How to Complain to CBC about O’Leary’s exchange with Chris Hedges about Occupy Wall Street
Recently, Rabble.ca drew a blog post from Creekside to my attention. The post offers a considered reflection on an exchange which took place on the CBC show between Lang and O’Leary Exchange. (I have recently added this post to my blog as well).
The exchange was between one of the show’s hosts Kevin O’Leary, and Pulitzer Prize winner Chris Hedges focusing on the Occupy Wall Street (#occupywallstreet, #ows) protests.
While I will write about the show in more detail in another post, the point of this post is to encourage people, if you deem fit, to file a complaint with the CBC for Kevin O’Leary’s manner in the interview as a clear violation of CBC Journalistic standards.
Complaints should be sent to the CBC Ombudsman and should be in writing with your name, address and telephone number. Note that the Ombudsman does not respond to anonymous complaints.
You must including the following information: Program Name: Lang and O’Leary Exchange on CBC Television, CBC News Network or CBCNews.ca. Air Date: October 6, 2011.
Be specific. When you feel a program or report was inaccurate, unfair or biased, please indicate how it was inaccurate, unfair or biased.
Complaints can be sent via email to the CBC Ombudsman.
Alternatively, complaints can be sent via snail mail to:
P.O. Box 500, Station A
Toronto, Ontario M5W 1E6
Via fax to: Fax: (416) 205-2825
Via telephone: (416) 205-2978
Wondering what the CBC Journalistic Standards are? Read them here:
We seek out the truth in all matters of public interest. We invest our time and our skills to learn, understand and clearly explain the facts to our audience. The production techniques we use serve to present the content in a clear and accessible manner.
In our information gathering and reporting, we treat individuals and organizations with openness and respect. We are mindful of their rights. We treat them even-handedly.
We contribute to informed debate on issues that matter to Canadians by reflecting a diversity of opinion. Our content on all platforms presents a wide range of subject matter and views.
On issues of controversy, we ensure that divergent views are reflected respectfully, taking into account their relevance to the debate and how widely held theses views are. We also ensure that they are represented over a reasonable period of time.
We provide professional judgment based on facts and expertise. We do not promote any particular point of view on matters of public debate.
The trust of the public is our most valued asset. We avoid putting ourselves in real or potential conflict of interest. This is essential to our credibility.