CBC News Editors' Blog

This appears to be fairly stated and proper corrective actions taken.

After digesting this I must ask myself; How does a reporter get answers to specific questions from their elected officials in Parliament when Q&A sessions for the press are extremely limited.

If the Prime Minister controls his cabinet press releases and only takes questions he likes from friendy press outlets exactly how is this different from White House procedures these days.

News just released today on the wires suggests both the Americans and the British lied to the electorate to justify war in Iraq.

In the Americans case apparently 950 times by various spokespersons in the GWB circle.

Of course our officials would never lie but if we can't ask questions how is truth determined. Truth should be transparent in a Canadian democracy shouldn't it?

Who cares?

You're walking a tight line. A line that is difficult but necessary, and I appreciate the difficulty of that balance. I trust still trust you, for what it's worth from one individual.

Mr. Cruikshank,

CBC did the honourable thing. As our public broadcaster you had an obligation to do what you did, but I'm sure it couldn't have been easy.

I hope Ms. Erickson's career is ultimately enhanced by the lesson.

CBC deserves credit for reviewing the circumstance, and publicly acknowledging a bias in reporting.

Tomm

And one more thing, "she"(cuz we don't know her name cuz you're not being open about it!) should make a public admission of guilt, followed by a public appology!

But all of Canada shouldn't bother holding our breath, right!?

The simple fact that the CBC is open and transparent in all matters is the tops for me. We as people are generally forgiving. Someone made a mistake, it was investigated and consenquences were dealt. Everything was out in the open and admitted.

Seems like something we teach our children is finally being proved through your organization in the public domain. Thank you for making it easier to teach our children values.

Actions speak louder than words and I hope we continue to have positive role models for our children.

I have long been of the opinion that the CBC television empire should be dismantled. CBC radio serves a connecting purpose for our country. The television arm is a relic from our past which our country no longer needs.

Doug Finlay was not the only one that sent a letter to Vince Carlin. I did too. Mr. Cruickshank, is this your feeble attempt to get this information out to the public at large? How come the CTV reported this as news on Monday, but it took you two days to post this pathetic blog. The CTV also posted your reporter's name, which you did not. The CBC should be dismantled because it does not reflect my views as a taxpayer. Are you saying that we can all be unethical due to the "heat of the hunt"?

I can understand and appreciate both sides of this issue to a certain degree. Having said that, I must also point out that the prominence of "puff" journalism is considered license by some people on parliament hill. There seems to be a complete lack of journalists willing to ask the questions that would likely see them black listed by our elected members. Journalists can and should be, at least in my opinion, at the forefront of accountability when dealing with politicians and public servants. To do anything less is a discredit to the public. One hundred years ago editors and reporters prided themselves in holding people accountable for their actions and words. What happened? Fortitude no longer required in this business?
Who will ensure that Stevie Cameron is called to testify in all this. I have heard her name mentioned once and that only in passing. Maybe it's time the CBC and other media hired some people who have memories longer than last week.

AB in Ottawa: The huge number of comments responding to the last blog relating to this issue proves that lots of people care.

Jeff Wilson in Winnipeg: The CBC is to be public/open about the actions the CBC took, which they have been. The particular reporter's name is irrelevant.

Ironically, in most cases things are the other way around. A corporation fires an individual for doing wrong, but doesn't admit any responsibility itself. The public then cries out for a public admission of guilt from the corporation.

Does anyone not find it ironic that at one point in his career John Cruickshank replaced David Radler. So John is hanging Krista Erickson out on the line, as David hung Conrad Black out? Poetic justice. Only at the Canadian Broadcorping Castration.

CBC in all it's programming, is the most blatantly biased and prejudiced media organization in Canada. From news, to current events, to so-called 'science' shows on radio, to debates, to the types of movies they show on Sunday night, the anti-conservative and pro-left bias is unmistakable. The only, ONLY voice that could be considered conservative or right is Rex Murphy. Several hours of a single voice per week to present balance against the overwhelming leftism on CBC isn't enough to justify that ALL taxpayers should fund this dinosaur.

