Jeff Keay

I'm sorry Jeff, this just doesn't stand scrutiny: I'm a regular CBC viewer (both the main network and Newsworld) and my radio receiver(s) are welded to CBC AM.

The idea that you have a 'strategic' plan in place to promote 'Intelligence' and especially tonight's finale is nonsense. It is an invisible plan for a show that itself might as well be invisible for all the commitment the network has made to it.

Compared with the promos (including on CBC AM Radio for heavens sake) for the execrable Dragon's Den and the far too long in the tooth 'Air Farce' there has been NOTHING for Haddock's show.

Your facile defence of the corporation's position is nearly as embarrassing.

For shame!

Codswallop!

I'm with GWest on this one. There seems to be no shortage of promotion for shows in the fall line-up...excepting Intelligence.

The promo for the season finale of The Tudors began with the second-to-last episode. Every episode of Little Mosque--even the re-runs--has been pumped to the point of overkill.

Until Murray Dobbin's piece was posted, I wasn't even aware that Intelligence was wrapping up tonight. Since the piece was posted, yes, there have been a few ads letting us know that the end is nigh.

While I'm here, what's up with The Hour? How many times do we have to watch the first three weeks of the season before the new shows roll around? The Vancouver shows were weak, to put it mildly, but at least they were new.

It's pretty hard to cultivate viewer loyalty when the worthwhile offerings are cut short or otherwise given short shrift. C'mon CBC, don't make me sign up for American-based HBO to get through the long Canadian winter nights!

Not even remotely convincing

It's sad just how far behind CBC is on this one. Last week, Haddock was only saying what fans of the show have known since the network utterly failed to promote the season premiere. Promotion for the show is nonexistent. CBC's right-wing answer to Intelligence, The Border, has got far more advertisement in the past few weeks than Intelligence has got all season. And what's with all of those stupid Viagra ads?

I don't really see what Mr. Keay is upset about. At this point, CBC can only admit to either deliberately burying the show or just being incredibly inept in promoting it. At least the conspiracy theory credits the CBC execs with some competence.

Is it really over?

That's it for me and CBC. Intelligence was the only show I watched.

The Border looks like the usual "terrorists hate our freedom" BS.

Keay Following Instructions

As Canada's elites become ever more isolated from the majority of citizens, they begin to adopt new forms of logic. Rules like: if we say so, it must be true. This is quite common in isolated elite thinking. Of course, it doesn't follow.

Keay is an employee of CBC, so no matter how vehement or sincere he says he feels, he's not a realiable source of truth. its easy to see why: if we imagine that senior government officials hate "Intelligence" and want it gone, could Keay report this? Of course not. He'd be fired in minutes. So he is not independant of his employer. Truth and facts are independent of an organizations wants. In this case, the facts indicate a great show is being torpedoed by the Harper neo-con government. Regardless if CBC staff try and say otherwise.

Sad day for Canadian Credibility

The CBC has clearly not been promoting Intelligence. G West is correct - crap like Dragon's Den, Little Mosque on the Prarie and the fetid corpse of Air Farce all receive much more promotion on air and in print. Hell, Hustle (a show I like) received more promotion from the CBC and it isn't even a Canadian show.
Intelligence was the best made in Canada show that had going. It's quality is obvious, so what does that say about the mindset we have in this country? Mediocrity above all else? The CBC isn't fooling anyone by their response.

The CBC has been promoting

The CBC has been promoting the Bejing Olympics ad nauseum since this summer, more than a year before the event begins. It sure was a surprise to me that last nights 'Intellegence' program was the final and a 2 hour time slot to boot. We can do a little less advertising for the olympics and a little more for the 'Intellegence' program please.

First time viewer

Saw Intelligence for the first time last night. I guess my first two episodes are to be my last? I`d never heard or read anything about it until Tyee..I liked it a lot...sort of a K Files
as in Kafka..Kafka meets William S. Burroughs meets Philip K. Dick.
When issues such as "Deep integration" and other current issues facing Canadians were mentioned in the show.. my wife said.."Ohhhh thats why they`re discontinuing it" Too relevant...pressure from Gov. Too bad.
Back to the Don Cherry Support the Troops Show I guess.

