I just love how Pierre-Karl Peladeau refers to the Quebec and Canadian media as if they are somehow separate. Quebec media is Canadian media. A small point, I know, but it does stick in my craw.
As for one point of the column, if the CBC is subsidized to the tune $1.5B+, then it should not be allowed to compete for advertising dollars. It is unfair to all the private sector broadcasters.
I would actually be more supportive of CBC getting funding if they were mandated to be "ad-free". Then they can be an actual public broadcaster again and not a company acting like a private business with a huge advantage. I do not think the CBC should be abolished, it can serve a purpose.... such as promoting Canadian content and giving a radio network that will never be shut off. Just take it out of competition with our private broadcasters and make it what it should be. I am also quite sure Carney knows this is not a good thing but he also took over a party that thinks more like JT , than him. There are things he has to do, like it or not, to keep the party together.
A lot of the Justin Trudeau agenda was inspired by a nostalgic view of Canada when Pierre Trudeau was in government, and the current Liberals' approach to the CBC and Canadian news media appears to derive from similar sentiment. CBC funding has been cruising on pleasant memories of Hockey Night in Canada, The Beachcombers, and Mr. Dress-Up for decades; news media like big newspapers are regarded as Important because they used to be Important.
It's all out of touch with today's reality, where the top-rated CBC show is re-runs of "Schitt's Creek" (a series that ended 5 years ago) and newspaper circulation numbers that have been on a steady decline since the '90s. The fact is that both CBC and the legacy news media need to count themselves lucky that Mark Carney is focused on other problems and hasn't yet pursued any real efforts to curtail government spending. A rational appraisal of current realities would reveal media subsidies to be a pretty frivolous expenditure compared with almost anything else.
Good column. Jen and Matt often talk about this issue and how Legacy Media has to face modern realities. It's a dilemma for all of us because good journalism is necessary to maintain that a healthy democracy but it requires a budget and it's difficult to hire investigators on a on what's generated by a podcast. All countries need a national broadcaster and, while the CBC's budget seems huge, it's per capita funding is a fraction of what other countries invest in their National broadcasters. CBC should have enough money that it doesn't need advertising. Oh, and yes, CBC does need a serious house cleaning and revamp.
Given that universal healthcare in Canada was originally designed to be funded on a 50/50 basis between Ottawa and each province, and that today Ottawa has shrunk their funding down to around 22%, it only highlights the egregious waste of money going to the CBC that should be going into healthcare. Shame on all federal politicians who have failed the Canadian people in this matter.
Health care is a provincial responsibility, as we all know, and therefore, federal funding of healthcare is an intrusion in provincial affairs. At the time of this intrusion, the quality of health care one received was wholly dependent on one's province of residence. Thinking that this was unfair, since we are all Canadians and Canada is a country, not a loose coalition of provincial fiefdoms, the federal government tried to get the provinces to adopt a set of minimum healthcare standards. The only way that the provinces would agree is if the federal government ponied-up some cash.
We see this province-first attitude to this day. The only way that we will see interprovincial trade barriers dismantled is if the federal government takes action. We cannot now, and never have been able to, rely on the provinces acting in any way other than serving their blinkered self-interest.
Rob, you conclude by saying, "... We cannot now, and never have been able to, rely on the provinces acting in any way other than serving their blinkered self-interest."
I, for one, am quite pleased that my government (Alberta) is willing to stick up for our own "parochial" interests given that the damned feds (and some other provinces) are incredibly hostile to us in so many ways. My point is that whereas you argue that "... we are all Canadians ..." what I see is that we are all Canadians as long as we are willing to be ruled by the elites of Vancouver, Montreal and the GTA. You know, folks who don't understand and absolutely don't give a damn about anyone who lives elsewhere.
So, yes, Danielle Smith, please do act in Alberta's own interest.
John, I deliberately left out Ottawa simply because Ottawa is principally elected by Vancouver, Montreal and the GTA. I also omitted the Atlantic simply because they vote whichever party is in power to get cash (no different than Quebec in some ways except Quebec is not nearly as reliably LPC).
OK I see where you’re coming from. Looking at vote concentration. My view is different. The candidates that the voters get to elect are not usually chosen by the people but selected by the elites regardless of the riding association shams. (Sometimes directly aka “parachuting” or Doug Ford nominating a bunch of candidates in his last election. Which is why the voters get no real choice it’s generally bland interchangeable sycophants regardless of party label. The parties want their candidates unsullied root and stem. Look up “unsullied” in Game of Thrones.
I see no difference between the Canadian candidate selection process and that of the communist party in the former Soviet Union. I prefer the Primary process used in the constitutional republic to the South. I realize money has a big role to play but at least anybody can play.
Yes, and how about the blinkered self-interest of the increasingly power-concentrating and the increasingly dictatorial Ottawa, which in practice a political front of the Laurentian oligarchy ? Corrupt oligarchy.
