Showing posts with label the o'leary and lang exchange. Show all posts
Showing posts with label the o'leary and lang exchange. Show all posts

Saturday, January 25, 2014

A Guest Post From John B.

Click here to read an unflattering magazine profile of this 'titan'.

Yesterday afternoon, I wrote a brief post on Kevin O'Leary, the fatuous, obnoxious self-promoter the CBC, likely in its futile efforts to appease the Harper government, keeps in its stable of right-wing cranks.

In response to the post, I received a thoughtful commentary on O'Leary from John B, which I am featuring here to ensure a larger readership than the comments' section normally affords:

Is it part of Mr. O’Leary’s deal with the CBC that his daily commentary as chief business analyst be introduced with a mention that he is also the “Chair of O’Leary Funds”? I’ve wondered about that for some time.

I think that the important story here is that "the Chair of O'Leary Funds" is getting media exposure that may help him market his shtick internationally. Look at the sly little grins and the glint in the eye obvious in the video as he spews his nonsense. I think he knows that it's nonsense. It’s been designed to beg for attention.

This guy doesn't believe in anything besides running his business. And for several years one of his main businesses seems to have been marketing himself as a caricature of the iconic greedy capitalist. Now they're writing about him in the Independent. That's the scoring play - his money shot. That's why he likes to mention his U.S. show when being interviewed - international exposure. In the U.S. ‘they call him Mr. Wonderful’. Yes - that's probably because someone told them he was known by that handle in other circles without mentioning that it’s likely he made it up. It's how you create and sell a product. And the product is the act.

The act may have taken over the person and the act may have started long before the advent of O'Leary TV; but it's still just about making the sale, whether it's dog food, a worthless corporate asset or a cartoon character.

The Lang & O'Leary Exchange isn't a business news programme; it’s third-rate entertainment with a little synergistic libertarian propaganda along for the ride. And the worst part of it is that you can’t escape exposure to its juvenile propaganda efforts by not tuning in. At every station break the network is sure to broadcast one of their promotional spots for the show featuring inserts of still close-ups of Mr. Wonderful’s wonderfully-manicured digits posed in that silly configuration that he seems to have come to prefer. In each of these spots his sidekick, Amanda, stumbles into a staged ambush that Mr. O’Leary can accomplish by rhyming off some line that could have come from the Market Libertarian’s Handbook for Disturbed Teenagers: “If you want a share, become a shareholder” or “The market will decide.” God has spoken.

O'Leary is serious about what he's doing - getting a paycheque and getting exposure for his fund and his comedy act. But his sparring partner provides the best comedy on the show. She presents herself in a manner that suggests she considers herself to be a journalist, while she actually just plays one on a boring TV show. Maybe it’s just part of her “straight-man” act. Whatever the case, she does it very well.

I’m still puzzled about one thing: did he come up with the thing with the hands or did he have to pay a personal stylist to do it?

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

My CBC Letter of Complaint About Kevin O'Leary

For anyone who might be interested, here is the letter of complaint I sent off by snail-mail (not as easily ignored as email, at least that's my thinking) yesterday to the CBC about Kevin O'Leary and his disgraceful treatment of Pulitzer Prize winning journalist and author Chris Hedges:


To Whom it May Concern:

I am writing to express my strong disapproval of Kevin O'Leary's insulting 'interview' with the well-respected writer and journalist Chris Hedges on a recent Lang and O'Leary Exchange. In referring to Mr. Hedges as a 'nutbar' and employing a general tone of sarcasm throughout the segment, O'Leary not only disgraced himself but seriously tarnished the reputation of the CBC, which at one time enjoyed world-wide acclaim for the quality of its programming. To allow one of your employees to resort to ad hominems as a substitute for reasoned discussion is inexcusable, and is a sad extension of the Corporation's unwillingness to demand an apology from O'Leary for his racist statement earlier this year about “Indian givers.”

I suspect the ongoing decline of the CBC's journalistic integrity stems from your desire to placate the Harper government and its right-wing adherents. History teaches us that such efforts at appeasement rarely yield the results intended, but rather exacerbate and accelerate the deterioration of the placating body. I also suspect you will find declining support for organizations such as Friends of the CBC, since the distinctive role the Corporation once played in Canada is quickly becoming just a memory.

It is perhaps ironic that in substituting invective for reasoned discussion in his Hedges' 'interview,' O'Leary was exemplifying the thesis of Hedges' book, The Death of the Liberal Class, which posits that the traditional challenges to the power elite's excesses no longer exist, as unions, the church, educational institutions, the media, etc. have abdicated that role in favour of ensconcing themselves within the power structure.

As a long-time supporter of the CBC, it is a harsh truth that I wish our national broadcaster had proven the exception to.

Sincerely,
Lorne Warwick



For those interesting in registering a complaint, both the snail-mail and website contact information is listed below:

Audience Relations, CBC
P.O. Box 500 Station A
Toronto, ON
Canada, M5W 1E6


http://www.cbc.ca/contact/