CBC Board of Directors Political Contributions by Party

[alienofwar]

"CBC Board of Directors Political Contributions by Party

Stephen Taylor
January 30, 2005

As I prepared this post, a rerun of the CBC's fifth estate documentary was lamenting the arrival of that "loud", "raucous" cable news channel that has debuted on Canadian digital cable. I am, of course, talking about Fox News.

Bob McKeown has an obvious thesis. He claims, quite correctly, that Fox News has aided in the division of the United States into Red and Blue. He calls it "a very un-civil war". Ironically he uses Al Franken and his Air America to confirm his thesis that Fox News is conservative (and thus quite evil). Yet, he ignores that by appealing to Franken he becomes unfaithful to his original thesis of media division of opinion as unfavorable.

I'd venture to guess that Bob took a lot of notes when he saw the Democratic Party funded documentary on Fox News: Outfoxed. All of the points were there. If I produced Outfoxed, I'd look into suing the Fifth Estate for plagiarism.

There is something quite ironic about the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation identifying media bias when the American news channel itself will compete directly with CBC for viewers.

So, I decided to look into the political influence behind what may direct the decisions at the CBC, from the stories that they choose to cover to which rerun of the Antiques Roadshow they'll play on Newsworld whenever the Conservative Party gets together at a convention or leadership debate.

Thus, I present the political contributions by party made by the current CBC board of directors."

http://www.cbcwatch.ca/?q=node/view/836 --- (Graph at bottom of page)

This is just the more reason to privatize the CBC. Why dont they call it the "Communist Broadcasting Corporation"?? Its a state funded news organization!! Of course its going to be biased and have an agenda!

Jeremy

 

[Jay]

Silence is golden.


I take it we all agree now, and we need not argue over the political leanings of the CBC?

 

[no1important]

RE: CBC Board of Director

Wee I don't remember the CBC ever dividing Canada like Fox did in America. I forced myself to watch Fox news because I get it on some obselete channel (where it belongs) when I went digital. I watched it for 3 hours straight. I just laughed. Like one comment saying it was the United State Supreme Courts fault that the Yahoo killed the Judge, Court Recorder and Deputy in Atlanta because the "Liberals" convinced the American Supreme court to allow inmates not to be in jumpsuits or shackles when they are on trial but to allow them to dress like normal people so the jury does not get biased against them.

I think anyone with a shred of common sense or intelligance knows FOX news is the tv version of the National Enquirer or Weekly World News and should not be taken as credible serious news.

 

[Jay]

It would seem to me that the CBC does provide fuel for divisiveness in Canada though, we do argue about it, because it is paid for by taxes.

I'm surprised by the amount of ppl in here who hate this Fox TV and watch it so much.
I don't even know what channel it’s on. TV sucks these days anyways.

 

[Reverend Blair]

Ironically he uses Al Franken and his Air America to confirm his thesis that Fox News is conservative (and thus quite evil). Yet, he ignores that by appealing to Franken he becomes unfaithful to his original thesis of media division of opinion as unfavorable.

Except that Air America was a reaction to the lack of diversity of political opinion in the United States, especially since Fox News came on the scene. It is an attempt to provide some balance.

I'd venture to guess that Bob took a lot of notes when he saw the Democratic Party funded documentary on Fox News: Outfoxed. All of the points were there. If I produced Outfoxed, I'd look into suing the Fifth Estate for plagiarism.

Hopefully Bob will see this and consider making a case against Stephen Taylor for libel. McKeown is a renowned journalist who did an original story on a topic that has been covered before. That there are similarities in the stories, such as the fact that Bill O'reilly and and Coulter have a problem telling the truth, that is to be expected.

So, I decided to look into the political influence behind what may direct the decisions at the CBC, from the stories that they choose to cover to which rerun of the Antiques Roadshow they'll play on Newsworld whenever the Conservative Party gets together at a convention or leadership debate.

This is untrue. CBC gives each of the elected parties in English Canada equal time when they have their conventions. If Taylor actually watched the CBC, he'd know that though.

Thus, I present the political contributions by party made by the current CBC board of directors."

Actually he just links to a contribution page, so if you don't know the names of those on the board you can't look them up. Since the CBC haters who are likely to read Taylor's column are likely to know those names, it is unlikely that they bother. The links to the actual names are found in a separate link.

It is a straw-man argument anyway though. If they are politically active CBC board members are highly unlikely to belong to the Reform/Alliance/Conservatives...a political party that has been screaming for the demise of their employer since its inception. That would leave them contributing either to the Liberals or the NDP. Since the Liberals are a much larger party they would naturally have such contributors.

