Tom Mulcair promises to reverse funding cuts to CBC

Source: cbc.ca

The NDP is promising to restore $115 million to the CBC.

NDP Leader Tom Mulcair made the election commitment in Montreal on Thursday.

Mulcair said the public broadcaster has been cut by both Liberal and Conservative governments and that an NDP government would commit to restoring the recent cuts made by the Conservatives in the 2012 budget.

That means increasing current funding to CBC/Radio-Canada by $115 million over three fiscal years in hopes it will allow the public broadcaster to evolve in a changing media landscape, Mulcair said.

Mulcair said both the French and English arms of the CBC had a big influence on his life and he grew up watching and listening to both.

“CBC has been my window to this great country,” he said.

In April of last year, the CBC announced it would cut 657 jobs over two years to allow the organization deal with a $130-million budget shortfall. While cuts in the federal budget have affected the corporation’s budget, losing the rights to broadcast NHL hockey to Rogers has also had a serious impact on the bottom line.

read entire story here

Posted in |

CBC to nix paid appearances by on-air journalists

Source: metronews.ca

The CBC announced Thursday it will no longer allow its on-air journalists to make paid appearances, a little over a week after senior business correspondent Amanda Lang publicly faced allegations about potential conflicts of interest for giving paid speeches.

CBC News and Centres editor-in-chief and general manager Jennifer McGuire told Torstar News Service the discussion around paid appearances had been ongoing, but that “the events of the last little while” impacted that discussion.

“The paid activity, just by virtue of being paid, was creating challenges in terms of our reputation,” she said. “So the idea was to just stop that from being the conversation and push our journalistic policies even further. It was creating a perception that we don’t think is right for our brand.”

 

read entire story here

Posted in |

Save the CBC, Stop the TPP: A Call to Action in 2015

By Martin O’Hanlon

President, CWA/SCA Canada

Making New Year’s predictions is risky business.

Last January, I predicted the worst would be over for newspapers in 2014 and things would start to improve.

Well, I may have been half right.

The last year, like the last decade, was not kind to the media industry. We saw more deep and damaging cuts at a number of employers, with the CBC and Halifax Chronicle Herald hardest hit.

In Halifax, a proud and vibrant newsroom was stunned and battered by deep cuts that came with no warning, empathy or delicacy.

At the CBC, we are losing hundreds of colleagues and unless we get a government that will provide adequate funding, the survival of our public broadcaster is in doubt.

As we begin 2015, I remain confident that things will improve, but we can’t just sit back and hope. We must stand up for jobs and journalism, and we must build a movement for social and economic justice. After all, if we don’t, who will?

Each of us has a part to play and once again, I am asking every member of CWA Canada to do something – even just one small thing – to help as we launch two new campaigns.

The first, the “Save the CBC” campaign, is already gearing up under the direction of our biggest local, the Canadian Media Guild.

The goal is to make quality public broadcasting a ballot box issue in this year’s federal election.

For years now, the CBC has been starved of the funds it needs to fulfill its federally legislated mandate.

The Harper Conservatives, while scared to kill the CBC outright, have not been shy about showing their disdain for public broadcasting. Unless they change their position, or unless we have a new government committed to public broadcasting, the CBC will fade away.

That unthinkable prospect would be a huge blow to Canadian culture and it would mean the loss of CBC News, with far fewer journalists to keep an eye on government, politicians and corporate power brokers.

That’s bad for society and democracy and we can’t let it happen.

So what can we do?

Over the coming weeks and months, we will use email, Twitter, Facebook and workplace posters to let you know how you can help.

It could be:

•    Attending a Save the CBC rally

•    Signing an online petition

•    Joining our Facebook page

•    Retweeting Twitter posts

•    Telling your local MP that the CBC matters to you

Our second campaign is to stop Canada from signing the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a secretive “trade” deal being negotiated behind closed doors.

The TPP isn’t really a trade agreement at all – it’s a cozy arrangement that would give corporations unprecedented new international powers and it’s being negotiated with plenty of input from corporations and almost no involvement from elected officials, never mind labour leaders or environmental experts.

The TPP would have a major impact on Canada, yet almost no one is talking about it. We must change that.

Under the TPP:

·       Foreign corporations would be able to challenge Canadian laws (environment, safety, etc.) bypassing Canadian courts and going directly to closed-door international tribunals that could override Canadian sovereignty.

