CRTC Complaint About CKLW Commentary

I am going to convey a personal message in this posting in the strongest possible terms. Go after me unfairly, and I will hit back. Hard!

I am a big boy. I have been attacked before because of my BLOGs and I expect it will happen again. You know the reasons why as well as I do.

And I am sure that it will become much worse as more and more Windsorites start agreeing with what I and others in town are expressing.

People are starting to complain openly by deciding who is responsible for the mess that this City has become and are begining to understand what needs to be done immediately to transition us out of this into what will become our new economy:

• high-end automotive R&D research,


• medicine (focusing on and supporting the needs of aging baby boomers if we have any brains)


• international trade


• building on our existing industrial, agricultural and tourism strengths.

I know that you, dear reader, do not agree with everything I say. In fact, some of you may agree with very little I write about. That is OK with me. I do not ask you to support what I write. But the reason you read me is because I give you an alternative point of view and some insight about what is going on in this City in a way that the traditional media do not do.

As I say in my BLOG's Profile:

• "Here are some musings about the state of events in Windsor from the perspective of an interested observer of local politics. Sometimes we just have to help out! I have the luxury of time to do and say what I want. Agree with me or disagree, it does not matter as long as you take an active role in ensuring that the Community we live in prospers."

I can take the heat. I am thick-skinned. I comment very strongly about others in this BLOG and others have made cracks about me in the media and on other BLOGsites. That is to be expected and endured. However, every so often someone crosses the line. In such a case, I will NOT tolerate it and will fight back.

In my opinion, Jason Moore's commentary crossed the line. It was an unfair attack on "Bloggers" generally and on me personally! We are painted as harming Windsor when instead it is our desire, and that comes out clearly when reading the BLOGs, to wake up citizens to what is happening so that positive change can be accomplished.

I am sure that he thought he was being oh so clever with the "Muppets" characters as well as a mocking device. I did not think so.

I sent him a note immediately after I heard his commentary asking for equal time on the air. I thought that was only fair in order to express a different point of view. I have not received a response to date from him or anyone from the station.

I have no intention of being ignored. It is not the first time that I have had an issue with CKLW. In case Mr. Moore does not know it, Canada's Broadcasting Act states that :

• "the Canadian broadcasting system, operating primarily in the English and French languages and comprising public, private and community elements, makes use of radio frequencies that are public property"

CKLW is regulated and accordingly, I filed a complaint with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC). My letter of complaint and the responses by the CRTC and Canadian Broadcast Standards Council to whom my complaint was referred are below.

My message is clear... go after me as hard as you want. Say that I am wrong, say that my ideas make no sense. That is your freedom to do so. And part of what I have to expect if I criticize others. What is needed is a debate in the open about the future of this City with many different points of view taken.

BUT if you choose to try and smear me...watch out!

• COMPLAINT LETTER:
  
  I wish to file a complaint against Radio Station CKLW in Windsor, Ontario.
  
  On December 3, 2007, the News Director of CKLW broadcast the following commentary which was repeated several times during the day I believe:
  
  "Commentary by Jason Moore
  AM 800 CKLW
  December 3, 2007
  
  I don't think a day goes by that some blogger doesn't send out a mass email pointing the finger, laying the blame condemning the actions or taking a shot at Mayor Eddie Francis and Windsor City Council.
  
  No matter what the elected do or say you hear this. (Audio of man shouting "awful" and "I hate it").
  
  Yeah, these bloggers and from time to time outside "experts" love to share their wisdom from on high, of course. It's just like the grumpy old guys from the muppets. (Replays above audio).
  
  The difference is they were funny. These constant panic button pushers just aren't.
  
  And while it’s important to keep a critical eye on the issues, there comes a point you have to look at the big picture.
  
  Some good folks from Essex recently provided AM 800 some old clippings of the news from 1963. There were threats to the Windsor economy from across the border. There was a push to keep Windsor moving. The United Way was looking for funding.
  
  Is any of this ringing a bell? Remember, its 1963. But doesn't it sound an awful a lot like 2007?
  
  Which brings me to my overall point.
  
  The Mayor and Council are the elected officials for the City of Windsor. The majority of voters decided not that long ago that these councillors have the city's best interests at heart.
  
  They have goals, they have objectives and they have the dubious task of trying to deal with everything in a politically driven fish bowl.
  
  It's time the vocal minority backed away from the glass, strapped a "W" over their heart and started championing what Windsor can be.
  
  (Audio plays with muppets shouting "Wonderful" and "Spectacular" and "We love it")
  
  That's better. At least that's what I think."
  
  On December 3, 2007 I wrote to Jason Moore by e-mail asking if I could have rebuttal time on air. To date I have not even have the courtesy of a response from him.
  