Wouldn't know CBC did anything about this if I hadn't followed a link from another source I read. Your arrogance is revealing. To place an obscure blog in the expectation that large numbers of people actually read it just shows how much contempt you have for Canadians. Make it the top story on the National! Not many watch that either but at least you can honestly say you reported your actions.

As for the actions CBC took, a transfer is hardly discipline. When one of my employees breaks our corporate code of ethics they are fired. Thats because we are serious about our business. CBC is not. They are self serving political manipulators fearing that Mother Corp may lose funding or be dismantled under conservatives. They know they are safe with the liberanos.

I have written your Ombudsman many times. After this incident and the "promotion" of Erickson to Toronto, I will no longer bother. CBC cannot distinguish between the Liberal party and the taxpayers (shareholders) who they are supposed to serve.

CBC is biased. Full stop. Furthermore, CBC does not have the ability to be anything other than biased.

Personally, I would rather CBC disappeared.

If the CBC doesn't have a policy to report the facts, free of bias and spin, why not? We are not idiots who require the opinions or spin from talking heads to make our own deductions on current affairs or anything else.
This recent situation was either business as usual or rules were broken when an employee decided to supply the Liberals with questions to advantage their agenda.

What's so complicated about reporting the facts and letting the people who pay to hear them use their own thought processes and make their own deductions?

Scape-goating is a last vestige. Fire away, it won't change anything. Try fumigation.

This is one of numerous examples why I, as a small c conservative, find that the CBC does not represent me and the beliefs that I hold. I am not opposed to the CBC expressing views to the left of mine. I just oppose the absence and the denigration of views, such as mine, that fall outside the accepted wisdom of the CBC. It is why I generally ignore the CBC.

Gee. If you really meant it, this apology would have been the home page of CBC.CA, and mentioned in your nightly newscasts. Like the original story.

Fat chance. Cry me a river, and give Canada the money to the appropriate percentage of Canadians who have involuntarily paid taxes to an institution that blatantly espouses and promotes political views that said Canadians do not.

If we shut down the CBC, I am sure the Liberal Party of Canada can find the funding to recreate the CBC as an organ of the party. At least then there will be some moral clarity and intellectual honesty in the CBC.

"our reporter provided questions to two Liberal MPs"

2 Liberal MPs? I haven't seen that reported anywhere else. Who was the "other" Liberal MP besides Pablo Rodriguez? Was it Paul Szabo, the chair of the ethics committee? The one who got to decide if the questions were in order or not?

If so, then the other half of this scandal is being buried by the CBC, whose "mandate is to provide Canadians with a view of their political life unobstructed by bias". These Liberals were responsible for hijacking a parliamentary committee's proceedings for purely partisan purposes. If Szabo was the other MP, then he must be removed as the Ethics Committee chair immediately.

Will the CBC fess up the name of the second MP?

Unfortunately, the mea culpa's that have so far been released have been insufficient.

First, Ms. Erickson should have been dismissed from employment for her egregious act. It reeks of bias, in that Ms. Erickson's questions seemed designed to link Mr. Mulroney to the current Government. It was an abysmal abuse of process by manipulating a parliamentary committee to answer questions she would not otherwise get to ask.

As I read this missive, I laughed at Mr. Cruikshank's defense of the impartiality of the CBC. Anyone who has an ounce of intelligence knows the CBC is extremely biased by a left of center set of sensibilities. Their news coverage stinks of it, and it is a good reason why their viewership trails every other news agency in Canada (though the other major televised news agencies are little better when it comes to bias).

I say it is high time the umbilical cord is cut, and the CBC left to fend for itself. Let bums in seats decide, and not MY tax dollars.

CBC folded like a cheap suit to demands of the truly ignorant, who are only interested in advancing their political agenda of supporting the Government's lock-down on the flow of information and on the CBC's ability to advance the interests of Canadians as citizens.

