CBC Wastes $1 million on Mulroney: The Opera

[August1991]

CBC wasted close to a million dollars on a movie it will never broadcast, but don't expect the state broadcaster to cough up details.

Mulroney: The Opera, which opened in theatres across Canada on Saturday, was started in partnership with CBC, but the Crown corporation's name doesn't appear in the credits. That's because it blew off the musical send-up of former prime minister Brian Mulroney over fear of political fallout.

"Yes, we were involved in the early development of Mulroney: The Opera. But as usual with our program development projects, we don't make those expenditures public," said CBC spokesman Jeff Keay.

Toronto Sun

I don't know whether I should be shocked and appalled because they approved this project, then pulled the plug on it for the reason given or because they won't confirm/deny/provide details.

Any public organization that is unaccountable in this way is a menace.

BTW, this movie was shown in certain cinemas across Canada last Saturday and will be shown again in about 10 days. Weird.

[Shady]

It must be nice to be able to literally burn a million dollars of tax money and not have to answer for it.

[cybercoma]

You might not like how CBC spends their money, but the last thing I want is the federal government involved in deciding what projects, programming and media they're allowed to fund and we're allowed to see. Too much of a risk for state propaganda and slant, which is already a bit of a risk given that they're funded by the state. They need to maintain their independence over these decisions, as much as we may not like some of them.

[fellowtraveller]

But as usual with our program development projects, we don't make those expenditures public," said CBC spokesman Jeff Keay.

why aren't their program development costs public?

and I very much doubt that they consider their $1 million wasted in todays circumstances.....

[cybercoma]

It must be nice to be able to literally burn a million dollars of tax money and not have to answer for it.

Considering they get over three-quarters of a billion dollars from the government, this is a drop in the ocean of their funding. Besides, we don't even know why they pulled out of the project and how much it could have ended up costing them if they stayed in. The problem could have ended up being much bigger than this. It is a possibility that they've mitigated their losses here.

[fellowtraveller]

You might not like how CBC spends their money, but the last thing I want is the federal government involved in deciding what projects, programming and media they're allowed to fund and we're allowed to see. Too much of a risk for state propaganda and slant, which is already a bit of a risk given that they're funded by the state. They need to maintain their independence over these decisions, as much as we may not like some of them.

after they have made their program funding decisions, why would you object to revealing those public costs? The money has been spent, why wouldn't taxpayers have the right to know how much?

[cybercoma]

why aren't their program development costs public?

Because they're a business in a market with other corporations that do not make their program development costs public. While they're publically funded, they need to remain competitive. A business does not give away what projects its working on ahead of time, nor do they inform their competitors of their expenses.

after they have made their program funding decisions, why would you object to revealing those public costs? The money has been spent, why wouldn't taxpayers have the right to know how much?

I'm completely in support of benchmarking $x for CBC to do with as it chooses. If the public doesn't feel they're getting value for their money, then we can have a serious discussion about how much money we're throwing at it. I do not, however, believe we should be involved in the decision-making process because that necessarily involves the government deciding what will be funded and shown on television. I'm not cool with that.

Edited April 19, 2011 by cybercoma

[M.Dancer]

Because they're a business in a market with other corporations that do not make their program development costs public.

Ummm.....as pubic companies (CTV, Global etc), there is a fair amount of disclosure both to shareholders and potential shareholders...and the developemnt costs are pretty much public knowledge.

As a crown corp, we deserve the right as primary stakeholders to know what they spend on and to whom.

[Shwa]

after they have made their program funding decisions, why would you object to revealing those public costs? The money has been spent, why wouldn't taxpayers have the right to know how much?

CBC Radio Canada 2009-2010 Consolidated Balance Sheet

[GostHacked]

You might not like how CBC spends their money, but the last thing I want is the federal government involved in deciding what projects, programming and media they're allowed to fund and we're allowed to see. Too much of a risk for state propaganda and slant, which is already a bit of a risk given that they're funded by the state. They need to maintain their independence over these decisions, as much as we may not like some of them.

The CBC is a crown corporation, it IS the public affairs (aka propaganda) wing for the Canadian government. So the government already has a say in what gets on the air and what does not, and also what is funded for a program. I don't feel they are independant in making those decisions. It would be nice, but it's never going to happen unless it becomes a private entity not accountable to anyone but real news. And even private corporate TV and radio are in the same boat as the CBC, but that means corporate interests come first and not the real news.

[fellowtraveller]

Because they're a business in a market with other corporations that do not make their program development costs public. While they're publically funded, they need to remain competitive. A business does not give away what projects its working on ahead of time, nor do they inform their competitors of their expenses.

They can't be both a 'business' and publicly funded. I'd have no objection to their costs remaining a secret if public money was not involved. But if my money is spent, it is not unreasonable to expect disclosure. Certainly, if I were an investor in a private film project for exasmple I would be given complete and detailed information.

And I do not need info before they make their decision, but have a right to it after.

I do not, however, believe we should be involved in the decision-making process because that necessarily involves the government deciding what will be funded and shown on television. I'm not cool with that.

Please stop tossing out this strawman, it contributes nothing to the diuscussion.

