http://frederictonguild.blogspot.com/
I don't undertsand the reason they set it up that no one can leave a comment? Maybe they have been hanging around with the Irvings too long? This is Jacques Poitras chatting with a cutty from the Irving Paper - Daily Gleaner!
51 comments:
They were letting others leave messages for a while, hard to say why they've changed because this is an excellent opportunity for them to talk to and listen to NBers they normally don't.
I've written before about the need for CBC managment and employees to find ways to better relate to the common New Brunswicker in order to present a better product that is relative to all Canadians not just elitists and fringe groups. CBC management still needs to come on board but it's unfortunate that the employees don't use this time to not only talk to the viewers and listeners they have but also the viewers and listeners they don't have whether it's on the picket line or throught the Internet.
On one other unrelated note, pick up Maclean's magazine this week for the article about Blogs. Apparently 99% of Blogs get less than 10 hits a day. Congratulations to Charles for hosting a Blog which is in the top 1%. Good work Charles.
10 hits a day???But lets be fair here? If I didn't have that huge email ist? No one would know about my site. It's not everyone who says- Hey? I got to visit Charlie's site today! As other blogglers? I visit their site one a week or two weeks. But we always to have over 100 hits a day andthat's a good thing! I noticed more and more people mentioning my blog to me in person on the streets! Hey Spinks? Post that story in this blog for me??? Merci!!!
Here you go buddy. The stats are 2/3 of the way down.
August 19, 2005
Nothing to blog about
The hype behind Internet weblogs is more thrilling than the reality
STEVE MAICH
Blogs are going to change the world for the better. Ask anybody.
But first, chances are you may have to ask, "what is a blog exactly?" Don't feel too bad about this, you have plenty of company. Recent surveys suggest most of the population still hasn't heard the buzz about blogs, even though they first made headlines as an "Internet craze" as far back as 2001. Since then, the hype has intensified greatly. But if blogs are indeed world-changing, somebody has apparently failed to notify the world.
First things first. A blog (short for "weblog") is essentially an online diary, where anybody with simple computer skills can post anything -- random musings, photos, screeds, poetry, you name it -- for the world to see.
To the believers, the genius of the technology is in the sheer volume of material it throws into the public domain. Blogs, they say, counteract the entrenched biases of the powerful mainstream media, or MSM, making mass communication a free-ranging conversation rather than a monologue. And now, with millions of self-appointed media watchdogs joining the fray every year, there isn't a shadow in the night that doesn't get barked at in the blogosphere. This, we're told, is an enormous step forward.
Ironically, it's the much-derided MSM that's most in love with the fledgling blog phenomenon. Recently, the New York Times reported that 80,000 new blogs are created every day, and earnestly enthused that blogging is "a profoundly human phenomenon, a way of expanding and, in some sense, reifying the ephemeral daily conversation that humans engage in."
A couple of months back, BusinessWeek offered a rapturous cover story entitled "Blogs will change your business," warning that if companies hadn't already figured out how to harness this new world -- by marketing to and through them -- they were already in deep trouble. Blogs "are simply the most explosive outbreak in the information world since the Internet itself," it gushed. To bolster its case, the article echoed numbers frequently cited by the boosters: that there are at least nine million blogs now on the Internet, and growing fast, and that 27 per cent of Internet users claim to read them.
With an audience that big, and growth so explosive, there must be a major social and business phenomenon happening, right?
Well, let's just take a deep breath.
For one thing, there are wild discrepancies in the estimates of how many blogs are actually out there. Some figure the number is as high as 30 million worldwide. But once you strip away pseudo-blogs that are really ads or scam traps, and subtract dormant sites, the numbers plunge precipitously. A couple of sites dedicated to tracking blog traffic estimate only about two to four million blogs are actively maintained.
Still, that's a lot of blogs and lots of readers. Or maybe not.
It was late last year that the Pew Internet & American Life Project reported two seemingly incongruous facts: that 27 per cent of Internet users regularly read blogs, but that 62 per cent of the online population still didn't know what a blog is. In fact, 40 per cent of those who said they read blogs then said they didn't really know what a blog was.
Do you read blogs regularly? Oh, yes.
Do you know what a blog is? Um . . . no.
This little comedy routine played itself out 143 times in a survey of just over 1,300 people. But that didn't stop the believers from trumpeting that blog readership soared 58 per cent in 2004. What they often fail to point out is that the overwhelming majority of blogs get almost no traffic. According to data from SiteMeter and other tracking services, more than 99 per cent get fewer than 10 hits a day. Even the ones that do attract readers don't hold their attention very well. The same reports suggest that the average blog reader stays on a site for just 90 seconds.
