Monday, February 28, 2011

The Cathy Rushton Red River Censorship running total

Like they tell you in hockey officiating, "[penalties] are like items at a grocery till. Just keep ringin'em up."

As such is the same with Red River Censorship's Vice President Cathy Rushton. Ahem.


1. Despite there being zero formal complaints filed about TGCTS, "...we've had any number of complaints about [Marty Gold] from people who's opinions we care about."

2. Mislead the entire KICK FM Board to believe that Mayor Sam Katz had complained about the show, without producing a copy to the rest of the board.

3. Mislead the entire KICK FM Board to believe that Federal Minister Vic Toews had complained about the show, without producing a copy to the rest of the board.

4. Stated she was "not big on censorship at all, but..."

5. When the Winnipeg Police Association contacted Red River College upon hearing of TGCTS's cancellation, Rushton dismissed their concerns as "an example of [station manager] Rick lobbying for support."

6. Stated she "...did not want to create the impression that this is about censorship."


TOTAL:

(1) Ruined Livelihood
(1) Ruined reputation
(1) Interference with freedoms of expression and opinion
(1) Successfully prevented freedom of speech
(1) Successfully implemented full censorship in Red River College
(1) Less media outlet in Winnipeg
(1) Less person holding people such as herself to account
(6) Board members mislead by her personal vendetta to silence Mr Gold
(3) RRC students mislead by her personal vendetta to silence Mr Gold


Cha-ching. Let's see how much more expensive this gets for you, Cathy.

39 comments:

Marty said...

Some clarification.

With regards to point 2 about the falsehood that Sam Katz complained, that we know of from emails, Rushton misled
(1) RRC vice president Rob Olson, and
(2) RRC vp Ken Webb and
2 people who answer directly to him, both of whom are Kick-FM Board members,
(3) Graham Thomson and
(4) Larry Partap.

Partap claims membership in the fictional "executive committee" that made a 'decision' on November 2nd that there is no record of, and Thomson, the Dean of Business, publicly promoted the fictional authority of the 4 member "executive committee" (which included Rushton) over the full 10 member Board, to cancel The Great Canadian Talk Show.

Who else Rushton may have repeated this Sam Katz lie to, I do not know. She claims no one else -- but I do not find it believable that ol' Cathy would have kept that kind of juicy gossip against me to herself aside from those 2 emails I have uncovered.

Your third point about alleging Vic Toews had complained was indeed, a lie told the entire Board on December 9th. As they sat in deliberation of the 4 presentations asking the Board to reinstate the program, by the way.

And her excuse for how that Vic Toews remark came to be on the record, as far as I can tell, is not true either.

In the totals, I'd say
Captain Audio handled some of the accounts personally, so there's another ruined livelihood.

Rick Baverstock's reputation has taken a hit because the College and self-serving radio station executives undermined his management of the programming, so that's 2.

And you probably meant the 3 students on the Kick-FM board.

In fact, EVERY RRC STUDENT was lied to.

The College pretended the cancelation was coincidental to a format change and denied it was in any way related to the College censoring opinion to satisfy their friends in mainstream media ie Margo Goodhand and the provincial government ( ie how they tried the same template of the fake "executive committee" to silence The Kenny Show for the NDP but got caught).

That charade was a lie to all the students and everyone who listened to the show.

Joey Smallwood said...

Question: If TGCTS is an important asset to the community, why has it not been picked up by another radio station?

Joey Smallwood said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Marty said...

Hey Joey, go ask Ace Burpee what he thinks of the show and why it hasn't been picked up.

Riverman said...

Word around the college is that "she's in trouble".

Joey Smallwood said...

Marty,

Nah, why don't you answer the question instead?

Phil Walding said...

The reason it was not picked up is very simple. It was a growing entity that was experiencing slow and steady growth due to the fact that economic support was spotty. When it was yanked without notice it was not large enough of an entity to survive long enough to relaunch elsewhere. If notice had been given I am very confident it would have reemerged on another station. Once the feed was disrupted it was like starting from scratch which was not appealing to other radio stations given the highly competitive nature of the Winnipeg radio market. It is of course also true that the executive of Crecomm being involved in other radio stations in the market were well aware that this sudden silencing would have exactly the effect of killing TGCTS which is why no notice was given in the first place.

Joey Smallwood said...

