Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

CBC Ombudsman to do Internal Investigation


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 202
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Newsworld is not funded thru CBC. You knew that, just dont want to admit it do you , instead, spin spin spin.

Yes, it is. From the Newsworld Wikipedia page, which I quoted earlier in the thread. I'm sure your personal attack was based on a presumed, but incorrect, knowledge of the truth. Here is the really story with ownership and funding of Newsworld.

CBC Newsworld is a Canadian English language cable television specialty news channel owned and operated by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC).

Owned and operated. Yup guess that means they get their funding from the CBC.

If you have any actualy support for your claims to the contrary please feel free to provide them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nielson owns BBM. I've never seen the figures for elsewhere in Canada. Perhaps Ontario is different. I guess then we can get rid of Canadian TV at any time then and the only problem would be the tax situation which could be changed with legislation.

If you are a subscriber to BBM (a radio station or a TV channel that pays...) you can get figures for all types of viewership scenarios. While Fox gets sizable numbers most of their content is simulcast on CDN stations, NFL football the exception...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, it is. From the Newsworld Wikipedia page, which I quoted earlier in the thread. I'm sure your personal attack was based on a presumed, but incorrect, knowledge of the truth. Here is the really story with ownership and funding of Newsworld.

Owned and operated. Yup guess that means they get their funding from the CBC.

If you have any actualy support for your claims to the contrary please feel free to provide them.

Too funny !.....presumed...incorrect...knowledge of the truth.

Go to your wiki site, count down 21 lines, and come on back and post what it says. OR, you can ignore it...........again.

And when that is done, you know what else you will print...doncha?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Too funny !.....presumed...incorrect...knowledge of the truth.

Go to your wiki site, count down 21 lines, and come on back and post what it says. OR, you can ignore it...........again.

And when that is done, you know what else you will print...doncha?

Fair enough. They only share resources such as studio time and equipment with the main network.

From the CRTC ruling on Newsworld, a link to which is in the Newsworld wiki page.

This separate accounting rule was not intended to prevent Newsworld or RDI from sharing resources and programs with the main service. In fact, as noted earlier, the Commission considers that such resource sharing is clearly in the public interest.

I will admit that the CBC does not receive direct funding from the CBC. However, the resources and programs shared with the main service are publicly funded when those resources are flowing from the CBC to Newsworld.

Does this represent a 'problem with the truth'? If you see it as such fair enough, but no need for a personal attack. Newsworld would not be able to afford to operate without those shared resources?

Michael Bluth; pantsed this day...

Are you saying those shared resources are not publicly funded?

Edited by Michael Bluth
Link to post
Share on other sites
Fair enough. They only share resources such as studio time and equipment with the main network.

From the CRTC ruling on Newsworld, a link to which is in the Newsworld wiki page.

I will admit that the CBC does not receive direct funding from the CBC. However, the resources and programs shared with the main service are publicly funded when those resources are flowing from the CBC to Newsworld.

Does this represent a 'problem with the truth'? If you see it as such fair enough, but no need for a personal attack. Newsworld would not be able to afford to operate without those shared resources?

Are you saying those shared resources are not publicly funded?

No and you knew nothing about it until you found your pants around your ankles.....

Too funny...those resources are already paid for.....if they are shared it is after the fact.

Link to post
Share on other sites
No and you knew nothing about it until you found your pants around your ankles.....

Too funny...those resources are already paid for.....if they are shared it is after the fact.

Ahh Morris, at least you forced me to delve into the CBC financials.

Those resources were paid for by the taxpayers. The rule in accounting is that they are expensed in the period of use, so Newsworld sharing those resources.

It appears that the CBC is applying some very 'creative' accounting rules in charging Newsworld for shared resources.

In Fiscal 2004 and 2005 shared resources represented 2.2% of Newsworld's revenues. These also represented payments to expand the infrastructure of the main network. Newsworld showed a surplus in those years.

In Fiscal 2006 shared resources represented 4.3% of Newsworld's revenues. Same explanation provided in the financial statemnts. Newsworld suffered a deficit in 2006.

After the deficit the CBC cut back the amount it charged Newsworld for shared resources to 3% of revenues. Conveniently they showed a surplus.

Leads to some questions. Why that relatively large changes in the charges for shared resources? Was 2006 an outlier or an accurate representation of the relationship?

Here are the links to the financials, judge for your self. 2006-2007 2004-2005

Link to post
Share on other sites
Newsworld would not be able to afford to operate without those shared resources?

Are you saying those shared resources are not publicly funded?

Newsworld should be compensating the CBC for the use of these resources. Newsworld collects advertising income and should be able to afford its own accommodations. If Newsworld doesn't want to compensate the CBC for the resources it utilizes then the CBC should terminate the arrangement. Boy would that create a culture shock for these two entities.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Newsworld should be compensating the CBC for the use of these resources. Newsworld collects advertising income and should be able to afford its own accommodations. If Newsworld doesn't want to compensate the CBC for the resources it utilizes then the CBC should terminate the arrangement. Boy would that create a culture shock for these two entities.

