I’m a full supporter of the CBC … the public absolutely needs a publically funded broadcaster and news organisation.
What we don’t need is high paid executives that soak so much needless waste just to hold on to supposed high ranked talent. Spread the money around and fund more young journalists, writers, producers and production people. It would be better to have lots of moderately paid professionals, rather than try to spend as much money as possible in a few high priced executives.
And move the headquarters away from an expensive downtown city. Place it in a part of the country that needs the money. We live in a digital world so there is no great need to physically locate your office in the most expensive place possible.
I can’t get any reasonable source of where CBC money goes because the federal government doesn’t provide a sunshine list of what people actually make and how much they actually spend. Which is also a problem as the costs the CBC incurs should be fully disclosed. How are we to judge how much to give to the CBC if we don’t fully understand where their funds go.
There are ways to save the CBC, we don’t need to save a few high priced people, high priced contracts in order to do it.
That’s great … but I shouldn’t need a financial degree or specialized training and vocabulary and knowledge in order to be able to understand what an organization has done with public money.
The accountability is to average people … so the documentation that should be shared should be understood by average people.
If any organization really wanted to … no matter how big or complex they are … they should be capable of simplifying their profits, costs and expenses in a clear concise way. I shouldn’t have to scroll through pages of financial charts to try to interpret for myself where and why the money went and came from. Financial data and political language has turned into a game that is only spoken and understood by a small group of people and everyone else told they are incapable of understanding and should only trust what they are told.
I’m Indigenous and I know from the outside what government bureaucracy sounds like and what kind of language they speak. On one side, they’ll say they know what they are doing and to trust them … then on the other tell you that you don’t know what you are talking about when you question them.
There is any easy answer to this and easy response … it just isn’t given which is why there is so much suspicion and animosity towards the CBC. If the proponents of the CBC can’t be clear, honest and respectful of dialogue … how do you expect anyone to support them in the public space? Or maybe that was the plan all along … to just seed distrust and let the public themselves decide that we should do away with the CBC.
In any case, the future of the CBC does not look good and much like most good things in this world these days, it is being destroyed from within rather than from any outside force.
Shouldn’t you? How about what an organization does with private money?
Financials of large’ish organizations can be complicated, and CBC is spread out across the country from large cities to small. That’s why businesses hire accountants and people with financial backgrounds.
That said, I don’t discount that CBC might have some fat to be trimmed, but I wouldn’t expect to be able to figure that from just financial reports. It’s awhile back but I worked with a bunch of people who migrated out primarily because of the overly-bureaucratic and often “it’s who you know” atmosphere.
CBC actually rents most of its office space now, including the new building in Montreal, it doesn’t own the building. Which complicates things about leasing the space to other businesses or modifying the lease agreement depending on their financial situation in a short timeframe.
I wouldn’t trust high priced talent of any kind … public or private … because they don’t care what happens to any institution public or private - they’ll always just go to the highest bidder.
Whereas if you have more moderately paid talent … you have more individuals working and competing inside their organization. It would never be a utopia and there would still be lots of headaches and stupidity … but I’d rather put my trust in 20 people rather than 1 person who is working for top dollar.
I would rather place my bets on ten potential talents … than on one sure bet that could easily just sabotage everything and everyone to make a bit more money.
Every talent comes from somewhere and seeding those chances are liable to spring new talent more often than in endlessly holding onto one overly hyped talent that we’re made to believe is irreplaceable
I’m a full supporter of the CBC … the public absolutely needs a publically funded broadcaster and news organisation.
What we don’t need is high paid executives that soak so much needless waste just to hold on to supposed high ranked talent. Spread the money around and fund more young journalists, writers, producers and production people. It would be better to have lots of moderately paid professionals, rather than try to spend as much money as possible in a few high priced executives.
And move the headquarters away from an expensive downtown city. Place it in a part of the country that needs the money. We live in a digital world so there is no great need to physically locate your office in the most expensive place possible.
I can’t get any reasonable source of where CBC money goes because the federal government doesn’t provide a sunshine list of what people actually make and how much they actually spend. Which is also a problem as the costs the CBC incurs should be fully disclosed. How are we to judge how much to give to the CBC if we don’t fully understand where their funds go.
There are ways to save the CBC, we don’t need to save a few high priced people, high priced contracts in order to do it.
Does that help?
https://cbc.radio-canada.ca/en/media-centre/2023-2024-second-quarterly-report
https://site-cbc.radio-canada.ca/documents/impact-and-accountability/finances/2023/2022-2023-Annual-Report.pdf
That’s great … but I shouldn’t need a financial degree or specialized training and vocabulary and knowledge in order to be able to understand what an organization has done with public money.
The accountability is to average people … so the documentation that should be shared should be understood by average people.
Compared to what the actual bookkeeping must look like to manage at this scale, this document is actually quite approachable.
If any organization really wanted to … no matter how big or complex they are … they should be capable of simplifying their profits, costs and expenses in a clear concise way. I shouldn’t have to scroll through pages of financial charts to try to interpret for myself where and why the money went and came from. Financial data and political language has turned into a game that is only spoken and understood by a small group of people and everyone else told they are incapable of understanding and should only trust what they are told.
I’m Indigenous and I know from the outside what government bureaucracy sounds like and what kind of language they speak. On one side, they’ll say they know what they are doing and to trust them … then on the other tell you that you don’t know what you are talking about when you question them.
There is any easy answer to this and easy response … it just isn’t given which is why there is so much suspicion and animosity towards the CBC. If the proponents of the CBC can’t be clear, honest and respectful of dialogue … how do you expect anyone to support them in the public space? Or maybe that was the plan all along … to just seed distrust and let the public themselves decide that we should do away with the CBC.
In any case, the future of the CBC does not look good and much like most good things in this world these days, it is being destroyed from within rather than from any outside force.
Shouldn’t you? How about what an organization does with private money?
Financials of large’ish organizations can be complicated, and CBC is spread out across the country from large cities to small. That’s why businesses hire accountants and people with financial backgrounds.
That said, I don’t discount that CBC might have some fat to be trimmed, but I wouldn’t expect to be able to figure that from just financial reports. It’s awhile back but I worked with a bunch of people who migrated out primarily because of the overly-bureaucratic and often “it’s who you know” atmosphere.
If you only go after unknowns that want to live in a remote community then all talent will go to the private sector
If you list salaries more people will call for defunding
Which further lowers quality
You saw the same thing with Post Media claiming CBC has tons of expensive real estate but they didn’t list their own holdings
CBC actually rents most of its office space now, including the new building in Montreal, it doesn’t own the building. Which complicates things about leasing the space to other businesses or modifying the lease agreement depending on their financial situation in a short timeframe.
I wouldn’t trust high priced talent of any kind … public or private … because they don’t care what happens to any institution public or private - they’ll always just go to the highest bidder.
Whereas if you have more moderately paid talent … you have more individuals working and competing inside their organization. It would never be a utopia and there would still be lots of headaches and stupidity … but I’d rather put my trust in 20 people rather than 1 person who is working for top dollar.
I would rather place my bets on ten potential talents … than on one sure bet that could easily just sabotage everything and everyone to make a bit more money.
Every talent comes from somewhere and seeding those chances are liable to spring new talent more often than in endlessly holding onto one overly hyped talent that we’re made to believe is irreplaceable
The 10 of those 20 worth having will be bought out and you’ll be stuck with the 10 not worth having
And with them goes their audience
We shouldn’t be having CBC depend on ad revenue either. The federal government needs to fund them better.