Tuesday, September 06, 2005
CBC 59: I seem to have triggered something
British journalist, academic and blogger, Michael Bywater, the man who sent me a "rocket" (to use the old journalism term from the last century) about my post on The Observer column on the lockout, has now blogged his own take on the matter in a post called, Dirty Trench-coat, Burning sense of public duty?
An interesting read. Not sure if all of it travels across the North Atlantic. My parents were both British so I get most of it ;-).
Bywater interprets former Guardian editor Peter Preston's response to my blog by saying the former Guardian editor:
Now I am not sure how the Brits do it with essential services, but let's say for a moment that journalism was declared an essential service. That means here any disputes would often be settled by arbitration or binding arbitration.
Arbitration might have defeated the Senior Management Committee's demand for total capitulation on casualization (Then again, maybe not, the history of the last few years in this country shows the provincial governments have often balked at arbitration, because it interferes with their plans to cut budgets,wages and benefits.)
On my first journalism job, many years ago, when I was the police reporter for The Sudbury Star, the local police association was in very tough negotiations with the local Police Commission and things weren't going well at all. In those days, even on a cheapskate Thomson paper, part of the police reporter's job description was to hang out at the cop shop (It doesn't happen any more, consultants would call it "waste" and "poor productivity." But if I hadn't hung around the cop shop I wouldn't have gotten half the stories I did.)
I talked to cops I respected (the good, hard working honest, dedicated cops) who were agonizing over working to rule and even, as one said "God forbid," withdrawing services.
I remember talking to a detective in his prowl car as he talked as much to himself as to me (off the record) about what he would do if the worst came to the worst.
As it turned out, fate intervened, and Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau brought in wage and price controls. That meant how much money the cops were going to get was no longer a factor. The Police Association head, a smart, fair and overworked uniformed patrol constable, was able to get an agreement with the help of (if I remember correctly) a mediator.
I will make one point here. I called for a 120-day truce in my post Fort Confusion.
Bywater also says:
Most of my colleagues, I believe, follow that higher purpose. So do, I know for a fact (I have read all of Tony Burman's memos on Inews) do most of our middle managers. It is the Senior Management Committee, whom I would argue, are part of the First Estate, which Bywater calls "Monarch and Parliament" and what we in Canada used to call Mandarins, who have no higher purpose beyond themselves and their own careers.
I posted my call for the 120-day truce two days before The Observer published. That call for the truce, if I do say so myself, followed that "higher purpose."
When the fire fighters in Britain went on strike, they did respond to major fires. With the CBC it is not a case of firefighters leaving a picket line, walking a few metres and jumping on a pumper or an aerial (ladder truck for my American readers).
The whole network has to gear up, and reporters and crews have to get on planes and head south.
It could have been done, the e-mails I have received indicate that the reporters and producers and technical people were, if there was a truce, willing, ready and able to cover Katrina. Senior management, apparently, was not moved.
The same agony I saw on that cop's face all those years ago, I saw all last week among my colleagues.
Perhaps the Brits are right. Bywater calls it "the abominable, no-winners lockout (or strike, if you're management) at the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation." And perhaps in the big picture, the greater scheme of things, it doesn't really matter if it is a strike or lockout, if as Bywater says "If it [the CBC]dies, they [the public] won't really notice; just click onto one of the other 3,791 channels and carry on. The same might be said of the BBC."
But they will notice. Britain is a "tight little island" that would fit over and over into Canada. If the CBC dies, who will serve small towns on the prairies, the dying ex-logging towns on Vancouver Island, the surviving outports in Newfoundland and the diamond mines of the Northwest Territories? As artist after artist have said, only the CBC can tell the stories of Canadian musicians, artists, authors and playwrights. Unlike the UK, here the private sector refuses to do that, unless of course the artist is a super celeb. And if the CBC dies, where will the next generation of super celebs come from? Only a couple can come from Canadian Idol, the rest claw their way up.
I seem to have triggered a debate in the UK that our objections to BBC feeds have not, I hope it continues.
Update: A blogger across the lake in Rochester, NY, has also posted on Preston's article in The Observer. In the London Calling blog, Doug Bickie, who uses the handle Hdougie, says The BBC's future, don't look to Canada?. Hdougie is semi-anonymous. He does allow comments, but there is no e-mail contact.
And Bywater uses footnotes in his blog. Yike!
Technorati tags
journalism, CBC, blog, news, lockout,
CBClockout, Peter Preston, Michael Bywater
9:16 PM posted by Robin Rowland
Permanent Link
Links to this post
British journalist, academic and blogger, Michael Bywater, the man who sent me a "rocket" (to use the old journalism term from the last century) about my post on The Observer column on the lockout, has now blogged his own take on the matter in a post called, Dirty Trench-coat, Burning sense of public duty?
