From: schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck)
Subject: Re: Senate Interrogation
Reply-To: Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Distribution: can
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 17:53:53 GMT

labach@acs.ucalgary.ca (Terence Michael Labach) writes:

>In article <schuck.721521140@sfu.ca> schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce
>Jonathan Schuck) writes: 

>> I think the Senators did a wonderful job in defending the memory of
>> the Canadians who died in WWII and those whose returned.
>> 
>> Let us remember the CBC is a public broadcasting instutution which
>> spends a pittance on allowing the people to respond to news shows and
>> documenteries. 
>> 
>> I will contrast them to the Globe and Mail.

>Better yet, let's contrast the Globe and Mail to you...

>"That a Senate committee should be conducting a formal investigation of
> a work of journalism is shameful enough. 

'Journalists' *hate* criticism. 

> Senators are of course free
> to hold whatever opinion they like, and to express it in the same way
> as any other citizen.  

Nice of them to admit. It's too bad they failed to mention that such
criticism hardly ever gets millions of dollars in CBC money or 3 hours
of prime time or 2 million viewers.
 
>But to compel witnesses to come before public
> hearings to answer their "charges" is another thing entirely.  This is
> no innocent encounter, as the senators protest, intended to shed light
> on a dark subject: it is to array the machinery of state against a free
> press, and its sole design is intimidation."

So...what the G & M says is that the CBC, a publicly funded
institution, with a billion dollar budget is free to put anything on
it wants. They can tell whatever lie they want without having to
respond or provide time for rebuttal. A documentry is by it's very
nature propaganda. It is a film with a point of view.

The Senate has the right to challenge that point of view if it uses
public money to promote factual errors.

>> Does the CBC devote 10 minutes to viewers responses, applause or
>> criticism? No. How about 1 minute. I think not. As far as I know,
>> there is no time reserved for such feedback on the national network.
>> Our local CBC used to dedicate 3 or 4 minutes once a week to viewers
>> phone calls , and I think they still do but I haven't seen it since
>> the revamp of the early evening newscast.

>The Talk-back line, on As It Happens.  CBC Calgary runs a "letters"
>forum for responses from listeners.  That's two.

Thats CBC radio -- not CBC TV.

>> I applaud the Senate Committee, and I urge the CBC to provide a daily
>> forum for the peoples view on it's news programs.

>Did it ever occur to you that those Canadian soldiers who died in WW II
>were trying to _protect_ us from interventionist, paternalistic, fascist
>government?

I don't see anything fascistic about complaining about factual errors
in a documentry film financed by the public, and televised without a
chance of rebuttal.

I think one of the greatest things about CNN is all the shows that
offer a variety of viewpoints from left to right debating issues.

The CBC rarely , if ever, gives a forum to a spectrum of viewpoints.
Name me more than one 'journalist' on the CBC with a viewpoint to the
right of centre that gets on regularly. I can name lots on CNN.

The CBC is supposed to be for all Canadians, not just for those who
agree with them.

-- 
============================================================================
"We've got to get bigger guns" -- Dick Durkin                  schuck@sfu.ca
============================================================================
Newsgroups: can.politics