LILLEY: CBC loses lawsuit against Tories while wasting your money

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
35,430
2,955
113
LILLEY: CBC loses lawsuit against Tories while wasting your money
Author of the article:Brian Lilley
Publishing date:May 13, 2021 • 11 hours ago • 3 minute read • 25 Comments
The Toronto headquarters of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is photographed on April 4, 2012.
The Toronto headquarters of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is photographed on April 4, 2012. PHOTO BY AARON LYNETT /Postmedia Network / Files
Article content
CBC’s biased lawsuit against the Conservative Party of Canada has been dismissed by the Federal Court with the state broadcaster likely being on the hook for expenses. The lawsuit was launched over the use of CBC video in ads paid for by the Conservatives during the last election.

With just about 10 days to go in the last election campaign, our esteemed state broadcaster showed their total lack of objectivity by launching a lawsuit against the Conservatives. Nothing like being a player in the game where you are supposed to be a neutral observer.


To make matters worse, CBC listed their then lead anchor Rosemary Barton and reporter John Paul Tasker as applicants in the court filing, something they later withdrew.

The state broadcaster’s claim was that by using a total of 30 seconds of video material from CBC in a one-minute, 46-second online ad and by using video clips for Tweets put up during a leader’s debate, the Conservatives have “taken” CBC’s work without permission. The Conservatives responded, as they have in the past, that they were working under the “fair dealings” provision of Canada’s copyright act and their actions were protected.

Advertisement
STORY CONTINUES BELOW

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
The ads in question also contained material from CTV, CityTV and Global but only CBC launched a lawsuit against the Conservatives. They did this, even though they had been warned in the past against doing so.

In 2014, CBC was up in arms over the Conservatives using news clips in ads to criticize Justin Trudeau and the Liberals when they were in opposition. Internal emails show that CBC executives tried unsuccessfully to get other private broadcasters to band together to stop the use of news clips in ads.

Those emails also show CBC’s own team was warning against such an approach.

“Under existing policies, the mere existence of broadcaster material is not grounds for rejection of an advertisement,” wrote Steven Guiton, then CBC’s Chief Regulatory Officer.

Elections Canada had even stated that the use of broadcast news material in an ad is not a violation of copyright.


“If a news clip is relatively short and is not a substantial part of the audiovisual work from which it was taken, the broadcast of the news clip in a political ad would not infringe the copyright of the owner of the audiovisual work and would not require the permission of that owner to be broadcast,” the Elections Canada Broadcasting Guidelines state.

It’s no surprise then, that after considering all the arguments, after comparisons to both Monty Python and Sports Bloopers videos, Justice Michael Phelan found against CBC.

“Weighing all these factors, the Court concludes that the Respondents’ use of the CBC Works was, on these facts, fair,” Justice Phelan wrote.

Advertisement
STORY CONTINUES BELOW

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
Not good enough for CBC, though, they may still appeal this court ruling.

“From the beginning, our objective has been to protect the trust Canadians have in the independence of their public broadcaster. We believe that misusing journalistic content and footage out of context in partisan political videos undermines that trust,” spokesperson Leon Mar said via email.

What undermines trust in CBC is that it poses as a neutral media observer when it has fully transformed into an arm of the Liberal Party. CBC would earn more respect from the millions of Canadians who currently refuse to watch them if they would admit their political bias.

The Conservatives said that they welcome the ruling as a victory.

“This decision is a clear win for democracy. It will serve to enhance the freedom of political expression – a significant component of a healthy democracy,” the Conservatives said in a statement.

“As the court said, ‘one of the most powerful techniques in any advocacy is to turn an opponent’s works and actions back on them. And one of the fastest and easiest techniques is to use video and audio excerpts to convey that message.'”

No government should try to stop such expression, especially not our tax-funded state broadcaster.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
22,437
7,466
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
CBC’s biased lawsuit against the Conservative Party of Canada has been dismissed by the Federal Court with the state broadcaster likely being on the hook for expenses (= ?). The lawsuit was launched over the use of CBC video in ads paid for by the Conservatives during the last election.

With just about 10 days to go in the last election campaign, our esteemed state broadcaster showed their total lack of objectivity by launching a lawsuit against the Conservatives. Nothing like being a player in the game where you are supposed to be a neutral observer.

The state broadcaster’s claim was that by using a total of 30 seconds of video material from CBC in a one-minute, 46-second online ad and by using video clips for Tweets put up during a leader’s debate, the Conservatives have “taken” CBC’s work without permission. The Conservatives responded, as they have in the past, that they were working under the “fair dealings” provision of Canada’s copyright act and their actions were protected.

