Lisa LaFlamme, CTV News, and Bad Executive Decisions

Former CTV national anchor
Lisa LaFlamme

There will be no bittersweet on-air goodbye for (now former) CTV national news anchor Lisa LaFlamme, no ceremonial passing of the baton to the next generation, no broadcast retrospectives lionizing a journalist with a storied and award-winning career. As LaFlamme announced yesterday, CTV’s parent company, Bell Media, has decided to unilaterally end her contract. (See also the CBC’s reporting of the story here.)

While LaFlamme herself doesn’t make this claim, there was of course immediate speculation that the network’s decision has something to do with the fact that LaFlamme is a woman of a certain age. LaFlamme is 58, which by TV standards is not exactly young — except when you compare it to the age at which popular men who proceeded her have left their respective anchor’s chairs: consider Peter Mansbridge (who was 69), and Lloyd Robertson (who was 77).

But an even more sinister theory is now afoot: rather than mere, shallow misogyny, evidence has arisen of not just sexism, but sexism conjoined with corporate interference in newscasting. Two evils for the price of one! LaFlamme was fired, says journalist Jesse Brown, “because she pushed back against one Bell Media executive.” Brown reports insiders as claiming that Michael Melling, vice president of news at Bell Media, has bumped heads with LaFlamme a number of times, and has a history of interfering with news coverage. Brown further reports that “Melling has consistently demonstrated a lack of respect for women in senior roles in the newsroom.”

Needless to say, even if a personal grudge plus sexism explain what’s going on, here, it still will seem to most as a “foolish decision,” one sure to cause the company headaches. Now, I make it a policy not to question the business savvy of experienced executives in industries I don’t know well. And I advise my students not to leap to the conclusion that “that was a dumb decision” just because it’s one they don’t understand. But still, in 2022, it’s hard to imagine that the company (or Melling more specifically) didn’t see that there would be blowback in this case. It’s one thing to have disagreements, but it’s another to unceremoniously dump a beloved and award-winning woman anchor. And it’s bizarre that a senior executive at a news organization would think that the truth would not come out, given that, after all, he’s surrounded by people whose job, and personal commitment, is to report the news.

And it’s hard not to suspect that this a less than happy transition for LaFlamme’s replacement, Omar Sachedina. Of course, I’m sure he’s happy to get the job. But while Bell Media’s press release quotes Sachedina saying graceful things about LaFlamme, surely he didn’t want to assume the anchor chair amidst widespread criticism of the transition. He’s taking on the role under a shadow. Perhaps the prize is worth the price, but it’s also hard not to imagine that Sachedina had (or now has) some pull, some ability to influence that manner of the transition. I’m not saying (as some surely will) that — as an insider who knows the real story — he should have declined the job as ill-gotten gains. But at the very least, it seems fair to argue that he should have used his influence to shape the transition. And if the now-senior anchor doesn’t have that kind of influence, we should be worried indeed about the independence of that role, and of that newsroom.

A final, related note about authority and governance in complex organizations. In any reasonably well-governed organization, the decision to axe a major, public-facing talent like LaFlamme would require sign-off — or at least tacit approval — from more than one senior executive. This suggests that one of two things is true. Either Bell Media isn’t that kind of well-governed organization, or a large number of people were involved in, and culpable of, unceremoniously dumping an award-winning journalist. Which is worse?

5 comments so far

  1. Susan (Claydon) McLoughlin on

    Shameful Not a good business decision. Younger replacements? Doesn’t Bell know younger people don’t watch news much anymore.

  2. Jeff on

    Bell has a history or treating their employees terribly. Ask any ex-employee. And how about firing someone who just returned from a second bout of cancer? No problem.

  3. Paul Lonergan on

    It is absolutely reprehensible that Bell Media dumped Lisa LaFlamme.

    Personally, we admire LaFlamme and her news reporting and have watched her broadcasts for years.

    We are boycotting Bell Media – including all their subsidiaries.

  4. Mac Burtt on

    Your thoughts go to the core of this mess and perhaps speak to a broader concern of a dissolution of ethics in the workplace.

    It is the news persons we turn to and trust in to provide us unbiased, accurate, honest information about our world and events. They help us to shape our beliefs and positions.

    When our trust is shaken what are we to think about that source? When ethics are abandoned for corporate desires, what are we to make of the product that is produced, the “News”

    Fake News… I can hear the call darn it.

    And our trusted sources suffer another hit.

  5. Theressa D. on

    This story in this blog is extremely interesting, and is the perfect example to show, when speaking on “ business ethics “. I would say that bell media business ethics are very poor and unfortunately I believe that Lisa LaFlamme was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Not trying to be on the other side but I do understand what they’re trying to say especially because this is TV and their job is to try to get ratings and views. If they thought in their minds that a younger anchor would be better, that’s what they were trying to do. As far as the sexism I definitely do think that something that should be investigated because if that’s the case, then that is what is the poor ethics and it’s extremely sad because it makes sense. Why would he try to give the company a headache and why would you fire someone who’s been a part of the company, does well at the job and is award winning.
    In conclusion answering your questions below. If I were to go with the them, firing her for sexism, I would be on the side of a lot of peoples hands being in her career choices and letting her go even though she’s award-winning but if I was going with the because “
    she’s old” then I would just say that they have bad business ethics.
    Either way, like I said, in the beginning, I think she was in the wrong place at the wrong time, and either outcome is very unfortunate for her.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: