CBCGate: An Email From A CBC Vice-President
Amazing what a little Bourque-driven traffic will do to stimulate interesting emails. This just showed up in my mailbox, forwarded from, if you can believe it, a vice-president of the CBC:
TANGENTIALLY RELATED: I’m also told that the PM’s annual Christmas party for the Press Gallery was well attended by dozens of big names and junior colleagues from Global, TVA and even Radio-Canada. But in contrast, in spite of invitations being sent to all their big names, CBC Radio and TV sent just one junior reporter and a makeup person. Très interessant.
I wanted to let you know that CBC news chiefs have looked at the allegations made yesterday.Well, big ups to the CBC for moving so fast. I should certainly hope they don’t want this to happen in the future. Which begs the question: if they’ve already made a determination, and are just sorting out the appropriate discipline, why are they still silent on the matter? When a person is convicted in a court of law, it’s not kept a secret until that person is sentenced. So while I’m grateful for the heads up, I’m not sure why the CBC hasn’t just plead mea culpa publicly and given us a name.
They feel that the reporter's actions in pursuing the story were inappropriate and against CBC/Radio-Canada's Journalistic Standards.
They are continuing to investigate the particulars and will follow the disciplinary processes outlined in the CBC's collective agreement.
I imagine that the CBC Ombudsman will be responding to complaints and investigating what happened as well.
They want to make sure this doesn't happen in future.
TANGENTIALLY RELATED: I’m also told that the PM’s annual Christmas party for the Press Gallery was well attended by dozens of big names and junior colleagues from Global, TVA and even Radio-Canada. But in contrast, in spite of invitations being sent to all their big names, CBC Radio and TV sent just one junior reporter and a makeup person. Très interessant.
13 Comments:
He's whispering sweet nothings in your ear while he prepares to cover the CBC's corporate ass. That line about following "the disciplinary processes outlined in the CBC's collective agreement" is the way out: whatever non-decision they finally make- if any- is going to be justified in terms of being in accord with the union agreement.
As Kady O'Malley points out, Andrew Coyne also tried to get committee members to ask questions. Is that a problem? If I were a journalist, I would also talk to my political contacts to try to get my questions into a closed committee room. Wouldn't you? I simply don't understand the problem.
Journalists questions don't belong in a closed committee room. It isn't the forum for reporters to be asking questions in.
There are numerous reasons why the allegations of CBC-Liberal party collusion are very troubling.
First off, reporters covering the committee are supposed to report the news, not become part of it by introducing unrelated matters into the committee proceedings.
Secondly, the idea that a reporter would encourage a committee member to introduce the question asked as if it were some sort of burgeoning scandal is fairly disturbing. The hearings in question were convened under the guise of investigating a would-be scandal that simply failed to materialize. The particular of the question asked suggests that the reporter and MP in question were working together on yet another CBC/Liberal party invent-a-scandal initiative.
The fact is that a private CBC investigation simply isn't enough. A line has definitely been crossed here, and it's time to have a public inquiry into some of the CBC's dealings. Canadians have the right to know how prevalent this practice is (or, conversely, isn't) within the CBC.
Andrew Coyne writes an opinion column; he doesn't report news.
Jason,
For someone whose been extremely critical of the media over the past several months -- in many cases suggesting a conservative bias -- its a little rich for you wonder whether a line was crossed. Especially when we have real evidence of real bias.
I wonder whether you'd be as quick to defend the reporter if they planted a question with the CPC to Jean Chretien in a hypothetical ethical inquiry into Shawinigate.
As Kady O'Malley points out, Andrew Coyne also tried to get committee members to ask questions.
Who cares? Does Coyne work for what is supposed to be an impartial employer like the CBC, a taxpayer funded news agency? That is the difference isn't it Cherniak? Gee, I wonder why you Liberals need to have that particular hypocritical distinction pointed out to you time and time and time again. Now we all know, don't we Cherniak?
Is that a problem? If I were a journalist, I would also talk to my political contacts to try to get my questions into a closed committee room. Wouldn't you? I simply don't understand the problem.
Well, of course you don't; Liberals usually don't have problems with these kinds of shady undertakings. They've benifitted you for so long now.
And to the CBC it apparently wasn't a problem either. That is, until they got caught doing it and is now prepared to discipline someone for doing exactly that. Now tell me Cherniak, if there was "no problem", then why is that journalist about to be disciplined for it? Yeah......EXACTLY.
And Pablo Rodriguez, who is going to cause himself and the Liberals considerable embarrasment because of this, called such allegations "absurd". Well, they don't sound so absurd NOW do they, lol.
Andrew Coyne doesn't get government funding to do his job. The CBC does. While it may be slightly distasteful for journalists to abuse parliamentary immunity in order to advance their own agendas, with the vast majority of them they aren't doing it on the government's dime. When the journalists of a government funded broadcaster begin abusing this practice, a broadcaster that was intended to impartially report the news, not try to create it, then we have a problem.
"If I were a journalist, I would also talk to my political contacts to try to get my questions into a closed committee room. Wouldn't you? I simply don't understand the problem"
The fact you see no problem with this practice speaks volumes of your morals and ethics. And therefore, why you speak for the Liberal party.
and as a taxpayer, I demand to know WHO the reporter was...since technically I (along with everyone else) pays for their paycheque.
Coyne published (at Macleans and his blog) lists of "questions someone really ought to ask Schreiber" and "questions someone really ought to ask Mulroney" as he called them.
He did not, as Lapierre has alleged, place a direct, private call to a Liberal researcher and supply him with written questions that he wanted -- asked.
I've taken a look at the CBC's statement on Journalistic Practices. Would it surprise anyone to find out that it says very little about whether or not CBC employees are permitted to perform political work behind the scenes?
How's that 20,000.00 in CPC contracts working out, Joan?
And I suppose it would be way out of line for an MP to call a reporter and suggest a story.
We need to hear the reporter's side of this story.
And I have more to say.
Post a Comment
<< Home