The Bridge with Peter Mansbridge - Your Turn - Love and Hate on the CBC

Episode Date: April 27, 2023

Your Turn - Love and Hate on the CBC. There are few things that generate more discussion from Bridge listeners than the debate about the CBC and this week is another example of that.  Lots of comments about the national public broadcaster's future.  Plus the Random Ranter on whether Joe Biden is just too old to keep being President.

And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. You are just moments away from the latest episode of The Bridge. It's Thursday, your turn, and your rants, believe me, you want to rant about the CBC, both pro and con, and we'll get right to it, right after this. And welcome to Thursday. It's a Your Turn day. As I said, it's also a Random Ranter day. And there's a real mix in this today because, man, do you want to rant about the CBC? We had the big show last Friday on Good Talk about the CBC and sort of where things are at with the corporation and new data about how people feel about the CBC.

And we got lots of reaction today, dozens and dozens of letters this week about the CBC. And, you know, it's both ways. There's pros and cons. I don't have time to read all the letters, but I am going to read some and portions of some, as is our custom here on the bridge on Thursdays.

We hear from you. We get your take on things. And I'm glad we've got that opportunity to do it. So let's get right at it, because because as I said, there's a lot. First one comes from Alan Mendez in Vancouver. I have to say the only show I watch still on CBC is The National. I used to watch it every night until COVID hit, and then in the last few years it's been about, well, twice a week.

Part of the reason I watch it is because when I moved to Canada in 1984, at the age of 14, most of my family watched it nightly. I have two kids, 14 and 12, and I don't think they know what CBC is usually because they're asleep when I watch The National. But they do know about The Bridge and good talk. Well, that's nice. I totally agree that CBC needs to reinvent itself and current management needs to go. I see a need for a national broadcaster, especially these days, to present a balanced view

and counteract misinformation. Well, I'm glad you see the knee down, and I think we all agree that there need to be some changes in the way things are done. John McCann from Calgary, Alberta. A thought on news in general and why I don't consistently watch or listen. Several years ago, it occurred to me that virtually every story on the news could have been titled the plight of the blank, the plight of the

single mother accessing housing, the plight of the Palestinians, the plight of the polar bears, and so on. It's just depressing. Maybe I'm lucky, but life's pretty good for me. The news doesn't reflect my reality. Dylan McGuire writes from Georgetown, Ontario. As a Canadian, I believe the CBC at its core is essential for our country that stretches from coast to coast to coast. Besides land and railways, it's one of the few things that connects St. John's to Victoria to Yellowknife. It spreads Canadian culture and helps stop us from becoming just another version of the United States,

or at least I believe it did before I was born. Now I'm not so sure, and here's why. Firstly, it is at a disadvantage as cable television dies. No one in my family has had anything but streaming services for almost eight years now. I believe it's trying to combat this with CBC Gem, but boy is that a terrible app. I've tried to use it on the rare occasions and found it very lacking in the user-friendliness area. More, to access most of the content, you have to pay. Now, this is true for every streaming service, but there is a key difference. As much as I hate to admit it,

the CBC's programming is not worth paying for. This brings me to my second point. CBC News is great. It's the news source I rely on the most. However, CBC is more than just the news and everything else it airs. It's just not that great. And so I don't want to spend my money on it. Okay.

That was Dylan McGuire in Georgetown, Ontario. Jean Fourgue in Notre Dame de L'As, Quebec. There was once a world where newscasters of all media, paper, and television decided for me what I needed to know and see. Then came the Internet. Now I decide what to read and see, and the entire world is where I choose from. The CBC just needs to rethink its role and get out of the dying broadcaster business.

Love your podcast. Angelo Milo, or Milo. My wife and I listened to the most recent Good Talk, and yes, our beloved CBC needs to change. In Ottawa, each morning we listen to local CBC radio for talk and news and some of the current before getting busy with our daily activities. Then it's Ontario Today and more listening later on.

Radio is the best part of CBC and Radio Canada for us. As for The National, we're already up to date before we tune in on JEM at 9pm, but we also find The National has too many commercial breaks. On JEM, the commercials are very repetitive and annoying, with the service flogging some of their poor quality shows with back-to-back plugs. Yeah, I've heard that on occasion. I'm not sure what the solution is to that. I mean, Jim needs, obviously, needs more viewers to get better quality commercials and more

commercials. I assume that's the way it works. I'm not in the sales department, so I don't know. Lauren Baxter writes from Medicine Hat, Alberta. I wanted to say my two cents about the CBC conversation. Having traveled and worked in much of the northern parts of the western side of our country, I absolutely see the value in CBC Radio.

