparent evaluations.

RECOMMENDATION 6.4

The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage recommends that all reports produced by the CBC/Radio-Canada, particularly those prepared for Parliament and especially the chapters about its operations, should be a comprehensive source of information, transparent, relevant and informative. This reporting should not, however, go so far as to compromise proprietary information that would put the Corporation at a competitive disadvantage.

RECOMMENDATION 6.5

The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage recommends that the CBC/Radio-Canada report to the Committee, at its earliest convenience, on its progress pursuant to the recommendations made in the 2005 Special Examination Report carried out by the Office of the Auditor General.

RECOMMENDATION 7.1

In the interest of greater distribution and availability of Canadian content, the Committee recommends that CBC/Radio-Canada give greater priority to negotiating with artists and producers a fair and equitable sale and broadcast rights agreement over new and emerging platforms.

RECOMMENDATION 7.2

The Committee recommends that CBC/Radio-Canada move rapidly to acquire effective and operational captioning technology in order to offer captioning for 100% of its programming in real time.

RECOMMENDATION 7.3

The Committee recommends that CBC/Radio-Canada build on its efforts to preserve the thousands of hours of radio and television programming broadcast by its national, regional and local services, so that Canadians have access to this audiovisual heritage.

RECOMMENDATION 7.4

Given the importance of the Office of the Ombudsman and the need for fair decisions, the Committee recommends that the individual be selected from persons other than current CBC/Radio-Canada employees, or persons who have not been employed by the Corporation within the five years prior to the proposed date of employment.

Why Did the CBC's Allies Wait?

Over a month ago I urged people to write their MPs about the CBC's money problems and created a petition for the same reason. Of course I was operating without staff or a budget and there was only slight response to these. I wondered aloud a few times where the CBC's allies were? Where was CMG? Where was Friends of Canadian Broadcasting?

Last week the announcements were made - dramatic cuts to just about every part of the CBC, 800 layoffs expected, shows cancelled etc., and suddenly opposition MPs are upset, Avaaz has a petition, Friends of Canadian broadcasting says It's Time to Invest in Public Broadcasting - so my question remains where were they? Why did all of the CBC's 'allies' wait until decisions were made before doing anything? Everyone saw this coming, but no one tried to preempt it. Everyone knew that Harper wouldn't give anything to the CBC unless pressured and everyone who has been paying any attention to politics knows that Harper is very unlikely to change his mind after the fact - so why did they wait until it was too late?

Is the plan to giver Harper a black eye rather than actually prevent damage at the CBC? I have no problem with giving Harper a black eye, he is completely incompetent as PM, and who knows, maybe, just maybe he'll do something to help the CBC - especially if he decides he wants to help the private broadcasters. But the time to actually prevent the damage to CBC was a month ago, or two months ago, or even when Harper tossed the extensive report compiled by the Heritage Committee in the trash. Now is just a good time to thump your chest and complain about something that you knew was coming for a long time.

Avaaz Launches Last Ditch Effort for the CBC

Avaaz has launched a new campaign to Save the CBC.
And they have gathered over 14,000 signatures in the last 4 hours.

The Petition Page reads:

"The Canadian government has refused to provide loans to the CBC to cover its budget shortfall this year.

This is forcing the CBC and Radio Canada to drastically cut over 800 jobs as well as programming.

The CBC is asking for temporary loans amounting to just $6 per Canadian, or less than 2 pennies a day for each of us. We can make this happen, so let's pull out all the stops to deliver a massive petition to Parliament and Save the CBC!

 
Petition to Prime Minister Stephen Harper: The CBC and Radio Canada are a national treasure, and play a vital role in our culture. We urgently call on you to grant the CBC's request for a bridge loan to cover its budget shortfall this year, and commit your government to supporting our public broadcasters."

I think it would have been far better if they had done this a month ago. Stephen Harper doesn't strike me as the kind of a person who changes his mind. But, it can't hurt.

The Petition is at http://www.avaaz.org/en/save_the_cbc/?cl=211537420&v=3118.

