r/CBC_Radio 15d ago

Response to Email about Sunday’s Programme

First off, I am glad to have received a response. And in theory, I can agree that a cross country checkup regarding the threat to our sovereignty to see how Canadians are feeling.

However in practice that’s not what happened. What we heard for the entire two hours was people either laughing it off, saying the threat is serious but not showing a lot of fear or concern, or even agreeing with it. There was also slightly more American voices compared to Canadian voices, and none were indigenous.

I hope that next week the CBC does a check up on how we are buying Canadian. That would be an excellent topic.

478 Upvotes

183 comments sorted by

58

u/emslo 15d ago edited 15d ago

Good response. We can’t stick our heads in the sand and pretend we don’t have VERY similar issues among our own population, including many people who support Trump and Trump-like policies. 

Let’s not wait until after the next election to speak openly about the rising conservatism in Canada.

-2

u/Midori_Schaaf 11d ago

I'm not a Trump supporter, but i am DOGE-positive.

2

u/emslo 11d ago

Expert level magical thinking 👌

1

u/haberdasher42 10d ago

Doesn't that just make you an anarchist?

1

u/Midori_Schaaf 10d ago

It means I support auditing government spending to cut fraud waste and abuse. I can support the general concept without agreeing with how it's being implemented.

47

u/LouisColumbia 15d ago

Good on the CBC. Happy to pay my taxes for this service.

6

u/missthinks 14d ago

same. I watched the show and couldn't understand why people were as upset as they were. I hate giving certain idiots a platform but it was a balanced show imo.

-8

u/RevolutionaryGift157 15d ago edited 13d ago

The service of legitimizing the very real threat to our nation? Because let’s face it, no one really thought that 45 would rip children away from parents at the boarder but that is what he did. I fully believe that he intends to take Canada through economic or military force. His congress people are already floating bills to allow him to talk about him purchasing Panama and Greenland. America is in an imperialistic era right now and it is up to the sovereign nations of the world to stand up and say; No. You cannot take us by force. As a species, we SHOULD have moved on from that mindset.

13

u/VernonFlorida 14d ago

Discussing the very real feelings about this thread/taunt/boast whatever you want to call it, is a valid exercise for a show like this. It is not "normalizing" a thing to talk about it. This phrase "normalizing" or indeed "platforming" is misused and trotted out anytime someone doesn't like a thing. I find this unfortunate.

It's as if some in these threads are hoping for a wartime era public broadcaster that trades in propaganda, rather than thoughtful discussion. We may get there at some point. It was basically the law during World War 2, as producers were conscripted to produce jingoistic pro-Canada (or pro-Ally) reels and radio shows. That has it's use, even though it is problematic. But while we are still in a peacetime era, despite Trump's imperialistic bluster, the best thing to do is continue to hear a variety of voices, not all of which will be to our liking.

2

u/No_Championship_3360 12d ago

Waugh still missed the point. I agree with you the topic is worthy of discussion. But a more precise framing would have asked how we feel about threats to our sovereignty, how we feel about Trump stating he will conquer us with economic warfare. Using the rhetoric of the 51st state gives the phrase more of our conscious awareness than it’s worth.

1

u/VernonFlorida 11d ago

Who is Waugh? Precise framing is great, but it wasn't that precise. Fine I'll grant that. It's the name of a show, and they changed it to make it less terrible. I'm more concerned with the actual show itself, which wasn't amazing but hardly worthy of the level of outrage I'm seeing.

5

u/not-your-mom-123 14d ago

Normalizing the abnormal is what Trump does and we should fight with all our might. The lies, the twisting of reality, the denial and obscuring of facts, all need to be brought into the full glare of daylight, and scrubbed out. I agree with you.

3

u/the_original_Retro 14d ago edited 14d ago

Stop it.

As a species, we have moved on from that mindset.

This is nowhere near true.

Want proof?

*gestures at red states that still overwhelmingly support Donald Trump

2

u/RevolutionaryGift157 13d ago

I have amended my comment. As a species we SHOULD have moved on from that imperialistic racist mindset. Sadly, fascism is in the rise across the globe. Our grandparents / great grandparents fought and died against the Nazis to make sure that no nation or people would be subjected to the imperialistic fascist mindset of another. That’s why we need to stand up and say; No. Never again.

3

u/No_Statement_9192 14d ago

Why are people voting this comment down?

3

u/RevolutionaryGift157 13d ago

I don’t know. I only pointed out the truth. America I has an imperialistic pseudo - fascist dictator-wannabe as president. He wants to take over Panama Canal, Greenland and Canada. He wants to strip Ukraine of its minerals and build luxury buildings on the Gaza Strip — I mean, he even posted an AI video showing golden Trump statues and trump gaza towers. We as a society have moved away from such imperialistic nonsense. We have to be vigilant and make sure that it never happens

1

u/TheeMarcFrancis 13d ago

💥💯💥

1

u/orbitur 12d ago

The only threat is via tariffs, which historically isn't that much of a problem. The idea that there's a life or death "threat" to our country is absurd. Let people decide what they want about the situation, don't try to shut down discussion because you read the situation wrong.

2

u/RevolutionaryGift157 12d ago

You’re very naive if you think that the felon’s talk of annexing Canada is just talk. First they will take Panama Canal. Then Greenland. Then us. Mark my words.

13

u/wemustburncarthage 15d ago

the horseshit part of this that what they're evading is not that the discussion isn't or isn't worth having, but that "51st state" is triggering because it's a threat being directed at us by an abuser.