Some areas of our country, it is the only FM or AM radio station you can tune into. Much of our sparsely populated areas cannot support private local news stations or newspapers. There's no other way to keep up to date in local affairs. Local reporters are needed in every jurisdiction of the country to have a proper functioning democracy. That brings me to the problems with the CBC. Too often the CBC's bias is showing. I don't know when it happened.

Maybe a reaction to a certain red-tie-wearing politician to our south. But it is sure that the CBC has leaned left. I don't know if it's the individual bias of the individual reporter telling a story or if it's an institutional, wide policy, but the CBC is distinctly left-leaning. To be fair, most media in Canada has a left lean on most issues.

You've heard my views on this. Reporters tell stories, and they put them in context. They're fair, and they're accurate. That's the goal. Mike Quah in Winnipeg. I personally have drifted away in recent years in terms of the frequency with which I listen. I'm not sure what has happened to the CBC over the past 10 years, but the CBC has become laser-focused on a few issues under the exclusion of seemingly everything else that happens in this country and in the world.

As such, I find I listen to the BBC, NPR, and Canada Talks. That's serious. XM. Much more than the CBC. Barring a meaningful revamp, I fear the CBC's best years are behind it. Let's hope for the revamp. John Waugh. He's in Southern Ontario. CBC Local News on TV is very limited in Southern Ontario. I now live near London, where CTV Local News at 6 and 11 is the only local.

CBC has morning radio with local. When I lived near Barrie, CTV was the only local. As I recall, Ottawa Local News TV is dominated by CTV. There's a pretty famous long-running CTV anchor there, as I recall. Well, there have been a number. Kitchener, a CTV-controlled local news market forever. Can't assume Ontario depends on CBC for TV local. Have you noticed that CBC Radio is no longer

commercial fee free? I didn't know this point. I mean, this is an element of CBC Radio. If you go on local radio through the internet, you get two video ads on the iPad before radio programming starts. Okay, that's... I don't think that's got anything to do with CBC revenue,

but I hear what you're saying. Albert Versteeg, I'm a news and political junkie who is not disillusioned by the mainstream media. I have been a loyal customer of the CBC, but I do have some issues with them that have affected my loyalty. Too politically correct. Hate to use the word woke. Too many previews during the nightly news.

Reruns of news during the summer months. Cancellation of local 11 p.m. news during hockey playoffs and Olympic coverage. It's not just local news. They canceled a national during the Olympics. It's just like mind-boggling that how anybody in management could ever have allowed that to happen. I just find it pathetic. Anyway, that's me ranting.

Not many news reports anymore from reporters actually on the ground where it happens. On Saturday and Sunday nights, we now watch CTV National and Toronto News, while during the week we quite often go from the National to CNN. Oy. Seems to me that CBC needs to go back to basics. Maybe the BBC might be a good role model. Well, how about being funded like the BBC on a per capita basis?

That would help get us to a BBC model. Your point about the weekends is great. The National calls itself a daily newscast. Yeah, when's the last time you saw the National on the CBC on Saturday nights? It's been years. Years. Apparently, there's no news on Saturdays.

Go figure. Anne-Marie Klein. See, I told you there were a lot of letters, and this is just a snapshot of some of these letters. Anne-Marie Klein, writing to you from Toronto with two thoughts about the CBC. I'm a recent sexagenarian without a television, and my use of the CBC is now through their mobile app, as well as some of their excellent podcasts.

Like my younger fellow Canadians, I use my phone for a wider range of news, and the CBC organization is a part of that, especially the weekday podcast Front Burner, great podcast, which has a global lens, though I suspect they don't do their morning yoga stretches to it. Her second thought is going into her memory bank and remembering my coverage of the Princess Diana funeral. Can you imagine what this coronation next week would have been like

if Princess Diana had lived and if their marriage had survived? Just think about that for a minute. Michael Pash from Victoria. The knee-jerk reaction is, CBC's sacred. Mustn't be touched.