CBC Cuts go Deep, But Radio 3 Lives On

Steve Pratt has a Radio 3 site outlining the changes coming to CBC Radio 3 but the important part is that it will go on.

Live recordings will be less, the budget will be lower and there may be staff reductions (they won't know until May) but the important part is that Radio 3 will remain. Thanks to everyone who chimed in, emailed the CBC, joined up on Facebook, signed the petition, posted to your blogs and did whatever else you did to help make this happen.

From Steve's post (do read the whole thing for details on the changes):

"This is a bad day for CBC Radio 3. There is no doubt about it.  However, it could have been much worse and for that I think we are all thankful.  We are moving forward with a very strong radio station, a brand new version of the website coming within a couple months, and a powerful, passionate community of artists and music fans.  Despite today’s bad news, I’m personally very confident that Radio 3 will continue to grow and prosper in the future and that impact of the cuts to our budget has been minimized at best as humanly possible.

I would personally like to thank each and every one of you who raised awareness online about the risks to Radio 3 since the infamous ‘unload Radio 3’ quote was seen in the media.  Your support and the visibility of that support was heard loudly inside the company and I hope was a factor in making today’s news considerably less than it might have been otherwise."

The rest of the CBC is also sharing the pain. Cuts are coming to news, radio, sports, drama and regional programming. A full list of the damage is available at http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/03/26/cbc-layoffs.html?ref=rss.

NxEW.ca

Whatever Happened to CMG?

Does anyone remember the 2005 CBC Lockout? I do. I was there. There were rallies, demonstrations, protests and concerts. Alot of unions and various organizations sent representatives out to support the CBC. All of this was organized and run by the Canadian Media Guild. At this stage I'm wondering what happened to them?

When the problems began in the auto industry there were rallies and demonstrations, with most of these directed at the government (not their employer.) Canadian Autoworkers spokespeople were all over the news and the media responded with intensive coverage of the issues.

But when the media problems started - when news organizations started laying off people the CMG (who, in addition to the CBC, represent employees of APTN, Canadian Press, Can West Television, TVO, and Thompson Reuters amoung others) was silent. They remained silent when the CBC shortfall was announced, remained silent through the process as individuals tried to persuade the government to intervene and are still silent now.

Ok they aren't totally silent, there are a few notes on their website and some good reads on the blog of CMG President Lise Lareau. But with 800 people about to be lockout out of the CBC permanently, that appears to be it. One of the headlines on Lareau's blog reads "The fight to save local news is on" - cool! Where? The first headline on Lareau's blog reads Radio silence on media crisis - it's about the lack of media coverage of the crumbling media but her 'About Me' section reads "President of the Canadian Media Guild - a union representing 6,000 media workers in public and private broadcasting and news services - and a TV producer."

So why has there been no coverage? You evidently have some good media contacts in the rolodex, all you have to do is give them something to cover : rally? press conference?

I know, from 2005 that the CMG and Ms. Lareau care about these issues, but I do not understand why they have opted to stay out of it.

Writer's Guild Supports the CBC

Denis of Dead Things on Sticks has posted the statement from the Writer's Guild of Canada on today's cuts to CBC.

"THE WRITERS GUILD OF CANADA is extremely disheartened by the CBC’s announcement today that it will cut 800 jobs in order to balance its budget. The WGC asks: why has it come to this? We have known for more than a decade, through successive governments and through a variety of official reports, that the CBC is underfunded – the economic downturn and the resulting decline in advertising revenues have only exacerbated what was already a tenuous financial situation."

read the whole thing here. They point out, quite rightly, that this has been coming for awhile. There have been repeated calls by private and public studies, boards and commissions for years and that no government has done much about it.

The problem isn't that the CBC is biased, the problem is that the CBC does journalism and investigative journalism. They ask questions and analyze answers and this can be problematic for those in power, whoever they are. So those in power tend to not want to give them more money so that they can do even more reporting.