  While the word “bloggers” was used in plural, there is no doubt that the attack was directed against me personally since I am a strong critic of the Mayor. Moreover, Mr. Moore receives one of my “mass e-mails” each day in which I set out the topic of my Blog.
  
  Here is what the Windsor Star wrote about me and my BLOG to demonstrate that it would be understood that the attack was directed to me:
  
  “SUBJECT: To blog or not to blog
  
  Ward 1 candidate Coun. Dave Brister is not a fan of blogs.
  “I don’t read blogs,” he said recently.
  
  He may not read them, but a lot of other people do.
  
  If Brister isn’t reading blogs, then he’s missing all sorts of interesting stories that are being posted about Windsor municipal politics. Coun. Alan Halberstadt has one. Brister’s rival candidate in Ward 1, Al Teshuba, has one too. The juiciest one of all though – the one which is considered a must-read among city hall workers and political hangers-on – is the one that’s posted by Ed Arditti, a municipal politics muckraker and not a big fan of Brister and Mayor Eddie Francis.
  
  Most city councillors will never admit they read Arditti’s blog, but they do. Be certain of that. Privately, city hall employees have said they’ve been surprised from time to time at the accuracy of some of his inside information. He has moles. But no one seems to know who they are.
  
  The problem with Arditti’s blog is that he goes on and on and on – and on – about border issues. An organizer of the Stop DRTP campaign way back when, he now shamelessly plugs the Ambassador Bridge every chance he gets.
  
  Arditti has pet names for a few politicians. Brister’s is Councillor Budget, a jab at the councillor who sat last year as chairman of the operating budget steering committee and fancies himself the guardian of fiscal fitness policies at city hall. (It’s interesting to note that he did not support a $60,000 grant to a women’s homeless shelter, but was there for the yes vote on a $48-million-plus arena).
  
  Brister should give a blog a read. (The Election Notebook here is a good start). They’re a lot of fun.
  
  Posted by Roseann Danese on October 19, 2006 9:37 PM EDT
  
  In my submission, the failure to provide to me on air rebuttal time, especially given the personal attack, is inequitable and is a violation of the Broadcasting Act since
  (a) it does not provide a balance of information
  (b) it does not give to the public a reasonable opportunity to be exposed to the expression of differing views on matters of public concern:
  
  3. (1) It is hereby declared as the broadcasting policy for Canada that
  
  (i) the programming provided by the Canadian broadcasting system should
  (i) be varied and comprehensive, providing a balance of information, enlightenment and entertainment for men, women and children of all ages, interests and tastes,
  (iv) provide a reasonable opportunity for the public to be exposed to the expression of differing views on matters of public concern.
  
  Accordingly, in my submission, CKLW should be required to apologize to me publicly on air and to provide me with an equivalent amount of time on air in which to put my position forward.
  
  ================================================
  
  Dear Mr. Arditti:
  
  
  Thank you for taking the time to contact the CRTC.
  
  
  The broadcasting industry has its own self-regulating organization, the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC), which administers codes of industry standards and mediates complaints from members of the public.
  
  Given the concerns you have raised, I have asked the CBSC to pursue this matter with CKLW on your behalf.
  
  ==============================================
  
  
  Dear Mr. Arditti,
  
  The Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC) has received your correspondence concerning Commentary by Jason Moore on December 3, 2007 broadcast on CKLW on December 3, 2007. It was forwarded to us by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC).
  
  By copy of this email, we are asking CKLW to respond to the concerns you have raised and to hold a copy of the logger tape of the broadcast which concerned you. This is always the first step taken by the CBSC in pursuing a complaint.
  
  You should know that broadcasters who are members of the CBSC take their responsibility to respond to audience concerns very seriously. The dialogue between broadcasters and members of their audience is a cornerstone of the CBSC's complaints resolution process. Concerns are often resolved satisfactorily through this dialogue phase. We hope that the response you will receive from CKLW within the next 21 days will resolve the issues you have raised to your satisfaction. If, however, after you have received and carefully considered the broadcaster's response you remain concerned, you may request a Ruling by a CBSC Panel by filing the form available on our website at http://www.cbsc.ca/english/complaint/rulingrequest.php
  You should do so within 14 days of receiving the broadcaster's response. More information on the CBSC complaints process is available on our website in the FAQ section ( http://www.cbsc.ca/english/faqs/index.php ).
  
  The CBSC is a national voluntary self-regulatory organization created by Canada's private broadcasters to deal with complaints made by viewers or listeners about programs which they have seen or heard broadcast on a member station. The CBSC administers four industry codes, namely a code of ethics, a code concerning television violence, a code concerning sex-role stereotyping and a code of journalistic ethics, which set out the guidelines for television and radio programming.