RE: October 6’s Scholarly Advice on CBC

RE: October 6’s Scholarly Advice on CBC

It is obvious by the ideas put forth in Professor Peers column on how he would fix CBC, he has missed the point of why CBC has fallen into such disrepair.

It is preciously because the deep thinkers at CBC retreated to special groups such as those in colleges, city councils, and other special interest group, that the CBC has fallen hard.

Why not try a novel idea, instead of talking hand picked groups, usually picked because they agree with a predetermined goal, go out on the street and see what the average Canadian wants from the CBC?

Why not set up a page in the CBC web site for a WIKI for all to comment, good, bad or ugly?

Why hand pick a group of people?

Put the management in the places where the listeners and viewers are, and have them listen to the people who the CBC is suppose to be serving.

Not the special interest groups.

Why not have the people who want to sit on the board at CBC come to Canadians and tell us why they are the best to be entrusted with a national treasure, and an international gem, like the CBC?

Why not have the person who is appointed to Chair the board of the CBC vetted by Parliament?

Why not have the person who is to be the President of the CBC, vetted by Parliament?

The governing party of the day, should not treat the CBC as a pasture where they can send their political hacks to live out their days.