The new 'CBC News Network', aka 'CNN'

Ms. Jennifer McGuire, fresh from her success in restructuring CBC Radio Two, has apparently moved on to tackle the stodgy, moribund CBC News Division, renamed the ‘CBC News Network’, or 'CNN' as it will hitherto be known. Here are her remarks concerning the recent changes that have taken place at CBC News, as submitted in Letters to the Editor of our national newspapers.

First, the National Post, in a letter published Friday, Oct. 30 2009:

Re: Thanks For Watching, And For Tweeting, Oct. 22.

We're grateful that your reporters have taken the time to weigh in with their views of recent changes at CBC News, including CBC News Network and The National. We knew going in that many in our audiences would have an opinion and be happy to share it. In fact, we celebrate this extraordinary engagement as proof that Canadians have a strong connection with and sense of ownership about CBC News.

We don't expect consensus on the colour of new graphics or whether anchor and chief correspondent Peter Mansbridge should be reissued a chair (the focus of quite a bit of commentary thus far) but are encouraged by the significant increase in viewership (double, in some cases) to many of the new programs. As we settle into our new forms, however, we can unequivocally say that we remain committed to authoritative and trustworthy public service journalism. And that we will continue to bring news that's relevant to Canadians to them in all the various ways they now demand.

Jennifer McGuire, general manager and editor-in-chief, CBC News, Toronto.

Next, from the Globe and Mail, Thursday, Oct. 29 2009:

We’re grateful your reporters have taken the time to weigh in on recent changes at CBC News, including CBC News Network and The National. We knew going in that many in our audiences would have an opinion and be happy to share it. In fact, we celebrate this extraordinary engagement as proof that Canadians have a strong connection with, and sense of ownership about, CBC News.

Change can be difficult. We don’t expect consensus on the colour of new graphics or whether Peter Mansbridge should be reissued a chair, but we are encouraged by the significant increase in viewership (double, in some cases) to many of the new programs. As we settle into our new forms, however, we can unequivocally say we remain committed to authoritative and trustworthy public service journalism.

Jennifer McGuire, general manager and editor-in-chief, CBC News, Toronto

I particularly enjoy the ability of some executives to use language in such a way that a public outcry of disbelief, shock and outrage can be made to sound like a happy occasion (‘we celebrate this extraordinary engagement as proof that Canadians have a strong connection with, and sense of ownership about, CBC News’)! Just as I celebrate my extraordinary opportunity to visit the dentist every six months, or to pay my taxes each year.

3 Days Later: Still no responses from the candidates in Carleton-Mississippi Mills

It has now been three days without receiving any responses from the candidates in the riding of Carleton-Mississippi Mills to my question concerning their policy on the CBC Radio Two programming changes. (For the record, I am only counting weekdays - I sent the original question on Tuesday, September 30, so three working days have elapsed without receiving a reply.)

I imagine a scene in one of the candidate's offices. Bob and Ted, two of the candidate's staff, are at their desks:

"Hey, Ted, have you answered that question yet from that guy, Wooten?"

"Lemme check. (Ted thumbs his Black furiously.) Woodhead? The guy that believes that flatulent Beavers are a major cause of global warming and wants to develop GMO Aspens with Simethicone in the bark to relieve the Beaver's excess gas? I forwarded that question to the Green Party - more their territory."

"No, not Woodhead. Wooten. It came last Tuesday."

"Let's see. (Ted continues to work his Black.) How about this one, from the Reverend Woodside, who claims that all the members of his congregation are "his children" and wants to be able to claim the child tax credit for all 352 of them. Is that it?"

"No, no! Wooten! W-O-O-T-E-N!"

"OK, here we go. Wooten. The guy who's complaining about the CBC Radio Two programming changes. Is that it?"

"Yeah, that's the one."

"What, he doesn't like Jian Ghomeshi?"

"No, no, that's CBC Radio One. He's talking about CBC Radio Two. Y'know, the one that plays Classical music. The dead white Europeans. The three B's. The music that shaped our culture."

"What, the Dead Kennedys? The Beastie Boys? The early Stones, Led Zep, Aerosmith? I listen to that stuff all the time." (Ted starts to jive in his chair, moving to an imaginary rhythm.)

"No, no! Classical Music! The compositions of Brahms, Beethoven, Bach! Mozart! Sibelius! He's complaining that the CBC has gone commercial, and taken away from Canadians the only nation-wide source of Classical music! He says that the CBC did this without consulting Canadians and, what's more, that Canadians are the owners of the CBC and should have a voice in the direction of the CBC!"

"Hah! What drugs is he on? The CBC is a Crown Corporation! As such, it's day-to-day operations are hands-off as far as Parliament and the Minister are concerned."

"Yes, but the government of the day has the responsibility to ensure that the taxpayer's dollars are being spent responsibly. That means providing some oversight over the Crown Corporation, to make sure they're not doing crazy things! To make sure that they live up to their mandate! To make sure they're serving a useful purpose, not just emulating popular culture! Right?"

"Ah, taxpayers, shmackpayers. What are they good for? Just vote for us and don't worry."

"Ted, how did you get this job again?"

"The candidate is my uncle. Remember?"

"Yeah, yeah, I remember."

A response from the CBC to my letter to Ms. Jennifer McGuire, Executive Director of Programming

Readers of this blog may recall that Ms. Jennifer McGuire, Executive Director of Programming at the CBC/Radio-Canada, was kind enough to reply to the letter that I sent to her on March 24. You may see the letter that I sent in my May 3 blog entry. Ms. McGuire sent me a reply on June 4 and I subsequently sent a second letter on June 29.

I received this letter this week. Sadly, it is merely a form letter. I was hoping for a further exchange of views with Ms. McGuire, but apparently it was not meant to be. The letter reads as follows:


August 15, 2007

Mr. J. Wooten

Dear Mr. Wooten,

Thank you for your letter of June 29, 2007 to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation regarding changes to CBC Radio 2.

We appreciate the time and effort you have taken to write and share your opinion with us. CBC welcomes all feedback about our programs; without it, we cannot remain sensitive to the needs and wants of our viewers and listeners. We have included your comments in our weekly Audience Reaction report, which is circulated weekly among all senior executives, producers and programmers at (CBC, including the President and CEO, Robert Rabinovitch.

Sincerely,

Hadley Keane
Communications Officer
CBC Audience Relations

I imagine Mr. Robert Rabinovitch is tired of hearing my opinions by now, but at least he has only a few more months to go before he is free of all this! We, on the other hand, must continue to endure the crapulent programming that now pervades CBC Radio Two.

And the results are in ...

The Bureau of Broadcast Measurement has just released their S2 2007 Top-line market share data covering the period April 16 - June 10 2007. You can find the report here. The report provides market share data, expressed as a percentage of total hours tuned to all radio, for the radio stations in major markets: Montreal, Quebec, Ottawa/Gatineau, Toronto, Hamilton, Winnipeg, Edmonton, Calgary and Vancouver. The data covers the period Monday to Sunday from 5:00 AM to 1:00 AM.

Now, this is not that useful to a member of the general public who is interested in the market share for a particular radio station in the evening, for example. However, this is the only report that is released to the public and so it will have to suffice. On the BBM web site it states that:

To become a full, voting member, you must be a radio or television broadcaster, an advertiser, advertising agency, or media buying house. Associate (non-voting) memberships are available to other interested parties, such as industry associations, consultants, government organizations, and U.S. broadcasters.

Each membership category warrants a different range of entitlements. Entitlements may include access to measured diary/meter data, software, data books, area/cell guides, population estimates, reach book, market reports, home market reports, specialty (sp) language reports, BBM newsletters, and a members-only Website.

I expect that a full member is entitled to market share data, by time period, for each radio station in each major market, thus allowing a radio station executive to determine, for example, whether his or her programming decisons (such as the recent changes to the CBC Radio Two evening schedule) have resulted in an increase or decrease in market share.

I've compared the market share data for the CBC Radio Two stations in the markets covered by this survey for S2 2007 with the same period last year (S2 2006) and found the following changes in market share:

Ottawa: down 0.6% (from a 5.2% market share to a 4.6% market share)
Toronto: down 0.6%
Montreal: down 0.4%
Winnipeg: up 0.6%
Calgary: down 1.4%
Edmonton: up 2.8%
Vancouver: up 0.6%

As I mention above, since this data covers the entire period from 5:00 AM to 1:00 AM one can not tell whether the new CBC Radio Two evening schedule is a resounding success or a dismal failure. Personally, I suspect the latter judging from the comments that I have seen on the "Petition to Restore CBC Radio Two", the "Petition to Return Classical Music to CBC Radio Two" and in the comments left on the Inside the CBC blog.