I assume by growth you mean audience and/or ad revenue? Revenue growth would be fairly constrained by the CRTC license that caps revenue for community/not-for-profit stations. Audience numbers had likely peaked, given the show had been on for a few years, and Marty had access to a big audience on CJOB for a short stint.

If Marty was going to be picked up by private radio, it would have happened before his show ended. CJOB tried him out and took a pass, so there's not much left in the talk genre. What I'm referring to is the other not-for-profit radio, like the university stations, places that can afford to take on a show like Marty's without fears about losing sponsors, revenue, etc.

And Phil, your theory about surviving to relaunch seems dubious. Hustler and Lawless should do just fine switching stations with a three week gap in between. Or would you allege that is not a fair comparison?

Phil Walding said...

Growth is ad revenue. Relaunching at the other not for profits offered the same problem the show had at Red River (no radio book numbers means no proof of audience which makes selling ads almost impossible) There was plenty of evidence to suggest the shows audience was growing. As for Hustler and Lawless they had the benefit of mainstream media promoting there show so no one was left scratching their heads as to where they went. If I had 10 bucks for everyone of Marty's listeners who thought he just went on a holiday during the first few days after the cancellation I would be a rich man. It is very clear that this is the big guy stepping on the little guy which would be fine if not for the fact that the dirty games were perpetrated with taxpayer's monies (either directly or indirectly)so as to prevent an alternate view from being presented which brings the argument back to the original point

The Great Canadian Talk Show said...

Joey you are sadly misinformed.

The audience did not peak years ago. It peaked with our civic election coverage which drew more and more advertising support as our work was seen as a service to the community.

The CRTC in no way "caps" campus station revenue, it only limited how many ad minutes could run in an hour.

I was contacted by another campus station but they had no revenue model nor a daily time slot.

CJOB passed on nothing, they had me fill in for Geoff and there was no other deal implied.

The Great Canadian Talk Show said...

Also the conflict of interest of the vice chairman of Kick in handling the cancelation and subsequent appeal while also negotiating with the Free Press for a drive home show for CFRW is the ultimate insult to the community he supposedly represents. The CRTC is going to find that very interesting come renewal time.

Joey Smallwood said...

No book numbers means no proof of audience numbers, but there was plenty of evidence the audience was growing... huh? Do you have proof it was growing, or not?

Once again, ad revenue is only a token with a not-for-profit Type B license. With only 4-6 minutes allowed per hour, and rates proportioned to small audience numbers, there is no way the show could become a real job for anyone. It's not a place to get a real job, unless you are the station manager. Someone has to be in charge of *all those volunteers*.

Your arguments do not add up. Commercial radio needs listeners to get ratings to boost ad rates to be profitable. No station would deny itself a ratings winner. If they thought they could get rich with Marty at the mic, they would hire him in a second. To date, they have not.

Community radio serves the public interest. So why wouldn't another community station pick up Marty's show if it was serving the community's needs? I have yet to read a coherent answer to this question.

The Great Canadian Talk Show said...

What are you, a comedian? Read my blog posts and get educated.

I trained community volunteers and students fr 3 different Colleges at no cost to anyone. I was contracted by the station manager at HIS initiative to fulfill their talk quota and engage the community under a barter deal
of HIS definition.

That was my job . That is how I EARNED my living. Don't try to pretend you are an expert on my business when you obviously dont know and have an ax to grind.


The influence of giving the community a platfo was in evidence everytime the Free Press chased one of our stories, or when 'cheez whiz' broke on CBC 14 months after we did it.

Your faith in radio programmers is laughable. They are beholden to their playbooks dictated by outsiders, not to what Winnipeg wants or needs.

The Great Canadian Talk Show said...

And here is the coherent answer -- for a second time.

I was immediately approached by a campus station.
They did not have a daily slot.
They did not gave a revenue model.
Therefore there was no basis for me to go forward.

Joey Smallwood said...

Marty you can't expect to make a living on a college radio station.

I'm glad you were approached by a community station, but they could not offer you what you needed, 5 days M - F, I assume, so you turned them down. Seems logical. But you can't expect to make a living like that, these stations are for volunteers.

I was a huge fan of your show. But it had run its course, served its purpose. Truly, it was time for you to move on to bigger and better things, and it is too bad that hasn't worked out for you. Perhaps you could ease your bitterness after all these months, and dedicate your efforts fully to re-entering the local radio market.

