TVO, I am appalled!

"The Agenda with Steve Paikin is TVO's flagship current affairs program offering
in-depth analysis and intelligent debate on issues of concern" - it says it right at the top of this page.

But where was the 'in-depth analysis', where the 'debate'?

What I saw was Steve Paikin contributing to a Porter promotional video, funded by tax dollars and
viewer contributions.

The problem with your Porter promotional video is that my son, my wife, my neighbours, my
neighbourhood, indeed, the vast and overwhelming majority of Torontonians are not and never will
be investors in Porter. We're too busy making ends meet. And we're worried about:

- the hijacking of public lands by a private corporatation, whose bottom line, not the welfare of the
public, is all that, understandably, matters to them;

- the history of pork-barrel politics (Federal, Provincial, Municipal), and what looks like graft, in the
saga of the Billy Bishop Airport, and Porter's tenure (or is it a monopoly?) there

- the noise and environmental pollution of one of the city's greatest green (and getting cleaner),
recreational spaces;

- the almost complete silence on the consequences of Porter jet traffic flying into the USA; doesn't
the 'Open Skies' free trade policy, signed in the 1990s, guarantee US carriers the right to land at Billy
Bishop?

- the reprehensible way that TVO is contributing to the campaign of misinformation manufactured by
the Porter machine (did anyone notice that both graphics were Porter products?), the Toronto Port
Authority, and sections of City Hall.

Of the 20 'questions' - which were in fact prompts - Steve Paikin put to Robert Deluce, not one
challenged his promotional interpretation of jet expansion, and only one asked a political question!:
'given that people on the waterfront don't want jet traffic in their backyard, is larger traffic at the
airport an issue?' Deluce's answer mentioned eight (8!) times _less_ traffic with jets -- I'm sorry,
Steve, he said EIGHT! Isn't the first job of the journalist to ask questions about facts?

Was this a single, accidental abdication of journalistic responsibility? Appallingly: no. What about
these so-called benefits of airport expansion? Are the _existing_ runways insufficient (according to
Transport Canada guidelines) for the turbo props that use them? Is that why Porter flies, by policy,
2/3rds full? (Transport Canada requires a longer runway for a full turbo prop.) 'All 1400 members of
our team are highly motivated' - but what about that aircraft technicians strike over dangerous
working conditions last year?

Every other question was a 'technical', sales, or personal question. These are fine questions to ask
at a stockholder's meeting. Investors need to know the answers before they put their money down.
And investors want to know the 'feel good' personal story of man, who like his father, is a pilot and
believes that racoons are feisty.

TVO: the time has come to make a rectification, and fulfill your mandate.

Let's have some "in-depth" analysis of these numerous, pressing, and un-discussed _political_
issues, and "intelligent debate".