|
|
Post by PTH on Mar 7, 2008 0:12:52 GMT -5
www.cyberpresse.ca/article/20080306/CPARTS/80306079/1017/CPARTSApparently, for a "Pantheon Gala" organized by the CBC, several Quebec artists were invited, yet they were all, without exception, cut from the version edited for television. Claude Dubois, a fairly high-profile artist who's been around forever, is ticked, and I think rightfully so. If Quebec invited Shania Twain and other anglo-canadian artists and then cut them, somehow I think there'd be more of a ruckus....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2008 0:31:35 GMT -5
Keep burning your bridges, CBC...
|
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Mar 7, 2008 10:44:41 GMT -5
www.cyberpresse.ca/article/20080306/CPARTS/80306079/1017/CPARTSApparently, for a "Pantheon Gala" organized by the CBC, several Quebec artists were invited, yet they were all, without exception, cut from the version edited for television. Claude Dubois, a fairly high-profile artist who's been around forever, is ticked, and I think rightfully so. If Quebec invited Shania Twain and other anglo-canadian artists and then cut them, somehow I think there'd be more of a ruckus.... No other explanation is needed other then it's the CBC. I am not proud of that institution and I wish Harper deals it a death blow. |
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on Mar 7, 2008 10:55:57 GMT -5
www.cyberpresse.ca/article/20080306/CPARTS/80306079/1017/CPARTSApparently, for a "Pantheon Gala" organized by the CBC, several Quebec artists were invited, yet they were all, without exception, cut from the version edited for television. Claude Dubois, a fairly high-profile artist who's been around forever, is ticked, and I think rightfully so. If Quebec invited Shania Twain and other anglo-canadian artists and then cut them, somehow I think there'd be more of a ruckus.... No other explanation is needed other then it's the CBC. I am not proud of that institution and I wish Harper deals it a death blow. CBC needs to exist for no other reason than providing an unbiased news service in Canada, but it really should be looking to serve the interests of the entire country in its other programming, which it doesn't. |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Mar 7, 2008 11:10:42 GMT -5
No other explanation is needed other then it's the CBC. I am not proud of that institution and I wish Harper deals it a death blow. CBC needs to exist for no other reason than providing an unbiased news service in Canada, but it really should be looking to serve the interests of the entire country in its other programming, which it doesn't. I have to ask, where is the disconnect? Who is calling the shots on programming? Outside of sports coverage I really don't listen to CBC all that much. Not a very entertaining network by any means (not that I watch a lot of TV anyway). Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Mar 7, 2008 11:23:49 GMT -5
No other explanation is needed other then it's the CBC. I am not proud of that institution and I wish Harper deals it a death blow. CBC needs to exist for no other reason than providing an unbiased news service in Canada, but it really should be looking to serve the interests of the entire country in its other programming, which it doesn't. Unbiased? Only if you are global warming believing, left leaning viewer. To me, it's a mouth piece for the left and it's as biased toward that direction as anything on the planet. Do you remember how every Afghanistan and Iraq news segment started with the "American INVASION of Afghanistan"? With extra emphasis on "invasion". I don't even bother with that channel anymore other then to watch the Hab's play on high def. I want my tax dollars spent more wisely. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Mar 7, 2008 11:25:14 GMT -5
CBC needs to exist for no other reason than providing an unbiased news service in Canada, but it really should be looking to serve the interests of the entire country in its other programming, which it doesn't. I have to ask, where is the disconnect? Who is calling the shots on programming? Outside of sports coverage I really don't listen to CBC all that much. Not a very entertaining network by any means (not that I watch a lot of TV anyway). Cheers. Ah 'cmon Dis, aren't you entertained by third rate programming that your tax dollars payed for? |
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Mar 7, 2008 19:35:31 GMT -5
Maybe if's for big ratings in Toronto?