Fair enough. Though we must not forget that Ottawer is the nexus that collects and enables the ... insert several bad words here .... ideological pestilence from Vancouver, Montreal and the GTA and a few other regions.
My comment ties to RR's, you mentioned "blinkered self-interest" in quote, also responding to RR.
All big places of harbouring lunacy destroying Canada should be often listed.
Defund the lot, CBC first. F........ leaches, make your own bread.
CBC is NOT a national broadcaster, it is a leftist activist truth-suppressing facts-suppressing population-brainwashing propagandist.
CBC should be funded entirely out of active personal non-taxable donations, not out of any form of taxes. Then we will see who wants this heap of crap.
The MSM lost its way a long time ago. Almost all articles are opinion pieces with facts provided selectively. As the BBC has come to learn, this is a dangerous game.
No tax payer dollars should go to the MSM. The CBC, a media wing of the LPC, should be weaned off the public teat as their biases parallel those of the BBC.
Giving the CBC more money is a slap in the face to tax payers. It needs to be cut loose from government purse strings and allowed to sink or float on its own merit. To those who are ardent supporters perhaps they can contribute directly through some form of subscription thus relieving the rest of us of the onerous task of paying for a service we do not want nor have any intention of using.
When private broadcasters can demonstrate they will cater to and represent listeners, readers and watchers across the entirety of our country, from sea to sea to shining sea, (and not those in the lower latitudes), then they will be deserving of subsidies. And don’t suggest the internet gives everyone equal accessibility. It is not true for many underpopulated areas of our vast country. And there in lies the reason why public broadcasting deserves to exist. Sharing facts, news and entertainment that speak to the identity of our country are more important than ever.
I think the thing that would really fix the legacy media would be taking away the new media's super-power: targeted advertising. We need strict, and I mean STRICT, limits on the information that digital media companies are allowed to collect and share about us.
When a person watches a YouTube video, the one and only thing YouTube's advertisers should be allowed to know about that person is that they are the kind of person who would be watching this video. They're welcome to infer what they can from that fact.
That would put new media and legacy media on a level playing field in the battle for advertising dollars. And it would also take away the incentives for media companies to build their vast, privacy-invading, error-ridden databases about us.
I just love how Pierre-Karl Peladeau refers to the Quebec and Canadian media as if they are somehow separate. Quebec media is Canadian media. A small point, I know, but it does stick in my craw.
As for one point of the column, if the CBC is subsidized to the tune $1.5B+, then it should not be allowed to compete for advertising dollars. It is unfair to all the private sector broadcasters.
I would actually be more supportive of CBC getting funding if they were mandated to be "ad-free". Then they can be an actual public broadcaster again and not a company acting like a private business with a huge advantage. I do not think the CBC should be abolished, it can serve a purpose.... such as promoting Canadian content and giving a radio network that will never be shut off. Just take it out of competition with our private broadcasters and make it what it should be. I am also quite sure Carney knows this is not a good thing but he also took over a party that thinks more like JT , than him. There are things he has to do, like it or not, to keep the party together.
A lot of the Justin Trudeau agenda was inspired by a nostalgic view of Canada when Pierre Trudeau was in government, and the current Liberals' approach to the CBC and Canadian news media appears to derive from similar sentiment. CBC funding has been cruising on pleasant memories of Hockey Night in Canada, The Beachcombers, and Mr. Dress-Up for decades; news media like big newspapers are regarded as Important because they used to be Important.
It's all out of touch with today's reality, where the top-rated CBC show is re-runs of "Schitt's Creek" (a series that ended 5 years ago) and newspaper circulation numbers that have been on a steady decline since the '90s. The fact is that both CBC and the legacy news media need to count themselves lucky that Mark Carney is focused on other problems and hasn't yet pursued any real efforts to curtail government spending. A rational appraisal of current realities would reveal media subsidies to be a pretty frivolous expenditure compared with almost anything else.
Good column. Jen and Matt often talk about this issue and how Legacy Media has to face modern realities. It's a dilemma for all of us because good journalism is necessary to maintain that a healthy democracy but it requires a budget and it's difficult to hire investigators on a on what's generated by a podcast. All countries need a national broadcaster and, while the CBC's budget seems huge, it's per capita funding is a fraction of what other countries invest in their National broadcasters. CBC should have enough money that it doesn't need advertising. Oh, and yes, CBC does need a serious house cleaning and revamp.
CBC really does need a serious house cleaning and revamp.
Given that universal healthcare in Canada was originally designed to be funded on a 50/50 basis between Ottawa and each province, and that today Ottawa has shrunk their funding down to around 22%, it only highlights the egregious waste of money going to the CBC that should be going into healthcare. Shame on all federal politicians who have failed the Canadian people in this matter.