In fact, I haven't watched the main network in years. Not since Rick Mercer retired. Speaking of Rick Mercer, he'll be with us Monday. Starting the week next week with Rick. Not since Rick Mercer retired. It could go and I wouldn't notice. When I watch the CBC, it's News World. It hasn't been called News World

in years. It's CBC News Network. Even then, only when there's something going on I want to know about. I do consume a lot of News World content, but nearly always on my phone through the app or as a podcast. Which brings me to the senior service. CBC Radio matters enormously to me,

given the ratings I've heard about to many others throughout the country as well. That's true. Barry Thorsness in Vancouver. Yes, I have not. I have not have. He's trying to say I don't have a regular TV and haven't had one for 15 years. But I do watch The National on YouTube probably four times a week. My phone sends me a notice that it is available in 30 minutes. I also read the CBC multiple times a day. My phone sends me breaking news stories by the CBC many times a day.

But in most of the important news flashes I read, the CBC ones are the most important to me. So don't write off the CBC because I too do not watch traditional programming or listen to CBC radio. I'm a devout user follower of the CBC and would really miss it if it were not around. Gary Westall writes from Picton, Ontario. I think the CBC needs to rediscover itself as a true public broadcaster.

It needs to get back to basics and programming, more public information, minus the political innuendo and the undertones, the preachiness and the identity politics. It needs a clean house, a redefined, more precise mandate, new sensible executive leadership and producers. Annual funding in the order of one and a quarter billion is a grossly large amount, considering the low audience uptake. The overall poor product, the negative competitive impact on private broadcasters. I'm concerned about the CBC treading on private broadcasters' role in providing

entertainment and news. Well, they don't tread on their right to run American programming, which they do. It's a great benefit to them. Good for them. They're there to make a profit, which they do. It's a great benefit to them. Good for them. They're there to make a profit, and they're making one.

CBC should likely be defunded to a point commensurate with the above. Defunding, to me, means paring back, not totally cancelling. Okay, here's the last one of the ones we're going to highlight today. Tom Sorley writes from Ontario. CBC was number one in my book by a long shot. Underfunded, yes. Compromised in standards, yes. Today, well, it's over for me.

It literally took me years, but I've completely divorced myself from regular CBC intake. I do peak occasionally, but I've gone from hardcore to strong avoidance in my lifetime. Incompetent management, underfunding, changing times, irrelevance. Yes, but that's not it really. The bottom line is CBC does so many things poorly, it just doesn't warrant tuning in. It's a crying shame. It's awful. That's, you know, this guy likes public broadcasting, Tom. He's a PBS viewer.

He's a TVO viewer in Ontario. The BBC, when he can. So when he says those kind of things about the CBC, you've got to kind of listen. This just isn't a guy who's against public broadcasting, broadcasting supported by the taxpayer. He's against broadcasting that he thinks is deficient. And that's how he feels about the CBC.

And that's how many of you feel. But you can see there is a current through almost all of those letters. CBC was a part of their life. It's not as much today as it was before. I mean, nothing's the same, right? Things have changed. I get it. I understand that.

That's obvious. But there's something else, something a little deeper in some of these concerns that are being mentioned. I guess that's what we pointed out last week, and that's the challenge for the CBC today. Alright, let's move on with some more letters. This one gets us into another little segment of things that happened

in the last couple of days. And the headline from Sheldon Kufman in Ontario is An Alarming Week on the Pod. And she's talking about two of our shows, Monday and Tuesday. Monday with Dr. Sam Nutt, Tuesday with Brian Stewart. And, you know, it gives us this one example. Dr. Nutt described a global power shift moving from democratic countries to those less so.

There, countries are supporting or being supported by regimes that do not believe that humanity and human rights are of essence. Mr. Stewart described a new formation of NATO, building up capabilities close to, if not on the border with, countries that are far from being our allies. This defensive posture sounds rather offensive to me. This proximity to war alarms me. Are we in the midst of a significant shift in the global world order, or am I making too much of this all?

I don't think you're making too much of it. We are. Appear to be on the edge of a shift. Kelly Flynn writes from Comox, BC, Dr. Nutt's insights and comments could have been in context of Myanmar, where Kelly Flynn has been working on various projects for the last number of years. Myanmar is what we used to call Burma, right?

Could have been in context to Myanmar, even though she was speaking of Sudan and Yemen. In terms of waking us up and looking closely at regional contacts in specific countries that fall outside our 24-7 news feeds, this episode is a call to action, moving us out of our passive naivety, while hopefully being inspired by her final remarks at the end of your conversation. There are things we can do, so let's get on in the doing,

especially for children, youth, and women. Austin Ziegler in Toronto. This is, and there were a number of letters on this point, some of it on climate change and Canada's positioning on that, some of it on Canada's defense spending and Canada's position on that. Austin writes, Canada may only contribute 1.5% to global climate change, but we only have 0.4% of the global population. Our impact is three times our population,

so we have three times the responsibility for addressing climate change, no? Laura T. in Ontario. Someone had written in last week regarding how Canada doesn't produce the same emissions as other countries in the world, so why do we have to change if we're not creating the problem? To start, we are one of the top per-person polluters in the world. So the fact because we are a large landmass with a small population, our country's low carbon number doesn't matter.

We emit more carbon per person than China, says Laura T. Sean Aiken from Whitby. Hi, Peter. I was listening to Thursday's show and the viewer's comment about Canada's only contributing 2% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions is something I've heard before. The insinuation being 98% are beyond our control. Why worry? I would like to remind people that there are some notable 15 nations, UK, Germany, Japan, among them, all contributing between 1 and 3% each, totaling 24% of the world's total emissions, this being greater than the USA and rivaling China. Surely the cumulative impact of change here is globally significant. Canadians are,

unfortunately, one of the per capita greatest emitters, a world leader using this metric. Chuck Penfold writes from and excuse me Chuck if I get this wrong, Königswinter Germany. As an ethnic Canadian German, long story, I find it completely bizarre and shameful

that Justin Trudeau would apparently rule out meeting the NATO target of 2% for military expenditures. We Germans are not carrying our weight yet, but I hope we are working on it. Don't forget, Canada also has a border with Russia, namely in the Arctic. Got that right. Joe Damiani in Vancouver.

Great podcast with Brian Stewart, as always. However, Peter, I have to point out a couple of things that irritate me with the discussion in this country about defense spending. Yes, it's true that Canada does not spend 2% of GDP on defense. However, what is often not pointed out is that only a third of NATO countries have made it to that level. For instance, we are spending 1.3% of GDP on defense. Germany, for example, spends barely more at 1.45%.

Here's a cute one. It's from Elizabeth Daub. She's in St. Agatha, Ontario. On Tuesday, you went on about how no one is irreplaceable. Then promptly disprove your thesis by talking to Brian Stewart. Talk about being irreplaceable. Yeah, he is, eh? Speaking of irreplaceable people, rest in peace Harry Belafonte,

an amazing performer and activist. No argument there. Okay, a couple of notes on one of your favorite people. This one comes from Ron Fisher in Moncton, New Brunswick. I don't know where to begin. I know you don't want us to write you a book, but man, the ranter has bought into a lot of negative lithium-ion battery BS. I think it would be a great idea if you could get a real Canadian battery expert like Professor Jeff Dawn from Dalhousie University

to give the listeners an expert opinion on the subject. Obviously, Ron didn't like the random ranter's take on lithium batteries last week. Now, he says he's bought into the lithium battery BS. Suggests we get Jeff Don, who I quickly acknowledge, a world, you know, there's no one around the world in the sort of lithium battery discussions and as batteries in general, as an expert. I would point out, though, if you're going to slag the ranter, Ron, saying he's bought into the lithium battery negative tone

without any evidence that he's bought into anything, I would just say this. Look up Jeff Dahn's bio at Dalhousie University. And once again, I'm not slagging Jeff at all. But if you're going to take that approach, wouldn't somebody who looks at his bio and it says his work is sponsored by Tesla? Wouldn't somebody say hmm? Anyway, moving on.

Robert Podlasik. Where's Robert writing from? I think Robert forgot to tell us. But he makes a great point. Based on my background, I've been following the life cycle of many materials, including lithium. I think the random ranter has really done his homework.

Is it possible that I can get an abbreviated version of the podcast or a text version of the Random Ranter's presentation on lithium? I would like to share the Random Ranter's thoughts with interested colleagues. Well, unfortunately, this little hobby podcast doesn't provide that service, Robert, but what you can do is simply hold up your phone, put it on record as you're playing the podcast,

and just take the part you want, record it, and move it around. Or have somebody else's phone record it when it's playing on your phone, and then you can send it to whoever you wish. All right. Speaking of the aforementioned random renter, he has a new take today on a different subject. And I'm not sure how I feel about it. I'm not going to say anything more until you listen to it.