Personally I believe that the extra money for the CBC should come from Conservatives since they are the ones who get the most benefit out of it. What would conservatives do for entertainment if they didn't have the CBC to bitch about?

Exposing The Bias at the CBC

Ok so the CBC's conservative detractors continually say that the CBC has a left wing bias. It's the same stuff that conservatives in the states say bout the media in general and PBS in particular.

These same people claim that the majority of the public doesn't support the CBC - never mind that the polls disagree - that a slim majority of Canadians, including 41% of conservatives support more funding for the CBC. These people will still say that the overwhelming majority of Canadians think the CBC should be shut down.

These Canadians come from the Fox News school of reality. The Fox News school of reality goes like this: Rather than do research, or read a book, or even think about things much you just say the first thing that pops into your head. It should be something short and punchy that sounds good and that reinforces what you already think. (government is bad, tax cuts are the only thing governments should do, hand guns are a good toy for toddlers etc).

Then you repeat this silly thing, whatever it may be, over and over again and get your friends to do the same (in the states they refer to said friends as dittoheads - they are called this for a reason.) So once you have repeated your invented 'fact' often enough that you and your friends all firmly believe it's true. Then you go on the offensive against anyone who disputes them.

So, if you turn on the CBC and they say thing like

Evidence suggests that the world is more than 6,000 years old

Evidence suggests that toddlers should not play with hand grenades

Apparently there were no WMD's in Iraq

According to recent polls the majority of Canadians think the government should do more to end poverty

This means that they are obviously biased against conservatives - obviously. Because you know the 'facs' and they ain't reportin em. And you know that no Canadians support the CBC because you axed your dad, your mom and your sister and neither of them like it.

Fortunately the majority of Canadians do read books, listen to scientists on questions of science and clergy on issues of spirituality and not the other way around and the majority of Canadians do support the CBC (and health care, and welfare, and employment insurance etc.)

This rant has been brought to you by the National Post - not the article itself, but the comment section where there is so much venom and so little knowledge that I didn't know where to start.

But by the time the current economic depression recession is over I'm pretty sure that 3 things will be true:

1) The CBC will still be around (though it may be bloodied)
2) The National Post will not still be around.
3) CBC News will still be biased in favor of reality!

More CBC Math

Just some more number crunching in terms of the realities of CBC TV:

I said in the previous post that according to Richard Stursburg it costs 1 million dollars an hour to make original Canadian comedy and drama. I also said that, to the best of my knowledge CBC Radio 3 costs about 1 million annually: Full disclosure, that's the best number I have. Someone told me that once but I don't remember who or in what context so until I get a better number it's the one I'm going with.

That means that Radio 3 costs about the same as a single episode of Heartland. In exchange for that money Radio 3 provides 24/7/365 programming and several podcasts via the web and satellite radio. It falls firmly under the umbrella of 'arts and culture' (Canadian music) and provides airplay to artists who frequently get airplay nowhere else - or only on university radio. It's true that some of those artists go on to get airplay on commercial radio but that is a sign of Radio 3's success, it does not mean that they provide a service already provided commercially. If anything they provide a service to commercial radio. New Music Canada (a part of radio 3) houses music from over 10k Candian artists. Radio 3 filters it, tests it on the audience and allows some of those artists to gain a following - and then they are picked up by commercial radio. It makes it easy for commercial stations to know which new artists to play. The only downside to Radio 3 is it is not available on broadcast radio and is therefore threatened to an extent.

Now back to the television numbers. The cost of original comedy and drama is about 1 million, we're told. Now bear in mind that the CBC does not sell advertising on radio (so far) or during it's children's programming. So it gets no revenue back from those. As far as I know the only CBC (comedy and drama) programs that draw a million viewers are Rick Mercer Report and Little Mosque on the Prairie. Each of those is a half hour program which means that in Mercers case it costs 50 cents per viewer per episode to make, same goes for Little Mosque. That also means to break even the CBC needs to sell 50 cents worth of advertising per viewer per episode.