·       Canada would lose thousands more jobs as companies move production overseas, particularly to Vietnam where garment workers earn just 50 cents an hour.

With both the CBC and TPP campaigns, we have to build a movement, working with other progressives, including community organizations, social groups, student activists, environmentalists, religious leaders – anyone with whom we can find a common interest.

Again, over the coming months, we will use email and social media to let you know how you can help.

One person and one act at a time, working together, we can make a difference.

Let’s each do our part in 2015 to protect quality jobs, defend quality journalism – and make Canada a better place.

LUNZER: WHAT’S IN A NAME? WHY IT’S PAST TIME FOR ‘NEWSGUILD’

December 23, 2014
In 1995, when only 14 percent of Americans had internet access, I purchased the web domain name “NewsGuild.org.”

I was convinced that local Guild leaders would vote to drop “paper” from our name at our next meeting. I was wrong. Delegates had strong and passionate feelings about “newspapers,” almost as if bracing against the tidal wave of change headed toward their industry and careers.

Twenty years later, it is past time. It is inevitable. We are media. We are content producers. Ink may be in our blood but it is no longer essential to our survival. That is why a resolution to change our name to “NewsGuild” will be offered at our sector conference in January. Based on reactions at regional conferences this fall, I expect it to pass.

We are rightfully proud to be long associated with newspapers and their investments in and commitments to quality journalism. Yes, hedge funds and other distant owners have hurt those investments and commitments, but it is still true that most news stories and investigative journalism originate with newspapers.

Most stories—but not all—as this year’s Heywood Broun awards illustrate. The top Broun award was shared by the online Center for Public Integrity and ABC News for a phenomenal joint investigation into a coal industry conspiracy to deprive sick miners of medical benefits.

ABC’s Brian Ross accepted the award saying how honored he and the producing team were to receive the award from The Newspaper Guild — even though “we don’t think of ourselves as newspaper people.”

But “In this day and age in journalism, we’re all really one,” he added, all of us sharing the latest technology “to tell important and big stories.”

Members of the Guild’s Executive Council were struck by Ross’ words. They may have never heard anyone say that our name limited journalists from identifying with the Guild.

Our goal isn’t to preserve print — as hard as it is for many baby boomers to imagine a day starting without coffee and the morning paper, emphasis on paper.                     Our mission is to preserve quality journalism and good jobs. On the best of days, this is a challenge. It is even more difficult if we are limited by our name.

Our new name will continue to be linked, proudly, with the Communications Workers of America. CWA is a good case study for us. Our parent union began as the National Federation of Telephone Workers but reorganized in 1947 as the Communications Workers. The name didn’t limit CWA to telephone and telecommunication work. Instead, a forward-thinking organization was born that 50 years later was a natural fit for newspaper and broadcast workers, interpreters and all kinds of customer service representatives.

As the fight for a reliable business model continues for news organizations, the upheaval and uncertainty for workers brings evermore urgency to our work. It’s critical that journalists and other media workers looking for help don’t come across “The Newspaper Guild” and be discouraged by our name. We believe “NewsGuild-CWA” will make a difference.

Unfortunately, journalists are far from the only newspaper workers being hurt as technology forever changes, or kills, jobs. A brazen misassumption in the early years of the internet was that the web would have little effect on newspaper advertising.

No one predicted Craigslist, let along Google, Facebook, and the myriad other high-tech means of separating revenue from content. Google is particularly infuriating to me, so far removed from its “Don’t Be Evil” beginnings. Today, it is a multi-billionaire parasite, using its wealth and power to gain more wealth and power while fighting against compensating the content creators they exploit.

“Tell us to stop searching your sites,” they tell news organizations that complain. I think it’s time for publishers to call their bluff. Some in the media have fantasized about a separate search engine or portal, where visitors would either pay for content up front or advertising revenue would be returned to the content creators. I’m not sure why no one is seriously talking about this yet. Like our name change, it’s past time.

The irony is that even Google needs us to succeed in our fight to save paid journalists and journalism. Well researched, accurately reported, reliable information is the common denominator, whether we’re talking about a search engine’s profits or our democracy’s survival.

NewsGuild-CWA plans to be part of those conversations for many years to come.

Black Press purchases Island newspapers in deal with Glacier Media

Source: timescolonist.com

Glacier Media Inc. has sold its Vancouver Island Newspaper Group to Victoria-based Black Press.

