Lisa LaFlamme, CTV News, and Bad Executive Decisions

Former CTV countrywide anchor
Lisa LaFlamme

There will be no bittersweet on-air goodbye for (now previous) CTV nationwide information anchor Lisa LaFlamme, no ceremonial passing of the baton to the up coming era, no broadcast retrospectives lionizing a journalist with a storied and award-winning vocation. As LaFlamme introduced yesterday, CTV’s mother or father business, Bell Media, has made the decision to unilaterally end her deal. (See also the CBC’s reporting of the tale here.)

When LaFlamme herself does not make this claim, there was of class fast speculation that the network’s selection has a thing to do with the actuality that LaFlamme is a female of a selected age. LaFlamme is 58, which by Tv set benchmarks is not particularly younger — other than when you examine it to the age at which well-liked males who proceeded her have remaining their respective anchor’s chairs: look at Peter Mansbridge (who was 69), and Lloyd Robertson (who was 77).

But an even additional sinister theory is now afoot: fairly than mere, shallow misogyny, evidence has arisen of not just sexism, but sexism conjoined with corporate interference in newscasting. Two evils for the selling price of one! LaFlamme was fired, states journalist Jesse Brown, “because she pushed back from just one Bell Media govt.” Brown experiences insiders as professing that Michael Melling, vice president of information at Bell Media, has bumped heads with LaFlamme a quantity of occasions, and has a history of interfering with information protection. Brown more studies that “Melling has continuously demonstrated a deficiency of regard for females in senior roles in the newsroom.”

Useless to say, even if a personal grudge in addition sexism clarify what is heading on, here, it nevertheless will feel to most as a “foolish selection,” one particular positive to lead to the business problems. Now, I make it a coverage not to concern the small business savvy of professional executives in industries I never know well. And I suggest my college students not to leap to the conclusion that “that was a dumb decision” just because it is one they really do not have an understanding of. But still, in 2022, it is tricky to picture that the organization (or Melling extra specially) did not see that there would be blowback in this case. It’s a person detail to have disagreements, but it’s a different to unceremoniously dump a beloved and award-successful female anchor. And it’s bizarre that a senior executive at a news organization would assume that the truth would not come out, offered that, following all, he’s surrounded by people whose job, and particular determination, is to report the news.

And it is tough not to suspect that this a significantly less than joyful transition for LaFlamme’s alternative, Omar Sachedina. Of study course, I’m sure he’s content to get the position. But although Bell Media’s push release prices Sachedina expressing sleek matters about LaFlamme, definitely he didn’t want to believe the anchor chair amidst popular criticism of the changeover. He’s having on the role less than a shadow. Perhaps the prize is worthy of the selling price, but it is also tricky not to envision that Sachedina experienced (or now has) some pull, some means to impact that fashion of the transition. I’m not indicating (as some undoubtedly will) that — as an insider who is familiar with the true story — he must have declined the task as sick-gotten gains. But at the extremely the very least, it looks honest to argue that he must have utilized his affect to condition the transition. And if the now-senior anchor doesn’t have that form of impact, we should really be anxious in truth about the independence of that function, and of that newsroom.

A last, relevant be aware about authority and governance in elaborate corporations. In any reasonably well-governed business, the selection to axe a significant, public-struggling with talent like LaFlamme would involve indicator-off — or at the very least tacit acceptance — from extra than a single senior government. This implies that one particular of two issues is real. Either Bell Media is not that form of well-ruled firm, or a large range of people had been included in, and culpable of, unceremoniously dumping an award-successful journalist. Which is worse?

Leave a Reply