What a craven move this was, Mr. Cruickshank.

CBC=Liberal Ad machine

The CBC is well know as the Liberal Party ad machine. They are unethically biased on all fronts and the only way to eliminate this type of biased is to start from scratch PERIOD. I remember Peter Mansbridge saying on air, “WE WON” after the Liberal’s were elected prior to Harper’s minority victory. Unbelievable that Canadian’s have tolerated this for so long. I have written letters to the CBC several times complaining about BIASED reporting. Should any CBC employees read this I say to you that you are a pathetic example of reporting, ethics and all-around honesty! These are my opinions and as far as I know I am entitled to them, thanks to Ezra Levant!

Dan
Calgary

I loath the CBC and agree with Tom mcauley that it is by far the most biased station in Canada, I would go so far as to say the most left leaning station in North America.
Take man made global warming for instance, they constantly ignore the fact that what they are stating as facts have all been de-bunked but like good little Liberal soldiers they continue to spread mis-information that is incredibly dangerous to our economy, it borders on treason IMO.
PM Harper should do the country a favour and kill the taxpayer funded proganda arm of the Liberal party we call the CBC..Communist broadcasting corp.
Millions of Canadians would thank him for it.

You said . . . **we took the reporter off the story and turned to our Journalistic Standards and Practices guide to help us deal with this matter.**

You self incriminated by that statement. No professional news director needs to consult an *How to Guide*.

You know full well the basic rules you thrashed on so many News and Opinion reports and you willfully broke those rules on an almost daily basis.

Liberals have gone easy on you in these comments, but the facts are that left leaning bias at the CBC is a huge disgrace in a fair democratic country.

A graceful resignation on your part would be the classy thing to do. Not likely to redeem your reputation much, after such a long history of *Spun News*. = TG

Two MP's Who was the second MP. I want to know. This is important, who was the second MP that was sent the question, who else was she collaborating with in this ill advised quest for a story.

Bias is like trust. Once trust is gone, it takes a lot to earn it back again. Similarly, once bias appears, it rarely disappears, and it takes a lot to appear non-partisan.
In this case, you've moved a biased reporter to another position where she will likely express the same bias.
Additionally, there is no doubt in the minds of most conservatives, who comprise over 30% of the Canadian population, that the CBC does not represent their views whatsoever. As a previous commenter explained, Rex Murphy may be an exception, and perhaps Don Cherry. Moving people around will not change this.

I do not understand how a reporter can so severly tarnish the "unbiased" reputation of our public broadcaster, and not see so much as a pay cut, nevermind a dissmissal. This embarassed the CBC you can be sure. But why did the CBC keep her? By keeping her, the CBC is saying, subversively, that they condone her actions.

She believed it was permissible to create a temporary alliance of convenience with the Liberals if it would help determine whether Brian Mulroney had lobbied a Tory minister on a recent matter.

Why did she believe it permissible? There must be some reason for this. She is not a novice. Is this de rigueur at the CBC?

Who, what, where, when and why. That is what your "shareholders" are asking of the CBC. Is this too much to ask? If so, perhaps the CBC should get out of the investigative news business entirely and focus on culture, arts and entertainment.

If the CBC cannot provide a story where it actually has the inside track of what use is the CBC?

What does one need to do to get fired from CBC News? A transfer to Toronto is not a punishment, last I checked.

Do the right thing, Mr. Cruickshank. Fire her and her editor. There's plenty of legitimate journalists and editors who would love to cover what actually happens, rather than manipulating the political process for their own ideological purposes.

(You think we believe she was trying to get a scoop? Her intent, obviously, was to make the government look bad on live TV. It's not a scoop when it happens live on TV!!!! Therefore, it's so much worse than your implication that she was just overzealous in her quest for a scoop. Makes no sense.)

Agreement is a no-brainer. The reason I'm commenting is to decry the author's "verbification" (sic).