Comparing the total blog audience to the circulation of major newspapers or viewers of network newscasts is a total sham. Let's say you never watched a single episode of Everybody Loves Raymond, but you clicked past it many times while channel surfing. Maybe you even paused occasionally to remind yourself of its utter lameness. Does that make you a viewer? It does in the blog world.
And what about that explosive growth? Pew issued an update to its survey earlier this summer, and found that in the first few months of 2005, readership abruptly flatlined at about 25 per cent of Internet users.
Why? Perhaps it's because blogs are plagued by the same problems that have pervaded the Net from day one. Many sites are dumping grounds for every kind of online sewage, from virulent hatred to simple-minded polemics and laughable hoaxes. And with thousands of new voices joining the fray every day, separating the insightful from the inane is only getting more cumbersome. As a result, people are naturally migrating to the blogs they know and trust, usually by prominent writers or celebrity commentators. In other words, the blogs that matter are quickly becoming just another extension of the dreaded MSM.
Will blogs fundamentally change the media business, or any business for that matter? Well, did do-it-yourself wine kits change the wine industry? Think about all the homemade plonk you've had to drink over the years. Sure, everybody thinks the merlot they stirred up in a plastic bucket in their basement tastes fantastic. But try selling it.
I have been writimg updates for the last 4 years. I have people who's been on my list for a very long time. Thanks to WCIE I reach more people therefore attracting different point of views. Of course, I had around 10 emails send to me with a dangerous Domeday Virus but I never open an attachement. Some people admire me and some just plain hates my guts! It takes a lot of work mantaining a blog! For moi? It's a hobby that I truly enjoy but it's a darn shame that I'm not paid for it! I just take it day by day and that's all I can do. I believe that blogglers is the way of the future. What do you think?
Sorry...wireless wan't working right!!!! I'll delete all the same messages once it runs ok!!!!
Quote
IT'S BEEN A WEEK SINCE CBC EMPLOYEES WERE LOCKED OUT!!!
So? Do you miss CBC? Is the strike playing with your way to get news?
Just a note Charles:
In the first line you call it what it is.... "Lockout", and then the next line a "strike" There is a difference...........
i know yjr difference between a strike and A locked out!!!!
CBC is a great Canadian institution. It will rebound after the lockout/strike. If you want to watch sensationalism then watch commercial T.V. If you want to watch real news watch CBC. CBC cares. Commercial T.V, it is sell, sell, sell. And then sell some more advertisement. If some people are fans of commercials then commercial T.V. is good for them. CBC news and programs are being missed right across Canada. Local news are greatly missed as other outlets do not provid local N.B. news as extensively.
Folks, CBC hasn't rebounded from the last two labour disputes, at least in N.B. The ratings have routinely collapsed after each of the last two disputes and not come back. While I'll grant you there are loyal viewers as some on theis Blog appear to be, most viewers will only put up with switching channels for a couple of days. After several weeks they go elsewhere and don't come back unless there is a compelling reason to do so. In N.B. the viewers have not been given that compelling reason. While I have no doubt some miss CBC greatly, most Canadians do not. I agree it's unforunate. I would truly prefer it survive but they need to make some fundamental changes to do so.
CBC has nothing to worry. It has loyal viewers. It is the best in news and other programs. CBC is not going anywhere. You know the value of something when it is gone. People cannot wait for regular programs to return on CBC.
My friend, I appreciate your enthusiasm but it's the emperor with no clothes philosophy. If you choose to ignore the problem it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
CBC exist in all its glory. It is no emperor without clothes. One cannot imagine Canada without CBC. It is the part and parcel of our society and culture. When it comes to objective news and other programs it has no competetion.
WOW 12:45pm (or should I say CBC employee?) You should write brochures for the CBC. That's pretty good.
CBC needs no brochures but you need to update your knowledge on news media. Your knowledge is so ancient and biased.
CBC: A grand organization.
Is anyone out there who doesn't work for the CBC Public Relations Dept. want to discuss this?
Spinks, I think some are making fool of you. They really do not care about CBC. They are just testing you that how far your long-windedness will go. But I do not think you are getting it. Sorry to break your bubble.
Vancouver Sun column re : CBC
Privatized CBC could make new Friends — ‘stockholders’
by Gerry Nicholls
The friends of Canadian broadcasting are getting nervous. In fact, CBC lovers across the country are staring their worst nightmare in the face, or maybe I should say in the TV screen.