Now last year there was outrage when jPod was cancelled. (I was outraged) but the reality is that it was drawing between 2-300 thousand viewers per episode and it was an hour long show - which means it was costing $3-5 per viewer per episode to produce and the CBC would have to somehow get advertisers to pay $3-5 per viewer per episode to break even. The same can be said for Intelligence (which also caused unrest when it was cancelled.) People will say 'but the CBC is subsidized so they don't have to break even.' But as I demonstrated in the previous post most of the CBC's government subsidy goes to operating costs, beyond that it has to pay for commercial free radio and children's programming plus news and documentary - which rarely break even. So in terms of prime time programming there really is no 'subsidy' left at least not enough to cover shows that don't draw an audience. Prime time CBC shows need to break even, or almost, in order to stay on the air.

There is some evidence to suggest that some CBC programs get a number of viewers via bittorrents and the internet, but they don't really have a way to measure the number of viewers and so can't really include them in the totals when selling advertising.

It is true that things like Hockey Night in Canada make money for the CBC. Advertisers flock to that one, but the CBC also covers amateur sports and less popular sporting events that do not break even so sports doesn't really contribute money back to the overall fund. If people like our completely irresponsible Heritage Minister want to see more Canadian programming then Parliament needs to find more money for it.

Also, for anyone who missed it after a lengthy study the Heritage Committee last year release a report and a list of recommendations that would have addressed many of these issues but Stephen Harper dismissed it in total.

I'm not saying that the CBC doesn't need to make changes. It's a new world in terms of media and the CBC is going to have to adapt to it. What I'm saying is that in it's current situation the CBC does not have alot of options. Their government mandate and their financial situation do not give them much flexibility in terms of how they operate or what they do. Until Parliament decides to address the situation all the CBC can really do is try to do more with less annually and I think later this year, whatever that budget they passed contains, Canadians will really notice how much less the CBC can do in the situation they are in.

A few more little bits of info for you in case it comes up:

The CBC has said that it's budget for next year will not include advertising for radio.

There was some talk in my previous posts about all of those transmitters the CBC has to maintain for the few people that still watch/listen over the air. The total number transmitters the CBC maintains is 600!

An Overview of the CBC and its Current Situation

Trying to defend the CBC is largely a thankless task. Since the financial crisis at the CBC became known I have encouraged people to write their MPs and sign petitions and to write the CBC and sign petitions in defense of Radio 3.

Obviously there are huge obstacles. First there is the Government itself which is opposed to just about anything to do with arts and culture. Second alot of people have strange ideas about how the CBC operates, how much money it has and where that money goes and third the CMG and Friends of Canadian Broadcasting who have staff, resources, could both help educate the public, gather support for the CBC and who (in theory) exist to do the kinds of things I've listed above have been relatively silent on all of this.

So whatever cuts the CBC has decided to make are now set and unless something miraculous happens those cuts will go ahead. Whatever they have decided I can say that I won't take gripes and complaints about the decisions very seriously if they come from people who didn't try to prevent the need to make cuts.

But for those of you who think that the CBC is bloated and could use some trimming let me lay out a few facts.

First with Radio 3 there isn't any fat to trim: "Radio 3 has less than 25 people and we have less than one producer per on air host. We have one senior producer of editorial and one music director for the entire network. There are zero engineers working on our radio shows - the hosts operate the boards themselves."

Now, on the CBC more generally the CBC via it's mandate must be available on television, radio and other platforms (such as the web). They have to be available on all these platforms all over the country - so the CBC has to do all it can to make sure that small, northern communities for example have access to TV and Radio over the air. They must also be available in English and French in all of those places (even if there is no one who speaks French in a given area). To do all of this the CBC gets 1.1 billion annually from the federal government and, in good times, generates about another few hundred million in advertising from television.

So let's say that they have a budget of about 1.5 billion. Sure, that sounds like alot of money. But

About 1/3 of the budget goes to SRC to provide French programming for Quebec.

The CBC must maintain over the air transmitters across the country - although very few people get television signals over the air anymore.

