archive-ca.com » CA » C » CBSC.CA

Total: 480

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • Broadcasters Must Identify Known Sources of Photographs Used in News Reports, Says Canadian Broadcast Standards Council - Canadian Broadcast Standards Council Canadian Broadcast Standards Council
    the event The National Specialty Services Panel examined the complaint under Article 11 of the RTNDA Code of Journalistic Ethics which states Plagiarism is unacceptable Broadcast journalists will strive to honour the intellectual property of others including video and audio materials The majority of the Panel concluded that the broadcast violated this article for the following reasons The broadcaster knew full well the identity of the photographer whose still shots were used in the news report and the Panel s decision should be read as being limited to such an instance T he definition of what is fair what in terms of the RTNDA Code will honour the intellectual property of others must at the very least and consistent with Section 29 2 of the Copyright Act mention the source including the name of the author of the photographic work It seems to the Panel to be the opposite of honouring the intellectual property of a creator to take his or her work without acknowledgment and to in effect pass that work off as the broadcaster s own Although that may not be the intention of the broadcaster it is the inevitable effect of the failure to accord credit particularly where as in the present matter the identity of the photographer was known The Panel does not take a formal position on the differing versions of the complainant and the broadcaster as to whether or not permission was granted Nor does it consider that it needs to do so since it finds that unless the broadcaster is in a position to establish that permission was granted and that that permission extended to the non inclusion of credit for the creator the use made of photographic works for purposes of Article 11 of the RTNDA Code of Journalistic Ethics would be

    Original URL path: http://www.cbsc.ca/broadcasters-must-identify-known-sources-of-photographs-used-in-news-reports-says-canadian-broadcast-standards-council/ (2016-02-12)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Explicit Sexual Discussions, Coarse Language and Abusive Comments Violated Code of Ethics, Says Canadian Broadcast Standards Council - Canadian Broadcast Standards Council Canadian Broadcast Standards Council
    explicit dialogue on radio at times of day when children could be listening The Panel pointed out that it is the time of day and not the sexual substance of the discussion that is at issue The host also frequently used words that are commonly considered coarse The Quebec Panel found in particular that the use of the English f word and francized versions of it as well as French religious epithets contravened Clause 9 c of the CAB Code of Ethics which prohibits airing such language at times of day when children could be listening A third recurring problem with the challenged episodes was the host s comments about both men and women He consistently described women in abusive and degrading terms and made corresponding generalizations He also used disdainful and degrading language about any male who was attentive or willing to care for children The Panel found that the cumulative effect of such comments constituted breaches of both the Human Rights Clause of the CAB Code of Ethics and the article of the CAB Sex Role Portrayal Code prohibiting degrading comments made on the basis of gender Mailloux was also abusive towards different racial or ethnic groups including Maghrebins Arabs Central Americans African Blacks Russians and Japanese The Panel noted that these comments were clearly in violation of Clause 2 of the CAB Code of Ethics which prohibits abusive or unduly discriminatory comments on the basis of race colour and national or ethnic origin The CBSC acknowledged that although the aforementioned breaches had been recurring problems on Doc Mailloux CKAC s parent company Corus Entertainment had implemented strong measures to prevent such problems in future and that Doc Mailloux was no longer on the air Canada s private broadcasters have themselves created industry standards in the form of

    Original URL path: http://www.cbsc.ca/explicit-sexual-discussions-coarse-language-and-abusive-comments-violated-code-of-ethics-says-canadian-broadcast-standards-council/ (2016-02-12)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Broadcaster Takes Extraordinary Measures to Resolve Complaint about F-Word in Song, Says Canadian Broadcast Standards Council - Canadian Broadcast Standards Council Canadian Broadcast Standards Council
    programming does not contain unduly coarse or offensive language The Panel noted that daytime broadcast of the f word in songs remained a breach of broadcasters codified standards It almost goes without saying that the apparent increased on air usage of the various forms of the f word reflects a more frequent use of the term in everyday parlance In the view of the Panel this does not elevate the broadcast of the term at hours of the day when children could be listening to a level of acceptability since the CBSC still finds that there is a meaningful segment of society that is troubled if not offended by the broadcast of such language The Panel did not require the station to make the customary on air announcement of the CBSC decision because it had already aired an apology on six occasions The Panel acknowledged the broadcaster s actions in the following terms The Panel considers that the broadcaster proposed extraordinary measures in order to acknowledge its error and to put the matter right It exceeded by a considerable measure the customary CBSC membership responsibility of any broadcaster to be responsive to a complainant In accordance with its current requirements for members the CBSC would not for example have required the broadcaster to make an announcement of the CBSC decision more than twice and at that the CBSC dictated announcements are statements of its findings and not worded as apologies In other words the broadcaster s preparedness to make an apologetic admission is itself something more than what the CBSC orders That the broadcaster was prepared to do this six times was in the view of the Panel significant In conclusion while the Panel regrets the sentiment of disappointment felt by the complainant it can affirm the station s good

    Original URL path: http://www.cbsc.ca/broadcaster-takes-extraordinary-measures-to-resolve-complaint-about-f-word-in-song-says-canadian-broadcast-standards-council/ (2016-02-12)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Stations Must Clearly Identify Sponsored Programming, Says Canadian Broadcast Standards Council - Canadian Broadcast Standards Council Canadian Broadcast Standards Council
    numerous times A listener complained to the CBSC that CHWO did not reveal that the company actually paid the station for the opportunity to appear on the program She also argued that the host s endorsement of the company was inappropriate The station admitted that the segment was paid for and effectively constituted an advertisement but did not announce this fact because to do so would be stating the obvious The Ontario Panel examined the complaint under Clauses 6 and 14 of the CAB Code of Ethics which require the proper presentation of comment and the clear separation of advertisements from news or information programs The Panel disagreed with the station s assertion and determined that it should have informed listeners that the program was sponsored The Panel made the following comments A ssuming that the program was indeed a commercial the question is whether an ordinary radio listener would have known that I t is the reaction of the ordinary uninformed in commercial radio practices listener that counts In the view of the Panel such audience members could be expected to recognize 15 or 30 second commercial spots but they would not know without advice that the challenged Sunday Showcase was nothing more or less than paid flattery The failure to inform them is misleading and unfair In the matter at hand in addition to the non disclosure of the paid sponsorship of the program the host insinuated himself to an undue extent in the selling of the product namely the services of the builder The Panel also noted that CHWO should have been aware that it was required to advise its audience of that sponsorship clearly transparently and unequivocally because the CBSC had clearly established that principle in a previous decision released in 2006 Canada s private broadcasters

    Original URL path: http://www.cbsc.ca/stations-must-clearly-identify-sponsored-programming-says-canadian-broadcast-standards-council/ (2016-02-12)
    Open archived version from archive

  • No Inherent Conflict of Interest when Politicians Serve as Radio Hosts, Says Canadian Broadcast Standards Council - Canadian Broadcast Standards Council Canadian Broadcast Standards Council
    words the issue appears to relate to the unfair advantage that may accrue to an on air individual in the midst of an election contest Provided one is outside that period no necessary incompatibility is seen to ensue This does not mean that the Panel considers that absolutely anything could be said at any time by a candidate or an office holder It only means that the Panel does not consider that there is anything inherently incompatible between the holding or seeking of office by an individual on the one hand and being on air on the other The Ontario Panel appreciates that some Canadian broadcasters will prefer not to confer such an access advantage on an individual at any time even when there is no political campaign in contemplation That needless to say is their choice In both cases the Panel concluded that the hosts had responded to issues that had already come before City Council There was no question in either case of advocacy regarding matters about to come before City Council The Panel added that the access even the advantage that the politician host undeniably has is not inherently undue during a non campaign period Moreover where the political status of the speaker is known to the audience the listeners are not in any way deceived Indeed it is arguable that audiences having the opportunity to benefit from the knowledge and experience of an individual in office secure an information advantage In the CIGL FM decision in which the co host was customarily announcing sports news the complainant asserted that Miller as a sportscaster should not be reporting on a matter municipal affairs that was not his primary on air responsibility The Panel disagreed adding that he like any other broadcaster has no inherent limitation on the

    Original URL path: http://www.cbsc.ca/no-inherent-conflict-of-interest-when-politicians-serve-as-radio-hosts-says-canadian-broadcast-standards-council/ (2016-02-12)
    Open archived version from archive

