It is unwise for Canadians viewers to rely on the state broadcaster “if you want to be fully informed,” CBC Ombudsman Jack Nagler said in his final report before retiring. Nagler, who served in his role for 34 years, in his final report as Ombudsman faulted the CBC as “too timid” in failing to acknowledge differing points of view in its news coverage, according to Blacklock’s Reporter. Nagler’s term as Ombudsman ended December 31. His comments were in response to viewer complaints of one-sided CBC News coverage of the pandemic including uncritical treatment of vaccine mandates.“Even if CBC were perfect it is unwise to rely on any single news source if you want to be fully informed,” wrote Nagler.“This is part of the problem that has been created in recent years as many of us have slipped into ‘news silos’ or ‘information bubbles’ or whatever other jargon you want to use.”.BREAKING: CBC's Catherine Tait tops CTF's 'Naughty List'.“We aren’t hearing enough information that conflicts with our pre-existing views, and when we do, too often we reject it out of hand,” wrote Nagler.“Read widely. Watch widely. Listen widely. And don’t assume any source, even CBC News, is going to tell you everything you need to know.”“I do not pretend to be an expert on these subjects. One reason I make that point is because with rare exceptions journalists are not experts either. Their mission is simply to give the rest of us information that we can consider as we form our own opinions.”The CBC from the onset of the pandemic had a duty to “make sure the public got consistent information” in dealing with a crisis, wrote Nagler.“As time went on it’s perfectly fair to argue the CBC and other media should also have been more willing to report on perspectives that fell outside the consensus view of public health officials, not because those officials were wrong, but because there was an erosion of consensus among the public.”“Whether that was because of misinformation or because people were reasonably considering the effect of public health measures is almost beside the point,. Those developments were interesting stories and could have received more attention than they did.”“If I were writing as a media critic rather than Ombudsman I might say that CBC was too timid about giving exposure to some of the sentiments in Canadian society during the height of the pandemic,” wrote Nagler. “That does not mean it was wrong to give credence to experts.”.CBC executives frustrated by media coverage of $14.9 million executive bonuses.The Ombudsman in his final report quoted Nancy Waugh, CBC manager of journalistic standards, as suggesting a requirement for balanced news coverage should not be taken literally in all cases.“CBC policy acknowledges that how widely held a particular point of view is should also be taken into account,” wrote Waugh. “In other words, fringe notions however fervently held by individuals are not afforded the same time and attention as mainstream views.”“While CBC’s journalistic policy expects our coverage to balance differing points of view it also acknowledges balance is not a matter of precise equivalency. It does not mean that every voice advocating vaccination must be immediately matched with an equally strong voice opposed. Indeed balance is a more sophisticated concept that can be achieved over a series of programs or over time.”
