An offer we can’t refuse

Today CBC held an internal “Town Hall” to announce the corporation’s new vision for an integrated news service. The gist of it: dump Canada Now, get back into local news, integrate newsrooms with all media lines, and ramp up Web 2.0 stuff (which, I hope, may pave the way for Radio 2.0 and TV 2.0, which right now nobody really has the cash or cojones to attempt. Except Zed. But Zed’s dead, baby.)

Generally, it’s all sensible stuff, either undoing recent mistakes or doing what you’d do if you were building a broadcaster from scratch. I won’t get into the details of the announcement – I’m sure they will be reported and discussed at length elsewhere. But I was fascinated by the language involved.

So what exactly is this new CBC news thingy? According to CBC-TV VP Richard Stursberg, it’s an “offer” – he used the word exactly 26 times in his talk and Q&A.

Not just an “offer”, but an “integrated offer”, a “mobile offer”, a “multi-platform offer”, and so on. Which prompted a word-wise colleague to ask: when did “offer” replace “offering” as the noun of choice?

What’s the difference, anyhow, between “a special offer” and a “sacrificial offering”? Time to dig into semantics again (I still get at least a dozen hits each week to my post on Is Chairman Sexist?)

Turns out there isn’t really much difference. Both mean “something that is offered”. Offer connotes more of a proposal or an attempt, while offering seems to be more of a gift, but they are almost synonymous.

Offer:
1. The act of offering: an offer of assistance.
2. Something, such as a suggestion, proposal, bid, or recommendation, that is offered.
3. Law. A proposal that if accepted constitutes a legally binding contract.
4. The condition of being offered, especially for sale: thousands of bushels of wheat on offer.
5.
a. An attempt; a try.
b. A show of intention.

Offering:
1. The act of making an offer.
2. Something, such as stock, that is offered.
3. A presentation made to a deity as an act of religious worship or sacrifice; an oblation.
4. A contribution or gift, especially one made at a religious service.

In English, the term has a religious origin: “from the Middle English offren, from Old English offrian, to present in worship.”

But no religion here: the announcement made clear this “offer” is going to be “platform agnostic”. The idea is that content is not dependent on the media line it ends up on – a story is a story, and the medium is not the message.

It still seems religious to me: I imagine all these Stories, or Ideas floating around like lost spirits looking for a corporeal host. But it makes sense, at least in the early phases of a story. Gotta leave room for specialists after that, or it’ll suck. Anyhow, it’s apparently the way of the future for the New York Times in the U.S. (sorry, EPIC 2014) and Freeview in the U.K.

A final note on terminology: I had to wince at the name for the plan: myCBC. That’s the name CBC.ca uses for its customizable web offerings (look for the Sign In button at the top right of CBC.ca – it sets your local weather and program grids, newsletters, etc.)

It’s a really nice idea, and I’d totally dig it if CBC Radio and CBC-TV were truly customizable. But that’s Buck Rogers territory – even the myCBC part of CBC.ca leaves a lot to be desired. The wince comes because the implementation of the personalized part of CBC.ca was a drawn-out and generally horrible experience. I’m sure it’ll be easier when dealing with three+ platforms, right?

Oh, and we’ve missed the boat on the URLs, not that we’d use them - unless we want to pay off the Computer Business Centre in Long Island and the Macgregor Yacht Club of BC.

Actually, in an ideal CBC 2.0 future world, you could listen to it on a yacht sailing from B.C. to Long Island… where do I volunteer?

Posted by: Paul Gorbould | 12-01-2006 | 04:12 AM
Posted in: CBC | Television