July 04, 2015

NEW blacked out Ghomeshi documents, more CBC hypocrisy

Brian LilleyArchive

An Access to Information request has revealed new details about CBC's relationship with disgraced host Jian Ghomeshi and how the corporation planned to respond to the media storm.

I have a history of confronting the CBC -- and the CBC has a record of lashing out at me for asking too many questions, especially on the topic of sexual harassment.

This latest batch of documents shows the CBC refusing to answer questions it feels entitled to ask other organizations and businesses.

 


READ Brian Lilley's book CBC Exposed -- it's been called "the political book of the year.”

JOIN TheRebel.media for more fearless news and commentary you won’t find anywhere else.

VISIT our NEW group blog The Megaphone!
It’s your one-stop shop for rebellious commentary from independent and fearless readers and writers.


Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2015-07-04 23:25:43 -0400
Nice to see a conservative that recognizes that The Rebel censors people here and that The Rebel isn’t a precious commodity for free speech or a champion for free speech.

Thank you Joan. It seems like you are one of the few people here that can acknowledge the good, bad and the hypocrisy about The Rebel.
commented 2015-07-04 23:21:28 -0400
Joan claimed, "Listen up, folks, both cbc.ca and therebel.media censor for political views they oppose. "

Really Joan? How? In what manner does TheRebel.Media censor for political views?
commented 2015-07-04 22:47:25 -0400
Listen up, folks, both cbc.ca and therebel.media censor for political views they oppose.

The only media that didn’t do that was SunNewsNetwork, may they rest in peace.

Both cbc.ca and therebel.media are like Facebook. They underpay and overwork staff expected to respond to user flags of provocative posts. These frazzled but unqualified censors get pissed off with the extra work provocative comments cause and they censor the provocateur just to stop the nagging flags. They don’t take the time to read comments in context.

Some professional trolls understand this. They provoke with insults and even death threats until their target quotes them to refute the insults and threats. Then they flag the quote with a demand the media censor that user, maybe even punctuating the demand with a threat to bring in the law!! Well, what censor won’t remove a post that causes such offence?

The Muhammad cartoons caused that sort of offence. Media all over the world still won’t publish Muhammad cartoons.

Neither the cbc.ca or therebel.media will censor offensive posts that parrot their political bias. And therein lies the bias, of course. Just like how Saudi media will censor free speech by bloggers like Raif Badawi but won’t censor out beheadings, floggings, and stonings.
commented 2015-07-04 22:18:56 -0400
Jimmy, bla bla bla – have fun !!!
commented 2015-07-04 22:07:21 -0400
Peter,

I am sorry that we have different personalities and that I don’t post in a manner that you approve of. I am just curious – do you like The Daily Show with Jon Stewart?
commented 2015-07-04 20:27:16 -0400
Michael said: “Better the devil you know and can keep an eye on than one that is fully hidden. I have a hard time believing that I’m saying this, but there are ways that it’s good that we’re all paying for the CBC because it gives us the occasional look behind the curtain. Whether it’s worth a billion dollars is a separate question.” And therin is the conundrum given the “redacted” documents given up, or the out and out lies! What IS being taught in “Journalism School” does need to be examined. It has been taken over by the lefties as now is in progress in our public education systems!
commented 2015-07-04 20:11:09 -0400
There are benefits to the CBC being a public entity. Access to information doesn’t apply to the other members of the media consortium. Better the devil you know and can keep an eye on than one that is fully hidden. I have a hard time believing that I’m saying this, but there are ways that it’s good that we’re all paying for the CBC because it gives us the occasional look behind the curtain. Whether it’s worth a billion dollars is a separate question.

