What to do with Radio Canada and the CBC?

[biguc]

Originally Posted by jamincan

It is a laughably ignorant quote from someone who's should know better, but in the context of the CBC, we do have an expectation that our public broadcaster needs to be objective. The post-modern perspective (which I would tend to agree with), is that regardless of how committed you are to this ideal, it's ultimately impossible.

In that context, it does raise the question of what role the CBC should have.

The closest you could get is through a kind of multifarious perspective, aggregated out of the broadest possible cross section of the population, which is kind of what the CBC is doing by bringing in underrepresented people. This is exactly where a public broadcaster becomes invaluable--corporate media is only interested in that kind of thing insofar as it'll get them (or their owners, at least) paid.

[MolsonExport]

I think it is laughable that people still pay attention to Rex Murphy. He veered off into crazy uncle land about a decade ago, and has not said anything relevant since.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by biguc

The closest you could get is through a kind of multifarious perspective, aggregated out of the broadest possible cross section of the population, which is kind of what the CBC is doing by bringing in underrepresented people. This is exactly where a public broadcaster becomes invaluable--corporate media is only interested in that kind of thing insofar as it'll get them (or their owners, at least) paid.

This.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by jamincan

The post-modern perspective (which I would tend to agree with), is that regardless of how committed you are to this ideal, it's ultimately impossible.

Is it all the same though? The CBC is ultimately no more accurate than Fox News so why worry about it?

The CBC has news segments and I found them to be pretty good, although it seems like they don't travel as much and have as many correspondents in different places as in the past, maybe due to cutbacks. It is more the commentator/opinion stuff that gets old. That type of content reflects the race to the bottom of infotainment; why have a national broadcaster if it's doing this like all the others?

I don't find the commentators to be diverse or to be marginalized voices. A lot of them are drawn from a very narrow segment of society that gets a hugely disproportionate voice already, e.g., a subset of professors, activists, politicians.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

I think it is laughable that people still pay attention to Rex Murphy. He veered off into crazy uncle land about a decade ago, and has not said anything relevant since.

He had some pretty darn relevant things to say to Jordan Peterson that resonated with a lot of people and to a whole new audience. I didn't know he was a Rhodes Scholar that still counts as something to me.

Off topic, how many people here identify as Marxist or socialist, it might help me understand where people are coming from.

[flar]

Originally Posted by elly63

Off topic, how many people here identify as Marxist or socialist, it might help me understand where people are coming from.

That is off topic.

Literally nobody "identifies" with whatever you consider to be Marxism or socialism. It may surprise you that most people's identities don't hinge on political ideologies. There is very little utility in trying to label them, unless you are looking for an intellectually lazy shortcut to help you figure out if you're for or against that person.

Instead of slapping your labels on someone, why can't you just read what they write and think about it for yourself? You know, we don't have to divide everything up into teams. A lot of us aren't on a team.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by flar

That is off topic.

Literally nobody "identifies" with whatever you consider to be Marxism or socialism. It may surprise you that most people's identities don't hinge on political ideologies. There is very little utility in trying to label them, unless you are looking for an intellectually lazy shortcut to help you figure out if you're for or against that person.

Instead of slapping your labels on someone, why can't you just read what they write and think about it for yourself? You know, we don't have to divide everything up into teams. A lot of us aren't on a team.

Really, not that this matters but the leaders of BLM call themselves Marxists so that's not nobody.

Maybe I'll take this to a new thread but I just wonder if people can have a "big boy" discussion about this, but apparently some have to put out their subtle and not so subtle insults of anybody with an opposing opinion. I think you doth protest too much but that doesn't take away from what you have written, IMO.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by someone123

Is it all the same though? The CBC is ultimately no more accurate than Fox News so why worry about it?

The CBC has news segments and I found them to be pretty good, although it seems like they don't travel as much and have as many correspondents in different places as in the past, maybe due to cutbacks. It is more the commentator/opinion stuff that gets old. That type of content reflects the race to the bottom of infotainment; why have a national broadcaster if it's doing this like all the others?

I don't find the commentators to be diverse or to be marginalized voices. A lot of them are drawn from a very narrow segment of society that gets a hugely disproportionate voice already, e.g., a subset of professors, activists, politicians.

I think they’re just looking for filler. There is a reason the “national news” is usually 30 minutes, there just isn’t that much national news most days. They used to have a short newscast followed by a longer format documentary format for the rest of the hour, but now they have an hour to fill with talking heads.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I think they’re just looking for filler. There is a reason the “national news” is usually 30 minutes, there just isn’t that much national news most days. They used to have a short newscast followed by a longer format documentary format for the rest of the hour, but now they have an hour to fill with talking heads.