Jeff Keay's comments

I thought Jeff Keay's comment "...presumably Chris Haddock is attempting to negotiate through the media his relationship with the CBC" was very unfair. Initially, Murray Dobbin wrote a piece hoping to increase "Intelligence" audience numbers - so the show would not be cancelled. This was posted to the Council of Canadians website: http://www.canadians.org/integratethis/insecurity/2007/Nov-11.html As any fan of CBC knows of late, CBC executives have made it all too clear - if a TV show doesn't reach a million viewers - it's cancelled. There were many frustrated "Intelligence" fans with similar comments about CBC's lack of promotion - following the recent Globe and Mail piece "CBC wants more women". Then the media started paying attention.

For weeks, I didn't even see Intelligence promos during off-prime (daytime, weekends, and late night - the time when few viewers watch). I contacted Audience Relations in October to ask CBC to please promote Intelligence. They said many other people had phoned in with similar requests. Nothing changed. Only after the media fuss, in late November, have I seen Intelligence promoted in prime time television (6 - 10 p.m. weekdays) or even off-prime. Last evening, I watched an Intelligence promo during "Arrested Development" which didn't even mention the season finale - saying tune in at 9 p.m.

And so, as a fan of Intelligence, I share Haddock's frustration, and can understand his comments to the media. One becomes frustrated and angry - after repeated requests for a fair share of television promotion - fell on deaf ears. The fact that the viewership in Season 2 was the same as last season - with the most minimal promotion, late in the game - speaks incredibly well for the program. Imagine how well it would have done, had it been well promoted and supported by CBC. The question being, why wasn't it?

As expected...

Well that reads like the most predictable, corporate response one could hope for, and spoken like a loyal bureaucrat.

Compared to the polished, pandering, period costume rumpy pumpy rubbish of "The Tudors" and the tepid tea cup-tilting tedium of "Little Mosque...", "Intelligence" got precious little promotional play of late.

I guess the show's relentless indictment of shifty bureaucratic structures and conflicting motives hits too close to home.

Let's see proof ...

Both Haddock and the CBC are supporting their arguments based on unsubstantiated anecdotal information.

Lets see some proof.

You guys initiated this public discussion, so if you are going to be taken seriously it's time to prove what you say.

We want to see documented expenditures for the ads that ran for Intelligence, Air Farce and Dragon's Den.

If you don't provide them than we can only assume both of you are conspiring to play Tyee readers in your effort to raise the visibility of the show.

Tyee readers ... be wary.

You only know half the story, if that, and you're basing your arguments on emotion, not fact.

Searching for Intelligence...

Happened to run into one of the actors while in Van last summer. Only then did I find out that we'd be getting a second season.

Then, I had to search to find out when the first show was on. Other pals of mine who liked the show last year missed it.

Did not know that last night was to be a two hour season finale till I saw the Haddock interview here.

I watch tv a lot and I have seen the promos for lots of other items, but none for Intelligence.

Now I'm wondering how long I will have to wait to find out who shot JR.

Tough thing about private and public bureaucracies is that they do so well in hiding who is responsible for what. Secrecy and power, hand in hand...hey, that's what the show touches on.

right wing bias

Since I perhaps have your ear, Mr. Kealy, here's an idea or two about CBC's programming from the peanut gallery:

Why doesn't CBC revamp the National? I, for one, am tired of Mr. Flack-Jacket's (a.k.a. Peter Mansbridge) relentless and obscene support for the bloody war in Afghanistan (and formerly, Iraq, until it turned sour on him), his "complain-about-global-warming-but
never-bring-on-the-real-solutions-people" (such as Julian Darley of the Post Carbon Institute, Andrew Nikiforuk, Dr. William Reese, Dr. David Schindler, Dr. Brad Stelfox, William Marsden, Maude Barley, or a host of other never-heard-on-CBC environmental experts), and let me not forget, his nightly, neo-con panel discussions with his coterie of Tory-speckled friends. Would you put us out of our misery? I mean, you expect us to seriously take Allan Gregg as a PUNDIT??? He's nothing but a POLLSTER! Definition of pollster: a paid shill for corporate interests. (Gregg swept through Alberta a few months back and the local CBC Radio put him on for an entire, excruciating hour. Thank goodness, the savy listeners, one after another, told him where he could stuff his cheerful, pro-corporate nonsense--but good.)