To carry on thinking there is some kind of organized effort to keep you silenced is to entertain thoughts bordering on the irrational and the paranoid. You are better than that, and I hope to hear you on-air sometime soon.

The Great Canadian Talk Show said...

Joey you are delusional and evidentally have an agenda. Read the internal emails published on the blog. For someone so "expert" on Crtc licenses to not recognize the interference with the care and control required of ALL Board members is proof enough you are up to mischief.

Regardless of your opinion, it is a fact I had a valid contract, it is a fact no written complaints were advanced through the legal complaint policy, it is a fact the executive committee was never legally created or empowered by the Board, and it is a fact my contract was breached.

I note you are silent about the College that purports to teaching business ethics conducting itself in thus manner and lying to the public about the involvement of the editor of the Free Press and the College President.

It is also a fact that numerous falsehoods about "complaints" were spread by Carhy Rushton as part of her goal to censor nor only my program, but remove community participation from KICK FM to make sure TGCTS was silenced

Marty said...

(Please excuse the earlier typos folks, IPhones have a habit of slipping in intuitive word completions that are incorrect)

Oh and Joey, how's this for "irrational and paranoid"

Deb Pokrant, secretary to RRC president Forsyth asks Graham Thomson:

What do you know about Marty Goldman, Margo called Stephanie and "has her lawyer working on it".

Dean of Business Graham Thomson answers to Pokrant:

"The College does not technically have the ability to get rid of him, but this can be done without too much trouble either through a chat with Rick or a Board directive"

Nope, no breach of contract, breach of complaint process, funder interference with the non-profit, or Board interfering with station programming there. Move along Joey.

The rest of us will focus on holding those who lied to the community and National Post to cover up for their kowtowing to their rich and powerful thin-skinned friends to account.

Sam said...

Marty, in the over three months since your show has been cancelled have you done any of the following:

1. Filed a complaint with the Manitoba labour board.
2. Filed a complaint with the Manitoba press council.
3. Filed a complaint with the CRTC.
4. Filed a complaint with the Manitoba Human Rights Commission.
5. Hired a lawyer and sue KICK-FM and Red River College for breach of contract.

If the answer to all of the above is no, why not?

Graham said...

Joey, the argument that "the show hasn't been picked up yet" is bullcrap.

Stations don't just scramble and beg and plead and throw money at a program that has been cancelled elsewhere.

Hey that reminds me, if Conan O'Brien was so awesome, and he had such a great, loyal fanbase, why did it take him so long to go to another network?

It's called status quo, buddy. The programming you've got is good enough and you need to be completely desperate to start changing things.

The Great Canadian Talk Show said...

Hi Sam,

I understand Bob Cox told you to get lost. I would like to see that correspondence if you could share it via email.

In the meantime, perhaps you can clue me into what grounds you believe exist in legislation that would justify my filing :

1. a complaint with the Manitoba labour board.
2. a complaint with the Manitoba press council.
3. a complaint with the CRTC.
4. a complaint with the Manitoba Human Rights Commission.

Number 2 in particular really confounds me.

Joey Smallwood said...

@Graham:

Hustler and Lawless left CJOB late last month, to start on 1290 in mid-March. Literally there one day, gone the next, new contract in hand. So you're off-base there. Any station maanger citing your status quo argument will probably be unemployed in due time. If you have associates in radio who operate by that mantra, I'd love to know who they are.

Conan took a huge buyout package, with a clause that he could not join another network until a specified date. He was on the air soon after that date elapsed.

Friendly advice - please stay informed and aware before you patronize someone.

Joey Smallwood said...

@Marty:

You've got to let this go at some point. You had some kind of barter arrangement with the station? Fine, but to conflate that with an employment contract is bordering on absurd. You are in a business where people are let go all the time for reasons they perceive as unfair. The great thing in a free market is that if you are valuable, you will be able to take your gig elsewhere. Let's hope you can do that. In the meantime, try to build the audience for your podcast. There's people out there building loyal following in that format.

Truly Marty, this bitterness you harbour is going to eat you up. It's showing in the tortured logic that underwrites your posts here. Find a way to get back on the air somewhere, or move on to something else.

Marty said...

Joey

You started with the premise that no one can make a living selling advertising for a campus radio show.

I proved you 100% wrong.