Bingo, and as someone who was in news for a decade, it's also cheaper to have an in studio panel, than to have a foreign news bureau.

[flar]

Originally Posted by elly63

Really, not that this matters but the leaders of BLM call themselves Marxists so that's not nobody.

Maybe I'll take this to a new thread but I just wonder if people can have a "big boy" discussion about this, but apparently some have to put out their subtle and not so subtle insults of anybody with an opposing opinion. I think you doth protest too much but that doesn't take away from what you have written, IMO.

How about we don't start a thread about that?

[elly63]

Originally Posted by flar

How about we don't start a thread about that?

As I said I guess people couldn't have a mature discussion about it. Don't know what there is to be scared about (having a discussion that was silenced before even starting) but I guess that's how things are today. Mission accomplished.

As someone who had a career in TV, I've always had an interest in TV behind the Iron Curtain or is that subject verboten as well?

[flar]

You know it would be a train wreck. Let it go.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by flar

You know it would be a train wreck. Let it go.

I would be perfectly fine reading opinions I don't agree with without getting to the point of insults especially if they argued the good, bad or indifferent. You were wrong to do what you did stopping the free flow of ideas. There is nothing good in that.

[flar]

Originally Posted by elly63

I would be perfectly fine reading opinions I don't agree with without getting to the point of insults especially if they argued the good, bad or indifferent. You were wrong to do what you did stopping the free flow of ideas. There is nothing good in that.

The internet is full of sites that offer that, this is primarily a forum for architecture and urban related matters.

So...I say one last time, drop it.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by elly63

He had some pretty darn relevant things to say to Jordan Peterson that resonated with a lot of people and to a whole new audience. I didn't know he was a Rhodes Scholar that still counts as something to me.

Off topic, how many people here identify as Marxist or socialist, it might help me understand where people are coming from.

Off topic, probably none identify as a Marxist, perhaps a few identify with being a socialist (I myself am about as middle of the road as one can be), but this is a non sequitur.

And Jordan Peterson is someone who resonates with the angry anti-woke crowd, and has become very good at monetizing this rage with his perspective, which I do not find much merit in (much of it amounting to tilting at windmills), no matter how articulate he is.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by flar

The internet is full of sites that offer that, this is primarily a forum for architecture and urban related matters.

So...I say one last time, drop it.

Nice snip of my reply there Flar! Moi aussi je t'aime beaucoup!

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Off topic, probably none identify as a Marxist, perhaps a few identify with being a socialist (I myself am about as middle of the road as one can be), but this is a non sequitur.

.

I myself identify as a social democrat, but I think that has become largely meaningless today. Or at least is increasingly so.

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

And Jordan Peterson is someone who resonates with the angry anti-woke crowd, and has become very good at monetizing this rage with his perspective, which I do not find much merit in (much of it amounting to tilting at windmills), no matter how articulate he is.

In a marginally different timeline it's not that hard to imagine Jordan Peterson as the CBC's go-to commentator for something like social media ethics or even soft journalism "living your best life" type psychology advice. It's kind of a shame his career has gone the way that it has; I think he would have had a lot to offer Canada as a Marshall McLuhan type academic and as a clinical psychologist. As an American podcast celebrity and sort-of sociologist, he's done more damage than good IMO. It seems like people just ask him all the wrong questions and then don't really have the attention span for his answers. Even (especially?) some of his biggest supporters. Then again I haven't been paying close attention.

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by Hali87

In a marginally different timeline it's not that hard to imagine Jordan Peterson as the CBC's go-to commentator for something like social media ethics or even soft journalism "living your best life" type psychology advice. It's kind of a shame his career has gone the way that it has; I think he would have had a lot to offer Canada as a Marshall McLuhan type academic and as a clinical psychologist. As an American podcast celebrity and sort-of sociologist, he's done more damage than good IMO. It seems like people just ask him all the wrong questions and then don't really have the attention span for his answers. Even (especially?) some of his biggest supporters. Then again I haven't been paying close attention.

Had Peterson been more like Rex Murphy of yore, he might've had a chance for a national commentator position. He's articulate and there's actually something to his message to young men: "Make something of yourself lest you find that life's going to run you over."

However, he went Rex Murphy of today and decided to die on a pointless hill of stupid.

His most die-hard supporters are his worst enemy. With allies like those, who needs enemies?

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by thewave46

Had Peterson been more like Rex Murphy of yore,

I didn't know there was such a thing. To be honest I've always thought of Rex Murphy as an old curmudgeon who presents the... curmudgeon perspective? He always just seems... urgently cranky, as if he's frustrated every day that he wakes up and it's not the 1960s again. I can't even picture a young Rex Murphy. What was he like?