You may have noticed some of the changes going at CBC News which started last week, including the name change of their 24-hour channel from “CBC Newsworld” to the “CBC News Network.” This strays a little too close to the “CNN” brand for my tastes, and it’s not the only way CBC is now resembling American news providers, at least on the surface.
Anchors are now standing at counters instead of delivering the news from behind desks.
Different segments, such as the weather and sports, feel hurried, and cut quickly from one to the other, sometimes in a seemingly random order.
The stately authoritative music has been replaced with some sort of urgent disco reminiscent of the original ER television show theme.
There are so many flat screen TVs around the new set that I’m wondering if they’re being paid by the manufacturer.
Bright colours abound. Instead of CBCs hallmark dull greys, blues and red (Yes, they even managed to make red look subdued.), we now have orange, which makes it difficult to distinguish the morning news from an ING commercial.
Well below the surface, though, CBC seems to be making a genuine effort to enhance content in spite of diminishing resources. Their reporters and other staff have been redistributed to provide better, more relevant coverage for Canadians. Notably, the corporation has reinvested in local news, trying to re-establish some of the connection to communities lost years ago when local resources were cutback to the bone.
Also, it would appear that social media is on the mind of CBC News management. The emphatically (desperately?) emphasized integration of Twitter, Skype and other Web 2.0 thingies signals CBC’s sudden welcoming of input from me, the average audience member. Cuts to and from commercial breaks and between stories are rich with the zeitgeist of the Canadian people…at least the part that fits into 140 characters or less.
Although the CBC is predictably proud and confident in these changes, and others are as predictably critical, I’m not yet sure where I stand.
Part of why I love Canadian news media, and especially the CBC, is their slower, more methodical investigation and analysis of the issues, and the calm, informative reportage. I cringe watching this current drift of Canadian journalism towards the rushed, frenzied, fear-based, facts-be-damned, yelling-louder-makes-you-right, breaking news—“This just in!” style practiced in the United States.
As well, I’m really not sure about CBC’s approach to social media. It’s like they’re reluctantly opening the gates, long after the unwashed masses have already invaded the castle and made themselves at home. These occasional peeks into “What Canadians have to say…” via Twitter, etc. doesn’t really appreciate the shift of communications to a conversational basis. These tools are merely symptoms, or perhaps catalysts, of this, and picking them up doesn’t mean you’re suddenly a part of the conversation. Big news corporations are no longer the only ones with broadcasting power. Everyone has it, so the days of them dictating what news is or isn’t important, or always being first to know about an event are over. I don’t think CBC’s comprehension of this is quite there yet.
Still, though, I’m not ready to dismiss these “renewals” as ineffective or disingenuous. At least for now, I really believe they are trying to offer us a better product under increasingly tight budget constraints. Even though they’re sometimes misguided and awry in their implementation, I think CBC is working to create good content that is as accessible as possible to all Canadians.
We’ll just have to see what changes stick, and which ones get tossed in the “oops” pile. And based on the CBC’s tone, I’m sense that they appreciate the uncertainty. Of course they’re insisting that a lot of research, thought and planning went into these changes, and that they will succeed. At the same time, though, they are also allowing some wiggle room, hinting that things will be tweaked as audience feedback rolls in. (Ratings, as opposed to Tweets, being a large part of that, I’m assuming.) To my mind, this openness is the most promising change of all at the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.
Wordpress by the Minute
Limestone New Media Group
For Immediate Release: The Hobson and Holtz Report
Inside PR
The Canadian Podcast Buffet
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
A few years ago, when I still subscribed to cable TV, Global did a similar sort wide scale revamp to their evening newscast. The end result was a hurried delivery of “everything’s an emergency” news bits, which put them in line with the likes of Fox, CNN and MSNBC. The common scare-tacular approach to the evening news is something I’ve come to expect in the US, but not in Canada. That said, I suppose it was only a matter of time until we blindly followed the trends in the US. While we could easily argue that these American networks have ruined the news with their crappy, flashy coverage, one could easily counter with the fact that more people are tuning in to watch this sort of garbage.
Prior to the wholesale changes at CBC, I was a regular CBC Radio listener (everyday on my walk to work), and CBC Newsworld (every night before I fall asleep). As you’ve pointed out, the stylistic similarities between the new CBC and Fox, CNN et al., is uncanny, and unfortunate. Content wise, I find it similarly hurried and busy, while there are fewer redeeming, indepth pieces to keep me interested. Far be it for me to argue with the “research” the heads of CBC have done, but in the end, loyal viewers such as myself will grow weary of compromised coverage. I’ll simply have to go elsewhere.
I’m willing to give CBC a chance. Change, in every form, can be upsetting so I always try and give myself some time to adjust. CBC will never completely give up their slower and steadier approach. And, to give them their due, they’ve been experimenting with incorporating social networking into their broadcasts (in a limited way) for a while – remember the last election and the random useless Twitter updates?
Plus, Evan Solomon now has a daily show. How can that be a bad thing?
Hi Harvey,
Thanks very much for the comment.
I share your concern that CBC’s research and understanding of their audience leaves something to be desired. Further, my worry is that there’s really nowhere left to go, at least in the video/audio news broadcast business, if and when CBC goes the way of the Fox. To my mind CBC isn’t just part of an ongoing trend, but the last artisans in a dying craft. What will be left if traditional journalism doesn’t adjust to the changing market?
Deborah,
Good to have you in on the conversation!
You are definitely right about change of any kind causing unease, and that we’d all do well to step back, take a deep breath and try to give CBC a fair, more objective assessment that involves less of our own fear of everything new and different. Honestly, we have to get bent out of shape just because they rearranged the furniture. It’s not necessarily the harbinger doom.
Then again, the writing is on the wall…at least as it’s displayed on a multitude of panel television screens.
As for CBC’s long-standing experimentation with social media, I agree. They have been at it for a while, and to a successful degree. I even wrote about it on an earlier form of this blog. However, this has more been in talking about social media through traditional means, or using social media tools for broadcasting. Their room for improvement lies in building and keeping connected with an actual community, including two-way dialogue and all. The higher-ups there just haven’t quite grasped the significance of the “Web 2.0″ mentality, and the savvy, demanding and extremely giving audience it has created.
Hello to My Canadian Friends,
As a kid growing up in Cleveland, Ohio with London’s CFPL on cable in the 80-90s, as well as getting CBC Windsor over the air a bunch (Windsor is 160 mi. away), I can honestly say that “It’s about time”!!! I like the CBC’s new direction. It like it because its still simplistic compared to US tastes, but it gives CBC a spark it never had. I have always liked Canadian news since I was a kid, and I don’t think there is much to worry about in losing its unique presentation style. Yes, I know it is a bit more to their look than you may be used to, but it seems that more US stations are actually going the Canadian route of doing news. Look at WBZ-TV (Boston) or WCCO-TV intros/graphics on youtube and you’ll catch my drift. I am glad that CBC has made things interesting, instead of just keeping us comfortable. I was living in Seattle for the last 7 years, and got CBC BC on cable there, and I always felt that outside the “National”, CBC’s local product was lacking a direction and look. It was trying to be hip, while keeping its rigid, staid look. After awhile, it was a hot mess to look at (the Canada Now show). You can’t do both. CBC has now set the bar so that they can be more flexible and innovative at a faster rate, instead of being slow and mythodical. Trust me, they will become the BBC of North America with this new direction I think. And I don’t blame ‘em, for they have to go out there and compete with Global and CTV, plus all the BBC and US offerings out there in a crowded media spectrum. Also, the graphics are nothing like anything we have here, and seem to be very sophisticated and polished. I could only wish that US stations would take the risk and do what the CBC is doing…And one more thing…a few years back, once Strombo’s show hit the airwaves (The Hour), I had a feeling that CBC was using that as a test for what they are doing now…think about it, before The Hour, when has CBC put on anything that skewed (and was directly relevant) to the youth demographic?
When I read this, I felt like I could have written the same words about one of Denver’s local stations, “2TheDeuce.” Yes, that’s what they call themselves now — since March of this year. Snappy, huh? The makeover came with a very sultry, long-legged, velvet-voiced anchor whose wardrobe is more appropriate for cocktail parties than delivering news. She strolls from table to table (yes, these newscasters are standing now, just as on CBC), chatting up the co-anchors and commenting on their reports. The set, by the way has LOTS of orange and angles. It makes my eyes ache.
I could go on. But, like I said, your words pretty much describe this situation.
Thanks for another fine example of interesting writing!
Debi
Hi J.J.,
Welcome to the conversation! I only hope my egregious lateness in getting to your comment hasn’t discouraged you from continuing to contribute.
Actually, in a way, my unexpected absence has benefitted this particular discussion, as it’s allowed time for the CBC to work into its new skin, and for us in the audience to try getting used to it.
Sadly, I don’t feel it’s working.
You are very right in a lot of your observances on CBC, J.J., but I’m not sure you’re accounting for their dire financial situations. For decades CBC’s budget has been slashed by the government, forcing them to work with less and rely more on advertizing, thus pitting them, as you noted, against Global, CTV and other private competitors.
The problem with this is that CBC is not a private broadcaster, and shouldn’t be forced to act like one. Their high quality of journalism, openess to new forms of art, promotion of innovative music, promotion of intellectual discourse and appreciation for Canadian culture are rapidly eroding hallmarks of the CBC. These things are not popular commercially, and so need to be pursued by other means–namely by way of government funding and private donations.
Right now their attempt to be more hip, young, in-your-face and, ultimately, more attractive to advertizers, is ill-fated. All that I see happening is a loss of quality control in the newsroom, and almost deperate clinging to “Strombo” and the few other venture that have kinda, sorta worked…maybe.
You applaud CBC’s daring to be different, but from my perspective this is exactly what they are sacraficing. Investing in news that’s relevant and thoughtful, regardless of its lack of sexiness, stood out as a bold move in todays market oversaturated with loud, angry people, seizure-enducing cuts from one story to another, obnoxiously vapid banter amongst over-styled tv personalities; and all the other “new” stuff they’re trying out.
Now I admit that the CBC will never reclaim the prominence it once had. People just aren’t as interested by and large as they were. I concede that a much smaller-scale CBC is likely the reality becaue the justification for funding just isn’t there. But even a smaller version is better than losing it entirely, and getting just an awkward clone of the other networks in return.
Hi Debi,
As with J.J., I apologize profusely for taking so long to address your comment. I’m very sorry for your loss of your local station in Denver, and your “gain” of “2TheDeuce.” (Seriously, that’s their new brand? Eek!)
It’s funny in the very unfunny way how news sets are now being remodelled all in a very generic way, with specific colour schemes, layouts, carefully placed panel TVs, etc. It reminds me of how fast-food joints are all modeled to particular specs in order to make people hungry so they buy something, but too uncomfortable to stay very long, so there’s always room for more customers.
Maybe there are some realms best left free of marketing’s influence?