CBC Radio management has commented on the most recent market share results here, but their transparency, as usual, leaves much to be desired. I encourage CBC Radio management to publicize the market share data for the CBC Radio Two stations during the 6:00 PM to 8:00 PM, 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM and 10:00 PM to midnight time slots. If they are confident in the success of their new evening programming then they should share this market data with the public!

A reply to Ms. Jennifer McGuire's letter of June 4 2007

Ms. Jennifer McGuire, Executive Director of Programming at CBC Radio, had sent me a letter on June 4, 2007 in reply to my letter of March 24 (see my blog entry from May 3 entitled "Moving up the CBC hierarchy" for the original March 24 letter).

This is the letter that I mailed earlier today in response to Ms. Jennifer McGuire's reply:

June 29, 2007

Jennifer McGuire
CBC
P.O. Box 500 Station A
Toronto, ON
M5W 1E6

Dear Ms. McGuire,

Thank you for your letter of June 4, 2007. I appreciate the fact that you took the time to consider my letter and respond.

I have seen many references to the arts and culture survey that you mention. If, as you suggest, the results of this survey support the decision to revamp the programming on CBC Radio Two then I encourage you to make this survey available to the CBC Radio audience by posting it (or a summary of its conclusions) on the CBC Radio web site. I believe CBC Radio management should have nothing to fear from making this information available to Canadians, assuming that the results of the study support these decisions.

You also mention that CBC Radio Two listeners were consulted and that "in excess of two thousand people were involved". You also state that the results of this research indicated that "many Canadians did not find the programming on our radio services relevant to them and their experiences". This brings to mind the question: did the two thousand individuals consulted identify themselves as CBC Radio Two listeners? If so, then I would have expected them to find the CBC Radio Two services highly relevant to them since they are already listeners. If the survey sample was not restricted to CBC Radio Two listeners only, and was intended to represent the general Canadian population, then how many of these survey respondents do you believe will become CBC Radio Two listeners with the new programming?

I also contend that a survey with such a limited sample size should only have been the first step in a program of public consultation. While the survey may have identified some necessary changes, I suggest that the next step should have been to make these proposed changes known to the CBC Radio Two audience well in advance of their implementation and to allow the CBC Radio Two audience time to comment on these changes in a public forum, such as the CBC Radio Two web site. This would have allowed CBC Radio management to determine, based on the feedback received, how much of the existing audience would be retained after the new programming was launched. A subsequent step should have been to test market the new programming in some sample markets to determine how many new listeners would be attracted to the new programming. If you are planning any further changes to the daytime programming I suggest that you consider this course of action.

I agree that the mandate of CBC Radio should be to deliver programming that is meaningful to Canadians. What, however, is programming that is "meaningful to Canadians"? Should it attempt to reflect every region, every ethnic group, every musical genre that may be performed in Canada? If you attempt this then it is my opinion that the result will be a musical melange that will be of interest to only a very few. The programming will become so fragmented and unpredictable that you will lose your audience to stations where the programming is more consistent. If you succeed in broadening the scope of the programming, only to reduce the size of your audience, have you truly succeeded in making CBC Radio more relevant to Canadians?

Should the programming attempt to reflect popular culture? I suggest that popular culture is well represented by commercial radio stations and that CBC Radio does not need to attempt to replicate the genres available on commercial radio.

What, then, is the role of the public broadcaster? I suggest that the public broadcaster should attempt to perform one function and to perform it very well: that function being to expose Canadians to music that they can not find on other radio stations and that broadens their cultural horizons. Furthermore, the programming should be of such consistent quality and interest to the audience that it attracts and retains an audience. A public broadcaster that is broadcasting a varied and diverse program but has no audience would not be fulfilling its mandate. I believe CBC Radio Two previously fulfilled its mandate very well, but does not do so now.

