Monday, June 12, 2006

Seriously, she's coo coo for cocoa puffs...

From Val's kooky website:

June 11: News release CHUM previously purchased Stern's TV show for CITY TV but cancelled it before even airing an episode because they knew it would violate Canadian broadcast standards. Click here for MediaWatch intervention on Stern.

That Link to the MediaWatch intervention letter to the CRTC is from March, 2000. It contains the following paragraph:

When CHUM cancelled Stern's show in Montreal, and decided not to air the TV version of the program, it did so on grounds that: "CHUM is committed to adhering to the industry codes administered by the Broadcast Standards Council. It is clear that the television show will not meet those standards." Having had direct, daily experience of the program, CHUM is in a unique position to be able to comment on the show's ability to live up to the standards. If its conclusion is correct, how is it possible for the program to be airing in Toronto without contravening the standards?

What exactly is the point of bringing this up Val? This isn't even the same Howard Stern TV show. You are just continuing to show your ignorance toward the topic. Also note that even this quote doesn't specifically say that the Stern show DOES violate the Broadcast Standards Act, only that it was CHUM's feeling that it would. That decision was made before the December 1999 decision to renew CILQ-FM's licence. Where the CRTC noted:

4. In response, the licensee stated that it now edits the Howard Stern Show to ensure that it complies with the Broadcasting Act (the Act) and the Canadian Association of Broadcaster's codes. The licensee noted that, in a letter dated 25 February 1999 to MediaWatch, the CBSC stated that the program is "edited to conform to Canadian standards."

But please Val, let's try and stay on point. It's now 2006 not 2000. The radio show is on subscription based satellite radio not over the open airwaves. The TV show is only available via a specialty subscription service, not on a major network. Why not try and frame your arguments as to why that set up isn't acceptable to you?

No comments: