You’ve got some explaining to do, Mr. Mansbridge


Locutus
#1
via sda

Nuke 'em from orbit.


Two articles today on CBC's bias...except they aren't from the usual suspects.


Now, I doubt that the CBC has an editorial bias in favour of the oil sands, but you know, there's only one way to be sure.


Via Norman Spector.


Nasty


Who pays CBC panelist to shill for Keystone XL? | rabble.ca




You’ve got some explaining to do, Mr. Mansbridge | iPolitics
 
darkbeaver
Republican
+1
#2
As a tax payer I'm very discouraged by the poor quality of journalism on my CBC Radio. I'm not convinced that they are journalist.
 
tay
+3
#3  Top Rated Post
The CBC has stopped being a critic since the Harper Cons have implied that more cuts would be coming if they kept pointing out what the Harperites are doing to Canada........








A Leading Exemplar of The CBC's Policy Of Conservative Appeasement





[quote]


I received the following email yesterday from Jack Nagler, Director of Journalistic Public Accountability and Engagement at the CBC, regarding my conflict of interest complaint about Rex Murphy. [quote]


Thank you for your Feb. 5th email to the CBC Ombudsman about Rex Murphy. There have been suggestions he is in a conflict of interest because he has given paid speeches to groups supportive of the oil industry, and suggestions that the CBC should have disclosed this fact when he addressed the subject of Neil Young’s anti-oilsands initiative on The National last month.

While I don’t believe there is a conflict of interest, there is a serious issue about transparency, one that we are reviewing at the moment.

But let me address both concerns.

On the question of Mr. Murphy and the alleged conflict of interest:

First, Mr. Murphy is not a full-time employee of CBC News He is a self-employeed freelance. He does some work for CBC. He also does outside work, including speaking engagements.

Second, -- and I want to emphasize this -- the very reason Mr. Murphy appears on The National is to do analysis and express his point of view – he is not a regular reporter. We even call his segment on the program “Rex Murphy’s Point of View" to distinguish it from regular reports. His perspective on the oilsands, whether viewers agree with it or not, is an analytical argument based on facts, and is perfectly valid commentary.

He has been utterly consistent in expressing those views for a long time, and he makes the same broad points whether he is talking on The National, in a newspaper, or in a speech at a public event. We have no reason to question the independence and integrity of those views. That is important. Yes, Mr. Murphy holds an opinion that people in the oilpatch may like and agree with. But it is a considerable leap in logic to suggest that he is therefore in the pocket of this industry.



Third, the most important consideration for us is whether we are providing our audience with a varied and balanced perspective on an issue as important as oilsands development – and I believe we are. You may note that Mr. Murphy’s “Point of View” segment criticizing Neil Young was a response to a feature interview The National aired with Mr. Young two days earlier. There’s no other national newscast that gave Mr. Young and his views that kind of platform. It’s all part of us fulfilling our mandate as the public broadcaster to reflect diverse opinions and to offer Canadians the opportunity and the information they need to make up their own minds.

The other question, as I noted at the beginning, is that of disclosure: what information can and should we share with the audience about the outside activities of freelance contributors to on CBC News?

In policy and practice we support the idea of transparency, not just for Rex Murphy but for all of our contributors. But implementing this is not always as simple as it sounds.

There are a set of complicating factors, ranging from how much we can legally demand of our freelancers, to privacy rights of our employees, to what constitutes “full disclosure”. Is it only paid speeches we should disclose? Or do we need to be concerned about journalists who attend charity events, or moderate a public forum? Does the content of a speech matter, or does the mere act of getting in front of a lectern make it a question of public concern? And finally, how do we share the disclosure so the audience can properly judge for themselves what’s appropriate?

All are good questions. In light of your concerns and those of others about Mr. Murphy, our senior editors are reviewing the way we deal with the issue to ensure we are appropriately transparent with our viewers. I expect that review will be completed in the next few weeks. When it is we’ll be sure to post it. In the meantime, we thank you for your patience.

You should also be aware that the CBC Ombudsman has already launched a separate review of this subject. The Office of the Ombudsman, an independent and impartial body reporting directly to the President, is responsible for evaluating program compliance with the CBC's journalistic policies. When that review is complete, it will be posted on the Ombudsman's website at CBC Ombudsman.

I hope this response has reassured you of the integrity of our news service, as well as our willingness and desire to serve Canadians properly.

Sincerely,

Jack Nagler

Director of Journalistic Public Accountability and Engagement,





There is much more detail on all this included in a recent blog post by CBC News General Manager and Editor-in-Chief Jennifer McGuire, which I encourage you to read at: http://www.cbc.ca/newsblogs/community/editorsblog/2014/02/a-question-of-conflict.html

You might also be interested in what Mr. Murphy himself had to say in response to the critique of his ethics. He wrote an op-ed piece this past weekend in The National Post that you can find at: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/02/22/rex-murphy-speaking-my-mind-no-matter-the-issue/













 
mentalfloss
#4

httpwwwyoutubecomwatchverr8hY809mI





http://www.friends.ca/freethecbc/state-broadcaster-2/
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+1
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by tayView Post

The CBC has stopped being a critic since the Harper Cons have implied that more cuts would be coming if they kept pointing out what the Harperites are doing to Canada........

A Leading Exemplar of The CBC's Policy Of Conservative Appeasement

CBC has had too many years of being the marketing arm for the Liberal Party. That, in and of itself is fine, but as an entity that is 100% funded by the taxpayer, it doesn't work for many (if not most) Canadians.

If the CBC can't even pretend to be objective, then it's time to sell the corp to private interests and let them spend their money relaying what ever message they want
 
petros
#6
CBC was started by a Conservative. Some Bennett guy with PC behind his name.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+1
#7
I guess that it didn't take long before the Libs turned it into their own private Politburo
 
petros
#8
They did? How did they do that to a Conservative publicly funded broadcast network? Tricked them? If so Conservatives can't be that sharp can they?
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+1
#9
Which party is referred to the 'Natural Governing Party"

Ya think that the Cons came up with that moniker?
 
petros
#10
And that's how they "took over" the Conservative created and publicly funded CBC?

Apparently Conservatives really aren't that sharp if that's all it took.
 
relic
Free Thinker
#11
Sorry captain moron but CBC is NOT 100% funded by the govt. One wold think somebody as big on accuracy as you would know that.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+1
#12
Whatever... It's all Harper's fault, right?

That is your default mantra after all
 
petros
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by relicView Post

Sorry captain moron but CBC is NOT 100% funded by the govt. One wold think somebody as big on accuracy as you would know that.

Ad time doesn't count.
 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
#14
All these people that are busy protesting resource extraction should think very hard about how stopping development will impact both their paycheques(or whatever form of government cheque they receive) and their pensions.
 
BornRuff
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

CBC has had too many years of being the marketing arm for the Liberal Party. That, in and of itself is fine, but as an entity that is 100% funded by the taxpayer, it doesn't work for many (if not most) Canadians.

If the CBC can't even pretend to be objective, then it's time to sell the corp to private interests and let them spend their money relaying what ever message they want

If the right wing people are mad that it is too left wing, and the left wing people are mad that it is too right wing, as seems to be the case here, they are probably doing their job perfectly.
 
petros
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by BornRuffView Post

If the right wing people are mad that it is too left wing, and the left wing people are mad that it is too right wing, as seems to be the case here, they are probably doing their job perfectly.

And making good scratch off of Degrassi.
 
BornRuff
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

And making good scratch off of Degrassi.

Huh? Degrassi has been owned by Bell Media for like a decade and a half now.
 
lone wolf
Free Thinker
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

CBC has had too many years of being the marketing arm for the Liberal Party. That, in and of itself is fine, but as an entity that is 100% funded by the taxpayer, it doesn't work for many (if not most) Canadians.

If the CBC can't even pretend to be objective, then it's time to sell the corp to private interests and let them spend their money relaying what ever message they want

Same might be said for Sun Media
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+1
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Ad time doesn't count.

Why bother counting it? The 'Corp' can't exist without the vast majority of their operating capital being 'gifted' to them.

By the by, HNIC has lost much of their contract this year and therefore a big chunk of the paltry ad revenues.

Doesn't look good for the CBC now, does it?

Quote: Originally Posted by BornRuffView Post

If the right wing people are mad that it is too left wing, and the left wing people are mad that it is too right wing, as seems to be the case here, they are probably doing their job perfectly.

The other way to interpret this is that the CBC isn't providing any real service to anyone
 
petros
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by BornRuffView Post

Huh? Degrassi has been owned by Bell Media for like a decade and a half now.

They still have to pay.
 
BornRuff
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

The other way to interpret this is that the CBC isn't providing any real service to anyone

They are not supposed to be a left wing or right wing mouthpiece.

Some people are just getting too used to getting all of their "news" from partisans preaching to their own flock.

Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

They still have to pay.

Pay who? I'm pretty sure an outside company created and produced the show for the CBC. I have never heard anything about the CBC actually owning the brand.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by BornRuffView Post

They are not supposed to be a left wing or right wing mouthpiece.