Another item I wonder about is why those who are in the top levels of the media/news game skew so far to the political left. There aren’t solid business reasons, as shown by the dominance of centrist Fox News in the US. (yes, their opinion shows skew to the right, but their hard news reporting also leads). How much loss of market share can groups like the NY Times and the Globe and Mail absorb before they put themselves out of business? Their ideology appears to me to be such that they would rather go out of business than to show some of the alternate views that the general public will take on any given subject. One of the key items involved in the professions that I’ve worked with is the ability to think like someone who does the job should think. Not necessarily in terms of ideology, but in terms of approach to an issue. First responders need good situational awareness and hazard identification, and snap prioritizing of what to do they they can’t turn off when they’re off duty. Hunters are better at spotting animals on the side of a road while driving because they’re more attuned to small movements at a distance. Engineers need to be able to absorb a lot of information quickly to focus on the job at hand, and then forget a lot of the details (while maintaining the key findings and methods) to make room for the new information on their next job. Is there something in journalistic training that promotes the view that there is only one valid way to look at a given issue?
commented 2015-07-04 19:33:39 -0400
Peter said: “Rick, have you noticed how Jimmy Da SIlva resorts to mockery when he has no valid reply to a person’s comment.” Yes. Opposing viewpoints are good, they lend to the discussion. Vitriol does not. I think most here would agree with me that other viewpoints can cause a “pause to consider”. A good trait for any meaningful discussion. There are some here that do exactly that. One can disagree or add to the thought.
commented 2015-07-04 19:10:21 -0400
Jimmy, it is not your reply as much as your attitude. You post you comments with an attitude of superiority and condescension. You do this all the time when you have no valid response to the person’s comment.
commented 2015-07-04 19:05:00 -0400
Peter,

I am sorry you don’t like my reply which addresses his comments about The Rebel and free speech.
commented 2015-07-04 19:03:30 -0400
Glenn,

I don’t feel privileged – I go to many websites daily for uncensored political discussion. The Rebel isn’t a precious commodity in this regard like Rick thinks it is. Some don’t even have commenting rules like The Rebel does.

I am sure if we were sent bills for all things that our taxes go to – people would complain about the things that our money pays for and the amount to those various things. So your point is moot. Especially if you get a bill for Pride and don’t support gay people. The bottom line is that our taxes go to things that we may or may not support and the CBC is one of those things.

Why were would banned specifically from the CBC and on their enemies list? Context is everything.
commented 2015-07-04 18:59:49 -0400
Rick, have you noticed how Jimmy Da SIlva resorts to mockery when he has no valid reply to a person’s comment.
commented 2015-07-04 18:52:36 -0400
Rick,

LOL. You really do make me laugh. The are countless websites and media sources that have completely uncensored political discussion. I have my own website that does the same thing. Do you really think The Rebel is the lone crusader here for free speech?

By the way, some people here have stated that their comments were deleted. So maybe The Rebel isn’t as free speech as you think it is.

Your theory is moronic, but feel free to ignore views that you don’t agree with.

“This site is a precious commodity for free speech”. This is hilarious, so thanks for that at the very least. Just so you know, there is a big huge internet world outside of The Rebel with millions of uncensored political discussions going on. Maybe you should expand your horizons beyond The Rebel and Sun News Network when it was alive.
commented 2015-07-04 18:26:47 -0400
To all. Seeing as one of our “trolls” seems to be launching personal attacks again, I re-post the following for your consideration. B.T.W. I have “flagged” that comment for civility. Fellow Bloggers. My thoughts.

Some of you may have encountered our resident lefty trolls, Terrry Rudden and Adam Da Silva. They usually make their presence known by their demeaning attitudes towards other commentators.

I have a theory as to why they are here. They complain about the site being “conservative” but still remain. Why? I believe it is because of the unprecedented freedom of speech this site offers compared to others. Try expressing different opinions or profanity on CBC or others and see what happens! Our trolls are taking advantage of this freedom to vilify others, and spew vitriolic hatred rather than address the news item to which the blog is attached.