Considering that the Aspers and other CBC-bashers in the mainstream media donate heavily to the Conservatives and ENDORSE them with their press empire at election time (the CBC does not endorse parties or candidates) it becomes a matter of hypocrsiy on Taylor's part.

 

[Jay]

It is a straw-man argument anyway though.

No it isn't. It is a valid concern free ppl should have.

If they are politically active CBC board members are highly unlikely to belong to the Reform/Alliance/Conservatives...a political party that has been screaming for the demise of their employer since its inception"

Ya sure that’s the reason....


http://www.friends.ca/News/news09230401.asp

"Past Prime Ministers have had too much sway over CBC because the Prime Minister appoints the members of CBC’s Board of Directors and the CBC President. Robert Rabinovitch should be the last CBC President chosen by a Prime Minister,” Morrison said"

It wouldn't have anything to do with appointments now would it? Are you going to tell me that you weren’t aware of the this?

Considering that the Aspers and other CBC-bashers in the mainstream media donate heavily to the Conservatives and ENDORSE them with their press empire at election time (the CBC does not endorse parties or candidates) it becomes a matter of hypocrsiy on Taylor's part.

That’s because it would be or should be illegal in a free country to have the Federal run press endorse candidates from any party, but that isn't the case for the free press AS THEY ARE NOT OWNED BY THE GOVERNMENT!!!

Why do you have such a hard time understanding that?

such as the fact that Bill O'reilly and and Coulter have a problem telling the truth

This may be the case, but their not the only ones with a truth telling problem...

 

[Reverend Blair]

No it isn't. It is a valid concern free ppl should have.

Yes it is. If you were part of a crown corporation and you were policially active, would you be likely to support the party that's calling for you to become unemployed? Not bloody likely.

It wouldn't have anything to do with appointments now would it? Are you going to tell me that you weren’t aware of the this?

You forgot to mention that the Martin government (much like the Mulroney government) has used political appointments in a way that's detrimental to the CBC...program and finance cuts mostly, especially to shows that were left-leaning.

Do you think that if the president was chosen from within the board (something i agree with BTW) that there would be a major shif towards rabid right-wingers who want to see the CBC shut down sitting on the board? Somehow I doubt that would happen.

That’s because it would be or should be illegal in a free country to have the Federal run press endorse candidates from any party, but that isn't the case for the free press AS THEY ARE NOT OWNED BY THE GOVERNMENT!!!

Why do you have such a hard time understanding that?

The privately owned media is considered to have a duty to the public good in a democracy though. Did they not teach you anything about democracy in school? Have you ever heard the term Fourth Estate?

This may be the case, but their not the only ones with a truth telling problem...

Yeah, I've noticed that it's a major problem throughout the radical right.

 

[Jay]

Yes it is. If you were part of a crown corporation and you were policially active, would you be likely to support the party that's calling for you to become unemployed? Not bloody likely.

If I was part of a crown corporation board and I was hand picked by the PM, I would be a liberal. I would probably feel I have to give money to the cause too, to keep my job. Also If I was all that and a bag of chips, and even the PM knew it, I wouldn't have to work for the government to make money therefore I wouldn't.

Besides no body is saying burn the buildings down and fire all the staff. We simply want it to be privatized. If the current board members loose their jobs because the CBC is privatized, they likely deserve to loose their jobs.

You forgot to mention that the Martin government (much like the Mulroney government) has used political appointments in a way that's detrimental to the CBC...program and finance cuts mostly, especially to shows that were left-leaning.

It wasn't a "forgot" thing, it's a "I don't give a rats ass thing". I'm pointing out you conveniently "forgot" to tell the world that the boards of directors and the president of the CBC are all hand picked by the PM, and that’s why we get the product we get, not because if Steven Harper were to get elected, they would loose their jobs, therefore the board members don't give money to the right wing parties of Canada. And how is picking the current President of the CBC in any way detrimental to either the liberal cause or the CBC’s. It isn't.

Do you think that if the president was chosen from within the board (something i agree with BTW) that there would be a major shif towards rabid right-wingers who want to see the CBC shut down sitting on the board? Somehow I doubt that would happen.

How about if the PM didn't appoint the board members in the first place? What’s the sense in arguing if the PM appoints the President or the board members do? They are all directly or indirectly appointed by the PM in either case. What I do believe is that we have had many years of Liberal Fed governments in this country, and the CBC either is or has become a left wing propaganda machine and no doubt helps get left leaning governments voted in, in Canada. It also helps keep Canada left of centre. In other words it is the background noise of the nation and in "free" nations it’s hideous, and if other nations do it too, guess what....it’s hideous over there too.

The privately owned media is considered to have a duty to the public good in a democracy though. Did they not teach you anything about democracy in school? Have you ever heard the term Fourth Estate?

Yes they taught me that in a democracy the government doesn’t own printing presses, as that might effect vote out comes, and that isn’t the job of the government, but is the job of the people. Oh wait, no they didn’t because I went to school in Canada. I had to find out the truth of the matter, and about my rights on my own.

“Is considered”, are the key words there, not “is legislated”. If ppl believe that certain news papers don't take on certain personifications, and are left leaning or right leaning then they were born yesterday. The CBC has too fallen in this category, and it is wrong simply because they are funded by tax-payers money. I know you understand these principals; you’re just not going to admit it.

Yeah, I've noticed that it's a major problem throughout the radical right.

Is that because you watch the CBC all day?

 

[Reverend Blair]

If I was part of a crown corporation board and I was hand picked by the PM, I would be a liberal. I would probably feel I have to give money to the cause too, to keep my job. Also If I was all that and a bag of chips, and even the PM knew it, I wouldn't have to work for the government to make money therefore I wouldn't.

So how do explain the blue part of the graph? I'm all for getting rid of patronage appointments, but your reasoning is flawed. There are Conservatives on the board. They aren't your brand of radical right destructo masters, but they obviously give to CPC.

Besides no body is saying burn the buildings down and fire all the staff. We simply want it to be privatized. If the current board members loose their jobs because the CBC is privatized, they likely deserve to loose their jobs.

And if it was privatized it would be swallowed up by a right-wing conglomerate, leaving Canada without a national broadcaster that represents Canadians.

You also seem to want to remain ignorant of the fact that every developed nation on earth except the United States has a national broadcaster.

It wasn't a "forgot" thing, it's a "I don't give a rats ass thing".

That's you problem...you don't give a rat's ass about anything but your own pocketbook.

I'm pointing out you conveniently "forgot" to tell the world that the boards of directors and the president of the CBC are all hand picked by the PM,

Actually that isn't fully correct. The PM usually appoints the leader of the CBC...lesser appointments are made on the recommendations of a variety of people for a variety reasons.

And how is picking the current President of the CBC in any way detrimental to either the liberal cause or the CBC’s. It isn't.

It's detrimental to the CBC because it politicizes funding and gives those who would do away the CBC fodder for their insane rantings.

 

[missile]

Rev is right. The political appointees are just the Chairmen of the various Crown Corporations..CBC,Canada Post,CN. Usually these are people who failed to get a seat in the government or some great friend of the party in power. Most[not all!]of the other top jobs are filled on merit.

 

[missile]

Fox News is only available here on the digital box from Rogers..I believe its on Ch.95.

 

[Jay]

So how do explain the blue part of the graph? I'm all for getting rid of patronage appointments, but your reasoning is flawed. There are Conservatives on the board. They aren't your brand of radical right destructo masters, but they obviously give to CPC.

You mean all 3% of it? It seems even the Bloc gets better representation. IMHO it goes to show that these are political appointments. I don't think my reasoning is flawed.

I'm all for getting rid of the appointments altogether.

And if it was privatized it would be swallowed up by a right-wing conglomerate, leaving Canada without a national broadcaster that represents Canadians.

Would it now?

You also seem to want to remain ignorant of the fact that every developed nation on earth except the United States has a national broadcaster.

I don't seem to want to remain ignorant of the fact. I don't believe tax payers should pay to keep the CBC afloat. I look at it the way the USA does.

That's you problem...you don't give a rat's ass about anything but your own pocketbook.".

First of all this isn't true, second of all it’s about choice Rev, something the left knows little about.

Actually that isn't fully correct. The PM usually appoints the leader of the CBC...lesser appointments are made on the recommendations of a variety of people for a variety reasons.,

It's not how I read it, but who cares, what remains the case is the PM appoints them directly or indirectly. And it has no bearing that board members give to the liberals instead of the conservatives because the conservatives would privatize the CBC.

It's detrimental to the CBC because it politicizes funding and gives those who would do away the CBC fodder for their insane rantings.

Any one who believes that someone is insane because they question whether or not the CBC should be privatized has serious issues. For what ever reason you are unwilling to understand that we aren’t "doing away" with the CBC. You just don't get to spend tax payers money on it.

 

[Reverend Blair]

I don't think my reasoning is flawed.

:lol:

Would it now?

That is how things have been going in broadcasting.

I don't seem to want to remain ignorant of the fact. I don't believe tax payers should pay to keep the CBC afloat. I look at it the way the USA does.

Emigration is always an option...

First of all this isn't true, second of all it’s about choice Rev, something the left knows little about.

I'm just going by everything you've ever said on here, Jay.

