Again, both entities need to be assessed differently. There is no doubt that there is a big difference between the two. In my opinion, there is more work to be done on the English side than on the French side. The French side is on the right path, but the Radio-Canada management team and board of directors have to do some brainstorming. For example, in Montreal they have to concern themselves with the relocation of a tower or whether low income housing should be built. Such issues overburden the managers at the broadcaster who, in my opinion, having nothing to do with this.
I feel that Radio-Canada, in comparison to CBC, has shown discipline by conducting a more thorough analysis of content. However, the fact that Radio-Canada is part of the CBC weighs it down with responsibilities that belong to the entire corporation.
I would argue that there is one area in particular where both entities have gone wrong: they have completely gotten rid of feature length documentaries and short documentaries from the general interest channels. The documentary is a format that was literally invented in Canada, where we have a lot of strength in this genre. CBC no longer broadcasts documentaries during prime time. They now broadcast them only on the speciality channels. Radio-Canada may have two niches and these shows have to be formatted in order to fit in these two niches and allow the presenter to do so.
SRC is affected by the entire corporation and has to have more discipline than the CBC. We have to give this some serious thought. If not, you will be setting up a structure of new platforms on quicksand. As long as you have not resolved your problems, it will be difficult to incorporate new platforms and new technologies because they will have the same flaws they currently have. Take stock of the CBC and SRC before making new investments.