Lisa LaFlamme, CTV News, and Bad Executive Decisions

Previous CTV countrywide anchor
Lisa LaFlamme

There will be no bittersweet on-air goodbye for (now previous) CTV countrywide news anchor Lisa LaFlamme, no ceremonial passing of the baton to the next era, no broadcast retrospectives lionizing a journalist with a storied and award-profitable career. As LaFlamme introduced yesterday, CTV’s mother or father firm, Bell Media, has made a decision to unilaterally finish her contract. (See also the CBC’s reporting of the tale in this article.)

Whilst LaFlamme herself doesn’t make this assert, there was of class quick speculation that the network’s determination has a thing to do with the reality that LaFlamme is a female of a sure age. LaFlamme is 58, which by Tv standards is not specifically younger — other than when you review it to the age at which common men 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 extra sinister idea is now afoot: fairly than mere, shallow misogyny, evidence has arisen of not just sexism, but sexism conjoined with company interference in newscasting. Two evils for the selling price of just one! LaFlamme was fired, says journalist Jesse Brown, “because she pushed back in opposition to a person Bell Media government.” Brown reviews insiders as boasting that Michael Melling, vice president of news at Bell Media, has bumped heads with LaFlamme a range of periods, and has a heritage of interfering with information protection. Brown even further studies that “Melling has persistently demonstrated a deficiency of respect for females in senior roles in the newsroom.”

Unnecessary to say, even if a individual grudge in addition sexism make clear what’s heading on, in this article, it however will feel to most as a “foolish selection,” 1 absolutely sure to lead to the corporation headaches. Now, I make it a plan not to issue the enterprise savvy of professional executives in industries I do not know well. And I suggest my pupils not to leap to the conclusion that “that was a dumb decision” just for the reason that it’s just one they don’t comprehend. But nevertheless, in 2022, it is really hard to think about that the enterprise (or Melling extra particularly) didn’t see that there would be blowback in this situation. It’s one point to have disagreements, but it’s a further to unceremoniously dump a beloved and award-successful lady anchor. And it’s bizarre that a senior govt at a news organization would think that the real truth would not occur out, presented that, immediately after all, he’s surrounded by folks whose job, and private dedication, is to report the news.

And it is challenging not to suspect that this a less than delighted changeover for LaFlamme’s replacement, Omar Sachedina. Of course, I’m sure he’s content to get the career. But whilst Bell Media’s push release quotes Sachedina declaring sleek factors about LaFlamme, certainly he did not want to presume the anchor chair amidst popular criticism of the changeover. He’s getting on the position under a shadow. Probably the prize is worth the price tag, but it is also tricky not to think about that Sachedina had (or now has) some pull, some capacity to affect that way of the changeover. I’m not expressing (as some definitely will) that — as an insider who understands the genuine story — he need to have declined the work as sick-gotten gains. But at the really minimum, it seems fair to argue that he need to have utilized his influence to form the changeover. And if the now-senior anchor doesn’t have that sort of impact, we need to be fearful in fact about the independence of that position, and of that newsroom.

A ultimate, related observe about authority and governance in sophisticated companies. In any moderately perfectly-ruled group, the final decision to axe a significant, general public-struggling with talent like LaFlamme would have to have indicator-off — or at minimum tacit acceptance — from far more than a person senior govt. This indicates that one of two items is correct. Both Bell Media isn’t that variety of nicely-governed organization, or a significant number of folks had been concerned in, and culpable of, unceremoniously dumping an award-successful journalist. Which is even worse?

Leave a Reply