Editor,

I am not sure where to begin.

TMI’s explanation of economic trickle-down is very confusing. To state that it makes economic sense for CBC to cover events with overly large crews, because having lots of well paid journalists (on the public’s dime), puts lots of dollars back into the economy is a false premise.

Civil servants create no wealth but take from those who do, through taxation. To apply your argument locally, Meaford would be more economically successful with more staff and higher police costs!

Explaining away CBC’s left-of -centre bias using just two examples of commentators on the right (Rex Murphy and Don Cherry) is hilarious. CBC’s idea of balanced discussion, especially in regards to Power and Politics, is to have two pundits on the extreme left, and a centrist. Invariably their U.S. sources are the New York or L.A. Times, both Democratic Party organs.  You would never hear the Wall Street Journal quoted.

“And even if some show hosts or pundits on CBC Radio and Television have an individual political bias, there is value in hearing the views of those that might not align with our own.”

I agree, but if this is so, why did CBC staff and celebrity supporters so energetically oppose Sun News in their CRTC application process?

Interestingly, about half of CBC‘s budget is spent in Quebec. Radio Canada (as they refer to CBC in Quebec) is infiltrated by sovereigntists. So have fun watching more tax money head towards Quebec!

Ray McHugh, Meaford


+ 0
+ 0