The ads in question also contained material from CTV, CityTV and Global but only CBC launched a lawsuit against the Conservatives. They did this, even though they had been warned in the past against doing so.

In 2014, CBC was up in arms over the Conservatives using news clips in ads to criticize Justin Trudeau and the Liberals when they were in opposition. Internal emails show that CBC executives tried unsuccessfully to get other private broadcasters to band together to stop the use of news clips in ads.

Those emails also show CBC’s own team was warning against such an approach.

Under existing policies, the mere existence of broadcaster material is not grounds for rejection of an advertisement,” wrote Steven Guiton, then CBC’s Chief Regulatory Officer.

Elections Canada had even stated that the use of broadcast news material in an ad is not a violation of copyright.

“If a news clip is relatively short and is not a substantial part of the audiovisual work from which it was taken, the broadcast of the news clip in a political ad would not infringe the copyright of the owner of the audiovisual work and would not require the permission of that owner to be broadcast,” the Elections Canada Broadcasting Guidelines state.

It’s no surprise then, that after considering all the arguments, after comparisons to both Monty Python and Sports Bloopers videos, Justice Michael Phelan found against CBC.

“Weighing all these factors, the Court concludes that the Respondents’ use of the CBC Works was, on these facts, fair,” Justice Phelan wrote.

Not good enough for CBC, though, they may still appeal this court ruling.

What undermines trust in CBC is that it poses as a neutral media observer when it has fully transformed into an arm of the Liberal Party. CBC would earn more respect from the millions of Canadians who currently refuse to watch them if they would admit their political bias.

The Conservatives said that they welcome the ruling as a victory.

“This decision is a clear win for democracy. It will serve to enhance the freedom of political expression – a significant component of a healthy democracy,” the Conservatives said in a statement.

“As the court said, ‘one of the most powerful techniques in any advocacy is to turn an opponent’s works and actions back on them. And one of the fastest and easiest techniques is to use video and audio excerpts to convey that message.'”

No government should try to stop such expression, especially not our tax-funded state broadcaster.
It's sad that the political bias & timing from the CBC for the above mentioned bogus lawsuit aren't even surprising, nor are the consequences or lack there of. "CBC’s biased lawsuit against the Conservative Party of Canada has been dismissed by the Federal Court with the state broadcaster likely being on the hook for expenses." ??? What the Hell does that mean for a state sponsored broadcaster anyway?

Canada doesn't need foreign nations like Russia or China to interfere in our elections with the Gov't paid for CBC already doing so, & their only penalty (knowing it was bias & bullshit before initiating the lawsuit) is that Canadians just pay any penalty the CBC might see it from their taxes for them? It's a Win-Win for the CBC & the Liberal Party regardless of the outcome.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: Dixie Cup

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
22,437
7,466
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Catherine Tait (President of the Crown Corporation, the Canadian Broadcasting Companyhas suggested in public that one of the reasons the CBC is in decline is because it is being attacked by Conservative party leader Pierre Poilievre. “There’s a lot of CBC bashing going on — somewhat stoked by the Leader of the Opposition,” she told the Globe and Mail, frustrated over the party’s “defund the CBC” campaign. “I think they feel that CBC is a mouthpiece for the Liberal government.”

Does Catherine Tait not recall or does she even know that the CBC and its erstwhile national anchor sued the Conservative party during a federal election?

During. A federal election.

A government-funded news organization and one of its brand faces Rosie Barton, sued the opposing political party during a federal election. That surely did wonders for its neutralist, objective reputation.

…And now the President of CBC wandering the country to select venues speaks to what she calls “CBC bashing” — it may be just criticism born of annoyance and frustration at CBC’s performance and programming — hits at Pierre Poilievre as its “stoking” source. With the clear implication that the dismal ranking of CBC in the public mind these days comes only from its critics, and the Conservative party – the one CBC sued — in particular.

Well, here’s a press release. The purpose of a public news service is to provide news. It may have all the social justice goals it wants. It’s employees may embrace every cause on the wide so-called woke agenda. In their own time. On their own dime.

Diversity is much more than faces, identity or sexual inclination — it also includes minds and opinions and individuals, individuals who are always far more than blank templates for whatever group they issue from. CBC’s “diversity” is one-dimensional and superficial and most of all annoyingly preachy.

And news is news. It is not a subtle form of extended anti-bias lecture to be paid for with a 1.4 billion dollar subsidy.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
22,437
7,466
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
CBC President and CEO Catherine Tait scored an own goal on Tuesday, handing Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre a powerful fundraising tool and making life harder for CBC journalists, particularly those in the Parliamentary Press Gallery.

