This morning the moderator of our film class at McGill opened by saying angrily, “The CBC is finished.”
He was referring, of course, to the cuts announced yesterday by the CBC: 800 jobs gone (most of them drawing down $75,000 ); asset sales to raise $125 million; ‘ program of voluntary retirements.
This slaughter was provoked when the Harper government refused to advance the CBC $65 million to close the financial gap caused by a steep drop in advertising.
But does this mean the CBC is finished? I shouldn’t think so. Let me explain.
When I was hosting talk shows in radio and television in the eighties and nineties in Montreal, we would sometimes have a guest who had just done an interview at the CBC. Often they would ask where was everybody? They had been used to many more bodies at their CBC program. The fact was at that time (and I am pretty sure still) commercial radio and television was a lot leaner than at the public broadcaster.
So I don’t think these cuts are the end of the CBC. They might very well signal a leaner cleaner operation.
What do you think?
Should the government be pouring more tax dollars into the CBC?
Or should the corporation tighten up and shape up?
Tighten up and shape up. Also it should cease being considered a business operation and become again what it should always have been: a public service.
Agreed, Paul.
I was more interested in the anger of the film class moderator. Is it possible this means something personal to him? Like, he’s got a project going and the CBC was going to be his launch pad and now maybe he’ll actually have to compete with other projects rather than be guaranteed a slot?
The wealth of a country has to reflect its ability to use tax dollars in an appropriate manner, to create work.
Blue collar jobs are important in returning people to the workplace, bridge building and roadbuilding infrastructure.
White collar jobs in the arts and culture ie., C.B.C. should not be overlooked, they need all the tax dollars they can get.
Democratic Socialism which I am a big fan of because it so Christian and people oriented needs to have its voice acted upon.
We need more jobs, not less. A mixed economy where small business and Government projects like transportation, Medicare are opportunities of employment that return tax dollars to the Government is the kind of socialisme that works. Ask Obama.
Peter, I wholeheartedly and respectfully, from a philosophical side, disagree. It brings with it a shit load of corruption and waste. I fear you look too much at the “ideal” of it and less of the “reality.” Let’s call a spade a spade: they say capitalism is based on “greed,” well socialism is based on “coercion.” There is no social/citizen contract with it. That’s a myth to me.
I agree with Paul and Chimera. The ride is over and Harper is doing the right thing. I have friends and family who have worked for and with the CBC – even they used to joke at the excessiveness of it.
Neil, my sister sends her regards. She remembers your show and enjoyed it.
The Commentator, “Even they used to joke at the excessiveness of it”.
Maybe so, while still collecting their paychecks.
Hello. anybody home, we need jobs, jobs, jobs.
The advertizing dollar is finished. We need a Government that acts on what works thats what a spade is all about. Thats what Obama is doing.
The Harper Government is trying to satisfy his critics in his own party by coming down hard on the C.B.C., He is an unwilling socialist who has no choice, but to be one. Laisez faire Capitalism, which its founder “Smith” was against has finally shown its true colors, you, Paul and Chimera, don’t know what your talking about.
Peter, I worked in public and parapublic services for 40 years. Our main problem was, and still is, work systems with so many job descriptions and subdivisions that you ended with 3, or more, people to do a job one (1) person could have done easily and more efficiently. Why do you need a technician to hold a camera and another one to connect the electric cable to an electrical outlet, the former standing by until the cable has to be disconnected, some time several hours later?
Some years ago our establishment changed our stenographers job title to secretary so they could have a better salary. The first thing we knew the new ’secretaries’ refused to replace the receptionist, even for 15 minutes, because it was not in a secretary’s job description. We had to threaten to abolish some of the NEW ’secretary’ jobs to get a written agreement that they would accept a replacement of less than 8 hours.
Such excesses are at the base of several ills in government services…and CBC is one.
So, for one, I claim to know what I am talking about…What, Peter, did you do for a living?
Paul, when I say you don’t know what you are talking I mean in creating jobs. You do know what you are talking about in eliminating jobs.
Abuses in every system occurr. Eliminating jobs, creates unemployment which leads to Welfare. Its the earning power of people that runs an economy and supplies our tax base.
If you want to talk about cheats who don’t work talk about the stock market casino.
I worked for an accredited Police Force for 35 years. I am justice oriented.
Justice oriented eh? Better work organization does not eliminate jobs…it creates them in the right place at the right time. Padding the work force is counterproductive, is a waste of taxpayers money and is inefficient. The surplus people could be transferred to short staffed departments…but for collective agreements preventing it. So you have, in some areas people underemployed while on another floor the staff is rushing like hell piling overtime and risking serious errors. It’s not cutting jobs I’m talking about, it’s efficient use of human resources…and that is justice too.
A) What does PBS have that the CBC just doesn’t seem to be able to match?
B) Why doesn’t Harper get rid of all the avowed separatists on the French side of the CBC?. They are using the CBC to destroy our country.
C) If as a taxpayer I’m bankrolling the CBC, why are they then bilking me by way of assessing a fee for me to pick up some of their channels only thru cable or satellite.
D) The latest word is that Harper will be giving the 65 million to the CBC.
E) Wasn’t the CBC, at one time, supposed to operate without the benefit of advertising revenues?
Jim, your question to “A” should be self-evident: PBS appeals to its viewership for support. Plus they have way better programming.
My opinion.
Paul, man, and you thought we don’t agree on much? That was great.
Peter, they were merely stating a truth they observed. They were mostly freelancers on contract. They preferred it that way. They saw first hand how wasteful it was, so now you would like to muzzle them?
Anyway, are you saying so long as they’re working we tolerate waste and inefficient productivity? Put it to you another way. I’m personally in a transition period. Things are not going according to plan. I NEED my money. But to people like you, take from me, give to a CBC worker making more than me? For what? In the name of “creating” jobs for short term considerations? A station nobody watches except for Coach’s Corner?
Where the heck is the justice or fairness in that?
Nah, nah, nah. Cut the fat, tighten up, lower salaries (public servants in Bimmers don’t work for me) and trust me (as Paul said) we’ll all be economically healthier for it in the future.
How could anyone be against such prudent measures?
Oh by the way,
Don’t shoot!
;<)
OK Commentator, lately we seem to agree rather often, should we worry?
Chimera,
Our film instructor spent his professiona life making films at the National Film Board. He is now retired. I don’t think he has any particular axe to grind.
Commentator,
A big hello to your sister.
Paul, I’d be very concerned.
Neil, will do.
“Our film instructor spent his professiona life making films at the National Film Board. He is now retired. I don’t think he has any particular axe to grind.”
But it does answer the question of where his sympathies lie and why, doesn’t it?