Nicholls: federal conservatives drifting to the left
Many of you who come here often probably already know that I'm not a big fan of the CBC. IMHO, the so-called public broadcaster is a waste of taxpayers money and should be privatized (or at the very least, reformed). Which is why the federal conservative's inaction on this file over the last year or so (while in government) has really, really dissappointed me.
Unfortunately, for the conservatives, I'm not the only one who has noticed their lack of effort. [Hat tip Gerry Nicholls, Political Watch] Read on
13 Comments:
I couldn't disagree more with your views on CBC. Private broadcastors have never filled the need in my rural area, and CBC does. It doesn't do it perfectly, and it does have a poltical slant, but so does this blog. I think there is an important place for publically funded broadcasting.
As for this blind assumption that private sector will do better, I point to the monopoly of the Irvings in new Brunswick, as being the reason we need some sort of counterbalance. CBC, with all its warts, does a pretty fair job.
It doesn't do it perfectly, and it does have a poltical slant, but so does this blog.
Interesting analogy, Paul. However, last I looked, this blog wasn't being funded by taxpayers money. Nor should it.
Furthermore, taxpayers should not be on the hook for a public broadcaster who spews out biased propoganda in between hockey games, curing matches and Simpson reruns. Although, I have to admit, I do watch the Simpsons at supper time. ;-)
Paul, your comments are fair but something to consider: by privatizing or commercializing the CBC (there is a difference), this could allow for a greater focus on regional coverage for communities like our here in NB. For example, the CBC's track record of providing local french programming is really, really bad. We get programs from Montreal, like most of our news is from CBC Toronto. The bottom line is that maybe you are right, private broadcasters have never filled the need in your rural area, but neither has the CBC. And the CBC is not the only model for effective public broadcasting. In fact by global comparison, it is second rate.
CBC is broken plain and simple. I'm a big critic of CBC but I like to think not in a bad way. I'd actually prefer to see it survive but it is in desperate need of an overhaul. It does indeed have a political slant but its not supposed to have any slant. It's supposed to be as close to the middle as possible or sheesh at the very least have some different opinions instead of the moderate left, the far left and the looney left for every story.
I had a bit of an e-mail exchange a while back with one CBC employee who agreed when they're hiring the likes of far-left commentator Heather Mallick and not bringing in someone to at the very least balance her off, they're not helping the perception, (although I would argue the truth) that they're a far-left organization with an agenda and a billion of your dollars every year and a dwindling viewer and listenership to boot. I want to see it fixed but if it can't be fixed, its time for these far-left organizations that monoploize the CBC airwaves to start paying for it directly through their donations. That hasn't worked well for Air America in the U.S. so I recommend instead a little balance.
Honestly. I am beginning to wonder just what miracles you expected a minority government to perform?
If the CPC were to get the majority they deserve (given the total lack of substance, depth and moral integrity of the opposition parties) - then perhaps you might get your wish? Not going to happen if everyone keeps blamming them for all the crap that the Liberals left them to fix.
Kit said: "If the CPC were to get the majority they deserve...[...]"
Have you been following politics? The CPC have absolutely no room for growth under Steve Harper. They are unlikely to pick up any ground in Quebec or Ontario after dually scrapping (or should I say abandoning) Kyoto....and Afghanistan hasn't helped them. And I won't even bother talking about the east or Saskatchewan.
There was once a time when Canadians saw him as the fiscally responsible prime minister who represented the middle class. A minority PM, like Dief, that was ready for prime time. A PM that would fight against Ottawa corruption, waste, broken promises, entitlement and high taxes on behalf of common citizens.
Unfortunately, he became everything that he used to fight against and in record time I might add. Plus, he's looking more like Joe Clark every minute. A guy who doesn't understand the media or the country and governs himself like he's in a majority.
He'll get his majority alright, a majority of people voting against him and his bone head advisors and communications strategists.
Here's a thought, the CBC is Canada's oldest broadcaster having been set up in 1936.
So tell me, in competition with a federally funded broadcaster just how much of a chance did non-publicly funded stations have in the smaller markets?
By the way, perhaps the CBC doesn't deliver what people want because it's existence doesn't depend on providing what people want. The CBC doesn't need to care what kind of crap it spews out because it's funding is secure. What a vicious circle the welfare state has created for us eh?
Good exchange ppl. I might add that there are those on the other side of this debate (ones who want to continue with the status quo) who believe that if the CBC starts offering up broad-appeal in its programming schedule, the kind you would see available on private networks, it defeats the purpose of being a public broadcaster funded by taxpayers in the first place. In other words, why pay taxes for something that is already being offered up in the private market? I have to admit there is some validity to that arguement.