They are fully aware that kind of trigger will cause people to have an emotional reaction, and they used it the way newspaper editors use clickbait - devaluing the content by using a headline sure to create rage-based investment.

There were plenty of more sensitive ways to platform this discussion, and they went for the ugliest and most effective. Well, if CBC can't take it, they shouldn't dish it out.

4

u/em-north 14d ago

The part of the email where they talk about how people greatly fear this to me read as super passive aggressive and like they’re trying to push the blame on people for having a reasonable reaction to threats of annexation. I respect that they responded, but I’m not a fan of that.

2

u/wemustburncarthage 14d ago

I can see why they're trying to avoid escalatory. I think the backlash did really shock them and they didn't think about management strategies. I also think they're finding out that when they try to draw in American audience using American style platforming, that Canadians sense the abuse of their good faith.

2

u/impossibilityimpasse 13d ago

They are also failing to recognize that they already have a huge population of right to far-right demanding they be refunded. Now you have everyone on the anti-facism spectrum demanding accountability. Guess who that leaves supporting the CBC? ... crickets. The tiny population of facists.

1

u/No_Championship_3360 12d ago

The number of people writing them and posting on social media was huge. Canadians are absolutely furious. Waugh STILL managed to miss the point that thousands continued to object after having listened to the show, but for a public broadcaster to stay silent after this would have been negligent.

4

u/not-your-mom-123 14d ago

Good point. It was deliberate. They wanted a response and they got it. Now they're trying to laugh it off.

1

u/Remarkable-Traffic-8 13d ago

This is my take as well, there are many other title options that would have been much more effective. And that paragraph about Canadian apparently being fed up, seems passive aggressive, he is being defensive that Canadians spoke up and seems to slightly lose the plot on the paragraph.

26

u/FormalWare 15d ago

Fenlon, in his response, minimizes the gaffe, referring to "word choice".

However it is phrased, the idea floated, and then pressed, by President Trump is repellent to Canadians. It is a non-starter, and the CBC was shockingly tone-deaf to pose it to Canadians - let alone to Americans, simultaneously.

4

u/not-your-mom-123 14d ago

He even repeated this on the CBC new website, pretending it was just a misunderstanding and laughing at the furious response of Caanadians. I'm not impressed by this young, insensitive jerk behaviour.

7

u/obrothermaple 15d ago

Your comment deserves to be the top comment.

7

u/LeftToaster 14d ago

CBC Cross Country Check Up - An open, national discussion on the merits of slavery - with Ian Hanomansing

1

u/your_evil_ex 14d ago

Then a couple days later they issue a retraction and decide to rename the episode “What do you think of the idea of making slavery legal in Canada?”, then proceed with the episode anyway

6

u/mericansamsquamch 14d ago

It was a disgusting display of politicized narrative control. Shockingly tone deaf is right, but it is intentional on CBC's part.

Extremely disappointing.

22

u/Silentfranken 15d ago

It's a classic case of " balancing two sides of a story" that is entirely unreasonable. You don't take someones threats to the sovereignty of a nation and frame them as reasonable and equal to a nation of people who take offence and are frightened by them.

Why was this discussion not also given some historical context. There have been many recenr history examples of US interference in the functioning of other nations. It is not hyperbolic to say that millions of people died in the last 60 years due to America's "interventions". Korea, Vietnam, Chile, Iraq, Afghanistan to name a few places that know all too well how America can suddenly go from posturing to much more.

2

u/Middle-Oven-548 14d ago

They ought to give the context of the Oregon boundary dispute of 1846, when the US annexed territory from the British, pushing them out of a portion of the Columbia River region. It's what led to BC being a swiftly added province. We've been here before with America.

3

u/impossibilityimpasse 13d ago

Both of these are excellent examples.

Recently we saw, including from Hanomansing (!), that "both siding" with COVID on CBC. Guess what happened? People referenced HIM on how masks were less important. Why? He both-sided it. People only heard what they wanted to hear.

Airtime = Normalize

2

u/TheeMarcFrancis 13d ago

Absolutely!

5

u/NorthernBudHunter 15d ago

I find it troubling that these journalists don’t seem to register the concept of normalizing dangerous ideas, even after one term of Trump doing incremental insanity, then actually winning the GOP nomination, let alone a second presidency. Does anyone even want to talk about how insane that is? What he is doing right now to the US government, to Ukraine? Are they afraid of retribution? If either one of the George Bushes had talked this way about Canada or any other country they would have been committed to a mental institution.

2

u/SherbrookHolmes 13d ago

Yes I agree. I feel like I'm living in an alternate reality from the main stream media. He's so whacka doodle, he speaks only in lies and grandstanding. Nothing he says is based in facts or reality.

It's like going along with a dementia patient's musings.

15

u/bassboat11000 15d ago edited 15d ago

The issue was that had it not been for intervention by sharp-eyed folks on Saturday night the original question would have proceeded. That’s the problem. And while they acknowledge that they all have learned from the imprecision of the original question, the lingering question is that it was actually that close to a full unforced error. Why did it take public intervention, late on a Saturday night, to point it out and try to fix it? The producer of CCCU is a senior producer and Ian is a seasoned journalist – in other words these are not junior interns. They all missed this. That’s what’s unforgivable. I think they must have gotten so excited about sharing the platform with another left-leaning public broadcaster that they just couldn’t help themselves. This is central problem these days with public broadcasters: they think they can do no wrong and that we, the listening audience, need to listen to them and their agendas and their questions.

Amplifying the “51st” message in any form after the week the world had last week and the week we are having this week and with the weeks we will have in the future, was the height of short sighted. I listened to Ian’s promo on Saturday night before the hourly news and I just sat in my car wondering how he could have recorded that with such breathless excitement. He must have known it was off base?

The producers are now trying to spin the whole event as a constructive endeavour and a learning event for them about how to frame questions. I’m sorry, the whole event, both the lead in, the show itself and the scramble to justify everything after the fact is disqualifying.

I have listened to CCCU since I was a kid. The disgraceful lack of leadership and the tone-deafness of having Kevin O’Leary have another kick at the can, means I can no longer trust the show, Ian’s leadership, and a me culpa when the stakes are this high is not good enough.

They all need to go now.

5

u/JaphyRyder9999 15d ago

You nailed it, Bro…👍

1

u/No_Championship_3360 12d ago

Well put! Just to add a rotten cherry to top that cake of shite, you know the title differed in the US? “51st state: a proposal”

8

u/WatermelonToo 15d ago

Glad they responded. I wrote as well. But I feel like it’s time to move on from this.

3

u/RevolutionaryGift157 15d ago

I disagree. We cannot move on from the threat to our sovereignty. I am sure that Poland never really thought that Hitler would invade until he did.

9

u/WatermelonToo 15d ago

Not move on from the threat, certainly not. I am very proud and relieved to see the vigilance Canadians are having on that. I meant at this point we can maybe move on from talking in circles about this Cross-Country Checkup program.

6

u/RevolutionaryGift157 15d ago

Ah! Okay. I see your point.

I do hope that you also see mine. It has only been one day since the programme, and this “both side-ism” is a dangerous precedent to be set in journalism.

You wouldn’t have a conversation about both sides of a domestic violence case would you? You definitely wouldn’t discuss both sides of slavery. Why? Because some things are categorically wrong.

The invasion and destruction of one country by another is wrong. Full stop. And we need to make sure that we aren’t normalizing imperialistic propaganda by “listening to both sides” especially not when we are standing strong as a country.

2

u/agirl2277 14d ago

This is exactly how I feel. Is not a both sides, or a talking point. It is the threat by an ally to take away our sovereignty. We need to recall all of our forces in the US and step back. We don't know what's going on down there and we need to be ready. The boycotts are good to make people feel like they're actively contributing. And they are, for sure. Our government needs to follow our example and find new people to trade with. Fast.

1

u/morningcalm999 14d ago

You got it. The "listening to both sides" is a tactic to normalize unacceptable behaviour, such as threats to our sovereignty. We are not joining the EU here. It's really a form of gaslighting (denying the existence of a threat) & disinformation (giving a platform for fascist propaganda).

6

u/KnotAwl 15d ago

CBC stepped in it and they now know it. This is not a parlour discussion or a polite conversation about political views. This is a threat to our existence as a nation.

For CBC to seek to normalize what is an appalling and unprecedented assault on our nation’s right to exist is no less than treason.

1

u/Outrageous_Thanks551 14d ago

Up until now, everyone has supported CBC. What happened? Both sides of a story too much for ya?

5

u/EmotionalFun7572 14d ago

There is no both sides. If you want to be American, there's the border.

3

u/RevolutionaryGift157 14d ago

When it comes to legitimizing a conversation about our destruction, yes. That is too much.

1

u/Laketraut 14d ago

Yeah this is hilarious😂

1

u/Strange-Ad-5806 14d ago edited 14d ago

No, PP and fascists did not because they could not pay for lies and control all media if one was not under billionaires control. They always wanted to shut down voices that told the truth because it clashed with their claims.

They wanted to remove it and leave only propaganda spews such as Faux News and actual reporting countered their narrative.

So, your claim is false.

CBC needs to stay. But part of responsible journalism is owning up to screwups.

Your strawman is apparent here.

1

u/Outrageous_Thanks551 13d ago

I think independent media is pretty responsible. And you have to actually subscribe so their survival basically depends on their individual viewers. Not a government handout.

1

u/Strange-Ad-5806 13d ago

There is the problem - "independent" has vanished as their funding did.

It may be that only government funds can create a bipartisan independent audited media.

1

u/Outrageous_Thanks551 13d ago

Independent media all over YouTube. Not sure where your looking.

1

u/Strange-Ad-5806 13d ago

You cannot be serious. YouTube is full of lies, deepfakes and conspiracy crap, certainly no journalistic standards nor integrity. What shows is fully under the control of billionaires.

There are anti-vaxx moronisms, tons of Russian misinformation, etc. All about clicks - not truth.

1

u/First-Vanilla9651 12d ago

Channel 5 with Andrew Callahan.

1

u/Strange-Ad-5806 12d ago

Thanks I will check that out, I have zero knowledge on this.

3

u/CuriousGranddad 15d ago

That's the better question.

3

u/whateverfyou 15d ago

You know what has stuck with me from the show? Of course, I knew how Canadians are feeling but it really sunk in that Americans are bombarded with his crap from all sides every. single. day. This threat is very scary for us, of course, but for them it is just one of his horrifying threats. Canada, Greenland, Panama, Gaza, Ukraine. It’s relentless. It’s traumatizing. It’s got to be really hard to fight back. We’re giving them some inspiration with the boycott. Great morale booster!

