10.15.2005

i watch the national

Since the CBC is back, I've been watching "The National" every night (or every night that I remember to - trying to get into a new habit).

For those of you who don't watch CBC, The National is an hour-long nightly news show. I love it. First, it's a pleasure to watch a full hour of visual news with minimal commercial interruption. I really like the in-depth features on various aspects of Canadian life. The reporting on the US is edged with a heavy dose of skepticism, which of course I appreciate. In general, I actually feel like I'm learning something.

On last night's broadcast, there were excerpts from a "Mansbridge One On One" interview with Don Cherry. Since we've been talking about Mr Cherry (here and here), I had to watch. I must say, Cherry looked like an idiot next to Mansbridge, and not because Mansbridge was playing the interview that way. Cherry just sounded ridiculous, defending fighting in hockey, declaring that "whatever the fans want" is how the game should be played. (A sure-fire way to ruin a game!)

After Cherry declared that all hockey fans love fights, Mansbridge sought to soften the statement into "most fans". Cherry wouldn't concede the point, insisting that all hockey fans want to see a lot of fighting. Of course, whenever you say "all" instead of "most," you're setting yourself up to be wrong.

I don't pretend to know a thing about hockey, but Cherry sounded exactly like the blustery, idiotic baseball announcers that ruin ESPN and FOX broadcasts on a regular basis. No wonder he needs the jackets and the loud mouth. If he didn't make himself into a show, someone might peek behind the curtain.

Before we left New York, a friend gave us this assignment: Answer the question, why is it called "The National"? I have no idea.

14 comments:

James said...

Cherry just sounded ridiculous, defending fighting in hockey, declaring that "whatever the fans want" is how the game should be played.

This is Cherry's stock in trade. He is rediculous, and this is the most common example of his rediculousness.

Cherry's right -- in his own mind -- that all hockey fans like fights, because -- in his own mind -- anyone who doesn't like fights isn't a real hockey fan.

why is it called "The National"? I have no idea.

I always figured it was short for "The CBC National News". Wasn't it called that several years back?

teflonjedi said...

I always figured it was short for "The CBC National News". Wasn't it called that several years back?

That's what I would have thought as well...going all the way back to Knowlton Nash...?

Expat Traveler said...

I love the show too. Seems at least to have a different take or spin on things. I've definitely learned a lot too since I've been in Canada.

Maybe it's called the national because it's broadcast throughout the nation? No real guesses...

Suitcase Jenny said...

Who really knows the craziness behind it all? No one really knows why anything is the way it is, they just accept it without thinking, thats why I like your blog, you ask a lot of questions. We are all just crazy Canadians.

Wrye said...

It's been called the National since the 1970's at least, I know. It is the National News Broadcast, of course, just as CTV's National news is.

Cherry, I think, in his heart of hearts, doesn't take himself 100% seriously, but he-like a Wrestling announcer--plays himself. He's been doing it so long that he can hardly change now. He's a rabid Toronto homer who dresses like Jesse "The Body" Ventura, and there is a national affection for this doddering old uncle who likes to entertain us.

What he has never really adjusted to is that some things he says can carry beyond the world of hockey, and because hockey, unlike pro wrestling, is a legitimate sport, people don't "know" not to take him seriously. But he seemed quite legitimately chastened the last time he shot his mouth off over French Canadiens and the CBC called him on the carpet over it.

Anonymous said...

l-girl...so no comments on the Iraqi Constitutional Vote?

Or are you just in Bash-Bush mode at all times?

Liam J said...

If you're going to attack L Girl, or anyone else for that matter; at least have the balls to do it without hiding behind anonymity.

James said...

Unfortunately, the Iraq Constitutional Referrendum is a farce. By changing the rules so that 2/3 of registered voters are needed to defeat it (instead of the original 2/3 of cast votes), they have pretty much guaranteed that the rather disappointing draft Constitution will be passed.

Keep in mind that this is a constitution which says it's dedicated to "the principles of Democracy" (without defining what those are), and yet declares explicitly that the law is based on Islam alone. This is a huge step towards an Iran-style theocracy.

Horrid though Hussein was, he had one positive advantage over any of his neighbours: he had a secular legal system, which treated all citizens the same regardless of their religion. That is no longer true in Iraq.

L-girl said...

l-girl...so no comments on the Iraqi Constitutional Vote?

Or are you just in Bash-Bush mode at all times?


A. There are at least a million international - and another couple of million Canadian - stories that I don't blog about.

B. The Iraqi Constitution is a farce.

C. I am not a "bush-basher". I loathe him and everything he stands for, and I speak out about that. I tell the truth as I see it.

D. If you have been reading this blog, anonymously or otherwise, you know I do not support the Democrats either, so "bush-bash" hardly applies.

E. I was, and remain, against the invasion of Iraq no matter what the outcome. The existence of a piece of paper called a constitution doesn't change that.

F. Go away.

If you're going to attack L Girl, or anyone else for that matter; at least have the balls to do it without hiding behind anonymity.

Liam J, if only. If only. Thanks for your support.

L-girl said...

thats why I like your blog, you ask a lot of questions.

Thank you Suitcase Jenny, I appreciate that.

L-girl said...

Cherry, I think, in his heart of hearts, doesn't take himself 100% seriously, but he-like a Wrestling announcer--plays himself.

Great analogy. I was trying to think of something like that - you've hit on it exactly.

I think Ann Coulter does the same thing. "I say outrageous hateful things, that's what I do, so here I go again."

It's so post-modern it makes my head spin.

redsock said...

Yeah, but I have no doubt that Cherry actually has real knowledge about the game.

Coulter is a true moron, with no desire to learn anything.

L-girl said...

Yeah, but I have no doubt that Cherry actually has real knowledge about the game.

Coulter is a true moron, with no desire to learn anything.


True and true. And by comparison, Cherry is innocuous brain candy. Coulter is brain cancer.

Lone Primate said...

E. I was, and remain, against the invasion of Iraq no matter what the outcome. The existence of a piece of paper called a constitution doesn't change that.

Hear hear. To me, this has always been like a sadist bursting into your home and breaking both your legs and then expecting the whole world to go "awwwwww" in adoration when he reveals he brought along bandages and plaster for the casts he intended to put you in all along. Such a sensitive guy!!