Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Speaking Freely: Why I resigned from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

tarahenley.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 441 posts

Re: Speaking Freely: Why I resigned from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

#411

Post by [deleted] »

erk__ wrote: post #242
kazinator wrote: post #81

The CBC got a $1.2B in government funding in 2019-2020: Source: themselves: https://cbc.radio-canada.ca/en/impact-and-accountability/fin... Can you believe it? Yet, these money-grabbing robber barons don't provide Canadians with streaming. There is a shitty CBC app compatible with Android TV which serves some canned videos and pictures, and a CBC News app for phones that has live news (that will Chromecast). I say cu…

That a broadcaster with approximately twice the government funding is delivering a better service is not a great argument to cut funding, you could even say that it is the opposite. CBC get $31,807,419 CAD per million capita from the government.[0] NHK get $61.293.417 CAD per million capita from license fees.[1] CBC may be awful compared to NHK, but your argument loses power when you have not looked up information li…

[deleted]

Re: Speaking Freely: Why I resigned from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

#412

Post by olivermarks »

zacmps wrote: post #398
olivermarks wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(response to post that was just deleted) 'critical to note that she is just recounting of her own perception of herself.' Tara is outlining why she quit a job she couldn't do anymore because the CBC were ignoring important local stories to focus on CRT, identity politics and racialization of everything, biased reporting and click bait. 'People want to know why, for example, non-binary Filipinos concerned about a lack…

This is not at all how journalism works. Journalism requires editorial freedom, who pays the bills should have literally no impact on reporting; this is true even when with meta coverage of the publication or owner in question. Anything else is not journalism.

'In journalism, a hack writer is deemed to operate as a "mercenary" or "pen for hire", expressing their client's political opinions in pamphlets or newspaper articles'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hack_writer

Re: Speaking Freely: Why I resigned from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

#413

Post by kazinator »

erk__ wrote: post #242
kazinator wrote: post #81

The CBC got a $1.2B in government funding in 2019-2020: Source: themselves: https://cbc.radio-canada.ca/en/impact-and-accountability/fin... Can you believe it? Yet, these money-grabbing robber barons don't provide Canadians with streaming. There is a shitty CBC app compatible with Android TV which serves some canned videos and pictures, and a CBC News app for phones that has live news (that will Chromecast). I say cu…

That a broadcaster with approximately twice the government funding is delivering a better service is not a great argument to cut funding, you could even say that it is the opposite. CBC get $31,807,419 CAD per million capita from the government.[0] NHK get $61.293.417 CAD per million capita from license fees.[1] CBC may be awful compared to NHK, but your argument loses power when you have not looked up information li…

It terms of television (which isn't all there is to CBC, I realize) CBC isn't delivering any service to you, if you don't subscribe to some expensive service from a cable TV monopolist (that they are in bed with). They have no qualms about helping themselves to a piece of your income, though.

Re: Speaking Freely: Why I resigned from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

#414

Post by moistly »

djkivi wrote: post #402
monkeybutton wrote: post #28

I wonder where she will go after publishing her book. Postmedia? Bell media? Staying independent? The news landscape in Canada is rather limited and still consolidating. Think what you may about the CBC and its biases, its nothing compared to the National Post where the owner, Conrad Black, airs his crappy opinions.

Conrad Black hasn't owned the National Post for over 20 years.

True, but sad to say they still carry his opinion column.

Re: Speaking Freely: Why I resigned from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

#415

Post by moistly »

adamc wrote: post #18

I am curious what Canadians think of this argument. Does it seem true? It's hard for me, a USA resident who doesn't follow the CBC, to really evaluate.

I think CBC needs to return to gritty journalism, local, provincial, federal, and global. There’s no money in real journalism any more; it’s far more profitable to provide “news” entertainment, aka exaggerate and fabricate. I think the most important thing a government could do is pay a percentage of the budget strings unattached to independent, credentialed, public journalism. It helps keep a government honest.