By attacking Poilievre in an interview with the Globe and Mail in an article ostensibly about the CBC’s plans for eventually abandoning its radio and television services and going fully digital — someday — she handed Poilievre a cudgel with which to beat up the public broadcaster.

Within hours of Tait accusing Poilievre of “CBC bashing,” inciting attacks on the public broadcaster and calling his campaign to defund the CBC a fundraising slogan (which it is, along with an election promise), the Conservatives were out with a fundraising email giving Poilievre’s response.

Tait even did them the favour of directly referring to what Poilievre says about the CBC.

“There’s a lot of CBC bashing going on — somewhat stoked by the Leader of the Opposition” Tait told the Globe. “I think they feel the CBC is a mouthpiece for the Liberal government.”

Facing a lob ball like that, Poilievre responded in his fundraising email: “The President and CEO of Trudeau’s $1.2 billion propaganda arm, the CBC, is now openly attacking me. They’re not even pretending to be unbiased.”

No doubt the CBC’s supporters agreed with what she said and no doubt similar views are expressed in CBC boardrooms and newsrooms every day.

They aren’t trying to convince people who support the CBC to change their minds. They’re re-enforcing the perception of bias that many Conservative supporters have about the CBC, now using its most senior executive to do so.

Asked later by a CBC reporter whether she was concerned her comments about Poilievre would undermine working journalists at the CBC by pitting the public broadcaster against one political party, Tait said she wasn’t because she’s not a journalist (which is obvious) but the CEO.

As the CEO, Tait said, she has a responsibility to communicate to Canadians, including politicians, the value of the public broadcaster, no matter whether they are Conservative, Liberal or NDP.

If Tait wanted to defend the CBC from allegations of pro-Liberal bias, she could have highlighted many examples, instead of attacking Poilievre.

But, as she says, she’s not a journalist.

She’s a CBC executive heading a government-funded corporation that at times makes bone-headed moves such as suing the Conservative Party 11 days before the 2019 federal election, alleging copyright infringement for using some short CBC news clips in an online political ad and tweets.

Anyone who understands the defence of “fair dealing” for copyright infringement knew the CBC would lose, which it did, while re-enforcing the perception of anti-Conservative bias.
 

The_Foxer

House Member
Aug 9, 2022
3,084
1,837
113
Asked later by a CBC reporter whether she was concerned her comments about Poilievre would undermine working journalists at the CBC by pitting the public broadcaster against one political party, Tait said she wasn’t because she’s not a journalist (which is obvious) but the CEO.
Right , because the frikkin' boss couldn't influence what gets into the paper or anything, right?

I didn't see the CBC employment ad when she applied, did it say "Must have been dropped as a child' or something?
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
22,437
7,466
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
The CBC’s former head got a hefty raise, even though he left the public broadcaster five years ago, according to Blacklock’s Reporter.

The Department of Canadian Heritage declined to comment to Blackolock’s Reporter about the matter.

“Unfortunately we cannot help you,” said David Larose, spokesperson for the heritage department. The $44,000 raise was recommended by the prime minister, according to cabinet records, Blacklock’s Reporter said.

Lacroix left the CBC in 2018 earning $428,000 annually. The cabinet order retroactively raised his pay to $472,000 a year, the equivalent of $131,000 more than his predecessor Robert Rabinovitch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Taxslave2

Taxslave2

House Member
Aug 13, 2022
2,501
1,488
113
The CBC’s former head got a hefty raise, even though he left the public broadcaster five years ago, according to Blacklock’s Reporter.

The Department of Canadian Heritage declined to comment to Blackolock’s Reporter about the matter.

“Unfortunately we cannot help you,” said David Larose, spokesperson for the heritage department. The $44,000 raise was recommended by the prime minister, according to cabinet records, Blacklock’s Reporter said.

Lacroix left the CBC in 2018 earning $428,000 annually. The cabinet order retroactively raised his pay to $472,000 a year, the equivalent of $131,000 more than his predecessor Robert Rabinovitch.
That is truly disgusting. No wonder the libs want to kill of veterans, they need the money for party hacks.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
22,437
7,466
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Catherine Tait (President of the Crown Corporation, the Canadian Broadcasting Companyhas suggested in public that one of the reasons the CBC is in decline is because it is being attacked by Conservative party leader Pierre Poilievre. “There’s a lot of CBC bashing going on — somewhat stoked by the Leader of the Opposition,” she told the Globe and Mail, frustrated over the party’s “defund the CBC” campaign. “I think they feel that CBC is a mouthpiece for the Liberal government.”
The CBC is not a regular media outlet. It’s a state broadcaster, which gets its mandate from the government, and is showered with public funds.

