3 ms·

Clickbait title, there is nothing in the proposed legislation that forces platforms to do anything. It just gives the CRTC jurisdiction over the online platform

by Sytten 5y ago

Clickbait title, there is nothing in the proposed legislation that forces platforms to do anything. It just gives the CRTC jurisdiction over the online platforms. The real application will be debated in court and hearings. The current law is really outdated anyway and needs reform, there is not question about that. In Quebec, the proposed legislation has been well received in general. At the end of the day even if it was the case that youtube must push a bit more Canadian content, would that be a bad thing per say?

polishdude20 5y ago
I think this is a bandaid solution. If the government wants to promote Canadian content, they can find more Canadian content. Make more / better content that is worth watching.
- nickff 5y ago
  They are pursuing a tariff-style approach here, as they do on other platforms, whereas you're recommending a subsidy-style approach. It's worth remembering that Canada is generally more tariff-oriented in trade protection than their neighbors to the South.
- randompwd 5y ago
  > Make more / better content that is worth watching Or how about sovereign nations push back against the tidal wave of simplistic US cultural propaganda and limit it?
  - mixedCase 5y ago
    What are sovereign democratic nations if not the people who make them up and voluntarily choose to consume what you call "simplistic US cultural propaganda"? Or in other words: who the hell do you think you are to force other people to listen to what you want?
Barrin92 5y ago
> would that be a bad thing per say? Not in my opinion. In many European countries there's legislation when it comes to radio broadcasting or TV to play a certain amount of local content because international platforms have the habit of siphoning a lot of money out of local cultural production otherwise. It helps promote diversity in the arts. Particularly important for smaller countries who would go under when having to compete with the clickbait algorithms that are powered by hundreds of millions of largely English-speaking users.

by Sytten 5y ago

polishdude20 5y ago

I think this is a bandaid solution. If the government wants to promote Canadian content, they can find more Canadian content. Make more / better content that is worth watching.

nickff 5y ago
They are pursuing a tariff-style approach here, as they do on other platforms, whereas you're recommending a subsidy-style approach. It's worth remembering that Canada is generally more tariff-oriented in trade protection than their neighbors to the South.
randompwd 5y ago
> Make more / better content that is worth watching Or how about sovereign nations push back against the tidal wave of simplistic US cultural propaganda and limit it?
- mixedCase 5y ago
  What are sovereign democratic nations if not the people who make them up and voluntarily choose to consume what you call "simplistic US cultural propaganda"? Or in other words: who the hell do you think you are to force other people to listen to what you want?

Barrin92 5y ago

> would that be a bad thing per say? Not in my opinion. In many European countries there's legislation when it comes to radio broadcasting or TV to play a certain amount of local content because international platforms have the habit of siphoning a lot of money out of local cultural production otherwise. It helps promote diversity in the arts. Particularly important for smaller countries who would go under when having to compete with the clickbait algorithms that are powered by hundreds of millions of largely English-speaking users.