Here we go. This week's Random Ranter. There are a lot of things that improve with age. Just think about it. There's cheese, wine, scotch whiskey, and of course, pickles. But mental capacity? That ain't pickles. Neither is stamina, memory, or the ability to multitask. Like it or not, with age comes physical and cognitive decline. And if you don't believe that, you're either not old enough or you're deep in the throes of it.

So I'm really left to wonder, at 80 plus years old, what makes Joe Biden think he's fit to be president of the United States again? Now, I'm not saying you can't contribute at 80. I'm saying your best years, both mentally and physically, they're behind you. And I'm not an ageist, but come on, 80 seems pretty old for a job like president. And if you disagree, well, what's your number then? 85? Well, he'd be 85 by the end of his term. Look, honestly, I think he's done a good job getting this far because it's got to be a demanding job for anyone at any age. I mean, never mind all the stress and the travel and the history altering decisions. It seems like a job with a whole lot of stairs.

I'm not saying he's too old to contribute, but as president? Sorry, no. I mean, he's four years older than Clinton, and Clinton was president 30 years ago. Come on, Joe, it's time to take a knee, pass some of that wealth of knowledge to the next generation, like mentor a boomer or something. There's lots you can do. Hell, if you're really ambitious, pull a Jimmy Carter and go build houses. But whatever you decide, make it something that doesn't involve nuclear codes. For the record, I don't think anyone is too old to contribute, as long as they remain current and engaged. I do subscribe to the theory that age is just a number.

I've met old people in their 30s and young people in their 70s. And for the most part, age is a state of mind. But an 80 plus year old president, that one's asking a lot. And honestly, I don't get it. This must be some kind of American thing because they seem to love their politicians aged. In addition to Biden, the big orange monkey is pushing 80, McConnell is 80, Pelosi is over 80, and Feinstein is pushing 90. Thankfully, we don't have an equivalent here or we'd be watching Paul Martin, Brian Mulroney, and Jean Chrrescian calling Harper a whippersnapper. Look, I really believe there's a lot of room for people to meaningfully contribute at any age. But it takes some effort.

If you want to remain relevant, you need to stay current. You need to be flexible and open to new ideas. You can't live in the good old days. You need to live in the here and now. And you need to realize that a lot of the truths you have lived are no longer true. I mean, times change and no matter what age you are, it takes some mental flexibility to change with them. But I'm not saying Joe lacks flexibility of mind. I'm just questioning his judgment because to me, it seems pretty narcissistic of him to think that at 80 plus,

he's the only guy who can defeat someone who, in my opinion, is a fraudster, seditionist, racist. Oh, and let's not forget accused rapist. Way go joe you've done your part now it's time to tap out and let someone else take on the incompetent egotistical ignorant and yes also too old for the job big orange monkey Big Orange Monkey. Okay. So how do you feel about that one? As I said, going into it, I have mixed feelings about it. I'm very resistant to the idea of attacking somebody over their age. Because I've seen a lot of really bright,

smart, engaging people who are still absolutely plugged in well into their 80s, some even in their early 90s. I get it. But there are also some truisms in what the ranter was saying there. And I've seen it myself in my life. You know, you start to get carried away with the way things used to be. You know, when I was younger, some of us who were ready to position ourselves to take over things would say, you know, those people who are our bosses right now, all they talk about is the golden years. Well, they weren't so golden.

Well, every once in a while I think of that myself. I think back and I start to claim, well, you know, the golden years were, well, they weren't so golden. So we're finding that out ourselves at our age group. So anyway, it's a really interesting rant. And I know some of you are already writing, condemning it or praising it. I'd say listen to it a couple of times. Think about it.

See what you'd like to say about it, because I'm sure some of you will say something about it. Okay. We've got more letters, but we also want to take a quick break. So we'll do that, and when we come back, more of Your Turn. And welcome back. You're listening to the final segment of The Bridge for this day.

It's your turn on a random ranter day. It's a Thursday, of course. You're listening on Sirius XM, channel 167, Canada Talks, or on your favorite podcast platform. We're almost at the end of the week. Another really interesting week, and it's reflected by the amount of mail that we've had from you on various topics. So getting right back at it for our final selection of letters here.

