Not for a Lang time

Oh a deviously wicked complicated world we have. The very attractive looking Amanda Lang treads in the water of scandal and conflicts of interest. I gotta try to explain this without meaning to appear condescending. Its a legitimate question. Having lived in western Canada, I appreciate why this is met with the roll of eyes by most average Canadians.
... In Alberta, (with the exception of Calgary) the major economic focus is oil, cattle and grain farming. In Toronto, and lesser so eastern Canada the major economic focus is finance, insurance, legal and banking (wholesale and retail).
... The majority of business writers and journalists outside of Sun Media do try and maintain a distance between themselves and the subjects or topics of that writing. The fuel for the engine of this economic sector is the investor, whether the investor is large or small.
... To make good choices, the investor depends on impartial, factual, complete information and data. It must be furnished with as little bias as possible. There are legitimate sources, Mike Eppel, and Richard Southern of 680 News.
... Despite the fact that they are associated with Sun Media, the Financial Post is a good source. Other long time sources, Globe and Mail, The Star, The National Post, The New York Times, The Financial Times (UK), The Wall Street Journal and the Northern Miner. You will find these publications at every major Canadian Bank, Financial, Insurance, and Law Office at the Senior Executive and Board office podiums every single morning before six AM. And yes, many senior executives will have at least reviewed most of them before the morning meetings at 10:15.
... The Reuters Wire Service, The Washington Post, The Montreal Gazette, Chicago Tribune, LA Times, The Times (London), The India Times, are secondary but valid sources relating to these business aspects. The more information the better. Outside of meetings, executives and lawyers will spend the vast majority of their working hours reading news sources, reports and expertise books. Their whole job is to reach the correct decision. Billions of investors dollars depend on the ability of these people to research, evaluate and choose the future course based on that data.
... On that list, was the CBC which had developed what appeared to be a reliable business discussion program with the cantankerous Kevin O'Leary and Amanda Lang. The former could more than be expected to be full of greedy bias, but the latter was supposed to be an impartial but progressive Lang. It was a popular format. Regrettably, it also depended on the honesty, grounded, factually enriched opinions of Lang.
... The fact that Lang has been shown to be ethically compromised literally destroys the credibility of the program in the investment community. When the credibility of the program or print publication is compromised then they lose advertisers, they lose the value of the ads, they lose faith. And events such as these can, and often to effect the bottom line in television production but also impacts, investments in financial instruments and stock markets.
... Any tremor in the financial markets of Toronto, Montreal, Calgary and Vancouver can generate a literal tsunami of bad influences across the country effecting every single Canadian. Some Canadians believe things like this doesn't effect them. The Duffy, Wallin senate scandals have nothing or little impact. The Ghomeshi, Cosby scandals have little effect. A scandal or an exposed scandal in the business sector no matter how small effects loan rates, insurance rates, stock values, pension funds, bank fees, bond issues, tax rates and personal fortunes big or small.
... Let's say that Lang committed no crime. But an ethical lapse  of any sort by a business journalist carries far more direct impact on the reader and nonreaders than any other form of journalism. If a media company exists in that environment to survive it depends on the ethical compass of the individual writers in house and free lance to provide impartial, complete and balanced stories. Many people depend on that information to decide where and how much to invest.
... One problem is that a lot of people believe that all reporters and news stories have the same level of ethical behaviour. This is where the everyday reader/viewer sometimes gets turned around. Journalism inwardly has many divisions. Each division is determined by the style of writing, research and educational level. Loosely these divisions are: General, Investigative, Business, Legal, Science, Medical, Arts, Health, Home, Political, Opinion, Sports, Travel and Entertainment.
... You will see that the first five on the list demand total journalist ethics where any collusion, or payment violates a code where any malfeasance brings the immediate occupational punishment of dismissal. There really is no room for a publisher for if the publication or program bias fails to achieve balance and fairness it can mean that the influential reader leaves because the information displays prejudice. This means a departure of advertising, and the downward spiral descent is much quicker than the immense work needed to climb into credibility.
