Every now and then, the CBC tells us something that as taxpayers, we ought to know. It was, for example, the CBC that first informed us AHS chief Deanna Hinshaw received a six-figure cash-benefit payout for her efforts during the COVID-19 response. Kudos in that case to enterprising reporter Janet French..However, as a global defence for the CBC as a news reporting agency, to concede that much is a bit like saying pre-war Italian Fascist leader Benito Mussolini at least made the trains run on time. So he did. But that one might have departed Rome at the advertised time and arrived punctually in Naples, does not make me love fascism more..CBC, same principle. That it occasionally delivers a gold nugget, doesn't make me love it..Because if you think the CBC is a news outlet, think again. For decades, it’s been nothing more than a propaganda agency feeding the prejudices of upper-income, over-educated people in the 905 who shower before they go to work, not after. The kind who… you know, don’t drive pickup trucks, and don't think much of people who do. It's true. The CBC thinks it's their job to make us all better people, according to the consensus of virtue as understood among Canada's self-defined elite..Through it all, however, the CBC would say they did indeed do great journalism. And that elite would have nodded approvingly: It's hard to conceive the possibility of bias when one’s prejudices are affirmed and one’s deeply held convictions left unchallenged..But now the CBC has come out and made official something for which critics long condemned it anyway: It has no commitment to traditional notions of objectivity..Two things to note here..The first source of bias is what’s even considered newsworthy. If the CBC is interested — let’s say an anti-Israel protest — they’ll send the team. If they’re not — maybe a pro-life march with 13,000 people on Parliament Hill — well, it’s like the proverbial tree that falls unheard in the forest..Notwithstanding this, the CBC coasts on a general assumption that whatever they do cover will at least be done with some attempt at objectivity. That is, who-what-when-where- just the facts, ma’am, get both sides of the story, then stand back and let the viewers make up their own minds..Well, no more. We might not draw the right conclusions, which would put our democracy in danger, wouldn't it? So now, as reported by the Western Standard’s own Christopher Oldcorn, the CBC is considering dropping the “journalistic objectivity” requirement for “visible minority group” reporters..READ MORE: CBC Considering dropping the 'journalistic objectivity' requirement.For once, it’s not woke managers. Whatever you see on the screen, the official line is CBC journalists “do not express their own personal opinion because it affects the perception of impartiality and could affect an open and honest exploration of an issue.” Instead, this is reportedly an internal demand by CBC reporters, backed by their union, to stop forcing reporters and staff to remain neutral on political issues. Especially minority reporters..Why would reporters want that? It wasn’t that long ago that if you called a reporter biased, you’d have a hot argument on your hands and your beer in your lap. It was an insult..But, we’re reckoning without the current crop of J-school grads, many of whom have been taught something very different — advocacy journalism. Crudely described, the idea is that it’s in the public interest to be non-objective because true objectivity is impossible, anyway. So might as well educate people in right-thinking..Of course, in some ways, that’s just back to the first days of newspapers 300 years ago. Most were established to push a particular cause or party. (While it's not officially listed as a propaganda ministry for the Liberal government, by and large the CBC wouldn’t behave much differently if it were.).But it isn’t 300 years ago, it’s now, and if we're among the small number of Canadians who listen to the CBC three things are true:.1) We’re looking for news, the straight goods delivered without fear or favour, to help us make some pretty important decisions..2) We’re paying nearly $1.3 billion a year to get both sides of the issues, not the one point of view that an elite thinks is good for us..3) They’ve told us their people just want to tell us what they think is good for us..In this regard then, check out my colleague Linda Slobodian’s article ‘CBC shamefully airs ‘documentary’ claiming white women all white supremacists.’ Published September 29, it’s a nasty piece of race-baiting, masquerading as fearless consideration of a national issue. (Except it’s US-national, not Canadian.).READ MORE: CBC shamefully airs 'documentary' claiming all white women are white supremacists .Then there's this little gem from Western Standard reporter Jonathan Bradley. .READ MORE: CBC unveils children's show about colonialism, racism.There's lots more like this. The sad truth is whatever occasional gold the CBC may deliver on the news side, it's become a tireless and publicly-funded crusader for everything woke. By definition, woke divides people. Far indeed then, has the CBC strayed from its original conception as a grand unifying agency to bring Canadians together. It's become a propaganda agency..We're paying for this..Who asked for it?.And why do we let it go on?
