What to Do About CBC

UPDATE: Sitemeter tells me someone from CBC visited this blog entry. hehehehehehehe

Hope you enjoyed it, dinosaur.
=============================
Adapted from my comments at The Tea Makers at which you'll notice the CBCs fans are making the most snide and childish comments.
==========================
In order of preference:

1) Privatize it. I don't want leftards to lose their favourite source of propaganda, nor do I want them to accuse us of censorship. If it's privatized they will have to pay for it by patronizing the networks advertizers or paying a subscription fee or both, whatever model the new owner(s) choose(s) to adopt.  Privatization can be restricted to Canadian buyers.  A publicly traded stock option would fit the bill. Canadians who choose to buy shares, would be the owners. I've expanding on other possible funding schemes below.

If no-one wants to buy it, then:

2)  Dismantle it, lay off their employees and sell off the physical assets.

3)  If that seems too politically unpalatable, then reform the Act which governs it and much of its current policies.  Here are some suggestions for reform:

• The first and most important: change the method by which the Board is chosen.

Currently, they are appointed by Cabinet, which essentially means they are political appointees who will have an agenda, or at least a sense of obligation to those who appoint them. This could work against a commitment to quality, balanced programming. I believe that is what has happened with successive appointees made by Liberal Party cabinets. That and the fact that in a heavily Liberal dominated culture in both Toronto and Ottawa, what is essentially a crony network, no one but a Liberal would advance to the upper echelons of the organization. Once there, he or she is able give direction to and/or allow activity and behavior on the part of staff that serves the Liberal Party agenda. 

Board members should be chosen to represent the various regions of the country.  Perhaps they could be appointed by provincial governments or some sort of more local authority (at annual municipal/county association meetings, for example), where the chance of political affiliation would at least vary from one location to the other, from one time to another, regardless of who is in power in Ottawa. 

• Move CBCs headquarters to some more central location, Winnipeg, for example.

Winnipeg would be a good choice. Its proximity to Northern Ontario, a vastly under represented area, which extends both East and West, with similar demographics and cultural characteristics, and hence, covers a large part of Canada.  That area has strong links with the North, with daily flights to many Northern communities, and further connections to communities in the northern Territories.

It is also a major prairie regional centre with a population comparable to Edmonton and Calgary, which could give Westerners a sense that they are not left out. It is also approximately in the middle of Canada's East-West axis.

Winnipeg, and Manitoba as a whole, also has a large Francophone population. Programming in both languages should not be beyond its reach.  The same can be said of Aboriginal populations.

And finally, Winnipeg has, for many years, been known for its commitment to the arts, which is a big part of CBCs current mandate, but which, nonetheless, I recommend be changed.

• The second reform should be to review, reform and restrict the mandate of the broadcaster. 

Currently, too many of its programs are far too political. If it is going to remain a publicly funded institution it must be neutralized.

A strict code of conduct should be developed so as to maintain its neutrality. The  government watch-dog role needs to be left to private sector media alone, as the temptation to influence funders is a natural, indeed, necessary ingredient of any television or radio programmer.  This does not necessarily mean that CBC programs covering politics should be eliminated, but the aim of such coverage should be restricted to one where elected politicians, senior civil servants and political analysts are given a platform to discuss their ideas, but the viewer alone is left to make up their own minds.  We don't need the CBC drones to tell us what's important and, by deliberate and biased omission, what isn't, especially when the CBC is itself the subject of the news. Admittedly, this will be a "fine line" exercise, but there are many good examples available on the net. Fora TV, is one. CPAC and Parlvu are others, not to mention countless top quality bloggers (see my blogroll in the sidebar). You are no longer the "gatekeepers", folks.  The floodgates have opened and it's time to accept that fact. Pandering to Ottawa and Toronto only, must stop.

• The third reform should be to revise the funding paradigm.

In the private sector, the funders ultimately are the people who buy or patronize the advertizers' products, services and events.  If sales of those are high, due to the fact that large numbers of viewers watch the programs they sponsor, then the advertizer will continue to advertize, bringing  a continuous stream of revenue to the network. In part, the network will be able to assess the popularity of its programs by the volume of sales it's advertizers accrue. Highly popular programs enable the network to charge the advertizer higher fees.

