Open Thread On CBCGate
..because rather than be snarky, I want to hear some honest opinions from the progressosphere on these allegations the CBC was asking the Liberals to pose certain questions to Brian Mulroney.
My belief that the CBC does in fact have an anti-conservative bias isn't rooted in some spontaneous conviction that anyone who works at the CBC is ideologically anti-conservative. It's just a question of self-interest: since the types of people who support the abolition or privatization of the CBC tend to be conservatives, CBC employees are likely to be presdisposed, consciously or otherwise, to dislike a party that could possibly threaten their livelihood. (Therefore, the same isn't true of every media organization)
I'd also point out that there's nothing necessarily wrong with a news organization getting into bed with a political party - so long as they are willing to suffer the credibility consequences in a competitive media marketplace. The reason the CBC is a special case, however, is because they are publicly funded, and one of the primary arguments underpinning its existence is to serve as a neutral voice, above reproach, immune to the disciplinary forces of the market.
I look forward to hearing what the CBC has to say about these allegations.
My belief that the CBC does in fact have an anti-conservative bias isn't rooted in some spontaneous conviction that anyone who works at the CBC is ideologically anti-conservative. It's just a question of self-interest: since the types of people who support the abolition or privatization of the CBC tend to be conservatives, CBC employees are likely to be presdisposed, consciously or otherwise, to dislike a party that could possibly threaten their livelihood. (Therefore, the same isn't true of every media organization)
I'd also point out that there's nothing necessarily wrong with a news organization getting into bed with a political party - so long as they are willing to suffer the credibility consequences in a competitive media marketplace. The reason the CBC is a special case, however, is because they are publicly funded, and one of the primary arguments underpinning its existence is to serve as a neutral voice, above reproach, immune to the disciplinary forces of the market.
I look forward to hearing what the CBC has to say about these allegations.
5 Comments:
So - I see that many hours after you invited the so called progressives to give you some "honest" debate on this whole CBC in bed with the Liberals fiasco, not one has been able to provide even a statement.
All over the blogesphere they are trying to gloss over, change the channel, pick up some other minute piece of mud in the hopes that this blatant portrayal of Liberal Bias will just go away.
It's kind of interesting - and telling, i say.
Don't tell Doug Finley...
Paul Wells | December 15, 2007 | 06:19:02 | Permalink
paul.wells@macleans.rogers.com
...but reporters have been planting questions with MPs at committee hearings since the dawn of time. I don't know whether I ever did it with Reform, Alliance or NDP MPs when the Liberals were in government, but I know it got done and if I had a story I needed advancing, I'd have done it in a second. "Hey, you might want to ask about..."
I know this will come as a shock to people who think the state broadcaster must be barred from embarrassing the government. Guys like this.
Also, Jean Lapierre works for TVA. TVA is owned by Quebecor. On the board of directors of Quebecor - Brian Mulroney.
....and don't ever think Mike Duffy doesn't know this. When discussing on Mike Duffy Live - Joe Comartin laughed a little and said MSM often relay questions they'd like asked - Duffy then got a little sheepish until Comartin was gone.
This post has been removed by the author.
ruralsandi,
Was the Ethics Committee on KS and Mulroney's dealings the right forum to advance that line of questioning? Should the CBC, receiving public funds as they do, really provide a line of questioning to a partisan party for their gain?
That is the larger issue at play here. With respect to Mr. Wells, as he is employed by McLeans (and great job he does there), he is not being funded by the taxpayer. That is a rather large difference in circumstances that I believe ALW is trying to highlight here.
If your best defence of the CBC is that private sector counterparts are able to provide questions to elected officials, than perhaps the burden of public funding should be lifted from the CBC.
Leaving aside the $1 billion public subsidy and the fact that we could make 5 blockbuster movies every year with that money -- what Paul Wells said is equally disturbing.
I guess when we stopped calling them reporters tasked with reporting and starting referring to them as the media, we left ourselves open for journalists to make the news rather than report it.
Personally, I don't need Paul Wells, the CBC or anyone else to plant questions in order to decide where I stand on an particular issue.
I think this practise is executed rather effectively in places like Iran, Cuba and North Korea.
Post a Comment
<< Home