Two years later, CBC continues to be inconsistent on comments
It was a big beef of mine during the 2006 election. CBC’s lack of consistency when it came to commenting on their open forum sections (feel free to use the search feature at the top of this page to check it out, it came up often). Some areas were a free for all while at Jacques Poitras’ election blog, full names and hometowns were required for some, others were allowed to put in partial names while yours truly was asked by Mr. Poitras to come into CBC and provide ID before he would let me comment.
It was riddled with inconsistencies that even had a CBC employee blog into the situation and poke holes through Jacques’ "policy" so big you could drive a truck through it.
Today of course, one can go onto any CBC story, call yourself what you want and go on tangents (okay, maybe it’s gone too far).
Ah, but leave it to Mr. Poitras to add more confusion. On his new taxpayer funded blog following the PC leadership race, Poitras has written, "As with my Campaign Trail election blog in 2006, you must provide your full name to have your comment approved. Some other bloggers (emphasis-mine) see this as contrary to the spirit of blogs."
Forget the spirit of blogs, it’s contrary to CBC’s own policies or CBC’s comments section is contrary to CBC’s policies. They can’t both be right. Which is it?
Or is Jacques Poitras creating his own policy to try and prove himself right?
Dunno but by golly CBC pick one and make it clear to your listeners, viewers, readers, and ultimately owners so there is some consistency to your comments policy (if one even exists).
Crossposted - Spink About It
Comments (1)
All comments are subject to the site Terms of Use. For a full commenting tutorial click here.
Our editorial team relies on filtering technology and our visitor community to identify inappropriate comments. In the event that a site user has submitted offensive content that has evaded our filter, please select the option to Flag As Inappropriate presented within the comment. Thank you for helping to keep this site clean.
For all we know, anonymous posters (such as yourself) could be our feared enemies, the Taliban, Al-kay'duh, the Ruskies, what have you. Thus the state or Irving must take your name and location before any of your dangerous rhetoric hits the interwebs.
It's understandable after all, when you consider that we're 'living in a post-911 world' - the North American Union is in a cyberwar with God knows who and you're whining about censorship?
It's almost as if the terrorists had won.
So, put away the box cutters and register your user name properly, just as Irving should have had you do before they started carrying your partisan tripe on their blogger network.