The state-owned Canadian Broadcasting Corp. — the favorite network of left-leaning ivory tower academics, cultural elitists, and knee-jerk anti-Americans — has locked out its employees.
Now, that might not sound so nightmarish to you and me.
For us regular TV consumers who mainly watch non-CBC programming, the possibility a Nature of Things episode won’t get aired ranks somewhere below getting a hangnail on our list of things to worry about.
Indeed, as long as the lockout doesn’t interfere with something important — such as any sporting event that involves iced playing surfaces — 95 per cent of Canadians probably wouldn’t even notice the CBC wasn’t around.
But for this country’s urban intelligentsia (the kind of people who think subsidizing Margaret Atwood books should take priority over buying military helicopters), a CBC shutdown is more terrifying than watching Don Cherry speak without a seven-second tape delay.
To understand what I mean you really need to look at it from the CBCphiles’ perspective.
And from their perspective the CBC is more than just a mere broadcasting corporation, like say Global or CTV. Those entities, after all, seek simply to entertain viewers with things like reality programs where contestants are forced to eat grasshoppers.
The CBC, on the other hand, is different. It isn’t supposed to about mundane things like making profits or winning over viewers.
No, the CBC operates under the guidelines of a government sanctioned “mandate.”
And what is that mandate, you ask?
As near as I can figure it out from first-hand observation, the CBC’s mandate seems to be this: “We will seek whenever possible to present Canada’s left-wing elitists with a picture of the world not as it is, but as they imagine it to be.”
In other words, the CBC designs its programming to reassure Canada’s chattering classes that Americans are indeed imperialistic and war-mongering, that corporations are greedy and evil, that western Canadians are gun-toting reactionaries, and that Conservative party leader Stephen Harper is, in fact, the anti-Christ.
Some, of course, call this sort of programming strategy evidence of “CBC bias” or “socialist propaganda,” but to those with the proper ideological viewpoint, it’s called “protecting Canadian culture.”
And without that CBC cultural protection, the high-society set would be forced to watch the same crass, mandate-less networks as the great unwashed masses. It’s like asking them to shop at Wal-Mart.
The horror!
And the longer a CBC labour dispute lasts the greater the horror.
Not only would a long dispute deprive CBC fans of Rick Mercer, David Suzuki and Peter Mansbridge, but it would also remind the rest of Canadians of something that has been true for a long time — we don’t need a public broadcaster any more.
Maybe it made sense to have a government-run network back in the days when you needed tinfoil-covered rabbit ears to pick up a grainy image of Wayne and Schuster, but this is the satellite and Internet age.
These days there are all-news channels, all-sports channels, all-arts channels, all-comedy channels, allbusiness channels all available for a reasonable price.
So why should taxpayers pay $1 billion a year for an all-socialist channel?
That’s a questions taxpayers might very well ask if the CBC dispute drags on. This in turn might lead them to demand the CBC be privatized, sold off to the public.
And that’s the real nightmare for Canada’s left-wing crowd.
In fact, they even have their own lobby group called “Friends of Canadian Broadcasting” whose mission, according to its website, is to fight for a “strong CBC,” and by “strong” they mean government-operated and taxpayer-subsidized. Just like the Post Office is “strong.”
If the CBC were privatized, it would probably lose these “Friends” On the bright side, a private CBC would also make new friends — they are called stockholders.
Big deal, Spinks. It means there is another crazy one like you- Gerry Nicholls- out of 30 million Canadians. Does not prove anything. He is long-winded too. You two will make good friends.
Your nightmare CBC is going nowhere.
As I've said I would like to see the CBC hang around but it needs fundamental change. It can't apppeal to just fragments of the population. That's what a specialty channel is for and you pay for that. CBC is paid for by everybody and as such it can't take sides or be elitist. If it stays that way, it deserves to be sold off or shut down.
By the way to say that only two people in all of Canada disagree with how CBC is run is a bit arrogant. That would be like me saying only two people in Canada like CBC the way it is. Both statements are ridiculous.
You are into the same rut. You cannot change CBC by posting stuff here. CBC is doing well and your regurgitation of same stuff over and over will make no difference.
Puh-leeze, CBC is doing so well that their employees are locked out, they need a billion taxpayer dollars a year to survive, they have a single show in the national top 20, in N.B. the supper hour news has 6,000 viewers on a good night and most of their programs barely get an audience at all. Sounds hunky dory to me. Time for government to pull their heads out of the sand and see there's a serious problem.