However, the problem here is: if the CBC only serves to compliment and cater to a very narrow base or elitist audience, then it's very difficult to justify public funding. In other words, why should so many taxpayers pay to foot the bill for the small interests of a few? IMO, that should not be the mandate for a publically funded broadcaster, however, at the moment, that is essentially what is going on at Mother Corp.
OK Ellen. So the CPC don't win a majority... what is your alternative?
And given your reasons for not considering the CPC, heavy on Kyoto and Afghanistan, I would hazard to guess you get your news from the CBC. Which in some minds would reinforce the notion of leftist bias and support the argument behind the original thread.
I posted a comment on Spinks Blog as well, in defence of CBC.
"last I looked, this blog wasn't being funded by taxpayers money."
My point about the blog, and the CBC, is they all have bias. All media have bias I can sort the wheat from the chaff. I think the private broadcasters do a lousy job of being balanced as well.
Do I think they could do a better job, even in my area?..yes, by a long shot. Like why do we have three english stations in NB, and all located in sourthern NB. Ridiculous waste of money, but that has more to do with the politics in New Brunswick than it does with CBC.
Paul,
I think the point that's being made is that CBC can't be biased because other private stations aren't biased, but that it should not be biased because it's funded by tax dollars of everyone from libertarians to social conservatives to communists.
That said, going for news without bias is ridiculous - all news will have bias because it's presented and prepared by people, who can't be free of bias. What CBC should be, if nothing else, is balanced - and it's not. That isn't to say that the CBC is as bad as politicos make it out to be. For the most part, CBC presents the status quo. The problem is it tops that up with shows like the Hour, which are blatantly socialist/left-wing, without countering it with a small-government program.
Personally I don't want the government involved in broadcasting at all, but if we're going to keep public broadcasters, I'd much rather see something like TVO - a more regional public station funded by voluntary donations.
It shouldn't be called "the Hour", it should be called "the Flour" because it's all fluff. :)
Just thought I'd mention a few facts. First, this blog, and EVERY blog is VERY MUCH supported by your tax dollars. You can check out my blog for the latest stats and government spending on telecommunications is one of the highest increases of any sector.
The internet is highly subsidized, although is in the process of being privatized to ensure the people who paid for it don't get any of the profits. Nothing is this world is free.
To continue with subsidies, its also a mistake to assume there is a 'private' and a 'public'. New Brunswickers pay FAR FAR MORE, I can't emphasize this enough, FAR FAR MORE subsidies to the private print media in New Brunswick than they do for the CBC. Ages ago we had this debate at Charles website and I looked it up and it came to 30 cents a year per New Brunswicker.
Compare that to the subsidies Irving gets in the forestry sector to print their paper. Not just cheap giveaway land, but cheaeper giveaway licenses, and tax breaks, etc. Just the LNG deal is far far more than NBers pay for CBC. You'll notice the big issue now that UPM is closed but they have 10 million of taxpayers dollars that have just disappeared (funny no bloggers complain about that waste nearly as much as the caisse). That's UPM, you can just imagine what Irving pockets.
That also doesn't include the best subsidy a company can get, which is a lack of regulation and enforcement. So for years competitors have been talking about Irving dirty tricks to put them out of business but the fed turns a blind eye.
And keep in mind you guys are generally only talking about political shows, which is minute, and only interest a minute population. CBC's science shows are world renowned and win numerous awards, plus provide that service mentioned above. But of course if they aren't towing YOUR line in things that interest you, then you don't want to pay for it.
However, the same goes for virtually every public arena. You pay property tax but maybe never set foot inside a local arena. You may never use health care, and you may be a dropout.
There is no question that CBC is far better than the alternative, even if they have 'left wing coverage' they still at least have coverage, and those on the left will point out numerous cases where they'd love at least right wing coverage but don't get that. Again, if you are way to the right with a certain agenda, then virtually every discussion is going to be 'left' if it doesn't conform.
Spinks issue of abortion is a good example, you can go to their website and look up abortion and see over a hundred articles. Yet thats not enough, and its not enough because they dont address in the way spinks would.
So in that the CBC is doing exactly what its supposed to, its avoiding the extreme right wing position to accurately reflect the 'middle', and not just what conservative bloggers happen to believe is the middle. You guys spend way too much time at one anothers blogs and have fallen under the impression that somehow YOU reflect mainstream opinion. Far from it.
So how about some blogs on that 'other' public broadcaster, namely Irving. Should they be reformed, gotten rid of? Have their subsidies cut? What?
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home