13

Moore: downsizing CBC remains a goal

Heritage Minister confirms his vision of a smaller, decentralized public broadcaster


 

Heritage Minister James Moore confirmed that downsizing and decentralizing the CBC is a goal for the federal Conservative government, Postmedia reports. In a year-end interview, Moore said, “the CBC is today — in terms of the way in which they have managed themselves internally — much more efficient and even smaller than they were when I became Heritage minister. They’re about 25 per cent smaller on the staffing side. Their footprint in Toronto and Montreal is smaller than it was before because — as we’ve said publicly — we want them to be in the regions more than they’ve ever been before.” Following the federal election, Moore shifted a longstanding commitment to maintaining funding to the national public broadcaster, and instead announced that he was looking for cuts of five to ten per cent, as in other federal departments.

Postmedia


 
Filed under:

Moore: downsizing CBC remains a goal

  1. Privatizing the CBC would be in the best interests of all Canadians; direct competition between braodcasters for the advertising dollars is absolutely necessary to ensure balanced reporting.

    Also; HNIC could go as a unit to the highest bidder.

    • A privatized CBC wouldn’t serve outlying regions the way it does now. Indeed, no private broadcaster would.

      Privatization isn’t the answer to every perceived evil. In this case, it would leave a broadcasting vacuum in large parts of the country. So, it wouldn’t be in the best interests of all Canadians.

    • HNIC will be sold to highest bidder, never a CBC owned product.   U R Idiot.

      However without the CBC, MPs will become more invisible.  CBC is the only one that pays attention to local MPs.

    • “direct competition between braodcasters for the advertising dollars is absolutely necessary to ensure balanced reporting.”

      Really? Sounds like a way to ensure no reporting ever steps on the toes of the advertisers. Does that sound balanced to you?

  2. A privatized CBC wouldn’t serve outlying regions the way it does now. Indeed, no private broadcaster would.

    Privatization isn’t the answer to every perceived evil. In this case, it would leave a broadcasting vacuum in large parts of the country. So, it wouldn’t be in the best interests of all Canadians.

  3. Downsizing the CBC is too good for them.

  4. How can it “remain” a Conservative priority when during the election they were promising to maintain CBC funding or raise it?

    Liars. Nothing but liars.

  5. Cuts of 5% to 10% in federal departments, does that by any chance include the house of commons and the senate? Mp’s offices and travel budgets? G8 and G20 conference budgets? Federal budgets?

  6. If these are the best arguments for retaining the completely biased corporation, then lets be rid of it altogether. The digital age is here people. The 100 channel universe is available to all.

  7. CBC is a Cadillac in an era of economy cars.  It is ridiculously overstaffed and its pay levels are grotesquely higher than those in private broadcasting, particularly on the radio side.  It provides too broad a range of services and is no longer needed for professional sports coverage.  If it is to continue, it should be required to do some of its own fundraising, and reduce the billion-dollar annual subsidy it guzzles.

    – Retired broadcaster
     

    • It does do some of it’s own fundraising. A lot of it really. Presumably being a retired broadcaster doesn’t make you a stupid one and you understand what advertising is.

    • Ah then, you’d be Peter Kent, the broadcaster who retired to the Harper cabinet where you no longer have to think for yourself.

  8. Aaargh.  Start rant.

    As far as I understand things, most media outlets in North America are owned by corporate groups which are several orders of magnitude larger than the broadcaster/publisher/etc in question, so it doesn`t matter if it actually makes money or not.
    For example, GE is worth about $120 billion on paper (http://www.ge.com/investors/financial_reporting/financial_statements/index.html) has $150-200 billion in revenue per year for $10-20 billion profit annually,  GE owns 49% of NBC, which is worth about $30 billion on paper (http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/11/09/us-nbcuniversal-idUSTRE5A801F20091109).  If you skim through the documents, NBC accounts for about 15% of GE`s position.  A quick skim through the documents also suggests much of the rest of GE`s position is in highly regulated industries which are strongly effected by government policy & public perception.

    I`m not suggesting GE is doing anything wrong.  They are, in fact, very open about they manage NBC (& are no longer the majority shareholder, at any rate.)  They`re just a convenient example.

    The point I`m trying to make is that almost all media reports to someone with an agenda, whether in business or in government.  Selling CBC will almost certainly decrease the competition in journalism in Canada (already not a very competitive field, IMHO).  Although I sometimes think it should be renamed the TBC, at least we control which group with an agenda CBC reports to.  While a lot of people think a small number of very wealthy controlling shareholders have a more trustworthy agenda than an elected government, I don`t agree (not even when said elected government is controlled by Stephen Harper.)

    Okay, end rant.

Sign in to comment.