Tuesday, October 11, 2005

More Deep Thoughts from CBC Staff

Part of me wishes the CBC lockout would last ‘til Christmas, given the barn door it has opened into the attitudes of CBC workers. You cannot make up stuff like this letter from Toronto CBC employee John Corcelli that appeared in Friday’s Toronto Star:

My vision for the CBC begins with a structural change at the top – an elected board of directors. The first board, perhaps with nine people, would be elected by members of the staff and management of the CBC.

Once in place, the board would elect a new president whose term should be no more than three years. The board, with the support of the federal government, Canadians and other interested parties, would draft a new mandate. I would like to see one that is transparent, equal and progressive.
Now, before you get too alarmed that Mr. Corcelli is envisioning a workers’ paradise unaccountable to the suckers who supply it almost $1 billion dollars annually, read on . . .

The mandate would be released to the public [emphasis added] and then the work would begin to create a new CBC. The end of this lockout marks an opportunity for us to do better.
How kind of him to let the public see the CBC’s worker-penned manifesto (workers would comprise the majority of the voters electing the new board) before he sends us the bill. And people say the CBC is indifferent to the general public.


scott said...

"My vision for the CBC begins with a structural change at the top..."

This is very indicative of the top down, elitist attitude of not only the CBC but the government in general. Their talking points seem to scream of a party that has been in power for far too long. A party that sees itself as synonymous with Canada, a party willing to break rules and laws in order to appease its existence.

The Liberals and the CBC truely do believe that they are coterminous with Canadian values.

Now that is scary.

Anonymous said...

As the author of the letter to the Toronto Star, I would like to state that there was no intention in my plan to exclude Canadian taxpayers from knowledge of the process. Quite the contrary. It was to open up the discussion and write a policy that was more democratic in spirit, involving the people who work for CBC. The Board could easily include any citizen of Canada from any discipline. An appointed board doesn't offer the kind of scrutiny I wanted to address with my idea.

Considering the 3 plus years since the lockout, Ms Tintor, do you believe that anything has changed?

I think you'd be hard pressed to find any "bottom up" decisions being made which is the problem I was addressing in the first place.

John Corcelli

Joan Tintor said...

Anything has changed in terms of what? Bottom-up decision-making at the CBC? I wouldn't know. Maybe you should ask Krista Erickson.

Given who you envisioned should be enfranchised to elect the board -- CBC workers and management only -- your claim that "any citizen of Canada" could get onto such a board seems dubious. (I would love to see what would happen if a Catholic priest put his name forward.)

That's the annoying thing about the "democratic spirit" -- people disagree. Unless, of course, you exclude most of the people who are likely to disagree with you in the first place, by allowing only those who are paid by the CBC to vote for the board, and exclude those who (partially) pay for it.