Toronto Star

A better CBC model: It’s called NPR

- JEFFREY DVORKIN CONTRIBUTO­R JEFFREY DVORKIN IS THE FORMER MANAGING EDITOR AND CHIEF JOURNALIST AT CBC RADIO AND FORMER VP-NEWS AND INFORMATIO­N AT NPR.

There are two long-standing debates in Canada: Will the Leafs ever win the Cup? And what shall we do with the CBC?

It’s worth reminding people why the Canadian Broadcasti­ng Corp. was invented in the first place. It was created in 1936, during the Depression by a Conservati­ve government. Its purpose was to be a uniquely Canadian counterbal­ance to the flood of commercial radio pouring over the border from the United States.

National Public Radio (NPR), on the other hand, is a Democratic Party initiative. In 1969, public broadcasti­ng in the U.S. was part of the Great Society project. Public television was to be called PBS. Radio was to be called NPR. Both were to be locally funded and supported, as much as possible by public donations.

Unlike the CBC, NPR was never designed to be a network. Initially, it was just a few dozen scattered local radio stations, licenced to colleges and universiti­es. Programs came from NPR, based in Washington, D.C.

But (and here is the major distinctio­n) the local stations always defined the national service. At NPR, the (local) customers own the (national) company. This became a successful model that today has more than a thousand local radio stations as part of the NPR system.

From Alaska to Florida, American listeners love and support NPR.

NPR made a choice more than 20 years ago to serve its audiences by providing a spine of national informatio­n, while encouragin­g local stations to give more in-depth reporting and cultural programmin­g to be shared nationally.

Could the same be said of the CBC? I believe the stations in Kelowna, Saguenay and Windsor know their audiences better than the programmer­s in Toronto.

A reformed CBC should be stood on its head: the stations should have more financial and programmin­g control while Toronto, Montreal (and possibly Vancouver) should operate a vastly reduced network.

Before there is an outbreak of pearl clutching and a knee jerk antipathy to asking the public for donations (a.k.a., “beg-athons”), there are some U.S. public broadcasti­ng adaptation­s that Canadians might find more acceptable.

First, the age of full government funding for anything seems to be over. Why not public broadcasti­ng?

Second, the CBC, which once described itself as a “publicly funded commercial broadcaste­r” is unrealisti­c in this environmen­t. Other broadcaste­rs and publishers are openly opposed and resentful that the CBC competes against them with tax dollars.

Third, the real strength of any public broadcaste­r is not found in the centralize­d network presence, but in the myriad of local stations where the needs of local audiences can be more properly served.

CBC local and regional stations are being starved of resources. Budgets are redirected by Toronto to create non-informatio­n programmin­g to be sold outside Canada. Local stations can barely serve their local audiences now, while the network in Toronto seeks new ways to produce content more appealing and acceptable to non-Canadian (a.k.a. U.S.) audiences. This must stop.

The CBC, to become a truly public broadcaste­r, should be entirely commercial free.

Only then can it decide what it should produce to serve the Canadian public, first as citizens and not just as consumers. The CBC’s attempt to be “all things to all audiences” has resulted in a weakened CBC and an impoverish­ed CBC News service.

Finally, how to pay for a renewed public broadcaste­r?

If Canadians find something of value from the CBC, they should be allowed and encouraged to donate, but only to a local stations (tax-deductible of course). At the same time, the federal government should continue to support the new CBC with stable five-year funding models. And every five years, an assessment on the financial health of the company should be made with the ultimate goal of reducing the federal contributi­on and making the CBC a “standalone,” not-forprofit at the service of Canadians.

This will not be easy. There will be a lot of “what about” questions. But the CBC is unlikely to continue without some bold thinking about its future.

If we can’t agree that a revived public media is an essential element to our Canadian lives, then the critics, including Conservati­ve party leader Pierre Poilievre, are right.

Shut it down and start again.

If Canadians find something of value from the CBC, they should be allowed and encouraged to donate, but only to a local stations (tax-deductible of course)

 ?? ANDREW VAUGHAN THE CANADIAN PRESS FILE PHOTO ?? Every five years, an assessment on the CBC’s financial health should be made with the goal of reducing the federal contributi­on and making the CBC not-for-profit.
ANDREW VAUGHAN THE CANADIAN PRESS FILE PHOTO Every five years, an assessment on the CBC’s financial health should be made with the goal of reducing the federal contributi­on and making the CBC not-for-profit.
 ?? GREG PERRY FOR THE TORONTO STAR ??
GREG PERRY FOR THE TORONTO STAR

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada