Jeffrey Simpson whacks CBC again, but is it justified?

In today's Globe and Mail, national-affairs columnist Jeffrey Simpson took another one of his periodic swipes at the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.

"CBC's answer to funding problems has been massive popularization in the search for audience maximization," Simpson wrote. "A deep disdain for intellectualism pervades both English-language television and radio..."

I worked at CBC for many years, and I can say  there is some truth to what  Simpson wrote. However, there are also  many notable exceptions.

At its best, The Current, hosted by Anna Maria Tremonti, stands out as a model of what public broadcasting can be when it strives to provide an alternative to crime-and-mayhem-obsessed commercial media.

The Current did an exceptional job educating the public about the Bush administration's use of torture and  its flouting of international law. The Globe and Mail, on the other hand, has done a dismal job on this story.

In this province, BC Almanac's modest  host, Mark Forsythe, cannot be accused of having a deep disdain for intellectualism. Forsythe is well-read, cerebral, and knows a great deal about the province's economy, history, and culture.

National radio news reporters Derek Stoffel, Vik  Adhophia,  and Laura Lynch are also not lightweights.

But on the whole, there are still far too many interviews on CBC about crime and death. And there is not nearly as much effort put into educating citizens about public policy.

As It Happens , which starts at 6:30 p.m., also needs a kick in the ass because  the producers and writers  are  trying too hard to be clever rather than holding people in power accountable.

One of the most significant problems, as I see it, is the increasing influence of CBC Television over CBC Radio. Sometimes it seems that the local radio service has become a billboard to promote local TV newscasts.

CBC Television has some bright spots. They include Erica Johnson's work on  Marketplace, the news reporting of Nahlah Ayed,  Neil Macdonald and  Duncan McCue, and  Linden MacIntyre's exceptional journalism on the fifth estate, just to name a few. Terence McKenna's documentaries are amazing.

But I can do without the run-of-the-mill stuff, including the At Issue panels, the Rex Murphy commentaries, the excessive pageantry  that accompanies every Canadian death in Afghanistan, and Peter Mansbridge's efforts to market the show by broadcasting newscasts from communities across the country.

CBC brass would be wise to listen to Jeffrey Simpson's critique. The Corp. would be even wiser to put him back on the tube as a regular political commentator on the national newscasts.

But I'm  guessing that Mansbridge doesn't want to put anyone on the panel who might blow away the others with his intellect, which is why we'll continue to suffer through the "analysis" of  Andrew Coyne and Chantal Hebert.

"Political commentary apes that of private television, with discussions revolving not around substance but who is winning, what are the political calculations, who is up and who is down--questions that for the most part evoke the response: Who cares?" Simpson wrote.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Charlie Smith previously worked for CBC in Vancouver.