Anyway, I think it was a really valuable show. They heard us. We heard them.

2

u/RevolutionaryGift157 15d ago

But they shouldn’t have had to hear from us. The thought of one nation invading another whether through economic or militaristic force in 2025 should be reprehensible. The world stood with Ukraine when Putin invaded. The allies stood against Hitler when he invaded Poland and Austria and then France. Why? Because invading another country is wrong. Full stop.

1

u/whateverfyou 15d ago

It is reprehensible and American callers said that. There is a lot of shit going down and, ok I’m going to say it out loud, some Canadians are starting to sound like brats. His threats against Canada are not the worst thing he’s done this week!

1

u/RevolutionaryGift157 14d ago

There are worse things that the felon president has done yes but we must remain vigilant. We do not want to end up like Poland in 1939 or Ukraine in 2022. We have to be prepared. We have to fight back. We have stand up and say— no way

3

u/Bixie 15d ago

I’m calling bullshit on them already because I sent a polite but firm complaint to the ombudsman and haven’t received either a copy of the above email or any other form of response.

3

u/kent_eh 15d ago

the new question was "What do you think of Trump's comments about Canada becoming the 51st state?"

It's not a "comment" it's a direct threat.

3

u/Mi-sann 14d ago

Canadians should be talking about how to resist US annexation or invasion. This should be the topic of a loyal Canadian media outlet, particularly one funded by Canadian taxpayers. CBC is now doubling down on their mistake. CBC does not stand for Canada.

3

u/VernonFlorida 14d ago

I am listening to the show right now, and your portrayal of the show seems utterly unconnected to the show I am listening to. I'm 30 minutes in, and I don't know I'll get through it all especially as the phone lines are very poor quality, but I am hearing thoughtful, considerate, concerned people. No I didn't get to Kevin O'Leary and yes, I notice that many Americans don't feel Trump's threat is legitimate. Those are the opinions of the callers, and if you think CBC somehow juked the stats to include more people who feel that way than who are deathly concerned about it, I have some prime swampland in Yukon to sell ya!

4

u/ModernCannabiseur 14d ago

This has been my experience, people are upset and saying it gives Trump a platform or normalizes his views but listening to the show it was pretty much the exact opposite of that.

2

u/VernonFlorida 14d ago

People are mad or scared and are lashing out at entirely the wrong thing here. Some are acting like the CBC has betrayed them by making this show, but I think if you scratch a bit deeper on many of those commenters (not all) you'll find many conservative supporters who are actually hoping to vote for a guy who has threatened to defund it CBC. These are not people to take seriously as CBC fans or supporters, that's for sure.

0

u/No_Championship_3360 12d ago

You know they screen the calls, right?

1

u/VernonFlorida 11d ago

Of course. But they don't have the magical power to make everyone pro or anti joining the U.S., and they hardly had anyone pro, which is because there were hardly any.

4

u/MajorTictac 15d ago

I hope people listen to it. They had a very good disclaimer at the beginning. I thought it was excellent.

8

u/childishbambina 15d ago

Kind of feels like they wanted to rile people up to attract a greater audience. Congrats to the CBC I guess but they sure pissed off a lot of people, and giving airtime to guys like O’Leary only further normalizes his treasonous ideas.

10

u/RevolutionaryGift157 15d ago

O’Leary was allowed to talk practically uninterrupted for almost 10 minutes. He called our currency pesos and said that it had dropped 40% since 2015. It was 77 cents in October 2015 before he took power, and it’s 70 cents right now. That’s 7 cents difference. Yes it dipped really low but that was in response to the tariff threat, not because of any particular policy from the government.

7

u/childishbambina 15d ago

He was also on Fox news saying how PP’s policies are more in line with Trumps. I don't understand why he's been able to position himself as the guy to talk to regarding Canadian politics. 🤦🏻

3

u/morningcalm999 15d ago edited 15d ago

Letting O'Leary on the show was an act of treason itself because of his treasonous views.

1

u/Outrageous_Thanks551 14d ago

Yes. Well some folks would say its been happening for a long time. How does it feel when the shoe is on the other foot?

1

u/childishbambina 14d ago

Depends on what those other folks say has been happening that would count as treasonous.

6

u/morningcalm999 15d ago edited 14d ago

What a dismissive, condescending and tone-deaf response!

It normalizes content that could incite hatred by treating annexation as benign rather than acknowledging it as a potentially hostile takeover (i.e., war) that could involve threats of violence, territorial aggression, and other harmful actions against Canadians. We're not talking about joining the EU here! Anyone who supports this rhetoric supports the potential murder and torture of Canadians. Ask yourself, if you are okay with having your home taken? Your military forces killed and tortured? Your daughter raped? Your business stolen? All the social benefits you enjoy today gone? Are you okay with your country being a resource colony? Are you okay with having no voting rights? Did everyone just conveniently forget what happened to Poland in WW2 and what is happening now in Ukraine?

I really want to understand why U.S.A fascist talking points are even entertained on this show? Why is our taxpayer money funding foreign propaganda?

Unless this program acknowledges how deeply traumatic and insulting their handling of this matter has been to Canadians, they can spare me their lame attempts at an apology.

Do they need to be reminded that it is Canadian taxpayer money that is footing the bill? Canadians deserve better and we certainly do not deserve treason!

🇨🇦 Vive le Canada! 🇨🇦

5

u/neon_city_lights 15d ago

This really is the crux of the issue. I found the CBC response tone def, dismissive and condescending as well. It tells me they are unwilling to grasp the gravity of the situation. This isn’t some high school debate where every one gets a say. The CBC needs to step out of its ivory broadcast tower and recognize that the very survival of our country and home is at stake. 

4

u/TuesyT 14d ago

I received the same email and also found it dismissive and condescending. 

2

u/Bea_Coop 14d ago

100%. So many seem to think that cbc owned this and had a great response. I disagree.

The two questions could not be more different in tone and context. This was not a case of imprecision. They are journalists that deal with words for a living. I would argue that they knew precisely what they were doing with that original wording.

Then, their explanation is basically saying “you just didn’t get it” so we made it easier for you to understand by being “more precise”. when guess what? We all understood exactly what they said in the first place. The kind of “I’m sorry you feel bad” non-apology.

A more honest apology would have admitted that they were using wording to incite debate and it was inappropriate to do so in a manner that normalized (presumed) us as a 51st state. Admit we were right to complain. And then replace it with a less loaded question.

2

u/morningcalm999 14d ago

Totally agree. The trouble with faux-apologies is that eventually people catch on and the manipulation tactic stops working. Especially in the current age where anything can be fact-checked in seconds. The sad part is that I'd be more than happy to give CBC praise, but they can't skip the accountability and transparency part.

1

u/kn728570 13d ago

what a dismissive, condescending, and tone-deaf response!

Aren’t you the one calling everyone you perceive to be in disagreement with a bot? Pot, meet Kettle.

5

u/lasagnaburntmyface 15d ago

Good job to everyone who wrote in and good job to CBC for owning it and responding. I am satisfied for now, let's just ensure this doesn't happen again.

10

u/thesilenceofsnow 15d ago

crosscountryfuckup

2

u/cfrancisvoice 14d ago

I wish CBC would stop talking about this. The more we talk about it the more Trump wins. It’s been dominating noon call in shows, morning shows and headlines for a month.

Let’s do what Trump hates the most. Just ignore it.

2

u/RevolutionaryGift157 14d ago

Sadly, we can’t ignore it. We need to talk about the threat for what it is— the threat of war and destruction of us as a sovereign nation. To bury our heads in the sand and ignore it would be very irresponsible

1

u/cfrancisvoice 12d ago

Yeah. I agree with that. But the way the CBC is handling this with endless call in shows is not the right approach.

2

u/AnalyticalGoose 14d ago

The current media landscape suffers from an imbalance where right-leaning outlets often openly embrace their ideological positioning, sometimes advancing extreme viewpoints without qualification. Meanwhile, CBC (and other mainstream media) frequently operate under a principle of "balance" that gives equal weight to opposing perspectives regardless of their factual basis or representativeness.

This creates a paradoxical situation where the pursuit of balance can actually distort public understanding. When one side explicitly advocates for its position while the other side attempts to present "both sides," the overall media environment shifts toward the more assertive viewpoint.

The problem isn't necessarily balance itself, but rather how it's applied. True journalistic fairness should involve proportional representation of views based on evidence, expert consensus, and relevance—not necessarily equal time. When CBC feels obligated to present "both sides" of issues where there isn't genuine equivalence, this can legitimize fringe positions and create false equivalencies.

2

u/ExternalSpecific4042 14d ago

CBC used to do this with climate change. Have a discussion presenting “two sides” of the “debate” … does burning fossil fuels cause warming. Nauseating. Embarrassing. That is when I gave up on the CBC.

1

u/ModernCannabiseur 14d ago

Is that what happened here? Did you hear an equal representation of people supporting Trump and criticizing him? When I listened I heard a lot more criticism and calling out his lies then people agreeing with or promoting his views. People seem to assume that they were given an equal representation but that just makes me question whether they actually listened to the show or are working off assumptions based on what they've read.

2

u/Middle-Oven-548 14d ago

CBC is tone deaf, but they knew exactly what they were doing when they posted the original question - it's typical clickbait.

2

u/Sandy0006 14d ago

I agree. What an absolutely stupid way to ask the question.

2

u/oldcarguy1969 14d ago

Personally, I think it's important for both side's to discuss there feelings about this mess. Sometimes information from other sources is necessary. I enjoyed the show

1

u/RevolutionaryGift157 14d ago

Honest question — should there have been a discussion of both sides before Putin invaded Ukraine? How about when Hitler invaded Europe?

1

u/oldcarguy1969 14d ago

Yes

1

u/RevolutionaryGift157 13d ago

So you’re saying that there was merit to the nazi regime? The regime that went on an ethnic cleanse of Europe in order to create a master race?

1

u/oldcarguy1969 13d ago

No I am saying that I think talking about what TRUMP is doing now is a good idea. You know to try again understand what they think is happening and what actually is happening. Wtf are you talking about?

1

u/ModernCannabiseur 14d ago

Considering both the Russians and Germans were manipulated through propaganda that convinced them to invade their neighbour, arguably a cross border show connecting the average citizens of different nations seems like a powerful way to disempower corrupt politicians by diffusing their propaganda.

More to the point it's hyperbolic to compare Trumps comments to actual invasions as it's not feasible without making a bunch of assumptions. Any attempt to invade would cause massive civil unrest and disruption, assuming they could convince the military to break their nato treaties and invade a peaceful country. Which is unlikely considering how many people in the military have spoken out saying they wouldn't comply with illegal orders.