Yet, somehow the CBC manages to evade that supposition


Quote: Originally Posted by BornRuffView Post

Some people are just getting too used to getting all of their "news" from partisans preaching to their own flock.

CBC is the marketing arm for the Liberals. Been that way for years
 
BornRuff
+1
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

Yet, somehow the CBC manages to evade that supposition

CBC is the marketing arm for the Liberals. Been that way for years

Lol, how do you come to that conclusion? Just because they don't always agree with your point of view?

If your preferred brand of news is SunTV, then yes, the CBC will seem very left wing to you, but that is more a problem with your own calibration than theirs.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by BornRuffView Post

Lol, how do you come to that conclusion? Just because they don't always agree with your point of view?

If your preferred brand of news is SunTV, then yes, the CBC will seem very left wing to you, but that is more a problem with your own calibration than theirs.


Whatever you like. It is clear that between this thread and your entrenched position on the Obama Failed thread that you see only what you want to, and declare that all other opinions are wrong.
 
Goober
Free Thinker
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

CBC has had too many years of being the marketing arm for the Liberal Party. That, in and of itself is fine, but as an entity that is 100% funded by the taxpayer, it doesn't work for many (if not most) Canadians.

If the CBC can't even pretend to be objective, then it's time to sell the corp to private interests and let them spend their money relaying what ever message they want

I recall a study showing Journalists, in substantial numbers are left of center.
The CBC does serve a purpose.
But when I watched CTV and saw the Duffster on there- I knew I was getting 100 BS when he was interviewing Conservatives.
At least with CBC I have less of that.
 
BornRuff
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

Whatever you like. It is clear that between this thread and your entrenched position on the Obama Failed thread that you see only what you want to, and declare that all other opinions are wrong.

Lol, so you also think that the GOP making it impossible for the democrats to pass a bill that combined the house and the senate bill had absolutely no impact at all on the final bill?

Feel free to join that discussion if you have an opinion on the matter.
 
Zipperfish
No Party Affiliation
+1
#27
Much ado about nothing. Rex Murphy is a grumpy old blowhard. His job is to entertain, not enlighten or edify. If people want to pay to hear him talk, fine. Peter Mansbridge should be a little more circumspect, since he's an anchor on the "news" part of the show. And it appears Mr. Mansbridge was more careful in his talk--he didn't come out on either side of the issue.

I wonder they didn't mention Don Cherry. He must be making some coin on the side too!
 
Locutus
#28
via sda tips

Peter Mansbridge is innocent, there is no conflict of interest when a company pays him to speak.
Just ask him!


Speaking of Speeches... - Editor's Blog
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
#29
Maybe Mansbridge and Justine can get together and trade Speaking Engagement contact info... They can double-up on the same circuit.
 
tay
#30
As reported by Andrew Mitrovica on iPolitiics, the CBC ombudsman, Esther Enkin, has finally reached her decision on the many conflict of interest complaints lodged against Rex Murphy and Peter Mansbridge.

Briefly, here is what she said:




“Given that Journalistic Standards and Practices spells out a commitment to independence, and the Conflict of Interest guidelines encompass perception of conflict as well, it is inconsistent with policy when CBC news and current affairs staff accept payment from groups that are likely to be in the news.

She has a somewhat timid suggestion for CBC management:





“But since taking money leads to a perception of a conflict of interest, CBC management might want to consider, in the review they are undertaking, whether even with disclosure, it is appropriate for CBC news and current affairs staff to get paid for their speaking engagements.

“To summarize, in the course of reviewing its policy, I hope CBC management will reconsider the practice of paid speaking engagements for its journalists and, at a minimum, consider how any relevant activity and payment can be on the public record.”

As Mitovica tartly points out,


Enkin’s ruling is a stinging rebuke of Mansbridge and Murphy — who, since the controversy broke in iPolitics, have not only been unapologetic about receiving payment from outside vested-interest groups, but have also vowed to continue the controversial practice despite mounting criticism and condemnation.



Will anything change as a result of this finding? Given the fierce recalcitrance of Rex Murphy, more a legend in his mind than in anyone else's, I am dubious. But one hopes that the CBC will show a shred of its rapidly diminishing integrity and issue Newfoundland's favorite son an ultimatum.


After all, given Rex's apparent popularity with the tarsand enthusiasts, he should have no problem keeping body and soul together by continuing to be a shill for the petroleum industry.






You can’t have the cash and keep the credibility | iPolitics




The ombudsman's full report can be read here.
 

Similar Threads

30
Mansbridge interviews Obama
by #juan | Feb 18th, 2009
no new posts