If we buy your reasoning, Spinks then your head is the only one above sand. I have yet to see a post supporting your innuendos about CBC.
Innuendos??? This isn't ground breaking info. Even the CBC knows these basic facts at 3:06pm to be indisputable. Listen and check-out media besides CBC to find out more.
Now, what is the solution or the underlying problems, I don't know, although I have a few theories which is why I raised it here but it seems everyone here thinks the CBC is just fine the way it is.
Exactment!! You cannot get anybody to agree with you. Does that tell you anything?
Yep. It tells me I'm on a site where everyone thinks the same. Not much of a democracy when that happens. I'm glad to participate and offer some contrary views that you otherwise would not see. You have to admit it generates posts and occassionally discussion, although we don't seem to be making progress on CBC. Too bad.
You are good at self-praise. What one can say to that.
"You are good at self-praise. What one can say to that."
Huh?? Is that a question, statement or diatribe?
You be the judge what it means. You write lengthy something then tell us you are contributing to our knowledge. That is self-praise and self-congratulation. Rest of us are saying you are boring us to death, you repeat yourself, you contradict yourself and then you say you have an opinion. It is hard to find any opinion in all those contradictions.
Still waiting for the "contradiction" example. Somebody (you?) tried a desperate attempt at a Lord one. Clearly a red herring so you'll have to do better. I'm not here to entertain you so if you're bored get a hobby and don't respond to my postings. Pretty simple solution, no?
Ottawa Sun column for your reading pleasure. Gee I must be converting people since according to the poster above it was only me and a guy in BC who felt this way. I guess we're up to 6. LOL. You'll notice the balance in the column. Always happy to provide all sides which is why I'm here. Cheers.
By Earl McRae
Due to a labour disruption, regular programming on CBC 1 and CBC 2 is unavailable at this time. We apologize for the inconvenience.
Enough already with this %$#@ irritating apology every few minutes on CBC Radio. What, CBC, you think your listeners are so dumb that they have to be told over and over again? What an insult. Everybody knows CBC listeners are the self-proclaimed creme de la creme of the intelligentsia; if they don't know by now that their stratospherically intellectual dosages of regular programming have been deep-sixed by the labour disruption, our country is in serious trouble.
Being that I'm a peon, I do not listen much to CBC Radio, but since the lockout, I've tuned in several times, curious to hear what's replacing what and I'm hereby informing CBC that it does not need to apologize for the inconvenience because I can't tell the difference from what I'm hearing now and what I heard before when I'd sometimes switch over to help me sleep; I, for one, am NOT inconvenienced.
How dare CBC presume we're all "inconvenienced?"
I am not being inconvenienced by not punching the button and hearing some singing disaster, unknown for good reason, tunelessly wailing away to the sound of bongo drums and flutes; I am not being inconvenienced by not hearing a marathon interview with a no-name author from Minsk who has written a book on the latest diesel engine technology.
But, that's me -- am I wrong? Am I in the minority in this country?
Empty and depressed
Is CBC right, that it is so vital to the intellectual and emotional fibre of the nation that Canadians are now suffering severe inconvenience, their lives empty and depressed, their trauma too frightening to contemplate, that without CBC as the stimulant of our meaning and knowledge, our very survival as a nation is at risk?
I set out across the city, randomly asking Ottawans how it is they're able to cope, if, indeed, they are coping, without regular programming on CBC Radio 1 and 2. A sampling:
Mike Dewan is co-owner of Britton's, the international newspaper and magazine shop, and he's behind the counter of the Westboro branch. Immersed occupationally in world events every day, he has to be a CBC listener, I figure. "Mike, this CBC lockout, are you coping or not?"
He looks at me strangely. "I'm not a listener, I never listen. It's boring. It's all left-wing crap. Have you ever heard the CBC criticize a Liberal government in the last 15 years?"
The radio is playing back of Mike: Oldies 1310.
In the parking lot of Capone's Restaurant on Carling Ave. is the sleek Thunderbird of Tony Cuccaro, owner of the eatery. "Are you kidding me?" he scoffs. "How can I listen to the CBC? I only have six pre-sets on my radio."
Bland dress, shoes
Bonnie Fleming, senior citizen, is in Chapters on Rideau St. Her bland dress and shoes, and novel by Margaret Atwood tell me she's a CBC type. "Of course I miss it. It's all I ever listen to. I love Shelagh Rogers as though she's a daughter. She makes my day. I happen to think CBC radio is so important to Canadians that the government should legislate a settlement."