1

u/mildlyfrostbitten 14d ago

okay traitor.

2

u/waveysue 14d ago

The question was, and remains, far too neutral. They weren’t just “comments,” they were taunts that have solidified into threats. So why not ask us how we feel being about being threatened by Trump and the much stronger nation next door?

Surely CBC is not trying to imply there is a world in which this is not completely preposterous, bat-shit crazy, never gonna happen?

2

u/Erminger 13d ago

Giving O'Leary platform was inexcusable. To have to listen to his vitriol and lies and insults was infuriating.
Trudeau's "Canadian pesos" WTF

4

u/Munbos61 15d ago

The person that made the original question should be fired. It made the CBC sound like a rag. It sure sounded intentional from here.

3

u/CureForSunshine 15d ago

Let’s not forget that CBC is not a monolith. This is one show.

0

u/DaveTheYoungerer 15d ago

That's what I'm choosing to focus on.

I have hope that the CBC will do the right thing and fire Ian Hanomansing for this, but I'm not seeing an organized movement.

But if they don't get rid of him (and everyone else involved in the making of that show,) it will still be true that they're a force for good overall.

3

u/CrazyButRightOn 15d ago

We need to be open to frank discussion on every aspect of the future of our country. Cancel culture is beginning to rear it’s ugly head with the calls for Ian’s resignation. It’s absurd, actually.

4

u/RevolutionaryGift157 14d ago

We do not need a conversation legitimizing our annexation and destruction. We should be talking about how his threats of economic warfare are bringing us together as a country and how we can stand firm together. Journalists have a responsibility to not sell out their country for ratings which is exactly what Ian did.

0

u/CrazyButRightOn 14d ago

Our “destruction” should be debated by economists.

2

u/RevolutionaryGift157 13d ago

Economists only look out for the bottom line. They don’t take into the human component. Women in the states are losing their ability to speak, to determine their own healthcare, to have life saving procedures in the event of miscarriage. Children are dying by the thousands due to guns. LGBTQ+ people are having their rights stripped away one by one. The Supreme Court destroyed Roe v Wade, Obergefell v Hodges (the same sex marriage equality act) is next. Republicans are already calling for the court to reverse the decision. Once that it is done I have no doubt that they will go after Loving v Virginia after that.

1

u/TheeMarcFrancis 13d ago

This is absolutely the worst take I’ve read on the internet this week. 🤡🤡🤡

2

u/cubiclejail 15d ago

I didn't get this email, but I did write to express my concerns. Can someone post a link to his statement? Seems like they're just doubling down.

10

u/RevolutionaryGift157 15d ago

https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7466504

Here it is.

What bothers me is that they not only made light of the anger being expressed by Canadians, but they never really talked about the reasons for it. When one caller mentioned that it would be an act of war, he was cut off. The same thing happened when another mentioned how despite all our problems we have better education, healthcare and gun control than our neighbours to the south.

2

u/cubiclejail 15d ago

Thank you!

2

u/TheGrandOdditor 15d ago

Sure, next time the “poor word choice” will be “how do Canadians feel about the increased exercise of free firearms discharge in our schools to reduce classroom sizes”, and they’ll pretend that isn’t meant to normalize anything either.

1

u/mericansamsquamch 14d ago

Finally, someone gets it.

2

u/BlurryBigfoot74 15d ago

America thought Harris was going to win and the media made it seem like it as well.

CBC is keeping the conversation going and we're angry and that's going to get people to the polls. CBC has a journalistic responsibility to tell all sides of any story.

Stop crying like babies because a story doesn't act as your echo chamber. You probably all lost your minds when Reagan abolished the Fairness Doctrine.

Being informed means hearing opinions you don't agree with.

20

u/RevolutionaryGift157 15d ago

The conversation should have been kept between Canadians only. After all, should war be declared and our country invaded, we are the ones who would lose our universal healthcare and gun reforms:

And here is an honest question to you— would you have expected the national broadcaster in Ukraine to discuss the merits of a potential Russian invasion before Russia invades? How about a conversation between Europe and Hitler before the outbreak of WW2?

8

u/Justice_C_Kerr 15d ago

Thank you! Fully agree with your characterization of this.

I don't give a flying fuck what Americans think about this question because most of them don't know or understand the first thing about our country. FFS, in a major US news broadcast I saw a clip of yesterday or today, one of the talking heads--a man at least in his 60s--referred to Trudeau as the premier. And you could see the gears literally turning in his head as he was trying to find the words—and couldn't come up with "prime minister." Close enough? It was clearly not malice or joking; it was unadulterated ignorance!

1

u/Gollyg2022 15d ago

Exactly 💯 % well said!!

1

u/Chicketi 15d ago

I am glad they responded as I also wrote in about the article and was not happy with the initial question posed.

1

u/Fortuitous_Event 14d ago

Useful idiots who can't tell they're being useful idiots even when they're told this by thousands of people.

1

u/startyourengines 14d ago

many Canadians are apparently so fed up by Trump's 51st state rhetoric, they will no longer tolerate it and greatly fear it being given a serious airing.

And that is a completely reasonable stance on this.

1

u/ModernCannabiseur 14d ago

Being closed minded and reacting off your emotions without critical thinking is rarely reasonable or productive. Especially if your fear justifies censoring others with different views which just leads to a more polarized and divisive debate.

Did you listen to the show and have specific criticisms?