What we need is a nightly, HONEST-TO-GOD, openly democratic, hour-long interview program - a la Charlie Rose -- only NOT with a rightwing frontman interviewer like Rose, but an intelligent host who can lead a genuine discussion with the veritable intellectual left (and right), as they have on CBC French TV every night, and on Europe's public TV stations - stations where the producers have the moxie and integrity and backbone to let free speech actually be heard on air. Wow, what a concept.

George S's joking, brief banter on The Hour with a few left wing guests every so often, doesn't pass for serious intellectual debate. It's pseudo-sophisticated, light entertainment masking itself as serious discourse--akin to getting a chance to talk to Nikolai Tesla and then asking him where he got his hair cut and where he bought his suit. You can bet your thinking public isn't satisfied OR fooled by this kind of trendy programming. My God, man, CHALLENGE your audience; as it is, you're helping create the most dumbed-down, sheeple audience ever. But then again, maybe that's your goal...

Welllll.................?

Dunno Maurice, I expect Haddock has more than anecdotal info on his side of the ledger but I think we'll have to wait till he signs in here again to find our exactly what he's based his claims on.

Given the person pecuniary interest he has in the show's success and future prospects I'd put a trifle more stock in his claims (which seem to be largely reflected in the testimony of Tyee readers) than I would in Mr Keay's assertion that the network was operating according to some 'strategic' plan.

Would that be the same strategic plan that lost the contract for televising the CFL?

I'd really like to hear some more from Chris by the way - especially with Reardon lying bleeding there in the doorway of his club...
I think asking Quo Vadis of the mother corp is a fair question.

unheard of

Other than Dobbin's original Tyee article and this Keay of the CBC reply, I have not been aware of the show, Intelligence. I watch CBC News and listen to CBC in the car. I do watch some television for entertainment, but not much. Somehow, this show has escaped me.

the burning question of the day

Here's a few quotes regarding - the burning question of the day - from outside media sources in the TV industry:

"One of the great burdens that a TV critic carries in Canada is the necessity of dealing with the tedious question, "Whither the CBC?" Fortunately, there are times when CBC-TV just decides to answer the question itself. Last week's release from CBC, the "sneak peek" at the "exciting new season" was one of those times. The announcement is an astonishing document. It's astonishing for what's in it and what isn't. First there's the peculiar absence of Intelligence from the list. I've already had emails from concerned fans. According to some reports, CBC is "still discussing the future" of the show. In the context of the Canadian TV racket and how shows are funded, made and put on the air, that sounds like nonsense. It's far too late in the year to be still nattering about the future of the series. As far I know, Intelligence is definitely returning. Call me suspicious, but not putting it on the new season list looks like some kind of weird manoeuvre in negotiations with the Intelligence people." "CBC takes the safe road to the ordinary" by John Doyle - Globe and Mail - April 9, 2007

Fred Fuchs executive director of arts and entertainment at CBC "admits CBC hasn't invested a lot in promoting its returning shows." "Intelligence returns, quietly" by Ilona Beiks - Oct 15, 2007- Playback Magazine

"Intelligence is the unsung hero of Canadian TV drama -- thoughtful, intelligent, well-made, skilfully acted and unfairly overlooked." (9 p.m., CBC) "CBC's Intelligence lives up to its name" Alex Strachan - CanWest News Service - Tuesday, January 30, 2007

Intelligence is deserving of more respect ...

... and many people here make good points, but let's see the numbers from both parties so we can see who's stretching the truth, because honestly (pun intended), both parties are trying to unfairly manipulate the Tyee crowd - and isn't that what we moan about here almost daily?

Whether CanWest does it, or CBC, or I, or Chris, it's the same duck.

Some of the comments here are purely emotional and reflective of how little readers know of the Canadian tv industry.

It's news to me that The Tyee is a fan magazine.

Chris, there is an ethical way for you to get your political point across, but you chose the PR route instead, which is fine, but if it walks like a duck ...

Let's see the numbers so we can park the emotion and discuss this intelligently.

I'm not saying Chris that your complaint isn't legitimate, and that the U.S. isn't working hard to turn Canada into another state, or even that the CBC isn't secretly in cahoots with the Oval Office, but we are not getting all the information we need to make a good decision regarding your tv show.