I made a living by the sweat of my brow and the creativity of myself and others involved with the show to bring value to the advertisers and they responded in growing numbers as we ramped up the coverage of the civic election and proved the people had a voice that politicians and the mainstream media were forced to acknowlegde and respect.

Go examine contract law and come back with something informed and accurate to contribute instead of embarassing yourself with your inference a College that teaches business could in any way participate in breaching a contract. What are their students learning from this?

What did Phil say about the point of the post?
"It is very clear that this is the big guy stepping on the little guy which would be fine if not for the fact that the dirty games were perpetrated with taxpayer's monies (either directly or indirectly)so as to prevent an alternate view from being presented which brings the argument back to the original point"

Powerful interests swept away a media platform to hold elected officials and the mainstream media to account by illegal means, and then even lied about it to the national media.

You seem fine with it. In fact, you seem to want to stop Graham from exposing my findings via FOI filings and prove how the community and volunteers at Kick FM were betrayed, by marginalizing my practice of systematically exposing these icons of education and media through their own emails and actions as a sign of 'tortured logic' and 'bitterness'.

Nice try.

We are standing up for freedom of speech by showing how it was controlled by self-serving interests connected to Radio and a College that does not regard the community as a stakeholder but feeds off our tax dollars to the tune of $275,000 in debt owed the station to the College. You seem fine with that too by the way, that the taxpayer is paying for a non profit with no representation from the community of volunteers.

As to your remark about status quo and "If you have associates in radio who operate by that mantra, I'd love to know who they are"

Graham hit the nail on the head and your fantasies about how commercial radio stations operate in this town are quite absurd.

All listeners and supporters can rest assured I'll get back to podcasting after Kenny returns from vacation.

skinartia said...

I personally would love to hear new TGCTS podcasts and I agree with the statement that that's how other people have developed a loyal following. When the first podcast came out, I had hoped that it would be at least a weekly occurrence. Alas, there hasn't been one relating to local issues in quite sometime which is a shame as there have been a whole lot of issues to be covered.

Joey Smallwood said...

Marty you have a real victim complex. You berate those whose opinion differs from yours, as if your view is the only way to see things. Dare I say your conduct verges on imperious? While your show was almost always entertaining, at times you were so worked up you stopped making sense. Sadly this is another one of those times.

Picture this: a campus station sagging under a six-figure debt is serving as a vehicle for you to spout your opinions and earn a living while doing so. The optics on that do not look good for you or the station.

You can brag that you went out and hustled up the sponsors, but they were getting air time on CKIC, the station that gave you a platform to sell ads in the first place. Do these same sponsors line up to advertise on your podcasts? Doubtful.

Let me know when your wrongul termination settlement is determined, if it happens in this lifetime.

The Great Canadian Talk Show said...

Sagging! You ARE a comedian!

Read the minutes of the Board meetings. The College will pay all losses as long as they control the licence. The problem is that is illegal on 2 counts. Kick fm has NO intention of addressing the debt." Sagging," it is to laugh you would try to create a new false justification for their censorship.

Plus, I personally generated the single biggest ad buy in their history and was delivering at least 20% of their ad revenue this year. Go bullshit someone else.

Graham said...

@ Joey

Friendly advice,

When someone has suffered degradation and grave injustices, do not insult them by stating they have a "victim complex."

You are way off base, and incredibly uninformed, based on what you have written here. Your superiority complex leaves you unable to process new information and change your position. Your cup, in other words, is already full.

Sam said...

1. Manitoba labour board:
You were fired without notice, you went in to work on Monday and you were fired without explanation or notice.

2. Manitoba press council:
Margo Goodhand, the editor of the Winnipeg Free Press (a member of the Manitoba press council) lied to another newspaper, the National Post, when she said she had nothing to do with the cancellation of your program.

3. CRTC:
You just said in your last post the following: “Read the minutes of the Board meetings. The College will pay all losses as long as they control the licence. The problem is that is illegal on 2 counts.”: Your own words Marty “illegal”. If you have proof that the station has “violated” the conditions of its license then you have a duty to report that to the CRTC, just like you did when you blew the whistle on Flava 107.9.

4. Manitoba human rights commission:
You have repeatedly said that this is a “free speech” issue. Free speech is a human right, it is in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the Canadian Constitution, it is in the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and as Graham has pointed out it is also in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

5. Suing for breach of contract:
You say you had a contract with the station, was this contract in writing because if this was just a handshake deal, you’re screwed.

