Lisa LaFlamme, CTV News, and Bad Executive Decisions

There will be no bittersweet on-air goodbye for (now previous) CTV countrywide news anchor Lisa LaFlamme, no ceremonial passing of the baton to the subsequent generation, no broadcast retrospectives lionizing a journalist with a storied and award-profitable career. As LaFlamme declared yesterday, CTV’s mum or dad company, Bell Media, has decided to unilaterally conclusion her deal. (See also the CBC’s reporting of the tale here.)

Though LaFlamme herself does not make this declare, there was of system immediate speculation that the network’s choice has some thing to do with the simple fact that LaFlamme is a lady of a sure age. LaFlamme is 58, which by Tv expectations is not precisely youthful — except when you compare it to the age at which popular gentlemen who proceeded her have left their respective anchor’s chairs: take into consideration Peter Mansbridge (who was 69), and Lloyd Robertson (who was 77).

But an even a lot more sinister concept is now afoot: rather than mere, shallow misogyny, evidence has arisen of not just sexism, but sexism conjoined with company interference in newscasting. Two evils for the price tag of one particular! LaFlamme was fired, says journalist Jesse Brown, “because she pushed back again from 1 Bell Media government.” Brown experiences insiders as boasting that Michael Melling, vice president of information at Bell Media, has bumped heads with LaFlamme a amount of occasions, and has a historical past of interfering with news coverage. Brown even more reports that “Melling has consistently demonstrated a absence of regard for females in senior roles in the newsroom.”

Unnecessary to say, even if a personalized grudge in addition sexism explain what is heading on, right here, it nonetheless will seem to most as a “foolish decision,” a single guaranteed to cause the enterprise head aches. Now, I make it a plan not to dilemma the company savvy of experienced executives in industries I really do not know nicely. And I suggest my pupils not to leap to the conclusion that “that was a dumb decision” just mainly because it’s a single they do not comprehend. But still, in 2022, it’s difficult to visualize that the business (or Melling much more particularly) didn’t see that there would be blowback in this situation. It is a single factor to have disagreements, but it’s a different to unceremoniously dump a beloved and award-winning woman anchor. And it’s bizarre that a senior government at a news group would believe that the real truth would not occur out, specified that, right after all, he’s surrounded by men and women whose occupation, and individual dedication, is to report the news.

And it’s challenging not to suspect that this a fewer than satisfied changeover for LaFlamme’s alternative, Omar Sachedina. Of training course, I’m sure he’s content to get the job. But while Bell Media’s push release prices Sachedina stating swish items about LaFlamme, definitely he didn’t want to believe the anchor chair amidst common criticism of the changeover. He’s getting on the position below a shadow. Most likely the prize is truly worth the selling price, but it is also difficult not to imagine that Sachedina experienced (or now has) some pull, some potential to influence that fashion of the transition. I’m not expressing (as some surely will) that — as an insider who appreciates the actual story — he must have declined the job as ill-gotten gains. But at the very minimum, it seems reasonable to argue that he ought to have made use of his impact to condition the transition. And if the now-senior anchor doesn’t have that kind of influence, we should really be concerned indeed about the independence of that function, and of that newsroom.

A last, linked take note about authority and governance in sophisticated businesses. In any reasonably properly-ruled organization, the choice to axe a big, community-going through talent like LaFlamme would involve indication-off — or at minimum tacit approval — from a lot more than one particular senior govt. This implies that just one of two issues is true. Both Bell Media is not that kind of properly-governed firm, or a significant quantity of folks have been included in, and culpable of, unceremoniously dumping an award-successful journalist. Which is worse?