I started this thread in Post 205 and continue here with a sound agrument for why the CBC should have run the ads slamming our next Prime Minister, Michael Ignatieff. In truth, there are a number of reasons they should have, the foremost being they need the money. It goes deeper than mere money. Over the air media companies seem to forget that the public airwaves are for the public. All of the public.
Newspapers are different. Ditto the 'net. The air, is the air.
Glen McGregor quoted a Conservative insider, off the record, in the Ottawa Citizen Thursday as stating that "...the party thought it was odd CBC would turn down its advertising dollars at a time when the network was struggling under financial pressures. CBC has had to reduce staff and programming as ad revenues have plunged..."
Any port in a storm, folks, any port.
I am anything but pro Conservative and I sure did not think those adverts were kosher but, hello, note to the CBC: y'all need the money.
Deeper it goes, public airwaves and all that, and it is not just mainstream political thought that is rejected by the CBC [and other over the air broadcasters]. Adbusters, a Vancouver-based magazine, has been fighting a long-running legal battle to force media organizations to sell them spots for thing like "Buy Nothing Day".
I personally think that there should be no limits on what political parties and political advocacy groups like the one fronted by Adbusters, can spend, in and out of writ periods.
Plus, to reiterate, you-guys-say-you-are-broke.
WFDS
CBis publically funded - they can't show ONE party's ads and none for others.
ReplyDeleteOnly in election time, when ALL parties have ads
I like that CBC have principles.
It is because there is a time to run and a time not to..the time is the election, CBC says.It is an ongoing custom.
ReplyDelete