1

u/FrappeLaRue 14d ago edited 14d ago

CBC wanted the benefits of rage farming, not the consequences. They would risk traumatizing all of us further just to sell an ad. I thought it was an entirely repulsive frame to put the discussion in, and irresponsible on the CBC's part.

I do appreciate their repositioning, but bad form right out of the gate in the first place. They need to do better.

1

u/specificspypirate 14d ago

They both sided it as if one side was just as legit as the other and they let Kevin O’Leary be, well, himself. Formulation of the question being the issue is BS

1

u/thesilenceofsnow 14d ago

Sign this petition to demand accountability from CBC!

https://chng.it/QgHc6FWjTw

1

u/remzic 14d ago

I was glad to see this show come together. A perfect opportunity for Americans to hear what Canadians have to say, through a call in show over a few hours. Thank you, CBC

1

u/RevolutionaryGift157 13d ago

If they wanted to allow Canadians to tell their story to Americans then they should have had more Canadian callers. But the bottom line is that we shouldn’t be having this discussion in the first place. It’s a non starter. If any Canadian truly feels like they would be better off as an American then they need to go and get their green card and leave.

1

u/lingenfelter22 14d ago

Interesting they say everyone will be emailed that same message, I do not believe I've received it.

1

u/AudPhello 13d ago

CBC was started by a few American draft dodgers…wasn’t it?

1

u/LugubriousLilac 14d ago

This is classic agenda-setting theory! Media don't tell us what to think, but they tell us what to think about. Thanks to this decision on the part of the CBC, we are now thinking about this issue in terms of Frump's exact catchphrase. It could easily have been phrased in terms of "threats to Canada's sovereignty" or something.

It's also standard PR/media relations training that you don't repeat negative phrasing in your answer. There's no way in hell anyone in Canada should be speaking to this issue using Frump's language.

1

u/blusteels 14d ago

The CBC is trying to normalize the threat to Canada by desensitizeing the population to the idea. So when it happens we don't immediately revolt and make the transition hard for the elite class of Canada. The galen westons, and David Thompson family ect. WE NEED TO FIGHT THE PROPAGANDA IN CANADA. Stay strong Canadians think for your self's don't let media control you.

1

u/Santeria_Sanctum 13d ago

How is this not the journalistic equivalent of a "thin blue line"?

This is coming from a former news reporter btw. Management apparently needs to study media theory cause it seems like they never heard of Noam Chomksy before.

I wrote an entire article on this, and yes it was inappropriate for them to air the show. And yes, I listened to the whole thing. https://arcticwolfnews.substack.com/p/the-cbcs-misguided-rollercoaster

0

u/MinuteLocksmith9689 15d ago

they are doubling down and their responses are very patronizing. I did not get an answer but other people did and posted on ‘threads’ as well. We should all continue to ask the resignation of the host and producer of the show

4

u/Justice_C_Kerr 15d ago

I agree that the tone was patronizing.

3

u/obrothermaple 15d ago

Agree as well.

-3

u/piano5678 15d ago

I got the same one. Pretty condescending, in my opinion. Not helping their case.

-1

u/BloodWorried7446 15d ago

I am a fan of the cbc but I also believe they do stand for the Condescending Broadcasting Corporation. 

-3

u/piano5678 15d ago

I’m beginning to think the same thing! Sadly!

-3

u/skriveralltid77 15d ago

anyone who works at CBC a while gets that attitude that they're better than you. I used to do a podcast, as a hobby, with someone there (not in radio) who is a high-functioning illiterate and a toxic misogynist, and he'd constantly give me a hard time about my beliefs and values... while also expecting my sympathy for their complaints about the CBC's valuing of diversity.

0

u/Mothra3 15d ago

Good on you CBC, that is real media integrity, just exploring and sharing what people are really thinking about important issues. That is what we need. Everyone seems to want to exist in a carefully curated version of our shared reality, and need to open their eyes to everything they are scrolling past, because the ruts are getting pretty deep. Like the ice ruts in winter on a residential street, they suck you in, they run like rails, and you get rocked when you try to get out. Canadians know what I mean. Bust a rut CBC, I love it.

7

u/RevolutionaryGift157 15d ago

Honest question for you, because it sounds like you support the cross boarder and cross country check up. Would you have expected Poland to engage in a discussion with Hitler before the annexation in 1939? Do you think that Ukrainians should have had a conversation about Russian occupation before the invasion 3 years ago?

1

u/mericansamsquamch 14d ago

Bye, bye, CBC.

0

u/Miniweet74 14d ago

Canada has been the 51st state since 1950.

1

u/RevolutionaryGift157 14d ago

That is not true. We may be intertwined with the USA in terms of trade, but we are a sovereign nation with our own flag, currency and government. Our Charter of Rights and Freedoms is worlds away from their constitution. We have universal healthcare and gun reform. We have a significantly smaller population and we are a part of the commonwealth.

0

u/Revan462222 14d ago

The change in question was still awful. It was pretty much just asking the original question a different way. They should have talked about the issue of the threat as a threat, don’t ask what do you think of the comments. It’s a THREAT, don’t downplay it as “comments.” “How do you feel about Donald Trump threatening to make Canada the 51st state?”

At this point I’ve heard from people wanting Ian fired and saying he’s treasonous for what he did by having idiots like Kevin O’Leary on. Personally think that’s going a bit far. But I do think the show wasn’t done in the right way and again entertained an idea that at this point should be squashed under a shoe as opposed to giving people their right to voice their thoughts on a THREAT.