An interesting read. Not sure if all of it travels across the North Atlantic. My parents were both British so I get most of it ;-).
Bywater interprets former Guardian editor Peter Preston's response to my blog by saying the former Guardian editor:
is using the Fireman Argument against CBC journalists. That's to say, that journalism is such an important part of the polity that journalists should shrink from industrial action.
Now I am not sure how the Brits do it with essential services, but let's say for a moment that journalism was declared an essential service. That means here any disputes would often be settled by arbitration or binding arbitration.
Arbitration might have defeated the Senior Management Committee's demand for total capitulation on casualization (Then again, maybe not, the history of the last few years in this country shows the provincial governments have often balked at arbitration, because it interferes with their plans to cut budgets,wages and benefits.)
On my first journalism job, many years ago, when I was the police reporter for The Sudbury Star, the local police association was in very tough negotiations with the local Police Commission and things weren't going well at all. In those days, even on a cheapskate Thomson paper, part of the police reporter's job description was to hang out at the cop shop (It doesn't happen any more, consultants would call it "waste" and "poor productivity." But if I hadn't hung around the cop shop I wouldn't have gotten half the stories I did.)
I talked to cops I respected (the good, hard working honest, dedicated cops) who were agonizing over working to rule and even, as one said "God forbid," withdrawing services.
I remember talking to a detective in his prowl car as he talked as much to himself as to me (off the record) about what he would do if the worst came to the worst.
As it turned out, fate intervened, and Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau brought in wage and price controls. That meant how much money the cops were going to get was no longer a factor. The Police Association head, a smart, fair and overworked uniformed patrol constable, was able to get an agreement with the help of (if I remember correctly) a mediator.
I will make one point here. I called for a 120-day truce in my post Fort Confusion.
Bywater also says:
Preston clearly still believes in the "higher purpose" of journalism: the public duty of the Press as the Fourth Estate, without which the other three estates – Monarch and Parliament, Church and Army – would go about their daily business of exploiting and lying to the people.
Most of my colleagues, I believe, follow that higher purpose. So do, I know for a fact (I have read all of Tony Burman's memos on Inews) do most of our middle managers. It is the Senior Management Committee, whom I would argue, are part of the First Estate, which Bywater calls "Monarch and Parliament" and what we in Canada used to call Mandarins, who have no higher purpose beyond themselves and their own careers.
I posted my call for the 120-day truce two days before The Observer published. That call for the truce, if I do say so myself, followed that "higher purpose."
When the fire fighters in Britain went on strike, they did respond to major fires. With the CBC it is not a case of firefighters leaving a picket line, walking a few metres and jumping on a pumper or an aerial (ladder truck for my American readers).
The whole network has to gear up, and reporters and crews have to get on planes and head south.
It could have been done, the e-mails I have received indicate that the reporters and producers and technical people were, if there was a truce, willing, ready and able to cover Katrina. Senior management, apparently, was not moved.
The same agony I saw on that cop's face all those years ago, I saw all last week among my colleagues.
Perhaps the Brits are right. Bywater calls it "the abominable, no-winners lockout (or strike, if you're management) at the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation." And perhaps in the big picture, the greater scheme of things, it doesn't really matter if it is a strike or lockout, if as Bywater says "If it [the CBC]dies, they [the public] won't really notice; just click onto one of the other 3,791 channels and carry on. The same might be said of the BBC."
But they will notice. Britain is a "tight little island" that would fit over and over into Canada. If the CBC dies, who will serve small towns on the prairies, the dying ex-logging towns on Vancouver Island, the surviving outports in Newfoundland and the diamond mines of the Northwest Territories? As artist after artist have said, only the CBC can tell the stories of Canadian musicians, artists, authors and playwrights. Unlike the UK, here the private sector refuses to do that, unless of course the artist is a super celeb. And if the CBC dies, where will the next generation of super celebs come from? Only a couple can come from Canadian Idol, the rest claw their way up.
I seem to have triggered a debate in the UK that our objections to BBC feeds have not, I hope it continues.
Update: A blogger across the lake in Rochester, NY, has also posted on Preston's article in The Observer. In the London Calling blog, Doug Bickie, who uses the handle Hdougie, says The BBC's future, don't look to Canada?. Hdougie is semi-anonymous. He does allow comments, but there is no e-mail contact.
And Bywater uses footnotes in his blog. Yike!
Technorati tags
journalism, CBC, blog, news, lockout,
CBClockout, Peter Preston, Michael Bywater
9:16 PM posted by Robin Rowland
Permanent Link