Some others have suggested we ignore them. I am coming to believe this may be the solution. Remove the incentive. Because of this site’s seemingly dedication to free speech, I am not aware of anyone who has been banned. I do think one other troll which we do not seem to see as often (or ever) may have been warned about the vicious personal attacks and profanity used on others. With the incentive removed, this individual may have moved on.

Ignoring them will not initially stop the outrageous jabs, the snide smug jibes, the insulting demeanor displayed towards others. I would suggest if something is beyond the pale, not to respond but “flag the comment” for review by site administration based on the commenting rules easily found on the site. Either they respect others, or they become disinterested and go elsewhere to vent their hatred.

This site is a precious commodity for free speech. We cannot let the trolls destroy it as they would, crowing about their victory over our rights to speak freely!
commented 2015-07-04 18:12:14 -0400
Jimmy Da Silva…..I challenge you and ALL “friends of the CBC” to a meaningful public referendum on ACTUAL public support of that organization……send EVERY taxpayer a pro-rated bill that is as voluntary and optional as any cable TV subscription for the amount of funding allotted in the coming taxation year. With the understanding that any shortfall from discontinuing subscribers will subsequently be billed as a “surcharge” to the friends of the CBC ….and that there be a legislated requirement with penalties that the CBC not use any part of it’s funding to subsidize the surcharge……….:-)

Jimmy. I was on a CBC enemies list back in the days of pen and ink feedback…..I am banned from commentary on the CBC news site….that doesn’t matter….I have “sock puppets” (who have gotten so good at posting challenging comments I rarely have to advise them)….but their comments generally get censored.We have had the occasional satisfaction of squashing several “lead stories” and posting things that were so hum dinger that comments got closed altogether……….:-)

Jimmy….you should feel very privilidged that this site…unlike the CBC….does not ban you…..or censor your comments.

And I think that is a good thing,,,,if it weren’t for people like you …I don’t think I could come up with much to say…preaching to the choir gets boring quickly.
commented 2015-07-04 18:00:29 -0400
Deborah,

Sorry to wake you from your slumber – but the majority of Canadians support the CBC. This has already been confirmed repeatedly on The Rebel.

There are other conservative news sources in Canada that are sucking on Harper’s balls. The Toronto Sun being one. Are they not the media in addition to The National Post, which slants conservative? CTV, Global and other sources would love nothing more than the CBC to die – it means more eyeballs on their news and programming.

You are clearly not very intelligent and you don’t understand how the media industry works.
commented 2015-07-04 17:35:35 -0400
Jimmy (Duh) Silva – You are ignorant! Majority of Canadians do want the abolition of CBC! The problem is – CBC (your media) doesn’t report or poll Canadian’s opinions!! Rather, CBC censors Canadians who oppose those who speak up or out against CBC. For the Harper Gov’t to attempt deregulation or abolishment of the CBC at this time would (in the meantime) create more biases in the media against the Harper CPC Gov’t, while promoting the Liberal and/or NDP (flavor of the day) Party. Although Canadians are mis-trusting of CBC, CBC is pretty much all there is. CBC controls the media! CBC controls the CRTC! Everything must go through them!
commented 2015-07-04 16:12:09 -0400
Peter,

The Toronto Star LOVES me.
commented 2015-07-04 16:06:57 -0400
Dr. Jimmy. The Toronto Star called and said you are embarrassing. STFU
commented 2015-07-04 15:59:18 -0400
Peter,

And the fact that you say that as sarcasm as opposed to fact is why you fail.
commented 2015-07-04 15:53:43 -0400
Sure, Jimmy, sure. I bow to your almighty omniscience. You are just so damn smart. How could anyone keep up with your awesomeness.

If you did not grasp that as sarcasm, Jimmy, then . . .
commented 2015-07-04 15:50:16 -0400
Peter’s translation – I’ve got nothing beyond contradictions, hypocrisy and made up stuff.
commented 2015-07-04 15:35:03 -0400
Jimmy, it is obvious that anything I say you will not believe. Your mind is firmly clamped shut and you are not open to any real discussion, there really is no reason to continue this conversation.
commented 2015-07-04 15:05:32 -0400
Peter,

LOL. But apparently the majority of Canadians are already begging for Harper to defund the CBC, so wouldn’t he be giving them what they ALREADY STATED THAT THEY WANT?

Clearly you don’t want to admit that despite your position – the majority of Canadians do support the CBC. The tail waging the dog only applies if the majority of Canadians want the CBC gone and that isn’t the case at all. The majority feel as I do and that is why it would be political suicide for Harper.
commented 2015-07-04 14:52:24 -0400
The Communist Broadcasting Corporation needs to be cut loose from taxpayer funding. They should have to fend for themselves as every other organization. No doubt there are problems in the mother corp. LaCrois has no credibility, he of the attempted financial fraud he was caught at. Yet he is still there. CBC appears to be in decline. Symptomatic of this is the “eating of their own” as it were, in this case the (probably) illegitmate firing of Evan Soloman. Sad for an outfit that started with such high expectations.
commented 2015-07-04 14:27:47 -0400
Jimyy said, “But if we are to believe that this is true – why would it be political suicide for Harper?”

Jimmy, once again you display a lack of acumen. We have seen in many instances where the minority, sometimes a very small minority, can manipulate the political climate to their advantage. I think the metaphor is, “the tail waging the dog”.

A minority of people can cause enough disturbance that can cause Harper issues in getting re-elected. It all depends upon who they are. For example, the CBC itself is a main stream media able to reach the entire population of Canada. They already have a disproportional amount of influence over reaching the population even though the CBC is minority of people. And there are other groups that would throw in their influence, such as the organization called “The friends of the CBC”.

The tail can wag the dog.

So your argument, "You can’t have it both ways. Either the majority of Canadians support the CBC and it would be political suicide or the majority of Canadians don’t support the CBC and there would be just be a small liberal backlash. ", is invalid.
commented 2015-07-04 14:13:01 -0400
Donald,

Well that is a fallacy actually. I debate conservatives on the CBC all the time with the same shit that gets discussed here. They are not crying about being censored.
commented 2015-07-04 14:06:24 -0400
little jimmy is the typical leftard troll.. hoping that his stupidity is aggravating , when in fact, it is laughable… here is the difference little jimmy…your drivel doesnt get censored here.. censorship and the most licked comment is they way cbc does its opinion shaping for the mindless.. keep up the good work..
commented 2015-07-04 13:58:06 -0400
Peter,

But wait – I thought the majority of Canadians hated the CBC or so I have been told by people here that have no idea what they are talking about. But if we are to believe that this is true – why would it be political suicide for Harper? I mean sure there will be some liberal backlash, but apparently the majority of Canadians would support it and Harper would be the big hero for taking down the CBC.

You can’t have it both ways. Either the majority of Canadians support the CBC and it would be political suicide or the majority of Canadians don’t support the CBC and there would be just be a small liberal backlash.

Which one is it?
commented 2015-07-04 13:10:02 -0400
Jimmy, either you are intentionally being disingenuous of you truly have no political acumen.

Did you notice the screaming bloody murder the CBC and the CBC lovers did when Harper cut just a simple 300 million from 1.2 Billion to .9 Billion a couple of years ago? And that was just a small cut and they hollered and whined about that. They still are whining about it.

It would be political suicide if Harper cut the funding for the CBC altogether and the next government would just reinstate the funding again, so nothing would have been gained. Nothing would have been changed. As a matter of fairly certain speculation, the next government would likely increase the CBC funding after it repealed Harper’s decision to cute CBC’s funding and we, the tax payers, would lose even more.

Now I understand that you would love it if Harper did that and committed political suicide, so if you knew this would be the outcome, I can only call your comment disingenuous and quite devious (intentionally misleading).