Would Netflix want to get into the newspaper business? I doubt it. Then, why is CBC so keen on competing with the print media with its online offerings? Is it breaking the law in doing so?
Would Netflix want to get into the newspaper business? I doubt it. Then, why is CBC so keen on competing with the print media with its online offerings? Is it breaking the law in doing so?
It looks (to me) that the CBC has been operating outside standard broadcast media for some time. While I visit CBC online about as often as I tune in to CBC radio (never) or television (now that NHL is on Sportsnet, never) I do see that about 90% of the feed into Yahoo News is…CBC. Sure good to see we’re getting our $1.1 billion worth. Not!
CBC cut off the 1 billion dollar subsidy and put the money into Healthcare.
Interesting to see something worthwhile in thew Grope and Flail! And DJ, how about lower taxes? Healthcare is a bottomless pit that needs a rational business plan, not more money thrown at it.
” We will do that by shifting approximately 500 jobs from our traditional to our digital services…”
The 1991 Broadcasting Act states that…
“…the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, as the national public broadcaster, should provide radio and television services incorporating a wide range of programming that informs, enlightens and entertains;…
http://www.cbc.radio-canada.ca/en/explore/mandate/
For years the CBC has been telling us that their main purpose was to ensure that ALL Canadians had access to news and Canadian culture.
Apparently they have finally realized that Canadians do not need their services in that arena, so they are evolving into other areas.
That is OK with me, as long as they don’t do it on my dime(fat chance of that).
We already have too many sources in the MSM that only tell one side of a story. Global warming, now known as climate change is a prime example among many others like native issues. That’s the reason many of us go to the net, simply to weigh both sides of a story and make our own decisions. If anything, the CBC funding should be eliminated as they no longer serve any purpose except give voice to the far left, which is generally paid for by people that disagree with what the likes of Suzuki and Gore have to say. If they can keep a audience and stand on their own financial feet, then more power too them. If not, then too bad. Either way….cut them loose. It’s been decades since they represented truth in journalism. Now it’s simply activism.
I’m not at all sure that blogging is part of the CBC mandate either, yet Kady O’Malley is paid handsomely to post her opinions and interests on the net. When the leaked e-mails in the AGW scam came out, she whined on air that she couldn’t possibly be expected to read them all. On this site among others, Kate made the data available and she is working on her own dime. I see no reason for CBC to employ bloggers whatever.
Kady O’Malley is no longer working with the CBC.
Wiki still has KO at the CBC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kady_O'Malley
Live blogging from the Duffy trial with Kady O’Malley is up on CBC website now. She must still be working there.
Perhaps healthcare is not the wisest place to throw a billion plus dollars per annum and yes, tax cuts would be a much more productive target. However, throwing the cash at health care would not be a total loss and it would be much more palatable for the liv and the indolent to which tax cuts mean little or nothing. These people still vote and those that vehemently oppose ridding ourselves of the CBC parasite would not dare speak out against funding for healthcare.
In my humble opinion, taking a billion plus dollars and having an annual bonfire would be preferable to propping up the CBC year after year after year.