Peter Mansbridge, Rex Murphy, and the CBC brand
Once again, the issue of media people's private speaking fees has reared its head.
Former investigative journalist Andrew Mitrovica has written several articles on the iPolitics site over the past month about CBC chief correspondent Peter Mansbridge and CBC Cross Country Checkup host Rex Murphy giving speeches to Canadian oil producers.
Here's part of what Mitrovica wrote:
Still, like Murphy, Mansbridge remains largely unapologetic for accepting cash to speak. He makes about 20 speeches every year. He donates all or some of the money in several cases. Other times, significantly, he apparently keeps it all, less his speaking agency’s cut.
And like Murphy, he still won’t tell his audience how much he has made on paid speeches and who has paid him over many years of working the lucrative speaking circuit. Why the reluctance?
This comes at a time when Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau is under a cloud for collecting speaking fees while serving as a member of Parliament.
One of the first feature articles I wrote for the Georgia Straight in 1992 concerned journalists accepting fees from corporations and professional associations.
At the time, a TV news assignment editor at CKVU, a TV news director at BCTV, and the province's most popular hotline-radio host had all received consulting fees from organizations that their programs covered.
In the early part of the 21st century, the Vancouver-based National Speakers Bureau listed speaking fees on its website. These fees were taken down after I wrote about them.
Back then, the Globe and Mail's Margaret Wente and the Vancouver Sun's Vaughn Palmer were available for $3,000 to $5,000.
The CBC's Ian Hanomansing would speak for $5,000 to $7,500.
The then-editor of the Globe and Mail, Edward Greenspon, could be booked for a fee of $7,500 to $10,000.
In today's wired world, it would be easy for the CBC to create a website listing journalists' speaking fees and the source of these payments.
Ideally, this site would mention whether these fees were turned over to a worthwhile charity.
People in many occupations often moonlight—and there are legitimate questions about whether an employer has any legal right to thwart that.
The key is disclosure so that viewers and listeners know if a taxpayer-subsidized broadcaster is also on the payroll of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.
The failure to take such a simple and straightforward measure can leave the public with an impression that management is trying to hide something.
That's not good for the brand.
Comments
10 Comments
Mark Schneider
Mar 9, 2014 at 7:26am
Charlie - thanks for picking up on Andrew's item. It's a great suggestion to have a website that functions as a clear window on journalist's speaking fees. Especially since it could also function as a marketplace to buy a journalist's attention. Why not? then everybody would know what the price is, and who is paying.
Yeah right
Mar 9, 2014 at 7:59am
If they're speaking on their own time then it's none our business how much they make.
DR-Montreal
Mar 9, 2014 at 9:08am
My father worked for CBC for 25 years, but does anyone with a brain watch CBC anymore other than for a few investigative journalism programs that remain more or less independent?
I stopped watching Mansbridge after his breathless live coverage of cruise missiles slamming into Baghdad like it was a fireworks display, rather than high tech murder kicking off an egregious war of aggression in 2003. He and CBC have been a hand-maiden to the US propaganda machine ever since.
cuz
Mar 9, 2014 at 11:43am
CBC - your tax dollars at waste. Anyone who knows anything about television production will tell you that their staff for Hockey Night in Canada is ridiculous. Their staff is four times the number of people required by SportsNet or TSN, and their coverage is lame and uninformative. But when you have an unlimited budget of taxpayer money and no one to answer to, you can pretty much do whatever you want. One could probably think their "journalism" programs are the same. I can't wait until SportsNet takes over HNIC.
HellSlayerAndy
Mar 9, 2014 at 1:16pm
So to recap...
If some corpmedia employee is getting a paycheque through the ad revenues of said Petroleum, they're 'objective'. But if they cut out the Boss and get the money directly that is less objective and LOOKS worst for the brand?
Sorry...but if Mr. Smith got a hefty speaking fee from Rennie and Condo Club that wouldn't make me or anyone else think he was less objective than if Rennie and his pals simply purchased a ton of colour full page ads.
Why so timid, Mr. Smith. You sound like Mr. Dix in that last campaign preaching the gospel of 'campaign financing' while never explaining...why and nobody in the media bothered to ask?
Is there a question of political integrity, Mr. Dix...could you explain this process of how monied interests 'buy' politicians who then in turn produce laws and regulations in compensation and if you, Mr. Dix, think this is occurring, why would you think for a single minute that relying on the old sawhorse of 'limiting donations from corporations or unions' would stop politicians predisposed to such behaviours when their are already laws in place to deal with this form of corruption?
Suggesting that somehow politicians and media 'brands' would be enhanced by websites that 'tell all' about journalists and their corporate speaking fees or that political corruption is controlled through mo' better methods of registering lobbyists or limiting donations, is laughable cover intended only to make the corruption and propaganda LOOK better and shows a total misunderstanding of the economic relationship between elites and their 'employees'.
Exposure to Light is NOT the best disinfectant regardless of how many media employees believe such nonsense or how many times you read Manufacturing Consent...a good janitorial service (powerful watchdog) and thorough washing methods (strong regulations) is a much better solution to the spread of disease than volunteerism or hoping that someday they will see the errs of their ways.
AC
Mar 9, 2014 at 2:50pm
Mansbridge just happens to part of CBC - one of the most important institutes in Canada. Georgia Straight is kinda up there too IMHO when it comes to comprehensive news articles.
The oil industry is our highest profile antagonists so I wish he wasn't associated with them in any way. At the same time, he could be a link to drill some sense into them.
But who cares how much he makes. Only a strict Buddhist monk might decline any payment. Give the bald bugger a break.
MarkFornataro
Mar 9, 2014 at 7:05pm
I believe the late journalist/broadcaster Jack Webster refused-for reasons of principle, and to avoid any appearance of conflict of interest- the kind of speaking fees Mansbridge and Murphy accepted.
boris moris
Mar 10, 2014 at 11:03am
I wonder how many times a month/week/day Mansbridge takes direction from the CFR? Now that it's 2014 maybe they have an implant directly inside his high school educated brain. He sure is an obedient drone.
Sit. Beg. Roll over. Bite down on this air biscuit. That's a good anchor.
Bela Bugliosi
Mar 10, 2014 at 1:34pm
Can we re-brand Rex Murphy, the Flappylipped Fundamental Fulminator, as Rex Morlock... the Publicly Funded and Fully Pulpitted Dilbit Shillboy...Lard of the Tar Sands.
Sit, Rex. Lie down. Beg. Lick. That's a good shillboy.
John Vee
Apr 4, 2014 at 7:37am
Could you please have a say along with your panel regarding forced French in Canada, it must be very important as so far as I am aware the government has spent 6 billion dollars on this subject . I have not heard any comments on the news media. Please add Rex Murphy`s comments. Is the news media Muzzled on this subject ?