17 replies to this topic

[Michael Hardner]

I just (finally) caught CBC Radio's This Is That - Saturday morning @ 11 AM.

What a great idea - a dry send-up of the CBC's style of handling news pieces, from inside the walls of the castle itself. The piece I heard was Peter Oldring talking about the problem of drinking and drugs in the Cross Country Skiing community. I can't convey the humour of the piece by just giving you the high-level subject, though. The humour was all in the treatment of the topic, in the regular CBC style: sensitive music, interviews and the plaintive liberal concern that pervades everything that they do.

I think that the show would appeal to regular CBC listeners who would have a sense of humour about such things, or maybe CBC haters who are very familiar with their style of delivery.

However... thinking about those groups... I may actually be the only one would would enjoy it.

[August1991]

Michael, I'll try and listen.

But as far as I'm concerned, the CBC does not need "send ups". IMV, the CBC should hire Mark Steyn (on his terms) to share Sunday Morning with Michael Enright. One Sunday morning for Michael, another Sunday morning for Mark.

Until the CBC signs a contract with Mark Steyn, and as long as it keeps Michael Enright on staff, the CBC is biased.

Enright and Steyn are both good journalists/broadcasters. Unfortunately, the CBC only gives money to one.

---

Some claim that the CBC is a public broadcaster; others that it is a State broadcaster. The distinction is not clear to me.

But I am willing to pay taxes to avoid listening to ads. I just think that if I do, the CBC/state/public broadcaster should represent all points of view. At present, I don't think that it reflects the people who pay the billion dollars for its existence. Michael Enright can speak, but I never hear Mark Steyn.

Radio-Canada seems to be able to present all sides of the issue of Quebec sovereignty. Why can't the CBC do the same for English Canada?

Edited by August1991, 10 December 2011 - 08:36 PM.

[Michael Hardner]

They hired Kevin O'Leary, so it seems you have your wish.

[August1991]

They hired Kevin O'Leary, so it seems you have your wish.

Kevin O'Leary?

On English CBC, I only hear Anna-Maria Tremonte and Michael Enright. (Michael Hardner, have you noticed that they are all Catholics?) Catholic? Whatever.

----

Michael Enright and Anna-Maria Tremonti are articulate "leftists". Mark Steyn and Kate McMillan are articulate "rightists".

IMV, CBC Radio should give every other Sunday Morning to Mark Steyn. And it should give every other week day morning to Kate McMillan. On their terms.

We all pay for "State radio". It should reflect our views. At present, IMHO, Radio-Canada portrays Quebec's constitutional confusion but neither the CBC nor Radio-Canada portrays well Canada's various ideological debates.

I will support the CBC when I hear Michael Enright introduce Mark Steyn as the new Sunday Morning co-host.

Edited by August1991, 12 December 2011 - 10:55 PM.

[LonJowett]

I agree with August. It's Mark Steyn or nothing. He is the only acceptable rightist.

[Michael Hardner]

Well, I don't think it's even being considered so rest your mind.

[The_Squid]

If CBC hired Mark Steyn, they would lose a lot of their listeners.

Mark Steyn is one of those conservative pundits who like to make up their own twisted reality based on their own prejudices. His blanket statements about people from Muslim countries are simply fear-mongering rhetoric.

I think CBC listeners are more intellectually honest than to buy in to this twisted mindset.

[August1991]

If CBC hired Mark Steyn, they would lose a lot of their listeners.

It's State radio or publicly funded. It should reflect all points of view.

The CBC does not. It's Michael Enright, and Anna Maria Tremonti. Both English Catholics, ever the victim, not WASPs.

Radio-Canada arguably represents French Canada, but the CBC does not represent English Canada.

----

Squid, you are sadly right. More pointedly, I fear that Steyn would never work for the CBC.

Edited by August1991, 20 December 2011 - 12:46 AM.

[Michael Hardner]

I already showed how they are establishing a new personality with a very different point of view.

The response has been: "No. Mark Steyn must co-host Sunday morning with Michael Enright." Perhaps if you set the bar at something more realistic, you would see that some change has happened.

[prairiechickin]

Getting back to 'This Is That', the only thing funnier than the skits they do is the angry responses from listeners who haven't figured out its a joke.

[Michael Hardner]

My god, that sounds like gold.... do you have a link ?

[jbg]

I agree with August. It's Mark Steyn or nothing. He is the only acceptable rightist.

Would his arrogant sidekick Ezra Levant (actually both are putzes) do it for you?

[Wild Bill]

If CBC hired Mark Steyn, they would lose a lot of their listeners.

Mark Steyn is one of those conservative pundits who like to make up their own twisted reality based on their own prejudices. His blanket statements about people from Muslim countries are simply fear-mongering rhetoric.

I think CBC listeners are more intellectually honest than to buy in to this twisted mindset.

I don't follow your reasoning, Squid. You open up by saying "If CBC hired Mark Steyn, they would lose a lot of their listeners.". Then you end with "I think CBC listeners are more intellectually honest than to buy in to this twisted mindset."

IHO, the two don't go together! You can't refuse to hear the other side of an argument and then claim to be intellectually honest! By doing so, one would just paint himself an pig-headed stubborn old intellectual bigot!

The CBC gets tax monies from people across the entire political spectrum, not just the left. Their mandate is to serve ALL the people, not just those who vote for leftist parties!

Sadly, I must agree with your first statement. No doubt if the CBC aired Steyn they WOULD lose a lot of listeners. However, they would very likely GAIN some as well!

Meanwhile though, the loss would not speak well of the character of those who would no longer listen.

[The_Squid]

Well Wild Bill, to keep an "open-mind" one does not need to listen to right-wing propogandists like Steyn. Not every opinion has equal merit and this is what a CBC listener would not put up with. They can tell the difference between "the other side of an argument" and the intellectually dishonest propaganda of Mark Steyn that is presented as the "other side".

[Wild Bill]

Well Wild Bill, to keep an "open-mind" one does not need to listen to right-wing propogandists like Steyn. Not every opinion has equal merit and this is what a CBC listener would not put up with. They can tell the difference between "the other side of an argument" and the intellectually dishonest propaganda of Mark Steyn that is presented as the "other side".

Well Squid, I can see how it might look that way to you but to me, it looks like a rationalization for righteousness! Sort of like saying " I have an open mind! I simply choose not to listen to anyone or anything that disagrees with me!"

Moreover, from what I have heard from that 'side of the fence' all these years is that they consider ALL who disagree with them in any way, shape or form, to be intellectually dishonest!

It all depends upon how you define the words, I guess.

Doubleplusungood, indeed.