Good grief, so there were two reporters involved? So where has the second reporter being transfered to?

This story is like an onion, with more layers the longer it goes on.

James

"... we must be detached from partisan interest, and professional and dispassionate in all aspects of our reporting."

Very true, Mr. Cruickshank, but your statement and the reality of what Canadians have come to know as CBC "reporting" are worlds apart.

Your words hearken back to traditional ethics in journalism, which centered squarely on objective, full and fact-based reporting. But we all know journalism is no longer about objectively relating facts, rather it is about molding public opinion by either interlacing op-ed with facts or purposely omitting facts that do not support whatever political ideology is dominate in the newsroom or organization. It is exactly this partiality that Canadians perceive in the news services provided by CBC.

The telling thing is people are not appalled by Ms. Erikson's actions. Most aren't even surprised. It says CBC has a LONG hill to climb before it is ever again perceived as an impartial purveyor of news of any sort.

I am sure you are sincere with these comments. However, my years of observation have shown me exactly the opposite.

Too often CBC 'reporters' have shown a bias consistently towards Liberal talking points. Other parties are held to higher standards.

Smiles and humour are often used when Liberal transgressions are reported on. It almost has the 'wink wink nudge nudge' feeling.

Other political parties are consistently lit up and hammered for lesser transgressions.

Unfortunately, I am sure you and your colleagues would scoff at these points, feeling you are fair and balanced. Wrong!!!

Is it or is it not true, that reporters feeding politicians questions happens a lot, and that the cbc does not hold monopoly on this practice?

i wonder if the outcry to all this is more partisan than the act of a journalist tossing a question to an MP?

Mr. Cruickshank deserves some kudos for his words and actions with the parliamentary reporter. Many of us feel that the CBC IS weighted to the left in an oftentimes superior way. He does not go quite far enough to satisfy those of us who feel slighted a little bit each day by the reporting slants of the N. MacDonalds (PLO good/Isreal not so good) Bush bad/Dems good), Ivan Solomans (from up here), Nancy Whites, Avi Lewis's pompous interview with Hirsi Aly on On the Map, or when David Gray uses terms like ..."and from the progressive Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives" while always saying "the right wing Fraser Institute"...we tend to feel that the slippery slope is a lot steeper than it should or need be with our public broadcaster.

So who's the other Liberal MP?
It took you long enough to reveal Erickson's name. Apparently the CBC is only transparent when heat is applied. Should be a fun ride when the Auditor General starts poking around.

Some people have suggested...is normal practice .... Others condemn it as unethical and unprofessional.
Does not matter what some and others say, what say the person in charge?

This person was not disiplined. This person was simply sent to boarding school. For the top dog of the CBC to even think this is appropriate action is scary. The only possible outcome was Dismissal. Anything short of that comes under the "slap on the wrist" category. If Mr Cruickshank thinks that this is a suitable reaction then it brings into doubt his ability to remain as publisher. His judgment is obviously just as suspect as hers.

I find it amazing that so many people who loathe the CBC, radio and TV, they sure spend alot of time watching, listening and reading it. Not to mention the time and enrgy spent in even writing in response on your blog. Amazing and quite humorous. Do you think they even realize the contradictions in their actions ?

The CBC's claim to a view of politics unobstructed by bias is still a joke. This morning's 6AM World Report where the reporter called Mitt Romney the "Mormon moneybags" (like his faith is a crime) and said rather than fearing Bill Clinton in the White House with time on his hands that 'most' Americans fear another Republican in the White House. Like she thinks she knows their thoughts!
Nothing at CBC has or will change!!!

Mr. Cruikshank's risible assertion that the CBC is or must be seen to be unbiased is unworthy of rebuttal. Thankfully, a fair majority of posters also recognize this as nonsense. The CBC is staffed (stuffed?) with "progressives," most of whom are active in pushing the "correct" agenda. It's been so for decades now. And it won't change any time soon. Stop watching television. Go blogosphere or go crazy.

"Lar" from Toronto makes a very enlightened point, but without realizing it. If one doesn't share "Lar's" political views, then that that person is, of course, "ignorant". This is the classic mindset of the elitist Left. You MUST vote Liberal and you MUST agree with the CBC. If not, you are an ignorant fool. The very reason why that the current government doesn't pander to all of the whiners in the press gallery is because they are anti-conservative by instinct. Why should the Prime Minister go out of his way to get face-time with a bunch of left-leaning journalists that are going to trash him anyway?

By the way, can someone explain to me why, in 2008, we need a news outlet paid for and run by the government? I'd be happy to see my tax dollars used elsewhere, thanks.

Let me first declare up front, I am a Liberal. There - an open declaration of my political affiliation. What this most likely means is that approximately 1/3 of all readers will ignore or ridicule my views as biased... sadly closing their minds to 2/3rds of this discussion.

I appreciate the CBC's position, difficult - but not enormously so. Education, rather than a cursory dismissal... "Well done!" Supporting and developing staff may be the most important thing an employer can offer... I hope Krista Erickson learns from this error and continues to develop her craft.

What isn't being discussed is what drove her to this error. Simply the most information controlling government Canada has ever seen. We as Canadians value and should demand an open Government, for instance, one that doesn't ridicule as "Taliban Supporters" opposition members concerned with Canada's perception on the World Stage. Particularily when they are in possesion of information that clearly led them to the conclusion that torture was continuing...

Please continue to champion an open discourse...

I have been watching (TV) and listening to (Radio Two) the CBC most of my life (I'm currently 40 years old). I find the explanation of the incident and the actions taken quite acceptable. The CBC is beholden to the public and like diplomats, cannot side directly with any political party. In my opinion, it must now and forever be on the side of the Canadian public, and them alone.

Some may disagree with me, but I have faith in my public broadcaster. I was born and raised in Canada, and I have met guests from other countries in Canada who share my view.

Let me declare, I am a Canadian.

And I expect my government members to think of their own questions.

The question asked had nothing to do with the proceedings.

She should be dismissed immediately from her position.

Where did the original 'allegations' come from? The MPs who received the questions? And if they didn't report the breach of journalistic ethics, then what does that say about them?

Richard - yes I'm a Liberal said: "What isn't being discussed is what drove her to this error. Simply the most information controlling government Canada has ever seen."
- So it's wrong but for the right reasons. Thank you elitist. IT IS a gov't ethics committee investigation concerning a PM 15 years ago. She tried to smear the present gov't simply, unorthodox and very unethical in the method and choice of venue. Yes the present gov't has taken control of media accessability. Most of the reporting class did nothing during the spending scandals of the previous gov't to pad their own party coffers AND yet have been like hyenas, quick to report any little idiosyncrasy in a Conservative MP's life or personal beliefs. ie a moderate MP of one party gets harsher treatment than a moderate MP from another party even though they both attend the same evangelical church seems just plain unfair and plainly partisan when framing the story. And I don't have one religious bone in my body personally. It just appears over the top.

As someone who is both interested in politics and doesn't really support one party over another, I find this discussion interesting. I agree with the decision of the ombudsman and management here to allow the reporter in question to retain her position albeit with a transfer to a different market area. Also, since this is a personnel issue, I agree with the decision not to release the reporter's name.

What I find most interesting is the perception of bias within the CBC. A bit more than two years ago, the complaints were that the CBC were anti-liberal because of the election coverage of issues raised. I also heard a few anti-NDP comments about not providing enough news coverage.

One the whole, I have found that CBC Radio and television provide some of the most unbiased reporting in North America. One only has to consider CNN or Fox News (both entities should have the same corporate motto: "Hey, it's not like we hire real journalists.") to understand what bias is.

As for the anti-liberal or anti-conserative comments, reporters cover the news. If a news report makes a member of the cabinet or PMO look like a complete idiot based on the facts, presented, it's normally because the facts speak for themselves.