  • No Code Breach as CBSC Panel Splits on Controversial Bruce Allen Reality Check - Canadian Broadcast Standards Council Canadian Broadcast Standards Council
    for offending people The B C Regional Panel examined the public s complaints under Clause 2 of the CAB Code of Ethics which prohibits abusive or unduly discriminatory material or comment which is based on matters of race national or ethnic origin colour religion etc The Panel unanimously concluded that the Reality Check did not violate that Clause because While most of the examples appear to be Sikh community focussed they are not all of that nature In any event the Panel finds none of the examples cited problematic in their mere mention under the Human Rights Clause They are all issues of current or recent public discussion and even if controversial absolutely fair to raise and discuss The Panel concludes therefore that the identification of the issues noted in this paragraph is neither unduly discriminatory nor tied specifically to an identifiable group The Panel also examined the complaints under Clause 6 of the CAB Code of Ethics which requires the full fair and proper presentation of opinion editorial and comment On this point the six members of the B C Panel were evenly divided Those who concluded that that comment did not violate the Code provision came to that result on the grounds that Bruce Allen was only expressing a political perspective which he was free to espouse and to broadcast Political speech is the most important kind of speech to protect and its occasional unpleasantness does not change its nature If anything in this instance as Allen himself argued the provocative nature of what he said did result in a heightened awareness of the issue and considerable further discussion in the public place a great democratic plus The bottom line for these Adjudicators is that the ineptitude and bullying tone of the editorial have not rendered it sufficiently improper or unfair The other Adjudicators argued that Allen s identification of Sikh religious headgear as handkerchiefs and the Sikh surname as Khan rather than Kaur were mocking or condescending They added In other words he has felt free to lash out at the practices of those he characterizes as immigrants and to do so without taking the time or showing the respect to get his research right in the first place Because he and members of his family may not wear turbans or burkas does not entitle him to deride those religious or traditional practices of other Canadians whether of the first or older generational presence in this country While there is room for a legitimate debate on the current Canadian rules relating to the various accommodation issues he listed it is not on the us and them basis he has chosen It is these incorrect and divisive statements that the Panel finds improper One complainant also objected to Allen s appearance on the Christy Clark Show The Panel found that that program was an entirely balanced discussion of the controversy and surrounding issues The point for the Panel is that Christy Clark provided strong balance on the challenged

    Original URL path: http://www.cbsc.ca/no-code-breach-as-cbsc-panel-splits-on-controversial-bruce-allen-reality-check/ (2016-02-12)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Misleading Promos in Violation of Broadcast Code - Canadian Broadcast Standards Council Canadian Broadcast Standards Council
    minutes away from great classic rock He provided a block of time from one particular day as an example which demonstrated that there are sometimes considerably more than two minutes between songs particularly during the morning show Q107 explained that the two minutes away did not apply during the morning show so it did not air the promo during that program The complainant argued that the use of the word never in the promo implied that that would be the case throughout the day The Ontario Regional Panel examined the complaint under Clause 12 of the CAB Code of Ethics which requires that particular care shall be taken to ensure that promotions are not misleading and promises made are what they are represented to be The Panel disagreed with the complainant s interpretation of the words two minutes away but nevertheless concluded that the promos violated the Code The Panel made the following observations The two minutes can after all run in either direction In other words one could still quite legitimately be four minutes away and still be within two minutes from the song that just ended and upon the expiry of that two minutes be within two minutes of the song about to begin The broadcaster created a greater problem for itself though by not qualifying or restricting other words in the promo By saying and reiterating never without excluding the very large block of time between 5 00am 9 00am it appears to the Panel that it was purposefully luring listeners by the promise of frequent music The Panel also noted that the station modified the promo after receiving the complaint Canada s private broadcasters have themselves created industry standards in the form of Codes on ethics equitable portrayal television violence and journalistic independence by which they

    Original URL path: http://www.cbsc.ca/misleading-promos-in-violation-of-broadcast-code/ (2016-02-12)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Criticism of Pit-Bull Owners Not in Breach of Broadcast Code - Canadian Broadcast Standards Council Canadian Broadcast Standards Council
    that they also should be killed He spoke with callers some of whom agreed with him and some of whom did not The CBSC received a complaint from a listener who was concerned that Coren disparaged pit bull owners and advocated violence against them The Ontario Regional Panel examined the complaint under Clauses 6 and 9 a of the CAB Code of Ethics which respectively require the proper presentation of comment and the avoidance of comments that sanction or promote violence The Panel concluded that the program did not violate either of those Code provisions The Panel stated that it does not agree with the complainant s assertion that the host was in fact advocat ing to his listeners the killing of their owners i e the owners of pit bulls To understand the host s position it should be noted that contextually speaking he referred to the owners of pit bulls uniformly as cretins or by the application of other equally derogatory designations The Panel understands clearly the disrespect manifested by the host for pit bull owners but nothing in what it has reviewed leads them to believe in the slightest that he had any intention of advocating violence of any kind toward the owners of pit bulls Coren favoured pit bulls being put to sleep In the view of the Panel that was an opinion that Coren was entitled to air The Panel cannot disagree with the complainant s assertion that the host tarred all owners of pit bulls The issue though is not whether Coren made such comments but whether he was entitled to be as critical as he was Bad taste perhaps but fundamentally reflective of an opinion that goes to the dog owners lifestyle choice not to an innate human characteristic such as gender the

    Original URL path: http://www.cbsc.ca/criticism-of-pit-bull-owners-not-in-breach-of-broadcast-code/ (2016-02-12)
    Open archived version from archive



  •