You are promoting fear of a U.S. takeover for your personal gain. The Martians have landed, but like all Canadian tv producers, if the opportunity landed in your lap I'm not so sure you wouldn't be long gone and writing to us from LA.

Maybe our government should should force Canadian tv producers to sign agreements guaranteeing that they repay all the grant money when they jump ship. If you guys do that I'll feel more comfortable.

If Chris and the CBC refuse to show us the numbers, the Tyee should publish another article that gives everyone here a clear understanding of how television producers use tax dollars to grow their private companies, and how the CBC very happily encourages and supports this process to further the CBC mandate.

Personally, I love it Chris that you have the nuts to challenge your employer publicly. I just don't agree with how you did it. I expected something less personal and more altruistic. You actually sound paranoid when you use lines like, "CBC Wants Intelligence Dead." In one breath you reduced a serious concern to PR marketing hype.

Yes, your show is good, but the reality is that the CBC has a very low and hard ceiling, and you hit it long ago. Everyone in the industry knows the opportunities at the CBC are limiting and regional. Tommy Hunter and David Suzuki proved it years ago.

If, like many of us, you believe there is a problem, you should be speaking on behalf of everyone who produces Canadian television, and not focusing on lining your own pockets with our tax dollars.

Quit whining like Anne Murray.

Give me some Tom Cruise to work with ...

Show me the numbers.

ME2

CBC hasn't been forced out of NHL programing - it's the CFL television franchise they lost...Strategically and from the point of view of serving the 'whole' country - that was a really bad move.

Lack of promotion

Chris Haddock isn't the only one who feels that "Intelligence" has been underpromoted. The fact that diehard fans of this series didn't know when this year's season premiere was airing speaks volumes about how little the premiere episode was promoted. Also, in the days prior to Monday night's two-hour season finale, "Intelligence" was incorrectly listed at its usual start time of 9 p.m., when the two-hour finale actually started at 8 p.m. So I'm sorry, but I seriously do not think Haddock is spouting conspiracy theories just for the heck of it. Even those of us who have no inside information have to wonder at the lack of promotion this amazing series has received.

Yes, I know there are other shows on CBC. I also know that this is the best one you've got, bar none, and I think you really dropped the ball when it didn't rake in the massive numbers you'd hoped. Still, I believe you can save things by doing the right thing and bringing this show back, putting it in a timeslot other than "Corner Gas" (only the highest-rated Canadian show on the air) and giving it a sufficient level of promotion.

Our Public Airwaves

Quote from Our Public Airwaves website:

Canadian Programming

There is one inescapable fact of life about Canadian programming: because of our relatively small market, with the exception of news and sports, even the most successful popular entertainment programs cost far more to produce than they can generate in commercial revenue. This simple fact drives almost all other programming considerations.

As a result, Canadians are poorly served when it comes to seeing their country and their culture reflected back to them on TV. Prime Time viewing in Canada consists primarily of American programming on the commercial networks and Canadian programming on Public Broadcasting channels. During the hours when most Canadians seek entertainment, much of the available Canadian content is information programming.

Canadian Drama

Genuine Canadian content is particularly hard to find in the popular drama category. Public Broadcasters just don't have the money to produce very many of these expensive shows. To meet their minimum Canadian content requirements, commercial networks often air made-in-Canada dramatic series that are devoid of Canadian content in order to make them easier to sell in the United States and abroad.

The small amount of genuine Canadian drama and entertainment programming that is produced suffers unfair comparisons from critics because it often fails to attract audiences as large as those for bigger budget American programs that are much more widely promoted.

read more here . . .

http://64.26.159.86/index.php?link=whatswrong&PHPSESSID=dfb65430c37a4b9971cf476581c50d7f

Basically, what they're saying is that you can't get blood from a stone.

Maybe if tv producers quit squeezing the stone and start crushing it in an effort to create long term solutions they wouldn't find themselves in the predicament Chris is experiencing.

It's a little late to complain after the money is spent.

Canadian tv producers know exactly what they are getting into, but make little effort to evolve.

Maybe it's time to give government grants the boot and let Canadian producers compete like everyone else in the global market.

Sink or swim.

Hundreds of Canadian entertainers do it and our tv producers can too, but it's too easy to stick a hand out for corporate welfare.

