There was a time when public broadcasters took pride in the fact that they
weren�t working for capitalist enterprises. Now they seem almost ashamed to
admit they work in government-backed media. This seems like progress.

Last week this column noted that National Public Radio was getting prickly
over Twitter�s effort to inform users about NPR and its business model. Today
brings more news of taxpayer-supported media folk who seem to resent being
called taxpayer-supported media folk.

Rob Gillies reports from Toronto for the Associated Press:

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation paused its use of Twitter on
Monday after the social media platform owned by Elon Musk stamped
CBC�s account with a label the public broadcaster says is intended
to undermine its credibility.

Twitter labelled CBC/Radio-Canada �government-funded media� � the
same label that prompted National Public Radio in the U.S. to
similarly quit Twitter last Wednesday.

�Twitter can be a powerful tool for our journalists to communicate
with Canadians, but it undermines the accuracy and professionalism
of the work they do to allow our independence to be falsely described
in this way,� CBC spokesman Leon Mar said in a statement announcing
the change Monday afternoon.

It�s true that the term �government-funded� doesn�t scream quality to many
consumers, but some will wonder why the broadcaster doesn�t have to accept
this reputational consequence along with the money.

Regardless, just like NPR, CBC seems to have had some success in persuading
Mr. Musk to tweak his company�s description. Mr. Gillies reports for the AP:

CBC has sent a letter to Twitter asking the company to re-examine
the designation. Musk later tweeted about it and changed it to �69
percent Government-funded media.�

But CBC is still not satisfied. The broadcaster is not disputing that it is
in fact government-funded, but argues that a Twitter page defining this term
is unfair to CBC because it suggests that government influence may come along
with the funding. CBC says Canadian law protects it from government
interference. Just like public broadcasters in the U.S., the Canadian
broadcaster is arguing that it relies on politicians for money but remains
completely independent of them.

It�s not clear how many Twitter users have even read the social media
company�s descriptions of state-sponsored media outlets. But to make its case
CBC is pointing to a Twitter page that seems to differentiate among
government-supported outlets based on levels of government influence. The
Twitter page states:

State-affiliated media is defined as outlets where the state
exercises control over editorial content through financial resources,
direct or indirect political pressures, and/or control over
production and distribution. Accounts belonging to state-affiliated
media entities, their editors-in-chief, and/or their prominent staff
may be labeled. We will also add labels to Tweets that share links
to state-affiliated media websites...

Government-funded media is defined as outlets where the government
provides some or all of the outlet�s funding and may have varying
degrees of government involvement over editorial content...

Publicly-funded media refers to media organizations that receive
funding from license fees, individual contributions, public
financing, and commercial financing.

It�s understandable that CBC, NPR and the rest would want to be described as
belonging to that third category rather than the second. But in the U.S., for
example, some taxpayers may find it hard to believe that congressional
appropriators considering annual funding requests have never said a word
about content.

Rather than trying to argue that one can be entirely independent while
regularly accepting large bundles of taxpayer dollars, perhaps public
broadcasters should consider declaring their independence from government
funding.

At least one public broadcaster seems to have decided that rather than
claiming independence from the people who fund it, the better course is to
say the problem is all about Twitter.

Another Associated Press report today comes from Helsinki:

Sweden�s public radio said Tuesday that it would stop being active
on Twitter, but it did not blame new labels that Elon Musk�s social
media platform has slapped on public broadcasters, leading some
major North American outlets to quit tweeting.

Sveriges Radio said on its blog that Twitter has lost its relevance
to Swedish audiences... �For a long time, Sveriges Radio has de-
prioritised its presence on Twitter and has now made the decision to
completely stop being active on the platform, at the same time that
we are shutting down a number of accounts,� said Christian Gillinger,
head of the broadcaster�s social media activities.

He cited a recent study showing only some 7% of Swedes are on Twitter
daily and said the platform �has simply changed over the years and
become less important for us.�

Perhaps, like Spinal Tap, Sveriges Radio has opted for a more selective
audience.

--
Let's go Brandon!