Any one who believes that someone is insane because they question whether or not the CBC should be privatized has serious issues.

You know who has serious issues? Somebody who lives in one country and so despises it and its institutions that his answer to everything is to make it more like another country.

 

[tibear]

Rev,

Considering that the Aspers and other CBC-bashers in the mainstream media donate heavily to the Conservatives and ENDORSE them with their press empire at election time (the CBC does not endorse parties or candidates) it becomes a matter of hypocrsiy on Taylor's part.

Your kidding me right!!!! The Aspers are conservative!! What a joke!!! You should take up comedy.

Remember Izzy was the leader of the Liberal party and in addition to be a heavy, heavy smoker he was a strong, strong Liberal supporter.

Does the Asper chain allow their editorial writers to criticize the government? Absolutely, unlike the NDP philosophy of socialism, free speech is something we take seriously around here.

Aspers, supporting the conservative party. :lol: :lol: :lol: That's a good one. Man, my sides are hurting!! :lol: :lol:

 

[Jay]

Emigration is always an option...

Oh, I see your finally moving to a communist country rather than trying to turn Canada into one?

I'm just going by everything you've ever said on here, Jay.

Of coarse you are, because unless I say I want to only take home 30% of my income, and the other 70% the NDP can have, I'm only interested in my own pocket book. The only ones interested more in my pocket book than I am are socialist lefties like yourself.

You know who has serious issues? Somebody who lives in one country and so despises it and its institutions that his answer to everything is to make it more like another country.

I don't despise this nation, you do and that’s why you think our system is screwed up and want to invent reasons to write more laws so you can step on more rights.

You also seem to want to remain ignorant of the fact that every developed nation on earth except the United States has a national broadcaster.

So who wants to be like whom? You want to be just like every other European country out there and you know it.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: CBC Board of Director

They endorsed the Conservatives last election, Tibear. I don't know if you heard or not, but Izzy is dead. Even when he was alive he was very much on the far-right of the Liberal party...the part that has the same platform as the Conservatives.

The Asper empire does not endorse free speech either. They write editorials and require them to run in all markets, have policies restricing other editorials, and have killed straight news stories that did not fit their political position.

 

[Andem]

Re: RE: CBC Board of Directors Political Contributions by Pa

It would seem to me that the CBC does provide fuel for divisiveness in Canada though, we do argue about it, because it is paid for by taxes.

I'm surprised by the amount of ppl in here who hate this Fox TV and watch it so much.
I don't even know what channel it’s on. TV sucks these days anyways.

I don't watch much television either, but the CBC does provide the country with an alternative. I think public television, whether or not it's political leaning, is good to keep the media in balance. Just look at other countries that don't have a mix of private and public. The media in the US is, for example, a giant pot of money. The government, parties and lobbyist groups are constantly throwing money at them. (Personal note: I'd rather not watch journalists reporting from Palestine/Israel who are skewed over the middle-east crisis because they are a member of a jewish lobbyist group.

It's hard to throw money at the CBCk, because they are regulated. It effectively gives us straight-to-the-point reporting, without some of the political propaganda which is evident in large news networks such as CNN, Global, NBC, Fox, etc.



By the way, Jay, I'm with you. I don't watch much television. Though I almost always have the TV on, it's usually background noise I enjoy. I'd rather get my news from more indepedent sources on the Internet. You can't trust everything you read, as they say, but you also can't trust everything you see on TV. There's almost always a bias, but I like to see it in writing to decide for myself... with a handy too like Google

 

[tibear]

Rev,

Here's a website that shows that CanWest donated twice as much to the Liberal party as it did to the then Alliance party and nothing to the then Conservative party. www.friends.ca/files/PDF/ publications/polcontrib93-00.pdf

Granted this is in 2000 and Izzy has died since then. But the Asper children are very similar to their father and would doubt that their contributions would be much different than those quoted.

 

[Jay]

Re: RE: CBC Board of Directors Political Contributions by Pa

By the way, Jay, I'm with you. I don't watch much television.

Good points Andem.


When I do watch the idiot tube (as my grandfather called it) I watch the History channel, TVO, PBS, Home and Garden, Space, City TV, Food channel etc.

 

[Reverend Blair]

Tibear, I'll say it again...the Aspers always favoured the right side of the Liberal party and in the last election the Asper brothers endorsed the Conservatives.

I realize that it's very difficult for some to understand that the Liberal Party has always had two very separate sides constantly fighting for power, but that has always been there.

As for the endorsement of the Conservative Party, they announced it on television and in print. It's kind of hard to ignore that.

They have also made the CBC one of their favourite whipping boys over the last few years. That is evident in several editorials they have printed.