Black Press takes operational control of that group on March 2. That includes Cowichan Valley Citizen, Nanaimo Daily News and Alberni Valley Times.

The sale does not include the Times Colonist.

read the entire story here

A Plan to Mend Our Stricken CBC

New governance is the best Rx, but there’s more to do as listeners and viewers.

Source: By Nick Fillmore, 11 Dec 2014, TheTyee.ca

The CBC, and particularly CBC Radio, is easily Canada’s most important cultural and public interest institution. I say this not so much as someone who worked at the Corporation during the glory days of the 1970s and ’80s but, like so many other people, as a kid who was brought up in a home that was always watching and listening to the CBC.

Residing in a small village in Nova Scotia, we greatly appreciated the voices and images, ranging from Clive Gilmore’s 40-year run of Gilmour’s Albums on radio to the hard-nosed journalism of Norman DePoe on TV.

But after decades of serving and educating Canadians, Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s vicious cuts have brought the organization to its knees.

Can the CBC be saved and restored? Probably. But it will take significant time and good luck, as well as some heavy duty political lobbying. CBC supporters — including those who have fallen by the wayside during the destructive Harper years — will need to unite behind some common goals and pressure the two Opposition leaders to commit themselves to restoring the public broadcaster to its proper role in the country.

There has been much discussion about the kind of content the CBC should carry in the future. I believe that radio services should be more or less similar to what it was like 10 or 20 years ago. TV, however, should be changed dramatically. Instead of copying private broadcasters such as CTV, CBC TV should focus more than it currently does on the cultural, public interest, and the social needs of Canadians. To start, get the disgraceful Dragons’ Den, which humiliates people, off the air.

The Conservatives claim they cut CBC funding because its ratings in most service areas do not match those of private broadcasters. But given the way they spends millions of dollars on highly questionable activities, such as advertising and projects in the ridings of Conservative MPs, I believe their opposition to the CBC is more an ideological one. They dislike any programming that questions their policies or programs.

Audience ratings, which would not match private Canadian network ratings, should not be a major factor when determining the level of CBC funding. But more important for now, with an election coming in less than a year, we have to find out what the NDP and the Liberals would do with the CBC if elected. Because rebuilding the Mother Corp. will require a lot of work.

Change from within

Internally, there would be a number of to-do items. First, a new government would have to get rid of the imbalance of Tory boosters on the CBC board of directors — 10 of 12 have donated to the Conservative Party. And in his new book, Here Was Radio-Canada, Alain Saulnier, who was head of French language news at Radio Canada for many years, documents several occasions when board chair Herbert Lacroix pushed hard to make CBC journalism favourable to the government.

The government would need to create a new process for selecting CBC board members so that future governments will not be able to influence the body for its own gain. Such a model could have Members of Parliament appoint half the board members while the other half would be appointed, one each, by leading groups from the cultural and private sectors. Once in place, a new board would return the CBC to its rightful role of public service, not chasing ratings.

A new government would need to find people who know how to return the CBC to its rightful role of serving the public interest. I’m thinking of someone like Peter Herrndorf, the best boss the CBC never had. Herrndorf, a long-time CBC executive, was denied the opportunity to run the Corporation but instead did a marvellous job first heading up TV Ontario and then revitalizing the National Arts Centre. This could be accomplished within a couple of years.

Then they would have to see whether Heather Conway, who has been executive vice-president of English services for 14 months, can get it right with the wind blowing in a different direction. Hopefully, even though she has no experience in truly public interest broadcasting — she is a former marketing executive — she would possess the skills and instincts to fit into a new mold.

Once the CBC is in competent hands, Lacroix’s five-year plan to expand service on the Internet will have to be evaluated. The day after Lacroix announced the new plan — along with dropping a few hundred more job cuts on the CBC — the Friends of Canadian Broadcasting demanded his resignation. “CBC’s plan to privilege digital and mobile delivery over its radio and television broadcast platforms is a retreat driven by the federal government’s deep budget cuts that will leave the national public broadcaster smaller and weaker,” said the Friends.

In view of the fact that many young people have turned away from radio and TV, the Corporation does have to change. But I’m not convinced that Lacroix’s plan is best.

NDP, Libs must provide specifics

Now, the external politics: Both the NDP and Liberals must be pushed to spell out their specificplans for the CBC.