Here's one from Albert de Jong. So walking along the shore on the northeast end of Scotland conjures neat images in my mind. You old fellers, working hard or busy as ever guys, hop onto a plane with great regularity. He's talking about the way I started the program the other day. He said I was looking up in the sky watching the big jets fly over and thinking about pollution from jets.

So when you talk about the idea that there are sustainable jet fuels coming along, I just shake my head. Make it from agriculture waste? Really? Richard Branson and Virgin Airlines does not give a rat's butt about climate. He recently had to shut down his space fantasy. Virgin wants everybody to fly, which is in direct conflict with any solution or steps to moderate the rush to extinction. Richard Branson is just one guy with one airline there are much bigger airlines like british airways and british airways is one of the airlines along with heathrow airport biggest airport in the

world busiest anyway um who are pushing on this idea of sustainable fuel. Is it there now? No. Could it be there in the future? Absolutely. There's work to be done on it. So you may think it's all crazy, Albert, and you may be right. We'll see. Let's meet in 25 years and find out.

I hope. I wish I could say I'll meet you in 25 years and find out. I hope. I wish I could say I'll meet you in 25 years. Lynn Post writes from Nepean on the public service strike that's underway right now. Strikes finance settlements. Every day the strike continues, the government saves huge sums of money, providing it with the savings to put toward the settlement. Does the union point out that to workers? No. If you lose, say, $4,000 in pay and gain that in the settlement, that's a very poor deal, compounded with the many other negative consequences of a strike. Yeah, agreements aren't for one year.

They're usually multi-years. So looking at it in the short term, you may be right on the money end of things, but looking in the long term of the contract, not so much. Percy Phillips writes from Portage La Prairie, Manitoba, another old hometown of mine. Portage La Prairie, Manitoba. Another old hometown of mine. Portage La Prairie, 1967. I was based at CFB Portage.

But that's another story. Percy writes, The continued comparisons between Poliev and Trump leave me puzzled. The real comparison should be between Trump and Trudeau. Both men were celebrities before politics, and that was their ticket into their political game, and both are the recipients of their father's family fortune. Neither of the two men had previous political experience. Both have had their public image scrubbed,

including a very attractive wife, to be presentable as political leaders, and both of them are clinically assessed as narcissists to the core. Yeah, well. Okay. Pete Cassidy, Campbell River, Vancouver Island. Doesn't that sound great? Doesn't it just sound like I should be fishing?

Anyway, Pete writes, I value what you say because of your age and experience coupled with your impartiality and curiosity of current events and those who influence them. I hope I live as long as you. I'm only 60. Help, I'm a kid trapped in an old man's body. Listen, buddy, you're 60, you're not old. You're not even close to old.

You're just entering the good years. Steve Vena. Hello, Peter. I'm an avid listener of the bridge. Really enjoy Tuesday, Wednesday, and Friday's podcast. However, this week's Wednesday smoke, not so much. As you can see from my subject line, I live in Ottawa. I have to say your Toronto-centric comments today,

read the senators, are typical. Don't get me wrong. Best of luck in the playoffs, but we all know the inevitable and will be disappointment. Like that's not a shot. To my point, your comments read the location of the arena in Ottawa, the ownership status, and Ryan Reynolds are so far from reality, it's hard to comprehend. First of all, a previous owner passed away,

which may lead to a change in ownership as his daughters are 20 years old and probably don't fashion owning an NHL franchise. Why not? Ryan Reynolds is one of, as reported by the NHL, nine groups fined to purchase a team in the neighborhood of a billion dollars, of which, as reported, a number of the groups reside in Toronto. No one's begging Ryan Reynolds for anything. Right. That's why you never see his picture on the front of the Ottawa Citizen or in various Ottawa publications or online.

Never mind. However, there was also a letter from David Prime in Ottawa. Enjoyed SMT with Bruce, always worth a listen, except as an Ottawa resident and Senator's ticket holder, did not expect to receive a completely gratuitous drive-by shot during that item about Calgary getting a new arena. What's that saying about walking a mile in someone else's shoes?

Oh, and just because you decided to pick this fight, a final thought, 1967. I'll bet you even had hair back then. Like, that's not a drive-by shot. I actually did have hair back then, and the Leafs did win the Cup in 67. And I cheered for the Leafs in 67 and growing up in the 50s and the 60s, early 60s, and guess where I was growing up?

