CBC thought police

8 comments on “CBC thought police”

1. Mary Soderstrom says:
   August 6th, 2007 at 12:12 pm

   I suppose this means that nobody who works for the CBC can comment on the dumbing down of programming on Radio Two. Don’t know if anybody has noticed that the make over of the evening programming–which effectively eliminated anything vaguely literary from the line-up and cut the classical prgramming by about 50 per cent–has slopped over to the play lists on the remianing programs. Peter Togni’s Weekender is playing a lot of easy listening, cross-over stuff these days.

   We can get this kind of stuff elsewhere. What we can’t get is good literary coversation and music with a little seriousness, and that’s what the CBC should be providing us with.

   Mary

2. ed says:
   August 6th, 2007 at 5:11 pm

   The CBC is finished, it’s over. Not with a bang either.

3. Bruce from The Bookshop Blog says:
   August 6th, 2007 at 11:32 pm

   This must be the mistake of a middle manager and it slipped through the cracks. What a Canadian writes about in his free time is of no concern to the mighty CBC, assuming it’s not hate mongering or such. As you said I’m sure this potential pr mess will vanish quickly.

4. Paul says:
   August 7th, 2007 at 5:11 am

   This is an embarrassment of Orwellian-proportions for the CBC. Whether it came from some sniveling middle-management type who has grown carelessly contemptuous of his younger, hipper underlings, or from some out-of-touch executive uberlord who has forgotten that the corporation’s employees aren’t actually his personal property, we may never know, but it all points to the same unspoken wish shared by every corporation as it concerns their rank and file: “We might not legally be able to control what you do in your life away from the company, but we’d like to.”

5. Niteowl says:
   August 7th, 2007 at 12:44 pm

   If I may be the Out-of-touch Uberlord’s advocate, what’s wrong with controlling, to some extent, the blogging of someone who identifies as a CBC employee?

   I mean, that blogger might not stay ‘on message’. They might even say something against *gasp* the CBC. Such as, say, ‘Royal Canadian Air Farce’ licks donkey nuts. Except, maybe in a gentler, kinder, more Canadian manner (the ” ‘Royal Canadian Air Farce’ isn’t as funny as it could be, and probably never will be. I suppose it might be sort of drole to those who like that sort of thing, but those sorts of people must be dwindling right quick.”).

   Such departure from the accepted party line might sow seeds of dissent. It might bring to light all of the programming mishaps and follies that the CBC seems hellbent on committing. This might lead to greater criticism in the CBC and possible improvement thereof.

   It’s practically inviting a revolution.

6. Paul says:
   August 7th, 2007 at 5:49 pm

   I don’t think public criticism of the CBC is the big issue. Of course, it’s not a good idea for any employee of any company to publicly criticize his or her employer.

   No, the real issue, I think, is, “Further, the blog cannot advocate for a group or a cause, or express partisan political opinion. It should also avoid controversial subjects…” which is a clear violation of the individual’s freedom of speech.

   For example, a CBC employee, whose bio states that he works for the CBC, but who is also a poet, let’s say, and who has a blog, may not on his blog, according to this policy, post a poem that suggests that the Prime Minister of Canada might, in fact, be an asshole.

   And that’s a shame.

7. George says:
   August 7th, 2007 at 5:54 pm

   You’re confusing “shame” and “understatement”, Pauly.

8. Paul says:
   August 7th, 2007 at 5:56 pm

   Zing!

Discuss