The NDP has made its position somewhat clear. In April, responding to the Conservatives’ $130-million budget cut to the CBC, NDP leader Thomas Mulcair said in an email: “I assure you that an NDP-led government will support the CBC with stable and secure funding. We believe in CBC’s unifying role in a country as vast as Canada; especially in rural areas and minority-language communities.” The party circulated a petition opposing the CBC cuts. All this is pretty good, but too general.

What of the Liberals? Asked about the future of the CBC in an interview on Q in October, leader Trudeau said: “Where do we continue to fund it and how do we continue to fund it? All I know is the funding has to be substantial and significant… How much and exactly how depends on how we create a vision that is relevant for the 21st century.” It was a typical Trudeau sit-on-the-fence moment. Because he is ahead in the polls, he plays it safe.

To make sure that both leaders have firm and detailed plans for the CBC, we in English-speaking Canada must put on a campaign that matches what is happening in Quebec, where 20,000 people marched in support of Radio-Canada. The Friends of Canadian Broadcasting launched its campaign and should be joined by many other groups, such as the Council of Canadians, LeadNow, OpenMedia, the Canadian Media Guild, the Canadian Labour Congress, the Ontario Federation of Labour and others.

Five questions to ask

Mulcair and Trudeau need to be specific in answering some key questions, but Trudeau has to be pressed the hardest. Mulcair and the NDP have historically expressed their unwavering support for cultural institutions such as the CBC. The Liberals, not so much. Moreover, Justin’s overall performance since becoming Liberal leader shows he is not a small-l liberal like his father, and he is leading the party during highly conservative times. Most important, Trudeau has a much better chance of becoming prime minister than Mulcair. We can’t assume he would funnel more money to the CBC.

Here are five important questions and the kind of answers we should be looking for:

If they plan to change how the CBC is funded, what will that method be?

The right answer: Folks such as Barry Kiefl say the CBC would be better off if funded by an annual licence fee or a dedicated communications tax.

If they continue the current system, what level of funding will they provide? 

The right answer: About $1.6 billion per year, the amount proposed by the Canadian Media Guild, which would be a 50 per cent increase in funding.

Will they provide funding through automatically repeated five-year terms with no option for cuts? 

The right answer: Yes.

Will they change the current system under which the government directly appoints all board of directors?

The right answer: Yes. The government will consult with other parties in the House of Commons to appoint half of the members of the board. The other half will be named, one each, by leading groups from the cultural and private sectors.

Will they repeal Division 17 of Bill C-60, which went before the House and allows the government to be present at the bargaining table when CBC/Radio-Canada and its employees’ unions are discussing what constitutes news, etc.?

The right answer: Yes.

Many thousands of us who love the CBC — and love to hate some parts of it — spend far too much time discussing its future and not doing enough to help save it. But now, with the election only a few months away, we can do something constructive. We can, as members of public interest groups and NGOs, such as the ones listed above, contact our groups and tell them we want to be involved in helping to save the public broadcaster. Offer to get directly involved and see if you can help build a coalition of groups to save the Mother Corp.

Posted in |

Newsosaur: How Newspapers Lost the Millennials

American publishers and editors have only themselves to blame for failing to connect with the millennial generation that they—and most of their advertisers—covet the most.

The inability of newspapers to resonate with digital natives has left them with a daunting demographic challenge. Two-thirds of the audience at the typical newspaper is composed of people over the age of 55, according to Greg Harmon of Borrell Associates. “The newspaper audience ages another year every year,” he adds. “Everyone’s hair ought to be on fire.”

As the newspaper audience grays, the readers that newspapers and most of their advertisers would like to have are, instead, busily racking up page views at places like BuzzFeed, Circa, Mic, Upworthy, Vice, Vocative and Vox.

To delve into the demographic disparity, I pulled the audience data on mic.com, which comScore calls the favorite news destination for individuals between the ages of 18 and 34. Although many publishers and editors never may have heard of Mic, comScore reports that it is visited by a thumping 60 percent of millennials.

To make things interesting, I compared Mic’s audience with the aggregate data for the 28 geographically dispersed markets served by McClatchy Co., the largest newspaper company furnishing user data to quantcast.com, which requires publishers to opt in to its data service.

Quantcast indexes audiences against the national population to make it possible to compare the demographics of one website against another. This means a site whose audience perfectly mirrors the national age distribution would index at 100. Now, here’s how Mic compares with McClatchy, according to Quantcast’s data:

At Mic, users from 18 to 24 index at 156, meaning that the site has 1.5 times more readers in this age group than the national average. The index climbs to 171 for the 25-34 crowd.