I'm not saying you shouldn't take it if you get it, but don't complain when it doesn't meet your personal needs to grow your private company.

It's a new world.

An excellent show

Monday nights were great for TV. I do like Dragon's Den and I used that hour to clean the dishes and the kitchen, I hate washing dishes and Dragon's Den gave me the humour to clean them. It was all in preparation for Intelligence. I think that this program is well written, the actors all buy into it and it is staged well. There is not other show like it on television which sets it apart. I will be writing the CBC and letting them know that myself and a few friends wish to see Intelligence back for a few more seasons. It is good television and most of all, its CANADIAN. For once in our lifetime, we have a better show that anything that is out there! I like the CSI and L & O franchises but Intelligence is way better. And yes, I think that some higher powers that be are feeling a little threatened and I'm sure the CBC has heard them and that's pretty much why this show is being cancelled. If the CBC were going to be smart about this, they would put together some deals and have this shown down south. There are all sorts of shows in syndication and this could lead to a good stream of revenue for the CBC.
Just my two cents worth!

A Question for Jeff Keay

Hi Jeff -
I have a question as to how you calculate ratings for your programs. Some programs ratings sound quite impressive. For instance: you were quoted in sblog in Nov '06 saying Dragon's Den received a total of 657,000 viewers. But when you consider these were a total from three different broadcasts of a Dragon's Den episode, which appeared to be on the main network and Newsworld - this number takes on a very different meaning: (Wed. 8pm, 395,000; Thurs. midnight, 33,000 and Sun. 7pm, 229,000). http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20061108.WBsblog20061108101451/WBStory/WBsblog

I would like to know - when CBC calculates different programs ratings - such as Intelligence, Dragon's Den, and Rick Mercer, that are broadcast an unequal number of times, on an unequal number of stations - how do we know if we have an apples to apples calculation in ratings? And exactly what methods do you use to measure audience numbers?

I must admit, I'm much more skeptical of CBC's stats after all the media attention last year, regarding CBC's calculations.

Nielsen Media Research overnight ratings, took CBC to task in a ratings war with CTV, when CBC failed to cite the source of their federal election coverage results, or give any explanation of how they calculated their numbers. CBC was found to be conflating numbers across two channels - the main network and Newsworld. "Pants on Fire" http://www.macleans.ca/culture/media/article.jsp?content=20060213_121291_121291

Also, Antonia Zerbisias, Toronto Star media columnist - admitted being misled by numbers released by CBC in response to ACTRA/FRIENDS press release on CBC's drama performance. "Spin class" and "Size Matters" February 2006 - Articles available on Friends.ca website, under Media Monitor.

As a taxpayer, that subsidizes Canadian programming, I feel strongly that CBC's ratings and methodology should be more transparent.

Reality Check

Pertaining to the CBC's defence of their promotion of "Intelligence", I can't believe how much "Little Mosque of the Prairie" has been promoted, and although it may be seen as a cutting edge comedy, and after only a few shows, was promoted as being the most popular comedy on CBC, it seems to be only an updated version of "Green Acres" or "Petticoat Junction", with similar cartoon characters.

I watch a lot of evening CBC, but I've only seen one promotion of "Intelligence", which was last week, I believe, right before the so-called "finale". However, I've been inundated with advertisements for "The Tudors", (which I admit, is a good show and I enjoyed those episodes I watched), and "The Heartland", which seemed rather reminiscent of a Disneyland movie, safe and saccharine, and didn't appeal to me at all.

I've also watched a good deal of American television, and even their most popular programs, like "CSI" and "Criminal Minds", etc., are not as good as "Intelligence" in terms of acting, plot, nor believability.

It's rare to see a program of this quality with such a complex and cohesive plot week after week. If you really wanted the stats to rise, you could try promoting it with the same enthusiasm as you do "Little Mosque on the Prairie". I'm no believer in conspiracy theories, but I cannot believe that the CBC would even consider eliminating a program of this calibre unless they were driven by a political agenda.

numbers

Don't know enough about how the cbc calculates the numbers, but do know that the Neilsens polling system they use requires that you be a home owner to participate. So, no renters, which I would guess is a pretty huge segment of the population. How do you count those and what they're watching?