You mean like Much Music and much more music paying City TV?....

Newsworld subsidizes the CBC....if by getting studio space when it would otherwise be empty helps...there is no problem....no problem except to the arguments of those who for what ever reason don't like quality TV.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It isnt hard for me. I did it yesterday in fact.

Best to leave it alone mb .

Why? Because you told me to?

I don't have a problem with the truth. I provided evidence of questions about the CBC's adherence to the CRTC ruling and you refuse to apologize for your insults or respond to the evidence provided.

If you are a moderator I will listen to your 'suggestions' as to what my best behaviour is. Otherwise I'll behave within the rules of the board.

Link to post
Share on other sites
If you are a subscriber to BBM (a radio station or a TV channel that pays...) you can get figures for all types of viewership scenarios. While Fox gets sizable numbers most of their content is simulcast on CDN stations, NFL football the exception...

It is the simulcast situation that the CRTC said they were going to be looking at this year. It is kind of interesting how private industry gets upset with federal money going to the CBC but beg for protection by blocking U.S. signals with their own signals so they can place ads on the program.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It is the simulcast situation that the CRTC said they were going to be looking at this year. It is kind of interesting how private industry gets upset with federal money going to the CBC but beg for protection by blocking U.S. signals with their own signals so they can place ads on the program.

....and that has been a bone of contention with the US border stations who could easily sell canadian sponsors for canadian viewership....

Link to post
Share on other sites
....and that has been a bone of contention with the US border stations who could easily sell canadian sponsors for canadian viewership....

It is also reinforces my argument that Canadian TV based on U.S. programming could not work without protection.

I know some people (on both sides of the spectrum politically) have opted out of paying anything for TV. We have become a nation of thieves because it is so easy to do and there seems to be no repercussions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I watch very little US programming. There are some really good US shows....I watch Earl, the Office (a reworked UK show)...King of the Hill.....but I find I spend a fair bit of time watching shows like Rent-a-Goalie or Billable Hours...

I think I prefer writing that is Canadian....maybe that's why I like shows like King of the Hill...last I heard half the writers were from here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I watch very little US programming. There are some really good US shows....I watch Earl, the Office (a reworked UK show)...King of the Hill.....but I find I spend a fair bit of time watching shows like Rent-a-Goalie or Billable Hours...

I think I prefer writing that is Canadian....maybe that's why I like shows like King of the Hill...last I heard half the writers were from here.

US network programming , as in NBC, CBS ABC, I watch very little off, more like none.

American shows yes, like HBO's Weed (funny as hell but might have jumped the shark), Rescue Me , The L Word (for the visuals ya know)

But I love Natl Geographic channel and the like.

Link to post
Share on other sites
US network programming , as in NBC, CBS ABC, I watch very little off, more like none.

American shows yes, like HBO's Weed (funny as hell but might have jumped the shark), Rescue Me , The L Word (for the visuals ya know)

But I love Natl Geographic channel and the like.

I had one of those DirecTV dishes for a little bit and loved it. I got my hockey games (which is all i watch canadian tv for anyway) CBC newsworld if I wanted Can. news. And all the specialty American channels.

Blasted reality tv is ticking me off, that's what's all on the major networks now and turns me off of them.

But since I've gotten star choice I've been very disappointed, I've seen Bell but it's no better. Comparing Movie Central to Starz is like comparing a greasy hamburger to a steak at the keg.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I watch very little US programming. There are some really good US shows....I watch Earl, the Office (a reworked UK show)...King of the Hill.....but I find I spend a fair bit of time watching shows like Rent-a-Goalie or Billable Hours...

I think I prefer writing that is Canadian....maybe that's why I like shows like King of the Hill...last I heard half the writers were from here.

Many of the American shows have Canadian writers, directors, cinematographers and actors. House has a Canadian exec producer and creator, 24 is practically a Canadian show when it comes to staffing, The Simpsons has Canadian writers on board.

And so it goes.

I watch very little comedy and never seen a Corner Gas and only part of a single episode of Mosque. I have never see more than a few minutes of Trailer Park Boys and Rent and Goalie.

I don't watch Mercer and preferred the days when Royal Canadian Air Farce was on radio. I watched This Hour Has 22 Minutes for a year or so but it is on when I work now.

I like long form programming such as TV series and movies. I thought Intelligence was brilliant but know know that serialized programs are not doing as well (read Lost). As I look around the dial for Canadian one hour series, I find very few. I didn't watch The Tudors although I heard it was in the top 40 of programming which was considered good for the CBC.

I like several of the American network one hour series and wish there was more of them in Canada.

I like Canadian news both locally and nationally. I think they are good but could be better in terms of their presentation, who they have as hosts and who are on their panels, better on breaking news and more long form documentary series.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...