Linda Haughton, mother of two teenagers, shopping in the Canadian Tire store at Woodroffe and Fairlawn: "I listen to it (CBC) on the radio in the morning, but no, I don't miss it. I like that it has no annoying commercials, but I'm certainly not 'inconvenienced.' That's snobbish of them. It's not like they're a necessity. There's lots of other places to get news and information."
You really expect people to read this bul****t, Spinks. Fat chance. No one has time to read the books you are posting now.
Few not liking CBC? There are always few crazies.
Well you must have read it.
"Few not liking CBC? There are always few crazies" That's true. I've met a few right here. LOL.
Spinks, you realize that people can read you like an open book now (a mumbo jumbo book but an open book, nonetheless.) and they know what button to push and you keep going. You do not got it. Take it easy man otherwise you will get blood pressure or become a basket-case for cuckoo house.
..or am I doing the same thing to you guys...hmmmm.
You do hallucinate a lot.
So Spinks
Let me see if I have this right. You would rather get rid of the CBC than try to fix some of what is wrong?? So you obviously are quite happy with private corporate ownership of the news you recieve?? Currently BCE owns roughly 30% of the Canadian Media and you think this is good for the average Canadian?? Seems to me that it's rather nice to have a more independant source of news than simply what Company's like Rogers, BCE, Irving (Locally) try to force feed us.
If we rid ourselves of CBC what are we left with?? Sorry that is a rather scary proposition to me thanks. It would be moving us even closer to the same situation they have in the U.S. where a few corporate entity's own most of the media.
Simply look across the pond to England my friend.......public broadcasting can work very well....Also, if you pull your head out of the sand even a little bit and stop believing everything the "privates" tell you, you'd know that CBC is very respected abroad as a top notch news organization. Too bad more at home don't stop to take a good look also.I've said it before and i'll say it again. YES it is broken, YES it can be fixed. Most of the problems are at the top. Remember the fish rot's from the head down!
I'm not willing to throw the baby out with the bath water as the old saying goes.
First up, no need for the personal attacks my friend. We can agree or disagree but I don't see any need for that.
No you don't quite have it right. I have said repeatedley I would like to see CBC survive but not the way it is because it doesn't work and lots of Canadians, in fact arguably a majority (despite a few here who are in denial) agree. It really isn't independent because it's a state-run broadcaster and under the present Liberal Government has pushed even further to the left. In some ways obscurity and that's where they've lost relevance to many Canadians particularly average Canadians who may live in rural areas, maybe don't have university degrees, etc. In other words a significant chunk of the country. The CBC exists to share the Canadian identity and be refelective...and this is key.... "relevant" to Canadians. If Canadians aren't watching it obviously isn't relevant.
I'll agree that CBC is well respected abroad and it should be because international news is one of their strongest assets. They do a very good job of that, far better than any other Canadian media organization (see I said something nice). However we also need it to be strong domestically and it just isn't doing that. CBC Management should be going out doing focus groups, surveys, etc. My theory is that they'll find out they're not relevant to a majority of Canadians, maybe they'll find something different but I strongly suspect they'll find that's the problem and I think they already know that. Fixing it will require a radical change of attitude and thinking.
On the CTV issue, I believe they do a far better job than CBC does at local/regional news and the numbers bear this out across the country. (Only CBC in PEI is #1 in the ratings in the entire country). How they keep doing it, I have no idea because on your point about BCE, I completley agree with you. I don't think BCE has been good for CTV, journalism or the news. If you have a chance to run into an ATV reporter outside of Halifax, you'll see what I mean. They carry all the gear themselves as a videographer (which means BCE pays 1 salary instead of two). This has been the reason, as I mentioned in a past blog why many of ATV's strongest journalists have left. That's a loss. It hasn't affected the ratings as of yet however and I believe that's because the competition, CBC and Global, aren't stepping up to the plate to provide a better product. As always IMHO.
Spinks
Sorry if it sounded personal.....was'nt meant to be. Guess I was just a little fired up again over this topic. ;)
Actually it's no wonder the privates do more local/regional ....the CBC budget has been drastically reduced repeatedly in the last 10 or 20 years. And every time the budget gets cut local programming gets the "dirty" end of the stick, in favor of more National programming which is cheaper than concentrating on local.