Did the previous programming offer Canadians music that they could not find on other radio stations? Yes, I believe it did. There are very few radio stations broadcasting classical music and original works from Canadian composers in the evenings. Will young people discover and be attracted to classical music without CBC Radio Two's consistent broadcasts of classical music in the evenings? Some may, but their opportunities to discover classical music have been greatly diminished. Will young people discover CBC Radio Two's new programming and become regular listeners, thus allowing you to grow the CBC Radio Two audience as you have stated is your goal? I contend that the programming is too inconsistent to attract young people as a regular audience, given the many other source of music available to them.

You also state that the previous programming was "seen as an elite service marked by 'high culture' music". I believe this is precisely the point - the role of the public broadcaster should be to contribute to Canadian culture in areas that the private sector finds unprofitable. Just as the Canadian cultural landscape is enhanced by the existence of the National Arts Centre, the National Gallery of Canada, the Museum of Civilization and the public library system (to name some of the institutions in Ottawa), so too did CBC Radio Two contribute to Canadian culture. Should the National Gallery cancel the Renoir exhibit because it is elitist? Should the National Arts Centre Orchestra be disbanded because it performs 'high culture' music? Should all books written before the 20th century be removed from the public libraries because they are difficult to read? No, of course no one would propose any of these actions and I suggest that reducing the classical music content of the CBC Radio Two evening schedule because it is perceived by some as being 'elitist' is similarly unjustifiable.

What criteria will CBC Radio management use to measure the success of this new programming?. Will it be measured solely by market share? By audience feedback? Do you plan to survey various regions and ethnic groups to determine if you have broadened your audience, albeit at the expense of total listeners? I believe many listeners are interested in questions such as these and encourage you to make this information available in a public forum, such as the CBC Radio Two web site. I believe Canadians, as shareholders in the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, are entitled to this information.

Sincerely,

James Wooten

A reply from Ms. Jennifer McGuire, Executive Director of Programming

I recently received the following reply to my letter to Ms. Jennifer McGuire, Executive Director of Programming at CBC Radio, concerning the recent changes to the CBC Radio Two evening programming. You can see my original letter in my May 3 blog entry entitled "Moving up the CBC Radio Hierarchy". I'll save my response for later in the week:



Since the above image is not likely to be readable by most readers (except those with exceptional eyesight), I've scanned the letter using the OCR option on my scanner. Here is the text, as scanned:

Canadian Broadcasting
Corporation
Société Radio-Canada

CBC Radio-Canada

June 4, 2007

James Wooten

Dear Mr. Wooten,

Thank you for your letter of March 24, 2007 to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation regarding the first phase of the refocusing of CBC’s two radio services. I hope some of the information below is helpful.

I would like to begin by clarifying a few points that you present in your letter. First, it is not feasible for CBC to create another national radio network. We have neither the financial nor human resources to support a new network and, furthermore, the radio spectrum is completely occupied in most major North American cities. No frequencies are available.

Secondly, CBC did consult with Radio 2 listeners through a series of face-to-face meetings, and many telephone conversations, in addition to our conferences with staff and arts stakeholders across the country. In excess of two thousand people were involved. I’m sure you can appreciate that, with millions of listeners, we would need to rely on a sampling of feedback.

What we learned from our research into CRC’s reporting of arts and culture in Canada is that many Canadians did not find the programming on our radio services relevant to them and their experiences. CBC Radio 2 had not undergone any extensive changes since the service was introduced in the 1 970s. But Canadian society changed significantly in that time. We have an obligation to all of those who pay for this service to deliver programming that is meaningful to them. Each of the new programs is designed to appeal to a broader range of Canadians.

I would also argue that CBC Radio 2 continues to present an alternative to the commercial music and an avenue to introduce younger listeners to not only classical and serious music, but to other genres and artist not recognized by private radio networks. What better platform for the dissemination of new music in Canada than CBC Radio?

Radio 2 has in the past been seen as an elite service marked by "high culture" music. Our role as a public broadcaster is to program to as many Canadians as possible while remaining within our mandate. Programming for a minority of Canadians simply doesn’t meet our mandate. Much of the classical music that listeners hear now will remain on the service. But we are broadening the scope of music we offer and are satisfied that we have struck the right balance.

That said, I do thank you for making aware of your concerns. CBC welcomes all audience feedback about our programs. Your comments have been circulated among my colleagues in CBC Radio.


Sincerely,


Jennifer McGuire
Executive Director of Programming