Not specifically, because I don't have complaints about journalistic objectivity, as the other members of the panel might, nor do I have complaints about funding mechanisms or which documentary errs and which documentary didn't. I don't have those sorts of complaints.
When you get right down to it, discussing accessibility on the CBC is a sort of internal matter. It's a matter of their own production operations. In fact, if you go to the broadcasting centre here in Toronto, it's on the sixth floor in the program broadcast services department. So when it comes to complaints, I'm not in the same category as my esteemed colleagues on this table.
However, you are bringing up a point that CBC is not very good at dealing with criticism. They really only have two modes. They flinch. The first thing they can do, especially if some right-wing organization provides criticism, is just flinch and cave in completely. The example of that would be, let's say they produced an historical docudrama about a famous politician from the prairies, and that docudrama, even though it was fictional, showed the politician wearing his watch on his right arm when in fact he wore it on the left, and after a fusillade of complaints about this terrible historical inaccuracy, CBC gives in completely and agrees never to air it again and to stop selling the DVDs. That would be an example of their flinching.
The other case is the one I've experienced, where the CBC are complete rat bastards about things. You prove to them that they've made a mistake and they grit their teeth and seethe and angrily insist that, no, they didn't make a mistake. They dispute the definition of what a mistake is. They go through an entire list of things, but it's all done in anger and defensiveness.
So if we were talking about improving the complaint culture at CBC, I'd say they should get out of those two modes of just flinching and being arrogant and defensive all the time.