Mr. Cruickshank, now that the investigation is complete, please provide us with the names of the liberal MP's who were in collusion with Krista Erickson? As a taxpayer and shareholder of the CBC, I demand to know. Also I believe this is valuable information as it may affect the outcome of the "ethics committee" (LOL) of which these liberals are members.

The comments that the media stands apart is humourous to the extreem - I think I could take any story printed and show media bias including supposed hard news - the media is a joke and just about everyone I knows thinks the same. Have fun patting your own back.

" We have to stand apart. Our mandate demands it and our audience, the people of Canada, deserve it."

Mr. Cruikshank, I believe the mandate of Canadians is that you be fired immediately and the CBC be dismantled immediately. We do not wish to support your blatantly Liberal-biased organization. This, is what Canadians deserve.

The BBC recently acknowledged in public the egregious political bias on their news staff, and knowing that their already fraying credibility was at stake, conducted a thorough investigation.

I hope the CBC will follow their example.

There is no justification for a government owned news agency in a free country. Of course it would be biased and corrupt with propaganda. Look at the old USSR.
I hope to see the CBC dismantled and sold off. It is a costly albatross to the taxpayer and an insult to our intelligence. Everybody knows it is the propaganda arm of the Liberal Party. In this way you have been very transparent. Let the Liberal Party pay for it.
Your unethical reporter should have been fired by the way.

I don't understand where all the hostility towards CBC originated from and why? Much less why so many of the above were accusing CBC of being so liberal or leftist. I have always appreciated the fact that we had at least one source of reliable news that was not american-owned/biased. I would guess that the wobbly conservative ego cannot stand fair play or to have the facts of life or anything like the truth aired - because conservatives expose themselves as straight-faced lying braggarts, patriarchal puffballs with whom it is impossible to have an intelligent discussion on anything. We need CBC - at least those of us who are not pacified by american fluff.

This is a gong show.

The Ethics committee behaving un-ethically, Liberals collaberating with an un-ethical reporter (didn't think I needed to add CBC). The MP involved should be hauled in front of the ethics committee to explain his actions and those of the reporter.

I have a friend in the Hill media and he describes the CBC as overtly and blantantly anti-Conservative, not just pro-Liberal.

The CBCs distorted view of the world is just atrocious. The CBC reports more about unelected wannabe politicians like Elizabeth May and Bob Rae than actual politicians and the stupid things that come out of their mouths (like Stephane Dion).

The CBC does not represent Canadians, as it purports to do. I challenge the CBC to cut out coverage of US primaries for one week and fill that void with actual Canadian stories that are fair and balances. Fox News in the US was rated as the most balanced reporting the US primaries... What is the world coming to?

Privatize the CBC!

Hi:
I would like to comment from a different level. I see the covering of news in CBC very subjective. I mean hear, foreign policies. As a Canadian born overseas, I would like to inform many in canada, that in Middle East (I mean arabs states), some news agencies and newspaper have more freedom than what we have hear. I mention "Aljazeera, and many oppositions newspapers in Egypt". It is true that all arab leaders are not really elected (Except Hamas leaders)", however some gov. there allow for freedom of writting your point of view and people to access it. In Canada, it is not the case, the dollars play an important role in twisting certain facts, hiding some pictures etc.. CBC is not immune to it, sensorship exists when you dfeal with ME problem on CBC..CBC and othe Canadian media mimic the media in US

Sheila, do you actually have a job or do you spent all day bitching and fuming at the CBC?

Still waiting for those 2 names.

Giving the Libs time to get their spin in place?

The Buckler shows that obviously the Tories and people on the Hill misspeak a lot. The reporter that was reassigned should be commended by for getting around all this misspeaking and showing some entrepreneurial zeal in filing what was an unbiased story. Much like a private sector reporter. If the reporter was a typical sanctimonious CBC reporter she would have made numerous trips to Europe and elsewhere to talk to this source and that and filed some piffle..all at the taxpayers expense!!