Re: Speaking Freely: Why I resigned from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

#417

Post by YZF »

ameminator wrote: post #371
YZF wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US I think hate speech is protected under freedom of speech but I disagree with that. Hate speech leads to violence. This isn't about disagreeing with what Sam says. In a perfect world people decouple "speech" from their actions/beliefs but in the real world people act on what they believe and what they believe is influenced by "speech" (sometimes more so than by things like "facts", "reality", "science", "log…

How exactly do you quantify this harm? Most of these re-definitions of "harmful" speech always seem unclear and difficult to define. Under the current legal framework (which you said you disagreed with) we already have standards and methods of quantifying that harm when speech directly incites violence. These same measures also explicitly define anything else as not harmful. The way I see it, the government has more…

Where I live this what we got: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_Canada

Also see the UK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_the_United...

"Expressions of hatred toward someone on account of that person's colour, race, disability, nationality (including citizenship), ethnic or national origin, religion, gender reassignment, or sexual orientation is forbidden.[1][2][3][4] Any communication which is threatening or abusive, and is intended to harass, alarm, or distress someone is forbidden.[5] The penalties for hate speech include fines, imprisonment, or both.[6]"

There's plenty of laws where there is some ambiguity and the courts and juries need to interpret them.

There are lots (most?) countries that do not have the same level of protection of free speech like the US has and it doesn't generally seem to "hurt society and individuals". If you compare the US to other modern democracies in the west it's not apparent that "free speech" with no limits is a win and there's no problem in those other countries in speaking out in general on any/many topics. You'll be stretched to find an example of hate laws abused as a way of restricting general freedoms.

Re: Speaking Freely: Why I resigned from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

#418

Post by pyuser583 »

zacmps wrote: post #398
olivermarks wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(response to post that was just deleted) 'critical to note that she is just recounting of her own perception of herself.' Tara is outlining why she quit a job she couldn't do anymore because the CBC were ignoring important local stories to focus on CRT, identity politics and racialization of everything, biased reporting and click bait. 'People want to know why, for example, non-binary Filipinos concerned about a lack…

This is not at all how journalism works. Journalism requires editorial freedom, who pays the bills should have literally no impact on reporting; this is true even when with meta coverage of the publication or owner in question. Anything else is not journalism.

Kind of … more and more journalism outfits are going towards non-profit status. That usually involves some sort of ideological position: National Review is neoconservative, Jacobite is far left, n+1 is progressive.

That’s not really what we usually mean by news, but that’s the mode being adopted by many news outlets.

Re: Speaking Freely: Why I resigned from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

#419

Post by abernard1 »

Wiseacre wrote: post #249
david38 wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Broadly speaking, the left likes to go come up with new ways of doing things, the right likes to implement the "tried and true". Almost by definition, this means the left is always trying many things (always need the next new thing) and the right is consolidating on what they perceive to be the best of the tried and true.

That doesn't match up with reality. Take climate change for example. The left was fine with coal until it became proven that it is a major accelerant to climate change. It isn't change for the sake of change. In a similar vein, the right may choose an action because it is convenient, not necessarily because it is tried and true. Not only does what you say not follow, it describes nothing by definition. That being sai…

I upvoted this because your criticism wasn't of "left" or "right" but the parent's lazy understanding of "progressive" and "conservative".

The right in America understands the left quite well, but many on the left think they're trying "new" things leading to progress while the right wants to keep things the same. This is the understanding of a child and why we have political conflict in the U.S.

The most conservative stalwarts that want things to remain the same in America are government, finance, tech, media, academia and education. The cultural institutions that the left built in the 60s are the ones failing and the ones they want to conserve.

Re: Speaking Freely: Why I resigned from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

#420

Post by dragonwriter »

pyuser583 wrote: post #418
zacmps wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not at all how journalism works. Journalism requires editorial freedom, who pays the bills should have literally no impact on reporting; this is true even when with meta coverage of the publication or owner in question. Anything else is not journalism.

Kind of … more and more journalism outfits are going towards non-profit status. That usually involves some sort of ideological position: National Review is neoconservative, Jacobite is far left, n+1 is progressive. That’s not really what we usually mean by news, but that’s the mode being adopted by many news outlets.

> That’s not really what we usually mean by news, but that’s the mode being adopted by many news outlets.

National Review was founded in 1955, and is the only one of the examples you cite that even pretends to have a journalistic component (though its overtly mainly commentary); Jacobin is overtly commentary, not news; n+1 is a literary, rather than journalistic, outlet.

That's not really good examples of a novel trend in journalism.

Post reply on HN