Ottawa. Because they didn't have a team and so you had to choose between Montreal or Toronto and I chose Toronto. So my belief in the Leafs began in Ottawa because there was no option. Well, I hope it doesn't end up that way for Ottawa. I know there have been troubles supporting professional sports teams in Ottawa in the past. Hopefully there's a new beginning for the Senators with a new arena so you don't have to drive

20 minutes out to Kanata. Mind you, the people in Kanata will now have to drive 20 minutes into Ottawa. But that's okay. If it happens. Kim Johnson writes, enough drive-bys for one show? Kim Natto,

sorry, Kim Johnson. She's got one name on her, in Nova Scotia, one name on her email, and one name in a letter. And it could be, it could be a guy. I don't know.

But she writes a wonder, or he But she or he writes a wonderful letter. I just finished reading Off the Record. That was my last book. I'd like to begin by saying this is the first time I've ever written to a celebrity in my 65 years of living. I'm not a celebrity. I'm just a guy. Just a note to tell you how much I enjoyed every word of your book. Thank you. It's funny, but I could actually hear your voice in my head as I read every story.

I also remembered most of the events you wrote about, so it's no wonder I had such a connection to your book. Here's a little story for you. In 1987, when you were offered the job at CBS, I had just turned 30. I had two young children, and my CBS. I had just turned 30. I had two young children, and my husband and I had recently moved to Halifax from Toronto. My parents were visiting from Toronto at the time. Rumors were floating on the airwaves that you'd been offered a job. Keep in mind that my extended family, Ukrainian grandparents included,

watched the National every night. We loved Knowlton Nash. When the official announcement came that Knowlton would leave the anchor position and you would remain in Canada, our family celebrated the news. We sat in the living room, talked about how difficult the decision must have been for both of you. You got that right. A lot harder for Knowlton and what he offered than it was for me.

He is an amazing guy, a great friend, great mentor, not just to me, but to many. So thank you for writing the book. I was so sad when it ended. I felt like I was saying goodbye to you again. Well, don't get too big in the goodbye mode. There's a new book coming out this fall by me and by my good friend Mark Bulgich.

And it's not about me. It's in fact about you. And I think you'll enjoy it. Lawrence Brawl from Calgary. Retirement. I'm 68, retired for two years from my CEO position, enjoying it and having fun with friends. Indoor tennis two to three times a week,

golf in the summer. I too yearn for opportunities to share the knowledge I have acquired. I started doing this and have joined the local community association board. Good for you, Lawrence. Ian Hepplethwaite from Moncton, New Brunswick. Interesting but not shocking information you presented on your Tuesday end bit. A big problem in society, and that was the one about podcasts and how people are believing what they, everything they, or not everything,

but they're believing podcasts as much as they believe newscasts. And as Ian says, that's a big problem in society. As many cannot distinguish between opinion and fact. This is what allows some to spout whatever falsehoods they like. Scott Clement writes from Ottawa, I had to laugh after hearing Bruce and Chantel poke fun at you about watching old tapes of your broadcasts only to be treated to my very own Peter throwback that day on CBC.

CBC did a story on the recent gold heist from Pearson Airport, accompanied with story coverage from the vault of past heights. Halfway down the page was a 35-year-old Peter Mansbridge staring back at me. It only got better after seeing an equally young and jovial Brian Stewart covering the story from London. I've been enjoying the bridge for more than two years now. Keep up the great coverage. I saw that too.

It was funny. It's always funny to look at yourself from like 35 years ago and you don't recognize that person at all. Okay, here's your last letter. David Garofsky. David's in London, Ontario. His letter is short, sweet, and very much to the point. The Leafs are doing well while you're in Scotland.

Maybe you should stay there. Just thinking out loud. Maybe you're right. Beyond that, I say nothing. It's a best of seven series,'s a best of 7 series not a best of 5 series it ain't over till it's over thanks for listening today

thank you for your comments this week as always it's great to hear from you tomorrow it's good talk Chantel will be by. So will Rob Russo sitting in for Bruce this week. We'll have lots to discuss, as we always do. I'm Peter Mansbridge.

As I said, thanks for listening. We'll talk to you again in 24 hours. Thank you.