The CBC maintains local bureaus across the country and a number of foreign bureaus to gather international news.

The CBC broadcasts in English and French (to all of Canada), in 8 aboriginal languages (largely in the north), and in multiple foreign languages (in select areas for the benefit of new Canadians) and, of course, there is closed captioning and descriptive video for individuals with vision or hearing problems.

So, it is a safe guestimate that 2/3rds of the CBC's budget is spent just making sure that everything is available to everyone - TV, Radio and Web. So let's say there is 500 million (in good years) left over for programming
according to Richard Stursburg (Vice President of English Services) original comedy and drama costs about 1 million dollars an hour to make: That means that if the CBC wants to provide 5 hours a week of original television shows (beyond news and documentary) it would cost 260 million dollars, if they wanted to provide 10 hours a week it would cost 520 million (and would leave nothing for Radio, Web etc.)

As an aside, the reason they carry American game shows and British Soap Operas is because people watch them, and they bring in more money than they cost. If the CBC drops these the overall budget of the Corp actually goes down. They will be able to afford fewer Canadian programs, not more. So that's the situation.

The CBC is preparing for 150-200 million in cuts. Because they have to, under their mandate, do all of the stuff they do to make sure that the CBC is available to everyone all they can cut is programming and/or local bureaus - and if my guestimates are close to the mark it will mean cutting 30-40% of their programming (and not the profitable foreign programming).

The CBC is not bloated or over-funded. Much of the CBC operates on a skeleton crew to begin with and has been cutting corners wherever possible for years to try to come up with a little more money to do more in terms of programming. It is also not true that Canadians pay alot for the CBC

"Measured per capita, Canada had the third lowest level of public funding of 18 Western countries in 2004, according to a 2006 Nordicity study commissioned by the CBC. Our $28 per inhabitant was ahead of only New Zealand and the U.S., and far below the $80 average across 18 countries. Canada's funding was about one-fifth of the level of the leading country, Switzerland."

And bear in mind that in most of those countries the public broadcaster covers a much smaller geographic area and operates in only one language.

So this is the situation as it stands. This is the situation that your MPs (of every party) have created and allowed to stand. Personally I will be very upset with the CBC if it cuts Radio 3, which I feel is the most forward looking thing the CBC does and it costs from what I understand (this is unverified) about 1 million a year. Beyond that though, when the cuts are announced don't get upset with the CBC. They are doing a remarkable amount of stuff with the resources they have.

Get mad at your Members of Parliament, the Harper Government and the opposition parties. Get mad at pundits and members of the public who spread false information (through malice or ignorance.) You can even get mad at the CMG and Friends of Canadian Broadcasting for staying largely on the sidelines as the crisis unfolded.

But rather than get mad at anyone it would be far better if you write your MP, talk to your friends, educate yourself and work toward fixing the CBC for the long term so that next years budget doesn't look like the current one.

James Moore should Resign

Heritage Minister James Moore said today that the CBC could be looking at 6-1200 job cuts. The thing is Moore is in a unique position as the closest member of government to the national public broadcaster. That means that either

a) Moore took it upon himself to release sensitive, secret information before the CBC could

or

b) Moore senselessly, callously and needlessly caused panic among thousands of CBC employees for his own amusement.

In either case Moore should resign his office and his seat in parliament or be fired and removed from caucus.

CBC News Sunday on the Death of Newspapers

CBC News Sunday did a report yesterday on the plight of newspapers.

"Newspapers are laying off staff and, in more and more cases, they're folding up. What lies ahead for this traditional bastion of journalism? And would the death of newspapers mean the death of news?"

There was some good commentary on what's going on with newspapers and what it means for the future of journalism and news. Obviously the death of newspapers does not mean the end of news. What's sad/funny/ironic though is that what was said about newspapers applies to all media. Just as the film and television industries didn't get that what started happening with the music industry over a decade ago was also going to happen to them CBC News doesn't seem to understand that what is happening to the newspapers is also happening to music, film, television, radio ...