However, if the funders are tax payers, this natural feedback mechanism doesn't exist.  Therefore, the CBC must be mandated to reflect the views and interests of all Canadians. Potential viewers must find their views are given expression in CBCs programs in proportion to the rate at which they exist in society. Proportions can be assessed by the percentage of voters each of our political parties gain in federal elections. In other words, CBC needs to get back to its original intent - to reflect Canada to Canadians. All Canadians. Not just the Liberal-left. Less talking heads, please, and more talking from the actual news-makers.  Enough of the news-fakers.

I don't  think Canadians are interested in providing a tax payer supported incubator for actors and news reporters whose work consistently insults or alienates them, but currently, there is no natural feedback mechanism that creates real consequences for a state funded broadcaster, especially when it is dependent on Canada's natural governing party.  So, I would recommend the following as a set of principles for funding the CBC:

• Institute a matching grant formula based on the amount of funds the CBC can solicit in one year, to be paid the second year. CBC must begin to raise it's own cash through a variety of mechanisms, ranging from advertizing revenue, to paid subscriptions (especially for dramas and sitcoms), to periodic fund-raising drives similar to the various PBS outlets in the US, and likewise, donations from private individuals, corporations and foundations. 

• Whatever the broadcaster can raise through these mechanisms will be matched with public funds the following year. This way, budgets for any given year can be firm and forecasts for the following year can be anticipated. Most importantly, programs will have to respond to market forces. If its programs continue to suck, none of those sources will be automatically assumed as a given.  If there are enough left-leaning viewers willing to cough up their hard earned dollars, CBC can continue to be rabidly leftist in its program productions. It not, then adapt or die.  At least the tax payer contribution will be proportional to the number of its viewers and I won't be bummed by the fact that I'm paying for something that consistently annoys me.

• In my ever so humble opinion, tax payers especially don't need to compete with American networks in creating sitcoms and hour-long dramas. Nor do we need fictional series that advance politically correct causes (Little Mosque on the Prairies comes to mind). Any drama or sitcom produced MUST be at the mercy of market forces.  We DO NOT NEED radio or television programs that nobody listens to or watches, just because they are Canadian and just because some special group or issue gets to advance its agenda with it. I think the majority of Canadian viewers will not watch or listen to programs of inferior quality, simply because of its Canadian content. Unless this really is Soviet Canuckistan, we cannot be forced to watch it.  If no one is watching or listening, let them sink into oblivion.  Of course, if option 1, privatization, is chosen, that will happen as a matter of course.  But if that doesn't happen, then at least the customary hour-long drama series and the half-hour sitcoms produced by CBC should be funded with dollars raised from the Canadian private sector. Tax breaks for such contributions would be acceptable.

As it is now, it must really piss off private media companies, such as CTV, and their employees, to be paying taxes that support their primary competitor. Yet, for some reason, CBC and its employees, (and the politicians in Ottawa) seem totally oblivious to this blatant conflict-of-interest, not to mention common sense, violation.

5) Finally, a serious look at the role of television in a small market (Canada) needs to take place. Viewer and listener choices have a vastly increased range of competitors from which to choose, thanks to satellite dishes, the Internet and new media.

Indeed, the whole thrust of CBC programming in the last few decades appears to be driven by a desire to develop and showcase Canadian talent and advance political agendas.  If talented Canadians want to get a break, they can move to the US, where the natural feedback mechanism is in play. American networks probably have more Canadian viewers than all the Canadian networks combined. If anyone can correct me on that, I'd be happy to issue a mea culpa. The Canadian market is just too small to sustain this sort of industry without massive taxpayer subsidies, and that has to stop.  In fact, as far as viewership or audience is concerned, the American market is our market, too, just as much as the Canadian market is.  And gee whiz, CBC staffers will have drop their strident, screeching, irrational hatred of our southern neighbours, and that would make many of us very happy. Constant whining and dissing of a good neighbour grates at the nerves.

CRTC and other regulations may also have to be changed in order to accomplish this, but let's get it done.

Meanwhile, to sum it all up: Look at those headlines.

Yup. I hate the rest of the old media, too.  But at least I don't have to pay for it if I don't want it.