[M.Dancer]

So the government already has a say in what gets on the air and what does not, and also what is funded for a program.

cite

[GostHacked]

cite

Cite what?

[M.Dancer]

Cite what?

So the government already has a say in what gets on the air and what does not, and also what is funded for a program.

[GostHacked]

No idea what you are talking about.

[cybercoma]

They can't be both a 'business' and publicly funded. I'd have no objection to their costs remaining a secret if public money was not involved. But if my money is spent, it is not unreasonable to expect disclosure. Certainly, if I were an investor in a private film project for exasmple I would be given complete and detailed information.

And I do not need info before they make their decision, but have a right to it after.

Please stop tossing out this strawman, it contributes nothing to the diuscussion.

The problem is that they are both a 'business' and publicly funded. They raise advertising revenues and whatnot. I don't think what they spend their money on is as important to taxpayers as how much they're spending. I guess that's where we're divided on the topic. While you believe we should know every detail about where they spend their money, I don't really think that's important, nor do I want their decisions for funding media arts to be a politicized one. I'm completely fine with having an honest discussion about how much they're spending and if people think they're using too much taxpayers money and not getting enough value for it, then we can talk about that. The costs of particular development projects are just not necessary, in my opinion. We'll have to disagree on this.

I don't think it's a strawman at all. If you want the CBC to be accountable for every project, then you're necessarily involving the government in decisions about what individual projects are funded. That puts more control over programming and communications in the hands of the government. I'm not saying it's a certainty they will abuse that power, but it's a possibility that I don't even want to humour.

[cybercoma]

No idea what you are talking about.

What Dancer is trying to say is that the government doesn't decide what does and does not go on the air. If you have information to the contrary, please provide it because your word alone is not proof. The whole point that I'm trying to make hinges on the fact that the government currently doesn't dictate programming, but making CBC accountable to the government for every project would give the government that power.

[M.Dancer]

What Dancer is trying to say is that the government doesn't decide what does and does not go on the air. If you have information to the contrary, please provide it because your word alone is not proof. The whole point that I'm trying to make hinges on the fact that the government currently doesn't dictate programming, but making CBC accountable to the government for every project would give the government that power.

...I am also trying to get him to actually research his posts...which would improve their quality immensely

[cybercoma]

I think he has good ideas, but he says some baffling things like the above on occassion that make me cringe.

[Shwa]

cite

CBC dropped 'jPod' a comedy series about 20-somethings working in the gaming industry in Vancouver based upon the book by a well known pop-culture novelist, the gay Douglas Coupland. Meanwhile the wholesome 'Heartland' out of Alberta makes the cut.

Liberal-ish BC versus Ultra-ish Conservative Alberta

If that isn't political influence, then nothing is...

[msj]

CBC should be left to do what they are funded to do.

Sometimes they will have failures like this opera and other times they will have successes like... um, er... well I don't watch teevee so I don't really know.

The point is we should not expect the taxpayer/CDN government to micromanage the CBC because they screwed up here and there.

All businesses make errors because they have to take risks. Some of those risks take off and do well while others flop.

BFD.

[GostHacked]

...I am also trying to get him to actually research his posts...which would improve their quality immensely

I must aplogize to all, I just thought I'd play the M.Dancer role for a moment. Just to see how it felt. I've asked M. Dancer to cite things before in other threads and I rarely if ever get anything of quality out him. Anyone can search his post history to see that.

But, here is one area where the government controls what gets on air. The CANCON rule through the entity that is the CRTC. The CRTC is a government entity as well. There is even a government commision to oversee all that as well. That is on a high level.

http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&Params=a1ARTA0001266

It is funded primarily by federal statutory grants (about two-thirds of its budget), but also derives revenues from commercial sponsorship and the sale of programs to other countries. While ultimately responsible to Parliament for its overall conduct, it is independent of government control in its day-to-day operations. From its creation in the midst of the Depression to the present day, it has sought to provide Canadians with a broad range of high-quality indigenous information and entertainment programming, even as its critics continue to lobby the government to abolish its funding of the CROWN CORPORATION and level the playing field for all broadcasters.

Some good info on the CBC is even here on MLW.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/canadian-broadcasting-corporation

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/B-9.01/

And anyone would be pressed to find specific incidents of the government or MPs meddling with certain programming on the CBC, but I do not doubt it happens. Maybe I should ask if the CBC would do a program on that topic, I wonder ....

[M.Dancer]

I must aplogize to all, I just thought I'd play the M.Dancer role for a moment. Just to see how it felt. I've asked M. Dancer to cite things before in other threads and I rarely if ever get anything of quality out him.

You should apologize especially to me because you are full of shit and a bald face liar to boot.

No please be so kind as to site you scurrilous claim.

[cybercoma]

Gost, you should probably drop the claim that the government meddles in CBC programming, since you can't find anything to support it.

[M.Dancer]

But, here is one area where the government controls what gets on air.

While ultimately responsible to Parliament for its overall conduct, it is independent of government control in its day-to-day operations.

Now that you have definitively established you are blowing smoke and are clueless even to what in front of you, I can conclude you are mikedavid's equal.