The CBC’s privileged relationship with the government creates special responsibilities — one of the most important of which is a dedication to political neutrality, where possible.
Does Catherine Tait not recall or does she even know that the CBC and its erstwhile national anchor sued the Conservative party during a federal election?
In an ideal world, a state broadcaster faithfully serves the public interest and refrains from cheerleading for a particular political party. To abandon this responsibility and become a partisan mouthpiece is to allow the state to effectively put its thumbs on the scales of democracy.
During. A federal election.
Some of the CBC’s defenders have accused its critics of hypocrisy. For example, NDP MP Charlie Angus inaccurately claimed that Postmedia, receives around $35 million in government subsidies “every year,” and wondered why Postmedia isn’t considered “government funded” in the same way that CBC is.

At $1.2 billion, accounting for two thirds of its budget, public financial support for the CBC far exceeds any funding private media receives. To make a comparison, last year Postmedia, owner of National Post, was eligible for $8.3 million in journalism tax credits, according to its financial statements. That’s less than one per cent of CBC’s grant and only 1.8 per cent of Postmedia’s expenses for the year. The company was also eligible for a final $1.6 million from the now-ended Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy — but that amount is, again, trivial relative to the CBC’s public funding.
A government-funded news organization and one of its brand faces Rosie Barton, sued the opposing political party during a federal election. That surely did wonders for its neutralist, objective reputation.
Canada is not an authoritarian state, obviously, but that doesn’t mean that it is perfect. More importantly, the success of our democracy doesn’t absolve us of the responsibility to maintain democratic norms to the best of our abilities, including the neutrality of our state media.
…And now the President of CBC wandering the country to select venues speaks to what she calls “CBC bashing” — it may be just criticism born of annoyance and frustration at CBC’s performance and programming — hits at Pierre Poilievre as its “stoking” source. With the clear implication that the dismal ranking of CBC in the public mind these days comes only from its critics, and the Conservative party – the one CBC sued — in particular.
Last year, journalist Tara Henly quit the CBC after almost 10 years of working there and publicly excoriated the corporation for maintaining an environment where, according to her, radical progressivism is the norm and journalistic integrity is almost non-existent. Some journalists, such as Canadaland’s Jesse Brown, pushed back on her account and implied that she was exaggerating the issue.
Well, here’s a press release. The purpose of a public news service is to provide news. It may have all the social justice goals it wants. Its employees may embrace every cause on the wide so-called woke agenda. In their own time. On their own dime.
1682864392023.jpeg
Diversity is much more than faces, identity or sexual inclination — it also includes minds and opinions and individuals, individuals who are always far more than blank templates for whatever group they issue from. CBC’s “diversity” is one-dimensional and superficial and most of all annoyingly preachy.

And news is news. It is not a subtle form of extended anti-bias lecture to be paid for with a 1.4 billion dollar subsidy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Taxslave2

Dixie Cup

Senate Member
Sep 16, 2006
5,650
3,538
113
Edmonton
Catherine Tait (President of the Crown Corporation, the Canadian Broadcasting Companyhas suggested in public that one of the reasons the CBC is in decline is because it is being attacked by Conservative party leader Pierre Poilievre. “There’s a lot of CBC bashing going on — somewhat stoked by the Leader of the Opposition,” she told the Globe and Mail, frustrated over the party’s “defund the CBC” campaign. “I think they feel that CBC is a mouthpiece for the Liberal government.”

Does Catherine Tait not recall or does she even know that the CBC and its erstwhile national anchor sued the Conservative party during a federal election?

During. A federal election.

A government-funded news organization and one of its brand faces Rosie Barton, sued the opposing political party during a federal election. That surely did wonders for its neutralist, objective reputation.

…And now the President of CBC wandering the country to select venues speaks to what she calls “CBC bashing” — it may be just criticism born of annoyance and frustration at CBC’s performance and programming — hits at Pierre Poilievre as its “stoking” source. With the clear implication that the dismal ranking of CBC in the public mind these days comes only from its critics, and the Conservative party – the one CBC sued — in particular.

Well, here’s a press release. The purpose of a public news service is to provide news. It may have all the social justice goals it wants. It’s employees may embrace every cause on the wide so-called woke agenda. In their own time. On their own dime.

Diversity is much more than faces, identity or sexual inclination — it also includes minds and opinions and individuals, individuals who are always far more than blank templates for whatever group they issue from. CBC’s “diversity” is one-dimensional and superficial and most of all annoyingly preachy.

And news is news. It is not a subtle form of extended anti-bias lecture to be paid for with a 1.4 billion dollar subsidy.
Oh for FS, it's in decline because it's not relevant anymore. There are independents out there that are far better at doing their jobs than the CBC will ever be so they're not as necessary anymore.