Health care is a provincial responsibility, as we all know, and therefore, federal funding of healthcare is an intrusion in provincial affairs. At the time of this intrusion, the quality of health care one received was wholly dependent on one's province of residence. Thinking that this was unfair, since we are all Canadians and Canada is a country, not a loose coalition of provincial fiefdoms, the federal government tried to get the provinces to adopt a set of minimum healthcare standards. The only way that the provinces would agree is if the federal government ponied-up some cash.
We see this province-first attitude to this day. The only way that we will see interprovincial trade barriers dismantled is if the federal government takes action. We cannot now, and never have been able to, rely on the provinces acting in any way other than serving their blinkered self-interest.
Rob, you conclude by saying, "... We cannot now, and never have been able to, rely on the provinces acting in any way other than serving their blinkered self-interest."
I, for one, am quite pleased that my government (Alberta) is willing to stick up for our own "parochial" interests given that the damned feds (and some other provinces) are incredibly hostile to us in so many ways. My point is that whereas you argue that "... we are all Canadians ..." what I see is that we are all Canadians as long as we are willing to be ruled by the elites of Vancouver, Montreal and the GTA. You know, folks who don't understand and absolutely don't give a damn about anyone who lives elsewhere.
So, yes, Danielle Smith, please do act in Alberta's own interest.
You missed Ottawa and the Western Quebec Laurentians where the government elites / silk stocking socialists live…
John, I deliberately left out Ottawa simply because Ottawa is principally elected by Vancouver, Montreal and the GTA. I also omitted the Atlantic simply because they vote whichever party is in power to get cash (no different than Quebec in some ways except Quebec is not nearly as reliably LPC).
OK I see where you’re coming from. Looking at vote concentration. My view is different. The candidates that the voters get to elect are not usually chosen by the people but selected by the elites regardless of the riding association shams. (Sometimes directly aka “parachuting” or Doug Ford nominating a bunch of candidates in his last election. Which is why the voters get no real choice it’s generally bland interchangeable sycophants regardless of party label. The parties want their candidates unsullied root and stem. Look up “unsullied” in Game of Thrones.
I see no difference between the Canadian candidate selection process and that of the communist party in the former Soviet Union. I prefer the Primary process used in the constitutional republic to the South. I realize money has a big role to play but at least anybody can play.
Yes, and how about the blinkered self-interest of the increasingly power-concentrating and the increasingly dictatorial Ottawa, which in practice a political front of the Laurentian oligarchy ? Corrupt oligarchy.
NS, I deliberately left out Ottawer because Ottawer is principally elected by Vancouver, Montreal and the GTA.
Fair enough. Though we must not forget that Ottawer is the nexus that collects and enables the ... insert several bad words here .... ideological pestilence from Vancouver, Montreal and the GTA and a few other regions.
My comment ties to RR's, you mentioned "blinkered self-interest" in quote, also responding to RR.
All big places of harbouring lunacy destroying Canada should be often listed.
Defund the lot, CBC first. F........ leaches, make your own bread.
CBC is NOT a national broadcaster, it is a leftist activist truth-suppressing facts-suppressing population-brainwashing propagandist.
CBC should be funded entirely out of active personal non-taxable donations, not out of any form of taxes. Then we will see who wants this heap of crap.
The MSM lost its way a long time ago. Almost all articles are opinion pieces with facts provided selectively. As the BBC has come to learn, this is a dangerous game.
No tax payer dollars should go to the MSM. The CBC, a media wing of the LPC, should be weaned off the public teat as their biases parallel those of the BBC.
Giving the CBC more money is a slap in the face to tax payers. It needs to be cut loose from government purse strings and allowed to sink or float on its own merit. To those who are ardent supporters perhaps they can contribute directly through some form of subscription thus relieving the rest of us of the onerous task of paying for a service we do not want nor have any intention of using.
When private broadcasters can demonstrate they will cater to and represent listeners, readers and watchers across the entirety of our country, from sea to sea to shining sea, (and not those in the lower latitudes), then they will be deserving of subsidies. And don’t suggest the internet gives everyone equal accessibility. It is not true for many underpopulated areas of our vast country. And there in lies the reason why public broadcasting deserves to exist. Sharing facts, news and entertainment that speak to the identity of our country are more important than ever.
I think the thing that would really fix the legacy media would be taking away the new media's super-power: targeted advertising. We need strict, and I mean STRICT, limits on the information that digital media companies are allowed to collect and share about us.
When a person watches a YouTube video, the one and only thing YouTube's advertisers should be allowed to know about that person is that they are the kind of person who would be watching this video. They're welcome to infer what they can from that fact.
That would put new media and legacy media on a level playing field in the battle for advertising dollars. And it would also take away the incentives for media companies to build their vast, privacy-invading, error-ridden databases about us.