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

BornRuff

Time Out
Nov 17, 2013
3,175
0
36
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.

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.
 

BornRuff

Time Out
Nov 17, 2013
3,175
0
36
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

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
148
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
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

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
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

Time Out
Nov 17, 2013
3,175
0
36
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

House Member
Apr 12, 2013
3,688
0
36
Vancouver
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! :lol:
 

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
1
36
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.