The startling thing about the recent Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC) ruling that an "aggressive" interview of dancer Margie Gillis by Sun News TV's Krista Erickson last June was legitimate journalism, is that a record 6,676 people complained it was too tough.
That's over three times the number of complaints filed in a whole year.
Rather than reflect on Erickson, that number says a hell of a lot about the pathetic state of journalism in this country, where hard questions are deemed mean and unwarranted.
Margie Gillis seems a nice person and comes across on TV as warm and friendly. But she had difficulty justifying why she and her dance foundation should be getting government grants. And she fights back to defend her turf. Even nastily.
A lot of people are uneasy about the amount of taxpayers' dollars funneled into culture -- not necessarily the Margie Gillis Dance Foundation, but to book publishers, artists whose paintings don't sell, the whole culture establishment.
The thing about the Erickson interview last year is that it was ineffably courteous, albeit it blunt and direct. Erickson did not belittle or mock Gillis, but acknowledged that she's something of an icon in this country and internationally, being awarded the Order of Canada, Order of Quebec, a Governor General's Performing Arts award. A dancer and choreographer of considerable stature.
There was no name calling -- just questions which made Gillis uncomfortable.
In fact, last June, off camera, Gillis fought back -- fought back kind of dirty, if you ask me. She urged on Facebook, that those who disapproved of Erickson's questions might consider boycotting Sun News TV; might want to write advertisers urging they not use Sun TV; might complain to the Broadcast Standards Council; might write their MP.
Gillis called Erickson's interview "biased, unprofessional, contemptuous 'journalism,'" and that the Sun News TV network was disseminating "hate propaganda."
It could be argued that Gillis' reaction to Erickson's questions was far more intemperate and extreme than anything Erickson said. Gillis kind of floundered in the interview.
Many argue that the amount of taxpayers' money given to the Gillis Dance Foundation, spread over some 13 years, is not that much, and that the acclaim achieved by the dancing is worth the cost and enhances Canada's reputation.
That's not my view, but it's a valid justification for arts grants.
I'm inclined to the view that if an arts or cultural enterprise can't sustain itself among the public, then what we are doing with government grants is financing hobbies.
On reflection, many of the 6,676 complaints filed with the CBSC -- surpassing the yearly average of 2,000 - seem the result of Gillis lobbying fans to respond on her behalf. One wonders how many who complained even saw the TV interview in question.
There's a difference between a tough interview and a rude interview.
Mike Wallace was a tough but courteous interviewer in the U.S., as was David Frost in Britain. In Canada we had Gordon Sinclair and maybe Morty Shulman and Jack Webster in Vancouver. But they're long gone.
No one comes to mind today who fills their shoes.
Now that Krista Erickson has been vindicated, can we expect more no-nonsense interviews?
Not mere polemics, but tough, well-researched questions delivered with authority, confidence and courtesy? One hopes so. There's no shortage of issues waiting to be exposed. Go get 'em Krista . . . .
Regardless, when one considers that the Conservatives WASTE $1BILLION on the G-20 summit, the paltry funding to the arts pales by comparison.
By that math, we could fund 1000 dance troupes for 13 years or more!
I'd MUCH rather see my money go there, than to the boondoggle that was the summit!
How inappropriÂate to move your hands back & forth in a mockery of this womans contributiÂons to society and lump it into one gross payment of whatever the inaccutate sum was she kept throwing out.
Or how wonderful when she held her hand up and yelled stop and than claimed the woman was talking over her....(like that was even possible)
A society without art is a society that is repressed. Poetry, songwriterÂs, singers, authors, theatre allow us to express ourselves historicalÂly.
It makes you wonder what type of govn't doesn't want freethinkeÂrs or individual expressionÂs.
This was the first interview I ever watched on Sun NEWS it is also my last. Rude behaviour is not acceptable or entertainiÂng
The fact that it is being defended as a hard hitting interview is a joke. A hard hitting interview is one where the host has no political opinion and actually has their facts straight before they start yelling at the person in the interview.
You are entitled to your opinion sir, and the people that responded to the interview with less than favourable comments are entitled to theirs.
I am sure that that your newspaper believes that The Sunshine Girl is considered art
Let's take public infrastructure for example; would the building of roads, bridges, water treatment plants and electrical grids happen if it weren't for government subsidisation? (Not that it's happening well now). And if it was happening would the private sector doing it be good for our society?
Would you want a private company making millions of dollars off the paying of tollbooths by you and the rest of the public for the privilege of driving on their roads?
Who knows, maybe you would. This may all really boil down to a question of whether you think a society based on supply and demand is going to function better than the one we currently have in place.
Personally I don't think funding for the arts is taking too big a chunk out of my paycheque.
viva the Republican Party North....sad
Most Canadians, particularly the working class 99% do NOT want our money spent on interpretive dance. The idea of it is so absurd it comes across more like an SNL sketch than reality, yet the reality is that we have to pay for this woman, who seems to think she's pretty wonderful, to traipse around the world dancing out her feelings.
Better to see unemployment benefits go up, or nurses salaries go up, or class sizes shrink, than to pay for a liberal-arts elitist who has enriched herself off of liberal-arts connections for twenty years to have a lifestyle most people would dream of. She acts like she did Canada a favor traveling the world doing what she loves off of our hard work.
And that 1.5 million, over a few decades, hardly gives her a "lifestyle most people would dream of", since it supports large, group projects, pays staff and dancers, support crew, etc.
Beyond that, if you really are an artist, which seems doubtful, and you have any integrity whatsoever, return all grant money you've ever received, and issue a formal public apology for ever having received it. Otherwise, enjoy the rosy glow of self-righteous hypocrisy.
Sun News is a joke.
Do you really not see the difference?
When it comes to professional dancers like this, these kids and their parents dedicate unfathomable amounts of time and money developing their kids exceptional talents. Growing up I have two friends, a brother and sister, who bothed danced in competitions. Their parents would spend hundreds and sometimes over a thousand dollar for a costume, and those change frequently. They also paid through the rear to have their kids fly all over Canada and the US to take part in competitions. They never got a federal grant, and that's fine, because in the end, they weren't the best Canada had to offer. Now if one of their kids had managed to achieve the top spot, proving themselves as Canadas most talented dancer, well then their parents could have tried for a federal grant, because unlike national competitions that can cost 500-5000$, going international can cost 10,000-20,000$+. You can't possibly practice at the level required to beat others internationally while spending countless hours raiding 10-20k ever few months, and by then, that dancers parents have already spent more on developing their kids talent than many pay for their house (in cheap provinces), they can't afford 100-150k a year to compete internationally.
This woman is a world renowed dancer, and you don't achieve that level of fame by casually dancing on the side as a hobby, you achieve it by practicing almost every single day for hours on end, sometimes not having a 'day off' for weeks. Doing that also requires a lot of money, because travel and costumes cost a arm and a leg.
So would you selfish "my tax dollars shouldn't go to anybody but me" types be happy if we canned every non-income generation program in this country ? No cancer research, no public education, no public healthcare, no department of motor vehicles, no regulations (government bodies who create and enfore regulations aren't for-profit companies), no charities, no public infrastructure, no provincial or municipal police and fire services etc etc etc.
Granted I'm not surprised that you'd believe artists are talentless hacks who can be imitated by unskilled nobs with a superiority complex.
I've gotten to know professional dancers growing up, their parents would spend countless days and enormous amounts of money throughout their young years supporting their kids dancing careers. You don't get money because you can dance, you get financial support because after 15 years of dedicating thousands of hours to practice and dozens of thousands of dollars, you've proven yourself better than anybody else in the country, and THAT's when you get federal money to pursue your exceptional talent internationally. That girl didn't have federal money support her from childhood, she had to prove she was better than everyone else in Canada by spending her time practicing day and night while the rest of us watch television and go out for dinner.
You want a federal grant ? Good, now develop a admirable talent, spend your own time and money over a decade or two to prove that you're better than everyone else in Canada by driving and flying to countless competitions, all on your own dime, and then ring up the federal government for a grant so you can go international. Some of these parents spend more money developing their kids talent than you spent on your car.