|
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on Mar 8, 2008 0:50:03 GMT -5
CBC needs to exist for no other reason than providing an unbiased news service in Canada, but it really should be looking to serve the interests of the entire country in its other programming, which it doesn't. Unbiased? Only if you are global warming believing, left leaning viewer. To me, it's a mouth piece for the left and it's as biased toward that direction as anything on the planet. Do you remember how every Afghanistan and Iraq news segment started with the "American INVASION of Afghanistan"? With extra emphasis on "invasion". I don't even bother with that channel anymore other then to watch the Hab's play on high def. I want my tax dollars spent more wisely. Yep. Unbiased. As in, without outside influence. That you disagree with what they program is beside the point, but the CBC is inherently unbiased because they exist outside of the control or influence of the federal government. I think it ought to get a kick in the boot to remind them that it's intended to serve the interests of all of Canada, but it still needs to exist. As for the invasion.. did I miss something? Were they invited? |
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Mar 8, 2008 1:07:46 GMT -5
Unbiased? Only if you are global warming believing, left leaning viewer. To me, it's a mouth piece for the left and it's as biased toward that direction as anything on the planet. Do you remember how every Afghanistan and Iraq news segment started with the "American INVASION of Afghanistan"? With extra emphasis on "invasion". I don't even bother with that channel anymore other then to watch the Hab's play on high def. I want my tax dollars spent more wisely. Yep. Unbiased. As in, without outside influence. That you disagree with what they program is beside the point, but the CBC is inherently unbiased because they exist outside of the control or influence of the federal government. I think it ought to get a kick in the boot to remind them that it's intended to serve the interests of all of Canada, but it still needs to exist. As for the invasion.. did I miss something? Were they invited? The problem for the CBC is always that they're neither public nor private, they have to make compromises that really don't work either way. No way does a shortsighted loudmouth like Cherry deserve to get hired by a crown corporation, but the fact is he brings in enough viewers to be worthwhile. For the Gala in question, the CBC has a cross-Canada mandate, but then has to make editorial cuts according to who they think their viewers want to see on TV - which means Quebec artists get the boot. Either we give the CBC and Radio-Canada *more* money to allow them to be like the BBC in Britain (ie, fairly independant) or we just sell it off to the private sector and give up the whole idea of state-funded, high-quality broadcasting. Given how poorly the private sector does in terms of generating high-quality content, I'd rather see a state-funded network rather than a private-sector selloff. Plus, it would mean Cherry would finally get kicked off the airwaves. |
|
|
|
Post by cigarviper on Mar 8, 2008 1:19:52 GMT -5
The CBC's been going down the toilet since they cancelled Beachcombers. I miss Nick, Relic, Molly and Jesse Jim. Who can forget the Forest Rangers? Uncle Raoul, Chief George Keeley, Chub Stanley and that whacky Gaby La Roche. Wasn't he supposed to be a french NHL goalie? I think he was the first to say, "Nice try Nogoalov."
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Mar 8, 2008 19:42:28 GMT -5
The CBC's been going down the toilet since they cancelled Beachcombers. I miss Nick, Relic, Molly and Jesse Jim. Who can forget the Forest Rangers? Uncle Raoul, Chief George Keeley, Chub Stanley and that whacky Gaby La Roche. Wasn't he supposed to be a french NHL goalie? I think he was the first to say, "Nice try Nogoalov." For me they have been going downhill ever since they cancelled "Switchback" and "Yes You Can"....... wow, really showing my age there. How many people remember them?? Tammy, Trevor, Kevin Gillis, Coach Cuddles Ford .... and of course who didn't laugh at Harry Hog. I actually believe this was the first show to feature the Racoons and Cyril Sneer. |
|
|
|
Post by clear observer on Mar 9, 2008 11:51:42 GMT -5
I tuned-out the CBC years ago and am enraged that my money funds it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Mar 9, 2008 13:56:12 GMT -5
The CBC's been going down the toilet since they cancelled Beachcombers. I miss Nick, Relic, Molly and Jesse Jim. Who can forget the Forest Rangers? Uncle Raoul, Chief George Keeley, Chub Stanley and that whacky Gaby La Roche. Wasn't he supposed to be a french NHL goalie? I think he was the first to say, "Nice try Nogoalov." For me they have been going downhill ever since they cancelled "Switchback" and "Yes You Can"....... wow, really showing my age there. How many people remember them?? Tammy, Trevor, Kevin Gillis, Coach Cuddles Ford .... and of course who didn't laugh at Harry Hog. I actually believe this was the first show to feature the Racoons and Cyril Sneer. A couple of years ago I woke up in Victoria BC. bleary eyed after a night of partying. Great memories were brought back when the Friendly Giant admonished Jerome the Giraffe. Maggie Muggins would have topped it all off but that was asking too much. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Mar 9, 2008 16:37:51 GMT -5
CBC needs to exist for no other reason than providing an unbiased news service in Canada. If only they provided one. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Mar 9, 2008 16:40:04 GMT -5
Yep. Unbiased. As in, without outside influence. Ah, I should have kept reading. There is no such thing as "unbiased". Those who are hired to lead hire those who write and read. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Mar 9, 2008 16:44:18 GMT -5