In the U.S. fox news and CNN get huge ratings...does that mean they do a good job??? Personally I don't think so. It simply caters to people who want flashy and quick...30 second sound bites is the order of the day. Same in Canada. CTV news net is a prime example. Its a collection of sound bites is all. Slanted hard, in favor of Big buisiness. The CBC often get's accused of being left wing. I guess if caring about people and the planet and the stories that affect them, over big buisiness is left wing, then sign me up for the left wing also. The line above somewhere about the CBC never criticizing the liberals is total CRAP which anyone who actually listens the cbc would know. The Current is one show I can think of right off that has taken many a shot at the Liberals.
Oh and just for the record....I live in a rural area, and am non-university educated. :-) The stereotype of "egghead" CBC listeners is just that.......a stereotype.
"It simply caters to people who want flashy and quick...30 second sound bites is the order of the day."
That pretty well sums up Fox news and others of the ilk commercial news media. What does it say about the people who watch them?
As anything CBC can use some improvements (however, that needs funds which are not forthcoming) but it outshines any other commercial media on news and other programming.
Very true anonymous......well said.
The above few comments kind of make my point. CBC itself is looking down on people as some of you are and not listening. Viewers of Fox or CTV or the others mentioned are considered stupid and uneducated (it would seem by some of the comments) in the eyes of yourselves and definately of CBC Management. Yet, those stations have the highest ratings so by using that logic there's a lot of stupid people. I don't think all those people are stupid and hopefully you don't either because it's pretty arrogant. But even if you do, I can accept people here thinking that way. I can't accept CBC thinking that way and that these people don't deserve a voice on the public broadcaster because their views are different than what CBC has decreed to be mainstream. CBC should be giving a voice to ALL Canadians. It needs to figure out how to reach them as best as possible or they're not doing their job. There's still way too much bias and taking sides on a lot of CBC News and a lot of the programming is elitist and irrelevant to the majority of Canadians given the sub-par ratings. I don't think it needs to or should be a clone of CTV or Global. What would be the point? But they can still provide a valuable service if they try targeting the most number of Canadians as possible. They're not doing that currently.
11:11pm - the above wasn't aimed at you by the way. Sheesh, you guys have to start putting names to yourselves. Very confusing. At least the guy or guys who keep personally attacking me know who they're going at.
I think we're pretty close on this one, D.
The difference perhaps is I hold CBC to a higher level of accountability than the privates simply because as a taxpayer I'm part-owner and in N.B. for example their reporters are paid a fair amount more than the privates. For those reasons, the should be the best, and deliver the best. They don't. That of course is my own opinion but the ratings seem to reflect I'm not alone. If people weren't watching local news I wouldn't be as concerned but they are. I'll throw this one out. Maybe CBC needs to get out of local news and concentrate on their strengths like int'l news, docs, investigative reporting, etc. Rarely do they offer up anything different from anyone else on the private side anyway.
I'll agree with you that I don't think the CBC has gone easy on the federal Liberals. However I do think they go tougher on the Federal Conservatives than the Libs.
Sorry Draken. You're right. My focus is mostly on the television side. CBC Radio for the most part still does a decent job at least on the morning shows as the ratings prove and fills a gap that private radio does not although I'm still concerned about the bias in some of their stories particularly social issues in which they take sides. As journalists, they shouldn't do that.
The article you provided is interesting about the billion dollars not being accurate. There was an ad in the newspaper last week from CBC managment which said it cost a billion dollars of taxpayer dollars a year...and I'm accused of flip-flopping. LOL
Oh and Draken, I said they should get out of local news, not local programming...there can be a difference and again I'm mostly talking about TV.
CBC TV does have enough staff to put together a decent 17 or 18 minute show. I just don't think they know how because for years they had a lot of staff. For those who say it's an all NB cast, it rarely is. Usually there's PEI or NS content thrown in much like the ATV and Global. There's 2 reporters in Saint John, 2 to 3, sometimes 4 in Fredericton, 1 in Moncton, and one in Bathurst. Throw in the cameramen running around getting the odd clip and they could make a decent show each night if the will was there. I think they're too caught up in the "we don't have as many people as we used to so this won't work." IMHO.
We can't compare right now but when CBC is back, check out a story that they, Global and ATV do. CBC is usually the driest of the bunch because they'll only talk to politicians or interest groups. The others talk to them too but usually get Joe Citizen in the mix to give it context. To say CBC doesn't have the staff is ridiculous. ATV reporters report and do the camerawork and editing. I don't think that's a great way to do journalism but it does get done and often is a much more watchable product.
Now you've got me wondering about the billion. Is it that or is it more or less? Looks like CBC doesn't even know. I think I have reason to be concerned where they're spending my dollars. LOL.
Post a Comment