The story is quite the opposite at McClatchy, where the under-34 age groups come in at less than 100 but where the incidence of older readers is above the norm, indexing at 108 for 35-44, 117 for 45-54, 126 for 55-64 and 125 for 65-plus.

Assuming McClatchy is representative of the industry—and I see no reason why it wouldn’t be— the big question is how so many highly intelligent and highly motivated newspaper executives failed to connect with this massive and influential market.

Here’s a not-so-subtle clue: In a recent study, researchers at the University of Missouri reported that only 29 percent of newspaper publishers conducted focus groups prior to putting paywalls around the digital products that most profess to be the future of their franchises.

Instead of talking to with their intended consumers, fully 85 percent of respondents to the survey said they asked other publishers what they thought about erecting barriers around the content that they had been freely providing for the better part of two decades.

While paywalls boosted revenues at most newspapers because they were accompanied by stiff increases in print subscription rates, the tactic gave the growing population of digital natives—and non-readers of every other age—the best reason yet for not engaging with newspapers.

Of course, newspapers were losing millennials well before they started feverishly erecting paywalls in the last few years. But what if publishers and editors had begun studying the needs and attitudes of the emerging generation from the early days of the millenium? Could the outcomes have been more positive?

In the interests of tuning into the thinking of those elusive 20-and 30-somethings, a newspaper client recently brought a panel of them to a strategy session. Here is what we learned:

  • The millenials said the only media that matter to them are the social media, where they get current news about their friends, as well as cues to other interesting or relevant content.
  • They put a great deal of trust in recommendations from their friends but are not motivated by loyalty to media brands.
  • They will click on whatever content interests or amuses them, and they make no distinction among news, entertainment and advertising.
  • They prefer graphic content—images, videos, GIFs, infographics, etc.—over text.
  • They will buy a book, vinyl record or other physical artifact that they view as a collectible, but see no value in paying for access to ephemeral headlines that are freely available everywhere.
  • They are turned off by the dispassionate voice that characterizes conventional media, preferring treatments that evoke an emotional response.
  • They are smart, engaged and want juicy articles that take stands on important topics.
  • They will exercise the full power of choice made possible by their always-on mobile devices.
  • They are decisive. If they don’t like the content they are getting, they will make their own.

 

 

Given the above, it is easy to see that publishers and editors have a higher regard for their products than the next-gen consumers they need to attract. Now, the only question remaining is whether they have the gumption—and time—to turn things around.

Alan D. Mutter is a former newspaper editor and Silicon Valley CEO who today consults with media companies on technology and technology companies on the media. He blogs at Reflections of Newsosaur (newsosaur.blogspot.com).

– See more at: http://www.editorandpublisher.com/TopStories/Columns/Newsosaur–How-Newspapers-Lost-the-Millennials#sthash.uEbSPKlg.dpuf

Rally to support Cowichan strikers 

Source:mediaunion.ca

DEC 5, 2014
On Monday, December 8th, at 2pm – BC Fed President, Irene Lanzinger and Secretary Treasurer, Aaron Ekman will be joining the picket line in support of our strike at the Cowichan News Leader Pictorial.

The main issue is the employer’s insistence on a two tier wage system.We are asking our members and other locals to come and support our members behind the line.
The address is#2-5380 Trans Canada Hwy, DuncanWe look forward to your support! See you there!

News Leader Pictorial staff on strike in Duncan

Source: cowichanvalleycitizen.com

Twelve employees at the Cowichan News Leader Pictorial newspaper in Duncan took to the picket lines on Monday in a dispute over proposed changes to their pay structure.

The strike is about blocking the implementation of a two-tier wage system by management, said Unifor Local 2000 representative Peter McQuade.

Right now, employees’ wages increase over time through a classification system. Management is trying to eliminate the top wage classifications for any new employees coming in, McQuade said.

Employees voted 100 per cent in favour of strike action.

McQuade said it was possible the paper would not be able to put out an edition for Wednesday. He had no indication when the strike might be over.

Calls to the News Leader Pictorial’s editor and publisher were not returned Monday morning.

– See more at: http://www.cowichanvalleycitizen.com/news/news-leader-pictorial-staff-on-strike-in-duncan-1.1632965#sthash.QdORmcda.dpuf