give up the whole idea of state-funded, high-quality broadcasting. You had me until here. Last "high-quality CBC programming" [giggles uncontrollabley] was Seeing Things. Maybe King of Kensington? Maybe . . . hmmm . . . what's the latest . . . Little Mosque? Are you kidding? He's a cash cow! The 750K CBC pays him brings in much more in return -- for years that segment has been the profit margin for CBC -- and that's after tax subsidies and ad revenue. CBC has an unfair advantage over Global and CTV. Eitehr fully privat or fully public for sure. |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Mar 10, 2008 6:42:54 GMT -5
give up the whole idea of state-funded, high-quality broadcasting. You had me until here. Last "high-quality CBC programming" [giggles uncontrollabley] was Seeing Things. Maybe King of Kensington? Maybe . . . hmmm . . . what's the latest . . . Little Mosque? Are you kidding? He's a cash cow! The 750K CBC pays him brings in much more in return -- for years that segment has been the profit margin for CBC -- and that's after tax subsidies and ad revenue. don't forget the 500K they pay McLean |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Mar 10, 2008 7:48:24 GMT -5
Last "high-quality CBC programming" [giggles uncontrollabley] was Seeing Things. Maybe King of Kensington? Maybe . . . hmmm . . . what's the latest . . . Little Mosque? Me and my friends actually grew up watching "The Beachcombers." Later on we heard that the rights to it were sold to the Americans. I think CBC does well in their mini-series from time to time ... that is every few years or so. "I Claudius" was very popular the year it came out (70's) and Gwynne Dyer's epic, "War" is up there as well. However, if it weren't for British comedies like "Faulty Towers, "Doctor in the House," or "On the Buses" I probably wouldn't have watched CBC at all. I was up north in Cambridge Bay a few years back and I remember the guys not even tuning CBC when they were bored. You can only learn about the mating habits of lemmings so much. Are you kidding? He's a cash cow! The 750K CBC pays him brings in much more in return -- for years that segment has been the profit margin for CBC -- and that's after tax subsidies and ad revenue.[/quote] That's a fact. If they lost Cherry a lot of people would follow him to whatever network signs him. And, like John Madden in the States, Cherry would get top dollar. Another feather in CBC's cap is that Don Cherry has been nominated for a Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) Commendation for his support of the troops in Afghanistan. It's a small bar worn on the left pocket of the tunic. It is quite the honour that is normally reserved for serving members of the forces who have performed deeds or activities considered beyond the demands of normal duties (not a direct cut and paste but reworded from another source). If Cherry is awarded this he'll be wearing that bar on his blazers and CBC will make sure we see it every week. I can't find a news link for it but we here at work received a CDS message stating he's been nominated. Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Mar 10, 2008 7:58:41 GMT -5
I have to ask, where is the disconnect? Who is calling the shots on programming? Outside of sports coverage I really don't listen to CBC all that much. Not a very entertaining network by any means (not that I watch a lot of TV anyway). Cheers. Ah 'cmon Dis, aren't you entertained by third rate programming that your tax dollars payed for? It's like I was saying to Franko, if it weren't for the old British comedies and a few mini series, I wouldn't have watched CBC unless HNIC was on. I used to watch their news and as much as I respect Mansbridge, it's hard finding unbiased news reporting. What turns me away is either the way its reported or what they choose to report. If I want sensationalist headlines all I need to is pick up any "Sun" tabloid. If I want complete news, "The National Post" is by far one of the best. Just my opinion though. CBC or CTV Newsnet? I'll watch CTV because I have a personal connection to it. Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on Mar 10, 2008 8:48:26 GMT -5
IMO the government has to either dump more money into the CBC to make it bearable again, or just cut it loose. Just giving it enough money just to exist is slowing killing Canadian television.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Mar 10, 2008 10:08:25 GMT -5
Again, my problem with the CBC is that it is neither public not private -- it is a franken-hybrid of the two.
It is given money -- alot of money -- so that it can provide "quality Canadian programming" (it doesn't) but is also allowed to drain advertising $$$ from private broadcasters and add to the coffers that way.
One of the other -- sink or swim in the private broadcasting waters, or be fully funded (and know that no one will watch unless Sullivan comes up with a dozen more exploitive ideas around Anne of Green Gables).
|
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Mar 10, 2008 15:31:27 GMT -5
CBC has an unfair advantage over Global and CTV. Unless you work for Global or CTV... why does this bother you? There seems to be enough advertising money to go around. |
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on Mar 10, 2008 16:08:41 GMT -5
CBC has an unfair advantage over Global and CTV. Unless you work for Global or CTV... why does this bother you? There seems to be enough advertising money to go around. Not sure what the unfair advantage is. I'd say that CTV and Global have unfair advantages because they have private capital to draw from to buy rights to mainstream dramas. CBC operates on a budget of one billion dollars annually to operate radio, television and internet, and can't afford to do it all. I'm totally for making CBC a BBC clone (which incidentally operates on a budget 8-fold of CBC) but no prime minister has the stones to do it. In reading the 2007 financial report, I noticed something interesting. CBC (the actual TV station) is the only property under the CBC/Radio-Canada umbrella that actually runs at a deficit. Even those stupid pay-tier channels they have earn profit. |
|
