Lisa LaFlamme, CTV News, and Bad Executive Decisions

Former CTV countrywide anchor
Lisa LaFlamme

There will be no bittersweet on-air goodbye for (now former) CTV national news anchor Lisa LaFlamme, no ceremonial passing of the baton to the up coming generation, no broadcast retrospectives lionizing a journalist with a storied and award-successful occupation. As LaFlamme introduced yesterday, CTV’s mother or father organization, Bell Media, has made a decision to unilaterally conclude her deal. (See also the CBC’s reporting of the story listed here.)

Although LaFlamme herself doesn’t make this declare, there was of system instant speculation that the network’s selection has some thing to do with the point that LaFlamme is a woman of a sure age. LaFlamme is 58, which by Tv expectations is not just youthful — other than when you assess it to the age at which common men who proceeded her have remaining their respective anchor’s chairs: consider Peter Mansbridge (who was 69), and Lloyd Robertson (who was 77).

But an even a lot more sinister concept is now afoot: relatively than mere, shallow misogyny, evidence has arisen of not just sexism, but sexism conjoined with corporate interference in newscasting. Two evils for the price of one particular! LaFlamme was fired, states journalist Jesse Brown, “because she pushed back again in opposition to one particular Bell Media govt.” Brown studies insiders as proclaiming that Michael Melling, vice president of news at Bell Media, has bumped heads with LaFlamme a selection of moments, and has a background of interfering with news coverage. Brown additional stories that “Melling has consistently shown a lack of respect for gals in senior roles in the newsroom.”

Useless to say, even if a private grudge plus sexism demonstrate what’s likely on, in this article, it nevertheless will seem to be to most as a “foolish decision,” one particular certain to result in the corporation complications. Now, I make it a coverage not to query the small business savvy of expert executives in industries I don’t know well. And I suggest my learners not to leap to the summary that “that was a dumb decision” just due to the fact it’s a person they don’t recognize. But still, in 2022, it’s difficult to think about that the corporation (or Melling much more exclusively) didn’t see that there would be blowback in this case. It is just one detail to have disagreements, but it’s another to unceremoniously dump a beloved and award-winning female anchor. And it is weird that a senior executive at a news group would feel that the fact would not occur out, given that, just after all, he’s surrounded by people whose job, and particular determination, is to report the news.

And it’s challenging not to suspect that this a fewer than joyful changeover for LaFlamme’s substitute, Omar Sachedina. Of class, I’m positive he’s content to get the career. But whilst Bell Media’s press release quotes Sachedina stating sleek factors about LaFlamme, certainly he didn’t want to believe the anchor chair amidst prevalent criticism of the changeover. He’s getting on the job below a shadow. Most likely the prize is worthy of the value, but it is also difficult not to envision that Sachedina experienced (or now has) some pull, some skill to influence that manner of the transition. I’m not saying (as some undoubtedly will) that — as an insider who is aware of the serious tale — he must have declined the occupation as unwell-gotten gains. But at the quite the very least, it would seem honest to argue that he must have utilized his affect to shape the transition. And if the now-senior anchor doesn’t have that variety of influence, we should really be concerned without a doubt about the independence of that purpose, and of that newsroom.

A remaining, associated observe about authority and governance in advanced corporations. In any fairly perfectly-ruled business, the choice to axe a major, public-struggling with talent like LaFlamme would involve indication-off — or at minimum tacit acceptance — from additional than 1 senior government. This implies that a single of two issues is genuine. Both Bell Media is not that kind of nicely-governed corporation, or a huge number of people were concerned in, and culpable of, unceremoniously dumping an award-profitable journalist. Which is even worse?

Leave a Reply