FYI Brennan, this is the first time I have ever been outraged enough to blog on the CBC. I prepare taxes (LOL) and am a stay at home mom for three lovely children. I watched Mike Duffy Live on Dec. 13, 2007 and heard what Jean Lapierre said. The next day I wrote a letter to the ombudsman at the CBC. On Tues. Jan. 22, 2008, I received pretty much this same lame letter from John Cruickshank which assured me that he would be getting this information out to the public at large. So excuse me for wanting to find out what Cruickshank said. Now will he provide us with the names of the Liberal MP's or are we going to have to find that out from some other NEWS MEDIA?

The liberal MP's are Pablo Rodriguez, Robert Thibeau and Paul Szabo. Not bad for a tax preparer and I have no journalistic training. BTW why didn't the CBC report last week about Robert Thibeau having dinner at a restaurant with Karlheinz Schreiber? Good for Mike Duffy, getting that tidbit out. Mr. Thibeau sits on the ethics committee? I'll be telling ALL my clients this year how they are wasting all their taxpayers dollars on the CBC.

If the Government of Canada had one-tenth the regard for Canadians that the CBC has demonstrated --- we'd all be a whole lot better off!

I won't be satisfied until all the Liberals involved are named. I am very angry about this matter and will tell everybody I know to push for the extermination of the CBC.

There is no way taxpayers should have to pay for this. It's time to privatize the CBC.

january 2008 - first the ethics thing (bad boys and bad girl)and now the untendered disposition of public assets thing. oooh! the year is off to a rough start. disgraceful - altogether disgraceful.

oh, and you might want to send a little apology - no, make that a big apology - to mr. mulroney.

ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF BIAS LIVE COVERAGE OF THE COMMITEE WAS STOPPED AFTER KEENS TESTAMONY WHEN ALL OTHER TESTAMONYSUPPORTED THE GOV. POSITON AND SHOWED HER FOR WHAT SHE TRULY IS.SHAME SHAME.WHAT NETWORK COULD SURVIVE LOSING $1.5BILLION AYEAR WHY NOT TRY BEING HONEST WITH CANADIANS AND MAYBE SOME ONE OTHER THAN THE COVERTED WOULD WATCH BUT WHY CAre your jobs are guarenteed with no board to answwer to

the CBC is a disgrace and should be privatized at once. If the type of underhanded practices going on at the CBC were going on in a private company several people would already be turfed. What do you do, you circle the wagons. Way to go and show off those stellar ethics.

I want the cbc to have to compete in the open market,no more tax dollars.The cbc would argue this because it knows it would not survive,plain and simple.

To Robert Isaac Bricker, I noticed that too.
Now this is my third try to get this information on this blog. This time I will try to be unbiased and only report the facts. CBC please take note.
So here goes: yesterday on Mike Duffy Live, Robert Thibeault admitted that he met with Karlheinz Schreiber several times. The meetings were all in public places. Robert Thibeault is also currently involved in a lawsuit against Brian Mulroney. Robert Thibeault sits on the ethics committee. Just the facts, people can form their own opinion.

To Whom it may concern;
I am a taxpayer and I am forced to pay for the biased reporting that members of the CBC are paid to perform. I am not a supporter of the Liberal Party of Canada, I am not a supporter of the NDP either or the Greens. I do not have a government job. I am NEVER represented by the reporters I am forced to pay.

The nasty attacks on the Prime Minister and the Conservative Party - the Political Party that I support - are ongoing everyday, all day, by CBC, in Canada - I am not making this up!

I fiercely resent CBC cheerleaders for all left wing people and organizations and outfits on the public funded airwaves. Your TV people do not call President Bush "President", they do not call Prime Minister Harper, Prime Minister; yet they never call Queen Elizabeth, "Windsor" or "Elizabeth Windsor". They MUST show respect for democratically elected leaders to meet my democratic standards: don't forget I am footing the bill! I also do not want these reporters working with Liberals or Bloc members or the NDP to help them help themselves by having the Conservatives out of government.