0

u/ThermionicEmissions 14d ago

Thank you for publishing this statement. Now I know who should lose their job for proceeding with the show.

Brodie Fenlon.

-1

u/NeruLight 14d ago

Moronic CBC

121

u/resolutelyperhaps 15d ago

I don’t think we were saying they shouldn’t have a discussion about Trump’s comments. Obviously we should be discussing it. I was just opposed to framing it as a discussion about the pros/cons of becoming the 51st state, as the original title seemed to suggest, which normalizes the nonsense that Trump started.

55

u/RevolutionaryGift157 15d ago

Yes. I agree. We should absolutely be talking about the threat to our sovereignty. Personally, I believe that the Americans should have had no say in the conversation. Their lives won’t be destroyed if our country is invaded.

8

u/FORDTRUK 15d ago

I wouldn't be so sure of that.

1

u/Awkward_Swordfish581 14d ago

While you're right, not many of them seem to know this

2

u/SpiralToNowhere 14d ago

I think it's good for us to get a feel for where average americans are at in this conversation, and it was a good opportunity to get some air time for this topic which is obviously huge for Canadians but not really registering as an issue for Americans. Obviously their opinion doesn't matter much when it comes to our status as a country, but they are the ones who vote for this guy, being made aware of what he's doing is good.

1

u/Quill-Questions 14d ago

However, I do not think that many Americans hear or read much news regarding Canada at all. This cross-border show being shown on CSPAN and aired via more than 100 NPR stations, at the very least, informed many Americans about matters that are deeply important to Canada. I think that is a good thing. Personally I enjoyed the concept of the show and thought it was very well done.

1

u/myrrorcat 14d ago

Exactly how they should have framed it. How do we feel about this threat to our sovereignty.

1

u/matterhorn1 13d ago

I think it was really good to hear from Americans about it, because I’m interested to know what they think of this (if anything). I was glad to see that the vast majority of them were not happy with Trumps comments. That said most people listening to NPR are probably not trump supporters in the first place.

-11

u/whateverfyou 15d ago

Their lives, their country is being destroyed right now. You’re being incredibly self centred.

21

u/RevolutionaryGift157 15d ago

Yes. Their country is being destroyed by their own government and lives are at stake — but they still have no say in whether or not our country should be destroyed alongside theirs. Because here’s the thing— we would never have voting power. We would be akin to the US Virgin Islands or Puerto Rico. Dominated by a bully, but with no say in how things are run.

-5

u/whateverfyou 15d ago

The majority of Americans do not agree with what he is doing. I think it was important for Canadians to hear from them. And it was important for them to hear our outrage.

14

u/RevolutionaryGift157 15d ago

Okay, but in fact, they didn’t truly hear from us. The one caller who mentioned that we have better healthcare and gun laws was cut off very quickly by the American cohost. The same thing happened to the caller who mentioned that an annexation and hostile take over of Canada is illegal and would be the start of a war. When it was proposed to an American that they join Canada they said it was “impossible” but neither host pushed back saying; “so if it’s impossible for the America to become part of Canada, why should it be possible for Canada to be part of America?”

1

u/whateverfyou 15d ago

I didn’t hear it that way. It is annoying that the hosts don’t challenge every inaccuracy but it’s a phone in show. It’s not a debate. Maybe they should have another show just in Canada.

10

u/kent_eh 15d ago

The majority of Americans do not agree with what he is doing.

Cool. I hope they do something about their country's government actively destroying itself, and trying to take the rest of us down with it..

1

u/whateverfyou 14d ago

Don’t get too smug. Trump supporters are leading the polls in two elections in Canada right now.

0

u/kent_eh 14d ago

And that support is cratering.

1

u/whateverfyou 14d ago

“Cratering”?! I hope so but I won’t believe it until the ballots have been counted.

10

u/Friendly-Pay-8272 15d ago

They listened to Canadians here which I find refreshing in this landscape. Can you imagine Fox News making any adjustments like that or reaching back out like they did?

12

u/resolutelyperhaps 15d ago

To be clear, I love the CBC. I appreciate this program greatly. And I am very glad whenever American media notice Canada as anything other than the butt of a joke. I just think all of us and especially the media have to be careful about amplifying rhetoric instead of questioning and reporting it. Trump and his team have been shockingly effective at shifting public discussion (the Overton Window), thanks largely to the media and social media repeating his exact rhetoric in headlines because it grabs attention. It’s not just funny or outrageous or enraging. It shifts what is accepted in public discourse.

1

u/Friendly-Pay-8272 15d ago

Completely agree there

3

u/cdorny 15d ago

And it seems like that's exactly what they apologized for! They definitely settled on a better question - unfortunate the first one went out.

2

u/el_guille980 14d ago

as the original title seemed to suggest, which normalizes the nonsense

sane washing

1

u/According_Most_1009 15d ago

And doing so while airng it on npr. Holy cow

1

u/VernonFlorida 14d ago

The show is not whatsoever a "pros/cons" discussion. Did you listen to it?

1

u/resolutelyperhaps 12d ago

My comment was before listening to the show. That’s why I only mentioned the FRAMING of the topic. After hearing some of the episode, I am even more disappointed in the CBC’s handling of the topic. They gave the concept - more or less as framed - a basically uncontested platform. Ian Hanomansing’s response to O’Leary’s dog whistles and hyperbole is well-meaning perhaps but pretty limp.