This is not a newspaper issue, it is a media issue. One of their commentators said for example that it was primarily people over the age of 40 who were propping newspapers up. The same could easily be said for broadcast radio or television (probably DVD rentals too). It's not a holy grail, it doesn't explain all you need to know but try watching the video and insert radio for newspapers, or television, or insert 'drama' for news. Everyone's in the same boat but remember: a decade ago the recording industry claimed that it was all going to lead to the death of music (the big companies still make that claim.) They were wrong, music is alive and thriving. The large companies that would not or could not adapt are not.

Everyone Talks About the CBC, but No One Does Anything About It

The topic du jour in the papers this weekend has been the CBC's funding woes. Even Conrad Black weighed in from prison. (The article was very supportive of the public broadcaster but I don't know if his endorsement is helpful these days.)

George Jonas, in the same paper, was less favorable:

"Much to the chagrin of elitists, the medium didn’t elevate the masses. If anything, it was the masses that dragged the medium down.

For commercial television, this was just a fact of life. For public television, it was a blow to its reason for being. Why oh why subsidize mud wrestling?

Born of a liaison between show business and the Post Office, the CBC didn’t inherit the best features of either parent. Imagine a bureaucratic bohemian, sipping a mug of Ovaltine flavoured with absinthe, while reading the King James version of Marx’s Das Capital, and you’re close. Trying to be everything to everyone, CBC-TV ended up being nothing to anyone."

Jonas later says that he is nostalgic for, rather than biased against, public broadcasting. The National Post was somewhat less kind in it's 'A beleaguered CBC should ask itself: Who cares?'.

"The result is an ersatz, albeit Canadianized, private broadcaster calling itself a public one. A tiny handful of CBC board members sharply disagree with this direction, but they have been beaten down. The entire management of English CBC believes in the strategic direction and defends it vigorously.

Management changed Radio 2 into an ersatz private network (minus commercials), but has not (as yet) increased audience share. What CBC achieved was to alienate a chunk of its core audience - the one that really cared about CBC - and replace it with another that is only indifferently attached to CBC because so much of the programming is available elsewhere.

The same phenomenon besets television. The Hour, for example, could just as easily be on MuchMusic or CTV. Political commentary apes that of private television, with discussions revolving not around substance but who is winning, what are the political calculations, who is up and who is down - questions that for most viewers evoke the response: Who cares?

As long, therefore, as CBC pursues this strategic direction, it will have the worst of all worlds in the search for public money. It will have alienated core audiences who might have cared enough to fight, and exchanged them for audiences for whom CBC is just one choice among many, and therefore not worth getting excited about."

I would argue that CBC Radio 3 enjoys the same kind of strong support amoung its listeners that Radio 2 used to, actually I already argued that. It is ironic then that Radio 3 has been specifically mentioned as a possible place for cuts - which would leave the CBC without enough political support to get an official flag from parliament.

Finally there is the Toronto Star's extensive look at the CBC's funding.

You should read all of these articles. All of them raise some good points and none of them really take the tired, silly and pointless 'I don't want my tax dollars paying for this' approach.

The CBC needs many things. The CBC certainly needs more money but money alone isn't going to fix it. If you boil it down the CBC's mandate reads "Be all things, to all people, in every language, and be available everywhere in a variety of platforms. A billion dollars a year is not enough to do that, neither is two billion, or three.

So, someone has to redefine what the CBC is and what it should do. The Heritage Committee tried recently coming up with an extensive report and some strong recommendations for the public broadcaster. Sadly Stephen Harper (who has no faith in Canadian art, culture, heritage or anything that differentiates Canada from the United States) rejected all of the recommendations out of hand and decided instead to do nothing.

So the first thing the CBC needs is likely a new Government. While I will be surprised if Michael Ignatieff isn't P.M. by the end of the year there are few clues about Ignatieff's take on arts, culture and the CBC.

22 Minutes: Stapler - the latest in self defense

Despite heavy airport security, the public is now armed! Should the RCMP be worried? Should Ottawa do something about public access to such dangerous weapons?