The bottom line is: I do NOT want to pay for CBC anymore. Please tell me how I can get my refund for all the years I have paid the CBC, involuntarily, to 'air' opinions, fairy tales and biased news stories that do not reflect my views in any shape or form.

Thank-you for your prompt reply.
Sincerely, Elaine Kennedy

I for one watch CBC daily & find them the most non-partisan station in all of Canada. Those of you who want it gone are those who live in a very small world. If you ever cross our Canadian borders into the US & want to watch Canadian news while your there, the only Canadian channel I have found is CBC. I spend a fair amount of time there visiting family & really appreciate being able to view Canadian news while I'm there.

Those of you who so opposed to CBC, I really believe you really don't know why but simply feed on each others negative comments. We as Canadians should be extremely proud to have a public news channel like CBC.

You must know that people have conservative leanings and would like to be represented by theCBC.

Here's a suggestion put CBC on pay tv and discontinue the public funding. Those of you who want to watch pay for it directly. Those of us who get tired of propaganda from the likes of Suzuki and Micheal Moore can watch something else and not complain about having our tax dollars wasted.
Back on point the names of the 2 Liberals haven't been released by the CBC. When is that going to happen John?

The humourous aspect of this is the obvious question that it raises. If Mr.Cruickshank really doesn't think the CBC is biased, then one has to have a certain pity for him providing one assumes he believes it.
As his own organization has found out and been forced to publically admit, one of their reporters "believed it was permissible to create a temporary alliance of convenience with the Liberals". Further, if it was indeed in violation of CBC ethics, then the lack of outrage at CBC rather proves that there is precisley the bias mentioned. So why is he castigating the Conservatives rather than apoligizing to them???
I'd suggest that, far from being a "National" station, CBC is in reality a Toronto" station, with most of its jounalists and leadership living there and subscribing to Toronto's socialist, liberal dogma, hence they truly see no bias but simply as the way "right" people think. What they should do, is to ensure their journalists, leadership and news organizations come from and live in different areas of the country. Have people like Ezra Levant on the News editorial staff.
And if Ms. Erickson was truly so obtuse as to beleive that there was nothing wrong with forming an alliance with a Liberal MP in one of the most hotly debated and partisan political issues of the day, then posting her to Toronto won't do a damn thing for precisely the above mentioned reasons. For God sakes, post her to Calgary or somewhere she might benefit from differing points of view. That is of course, presuming her mind is open enough to absorb them.

Perhaps, instead of an entrenched Ombudsman, the CBC needs civilian oversight so the kind of abuses which Erickson committed can be appropriately addressed instead of swept under the carpet.

The time has long past since Canada has required a TAX funded TV network. Only the Liberals will argue against that. Dennis

So Ms. Erickson made the mistake of being caught. Have the journalists from other media houses who do the same thing given up the practice?

The CBC does its level best to be factual and unbiased, and occasionally I find that maddening, when the more loony attitudes of society get discussed as if they deserved deep gravitas. It took, for instance, much longer than what one would expect from a group of fairly educated people for the CBC to recognize that we had a planet and it was in danger. For a while there, I expected to hear them interviewing the Flat Earth Society as if it proved demonstrable truth. The Cons are not the only group rather behind the times in scientific awareness. But the CBC is becoming more scientifically savvy. That must really madden the troglodytes.
Of course cons will be mad at the CBC, because they live in a dream world and they don't want their delusions disturbed.
Am I the only one who thinks that a reporter should be able to talk to a politican, and be able to suggest that information is being withheld which we, the public, have a right to know? I am not usually confused by ethical considerations, but this one has me puzzled, as a citizen who thinks I have a right to know what is going on, behind and in front of the scenes.
Next time, do the prompting anonymously, is my suggestion. Information is good. Isn't it? Or is it only good when we get it by being polite?