... The final nine sectors are set in rough descending ethical level in regards to the research, data, writing and publications. So the Medical sector remains at the high end of the moral spectrum and would be higher except this sector includes the major drug companies. You will see that the Entertainment is at the bottom of the ethical ladder. The reason is that if a columnist gives a bad review of a movie or television program the Media distributor will threaten and has pulled the advertising. Ever since the days when smoking ads were banned, media dependency on entertainment ad revenue became far more important as a part of the bottom line.
... The effect on Entertainment journalism ethics has been dramatic. Self censorship is onerous especially when it comes to movies. Honesty and integrity have been sacrificed for at least two decades. Witness the number of celebrities. Each celebrity answer the same questions with: He's a great guy/gal. We all had fun. We were a family. (director/actor) was brilliant. I just love visiting (insert name of hometown).
... This set of answers defies the reality of the human experience. But to a media outlet its all about advertising dollars. Why is the entertainment sector ethically expendable compared to the ridged ethical balance needed for business? If you see a bad movie. That's just a bad night and a couple of bucks down the drain. However if you are trying to decide where to put tens of thousand dollars into retirement or future education trusts you the reader/viewer need truthful, accurate, and balanced information. Lives hang on the balance. Business careers hang in the balance.
... A business publication or program can be and has been successfully sued for passing on bad or corrupt information. No publication has been sued for giving a misdirection to a bad movie.
... Different media outlets also have different degrees of honesty, Fox News, and Sun Media are examples of a lack of ethical standard. Your city Sun newspaper in Canada are not actually accredited news outlets. They basically can write anything they want short of slander and libel. The prime example is that total whack job called Ezra Levant. And these publications and television channels are nothing but proselytizing arms of the present Conservative government. They belong to no Press or Media standards accreditation associations.
... The CBC however is a member of media standards associations. Additionally, the CBC is publicly owned. Like it or not, as a corporate entity, they must live to a much higher ethical standard even above its private sector competitors. That's the reader/viewer expectation. In a business program such as the Exchange, the host must be equal to the task. She and/or he gets a good wage, and notoriety for being above the mire. Lang seems to have failed if the allegations stand up.
... Even if you aren't a direct investor, certainly the stock values, of everything could be effected. Lang isn't being sanctioned for public speaking. Its to whom. No one would get their shirts in a knot if the public speaking engagement was at a college or university, a church town hall, a social group. But she took money for speaking engagements at banks and financial institutions. When you look at the wonderful careers of Senators Wallin and Duffy, they were remunerated by the Conservative Party by way of speaking engagements. Then they tried to double down on the Senate expense account. So as a reliable media source she has suddenly, rightly or wrongly become a severe handicap.
... In response Lang has lashed out trying to deflect the blame onto what she calls haters. Yet Tomlinson in the best journalist traditions has brought up points of conflict which are undeniable. She appears to have tried to spike or suppress a story about the RBC use of Temporary Foreign Workers when the bank was definitely under scrutiny for firing their Canadian workers after the latter had trained them to replace them. She had received monies from RBC for "speeches". She dates an RBC Board member. Its emerged that in other speaking fees she gave favorable reviews to those companies that had hired her for those events. All that is on the record.
... Ignoring the ultimate fate of the producers of the "Q" with Ghomeshi, so far the CBC producers are trying to circle the wagons to protect her reputation. But her problem is that the allegations and information is from a trained investigative reporter in her own company. Compare her stubbornness attitude to that of Leslie Roberts who just got tanked from Glow Balls for a comparatively less damaging conflict of interest. Few people were effected adversely. The only damage being the integrity of the broadcasts.
... So it is a very big deal. The commercial sectors of Toronto/Montreal/Calgary/Vancouver are effected. Pensions, stock values, company valuations are effected. Every Canadian is effected. And you are effected.