Marty said...

Hi Sam:

"1. Manitoba labour board:
You were fired without notice"

Never crossed my mind. I am not sure what jurisdiction they have over contract as opposed to wage employment, I will have to ask around.

"2. Manitoba press council:
Margo Goodhand, the editor of the Winnipeg Free Press (a member of the Manitoba press council) lied to another newspaper, the National Post, when she said she had nothing to do with the cancellation of your program."

I presumed that the press council only dealt with material the members published in their own papers, you have an interesting interpretation there.

"3. CRTC ... just like you did when you blew the whistle on Flava 107.9."

Thanks for remembering !

"4. Manitoba human rights commission:"

The Code specifies prohibited grounds of discrimination, but makes no mention of free speech as a protected right under the Code.

As to #5, it is no secret I have the emails from when I was approached and the terms set out after the CRTC hearing, and presented them to the Kick AGM.

Graham said...

Who are you, Sam?

Surely you are not the person requesting a friend acceptance on Facebook right now.

If you are, or if you aren't, I dearly anticipate your email exchange with Box Cox.

Graham said...

@ Joey

"Marty you can't expect to make a living on a college radio station. "

Except that he did.

Everyone wondered "what Marty did" off-air.

Guess what? He did exactly that. I can vouch for it. It is a full-time job getting ready to prepare for a two-hour-per-day program that makes you a living. If you think this is some kind of slack-jawed-easy work, please stop posting comments on my website.

Joey Smallwood said...

"If you think this is some kind of slack-jawed-easy work, please stop posting comments on my website."

Oh Graham, who's trying to suppress free speech now? Dissenting opinions should be tolerated. No wonder a scan of your posts shows little to no commenting, aside from this post.

Joey Smallwood said...

"Degradation and grave injustices"
Oh my.
Who suffered more, Marty or Joan of Arc? Marty, or MLK? Marty, or Gandhi?

Tough calls, indeed.

Here's how this rolls out - Marty never works in radio again. Marty never gets a settlement. Marty never gets over it. Marty goes back to the only stable job he ever had, driving cab, and continues to write the Black Rod anonymously. Graham continues to write poorly formed, melodramtic sentences, receiving 0 comments for pretty much every post.

I wish I could say it was pleasure visiting you drama queens, but I cannot tell a lie. I'll go back to the readable blogs, so Graham, don't worry about anymore comments from me. Toodles.

The Great Canadian Talk Show said...

Thanks for finally exposing your true bias and crawling back into your hole. You went from claiming to be a supportive listener to showing that was a front for an agenda. I made a living based on a legal contract that was breached by powerful controlling interests on the community, you refused to believe it, and regardless of your attempt to undermine Graham the proof will continue to expose those who lied about their true motivation.

By the way I do not write the Black Rod, I have not driven taxi since being disabled in 94 and I have operated a successful consulting business since 1999. Radio does not define me and never did. Toodles.

Sam said...

I didn’t know you even had a facebook page Graham so the answer to that is no.

On January 21 I e-mailed Rob Cox a link to Marty’s blog post of January 19: “Margo Goodhand lawyered up on the way to Stephanie Forsyth's House of Censorship” and I asked him if there was any truth to this story, this was his reply:

“What a silly comment. Do you believe every rumour, allegation or post you see online to be true unless someone says otherwise? I don’t engage with, or respond to, anything that Mr. Gold posts and I am not about to start doing so. He has long ago made his biases perfectly clear. Believing a story from him about the Winnipeg Free Press would be similar to believing Sarah Palin’s take on Obama’s healthcare plan.”

Okay he didn’t exactly tell me to “Get Lost” but the implication was sure there as he really didn’t answer the question.

Sam said...

Marty believe it or not I'm on your side in this and I'm trying to help.

I noticed you didn't punch a hole in my arguement for filing a complaint with the CRTC. I wish you luck in that because that station needs to be exposed.

Graham said...

@ Joey

Did you just accuse me of censoring comments?

Really? After all the bullcrap flamewar you and Marty have been posting?

I asked you to shut the fuck up because you've no idea what you're talking about. Asking and censorship are two very different things.

Graham said...

@ Sam

Thanks for that.

Its really something else. It is as if he is denouncing the existence of the documents Marty has posted to his website.

Graham said...

@Sam

Is it at all possible for you to forward that email to me in some capacity?