It's a system designed to serve the advertisers, who want to target a specific demo who will purchase their product or influence the decision of those who do. Is it an appropriate measure for a public broadcaster. Many question that it is. It has much room for faulty data.

The cbc regular audience, I believe, is a greying audience, many of them unlikely to begin downloading or even tvo ing to eliminate commercials. They are probably onto using a remote and may never commit to any new platforms of delivery, hence, they become a very important viewership to the advertiser in that they're relatively static and show up in front of there tv's pretty habitually and watch at least some of the commercials. The cbc audience is of course, of interest to the other broadcasters, whose profit mandate is dictated by stockholders.

While I was producing a show for CBS, much was made of attracting the younger demographic, while at the same time slotting those shows in off prime hours, so they could maintain their similar, greying audience while attempting to develop a younger demo.

The cbc may well have different goals of number attainment for this sort of discrepancy. So, while some might complain that The Hour is not reaching a large audience, it may be enough to satisfy the cbc's strategy for the show.

The risk is of course in alienating that desirable older advertiser targeted audience and sending it searching elsewhere for it's news and current events, taking advertising dollars with them as they migrate.

Sometime soon the debate will again arise as to whether the cbc should show commercials. My prediction is the answer will be no, and the advertising dollars will drift to the other private broadcasters, which is what privitization is all about.

Then someone will suggest that the cbc hold telethons, like PBS, and that Canadians who want to watch programming like Canadian drama can pay extra for it.

Those who say that tv is dead on conventional broadcast television (free tv) are ignoring the facts that the most sought after viewers by advertisers are watching the cbc and are being targeted by other networks, who of course, like newspaper publishers, experiencing sharp declines in viewership.

What often looks like incompetence is simple distraction. But we all know that.

Transparency is required.

Give the people what they want....

That old maxim explains this:

> The CBC has clearly not been promoting Intelligence.
> G West is correct - crap like Dragon's Den, Little
> Mosque on the Prarie

Give'em what they want. The vast majority of the TV audience wants to watch crap, so that's what they get. (How else to explain the success of Two and a Half Men which has now been on the air for an inexplicable FIVE seasons.)

Having said that I find intelligence dull, uninteresting, convoluted, difficult to follow if not consumed regularly. it watches like a show that's a bit too clever by half.

Haddock's Da Vinci's Inquest was brilliant when it debuted, and at one point was a lifeline to Vancouver for me when I was away and didn't want to be.

Haddock's Da Vinci's City Hall was a tragicomic joke that I couldn't watch. It's preachy politics and storylines were unbearable.

Perahaps Chris has jumped the shark a bit. I certainly hope not, although Aaron Sorkin did it so he'd be in good company.

Perhaps instead of blaming the CBC we should examine the role of the writer.

BTW, Ms. Tyee Technical Director, why the hell is is that when I'm reading a story then login to comment I think have to go back to the HOME page, forcing me to search for my story again and come back. Why is it that you don't story the location where I clicked login and return me to there. This could take...a cookie? A database column? It would be easy, and much much more convenient. I can think of 1,000 ways to implement it (none of which involve sharing my personal information with your roommate, so they may not be of interest.)

Intelligence at CBC, not!

Like most here I missed the Premiere of Intelligence this season, but I sure knew when little mosque and air farce would be on not that I cared.

The only thing missing from the shoddy treatment this show got from CBC was that they didn't move the time slot around endlessly like they have done with Mercer.

The only reason I knew to tune in at 8 pm last Monday was because I had emailed Haddock Entertainment to ask a question about the show and they told me.

CBC deserves a good kick in the arse for this cock-up. Finally tv worth watching and it's gone...

If CBC really did try to

If CBC really did try to promote Intelligence they were had. Who ever set out the "strategic" wasted the "CBC" time, money and human resources.

This entire season the only reason I knew when the season began and finished is because I joined the Intelligence Mailing list and facebook page. If I hadn't I would have missed the first episode and defiantly the first part of the 2 hour season finale.

For the record I do watch the CBC quite regularly and don't think I've seen one add for Intelligence during another show, only one moments before each episode would begin. Also I know that the cbc doesn't have a huge marketing budget, but with all the money they spent on billboards for "The Tudors" they could have put some in to some decent Canadian TV.

