-CBC not taking unfair advantage of CTCPF

This letter is in response to the July 14 Playback editorial questioning the cbc for accessing ctcpf financing for Daily Tips for Modern Living and our series, Da Vinci’s Inquest. The editorial implied that the cbc somehow took unfair advantage of the fund with series that, in the words of the editorial, ‘don’t even have a slot on the 1997/98 schedule.’

In fact, the ctcpf is triggered, not by airdate, but by fiscal year of production, a system that allows broadcasters to set their programming schedules without interference from outside parties. To alter this process would jeopardize the autonomy not only of the cbc but of the private broadcasters who wish to apply to the fund as well.

We believe that the issue for the entire industry is the amount of financing available proportionate to the increased numbers of projects that are being triggered by broadcasters. Rather than hurting the industry in any way, the cbc is making a concerted effort to embrace new thinking and we believe that, in the end, it will prove to be the principal venue for quality indigenous programming in Canada

chris haddock, laszlo barna,

executive producers,

da vinci’s inquest,

da vinci productions,

vancouver.

-A prickly issue

‘How could the First Cut Award mean more?’ was the question posed by Peter Rigby in the July 28 issue of Playback. As an entrant (non-winning, alas), and as a woman, I got the impression, even before sending in my reel, that I was missingŠsomething. But what could I, a creative professional (albeit female) be lacking?

At first glans, the awards seemed supportive, lighthearted, even cocky, what with the ads featuring a baby sporting the teeny-weenie bandage and the droll copy. Yet I still felt oddly excluded from the process.

‘Don’t be a dink,’ I admonished myself. ‘This isn’t a pissing contest. It’s about nurturing young talent. Why, ever since we could walk erect we’ve been striving against each other. These awards will help you to meet your fellow creatives in the spirit of brotherhood.’

But there is a vas deferens between word and deed. And I was shaken by the urging to fill out the form correctly or ‘some other guy’ would get my prize.

Understanding slowly dawned: wait a minute! I made a commercial and I am not a guy! Surely, the notion of the boys-only club for directors is a fallacy. But perhaps I’m wrong. Addressing that prickly issue would have extended the reach of Peter’s polemic.

Indeed, the First Cut Award would ‘mean more’ if its implicit meaning was greater than, ‘Do you have a penis? Then you could win valuable prizes!’

Thanks for the chance to blow my wad.

benita aalto,

gut level productions,

toronto.

Editor’s note: First Cut judges were comprised fairly evenly of those with the aforementioned appendage and those without. Judges watched reels which had no visible reference to the size, shape or even existence of the director’s fella ­ i.e. there were no names used.

The work of those off-the-cuff creative and production types, the entry form did refer specifically to ‘guys,’ and even though the term is often used as a catch-all, perhaps more semantic care should be taken next time.

There is no arguing that the industry has an overabundance of male directors and we are among those who would like to see more sisters involved. There have been companies – like Partners’ – which have been notable in their support of female directors (among them Bronwen Hughes, Kari Skogland, Floria Sigismondi – who was, incidentally, a First Cut finalist last year – and more recently Christina Hodnet and Lisa Mann), and such support is doubtless based on merit rather than physical characteristics.