Raphaella

My friends in Toronto tell me that the campaigns there for the Stroumbolopolous and Gil Deacon shows were oppressive, on billboards, buses and the like while everything else was ignored. Perhaps that's why Haddock took to hanging posters and other types of guerilla marketing for Intelligence.

I'm actually surprised there ever 'was' a Gil Deacon show - I happened to be home ill one day and watched a few minutes of it - it was the most appallingly awful thing I've ever seen.

Does anyone know if it is still being shown?

On the other hand, was it cancelled as a mercy exercise - to the public?

Jeff Keay...I await your reply

Hi Jeff,
It's been over 24 hrs and I haven't received your reply regarding my question - about how CBC calculates program ratings. I really hate to bug you - I know you're a very busy guy, putting out fires for a living. But I've been anxiously waiting by my computer, in case those diligent Tyee editors are just about to pull the plug on these comments.

Really ! please feel free to post the Q and A here. I'm sure you already know, we're really a pretty harmless bunch.

Well...MOST of us...anyway.

You no doubt heard that Jimmy Reardon was shot and left in a doorway. So I'd be betting that Francine Reardon is on the prowl, and lookin' to blame someone. And come to think of it, I'm not so sure if I'd be trusting that Mary Spalding, either. Gawd knows what Ted and Martin are cooking up, desperately trying to save their bacon. And...just in...word on the street - Jimmy was wearing a bullet-proof vest - and gee whiz, he got kinda mad when those drug lords were steppin' on his turf. So personally, I wouldn't to be crossing the street, anywhere near his vicinity, either.

JUST KIDDING ! In case you missed it - and none of us would be surprised - these are character's in the TV drama "Intelligence".

Here's a hot tip, I just heard from inside sources - CSIS is using this drama as a front - to send secret messages to their agents. And also, as a way to improve their image. Kinda sex it up a bit. So....I'm thinking your article was code, and you've got the inside track, but can't really announce it yet. That CBC already has plans in the works for Season 3. So yeah !!! Thanks CBC !

WHAT A RELIEF !!

So please pardon us, those of us in the peanut gallery. We were all just being a bunch of silly ninny's - that got a little spooked - and started thinking up conspiracy theories.

P.S. So, thanks in advance ! And also thanks for your anticipated response to my query.

"Intelligence"

What can I say that hasn't already been said?
Apart from a few naysayers that obviously haven't followed the program and therefore are unaware of the lack of promotion for this best of All Canadian Drama the consensus is in. "Intelligence" by which i mean the writers, producers, directors, crew and actors have all been shafted this season.

Only by the good fortune of knowing someone involved in the show did I find out that the finalé was on for two hours and informed all my friends who also were unaware.

Being out of town and therefor taping the show i was able to change my presets to reflect the change in time. No thanks to CBC.

Don't want to sound paranoid but this is not the first show of excellent calibre, made in Vancouver without benefit of an eastern star, that has silently, without fanfare that has silently been shuffled off into obscurity. it would be interesting if we could turn an eastern CBC archivist to get us that"Intel"

Re: "Perahaps Chris has

Re: "Perahaps Chris has jumped the shark a bit."

If "Intelligence" is your idea of "jumping the shark," then I'd hate be interested in seeing what you view to be higher-caliber programming. I will agree with you that "City Hall" was a bit of a misfire, but IMO Haddock has been firing on all cylinders with "Intelligence" from the get-go. It seems, however, that the overall viewing public prefers brain pudding to something challenging that forces them to pay attention. Giving the public what it wants isn't the same as giving the public what it needs, and I put "Intelligence" in the need-to-know category.

Addendum

Also, I think that "Da Vinci's Inquest" was one of those rare programs that simply got better the longer it was on the air. I debate whether it would've been wise to stop on top, leave "City Hall" out of it and go straight to "Intelligence" . . . as there might well have been a huge fan outcry over the demise of "Inquest" (well, there was some of that, anyway). At any rate, the only point where I feel like Chris Haddock maybe dropped back a step was with "City Hall" . . . and I'd be interested in hearing/reading Chris's comments about that experience. I enjoyed his comment: "What often looks like incompetence is simple distraction. But we all know that." I suspect that axiom applies to more than just his desire to see transparency in the CBC's ratings.