4 ms·

I get your sentiment, but it also seems like you don't care for Canadian culture and identity, history, and everything, and would be happy seeing it eventually

I get your sentiment, but it also seems like you don't care for Canadian culture and identity, history, and everything, and would be happy seeing it eventually die out in favor of American culture or some other. Free market is nice, but applying it to culture is saying you're okay to see your culture lose to another. At the same time, how can a country of a small population win a culture content war against one of multiple time its size with much more capital. The way you talk about being forced to compete, I feel you're assuming that news, media, talk shows, music, movies, and all that are somehow not also incorporating values and morals that reflect a culture. And that there shouldn't be any desire to make sure that Canadian values, morals and historical lineage is still represented in content broadcasted to Canadians. Now personally, I value Canadian culture and identity, and I want to see it grow and prosper and still be represented in broadcast reaching Canadians. That doesn't mean blocking foreign content, but I think it's fair to make recommendations, search results, and other such promotional mechanism prioritize a certain amount of Canadian content when accessed from Canada. And even more so, I think it's a good idea if it should make sure to always include a little bit of First Nation material, a little bit of French Canadian material, etc., to give proportional representation to our minority groups as well, and support their culture and heritage too. As a Canadian consumer, it means that if you truly didn't like Canadian content, maybe you'd need to explicitly seek out non-canadian content, or non-canadian content recommendations. I could see it be an explicit opt-out setting, or having to explicitly switch to the American or some other endpoint. Maybe I'm patriotic, but ya, I do value those things. And I would want the default in Canada for broadcasters to prioritize a certain amount of Canadian content with proportional representation to our various minority/majority groups.

908B64B197 5y ago
> Free market is nice, but applying it to culture is saying you're okay to see your culture lose to another. If people want to keep it alive, they’ll simply consume it. If you can’t sell it without having to subsidize it and make special laws to force people to watch it, maybe the people already made their choice. > And even more so, I think it's a good idea if it should make sure to always include a little bit of First Nation material, a little bit of French Canadian material, etc., to give proportional representation to our minority groups as well, and support their culture and heritage too. Weren’t the state media making blatantly racist “historical documentary” (with taxpayers money) a few years ago? [0-4] Are people ok with this? I get the minority content but aren’t the French Canadians notorious for buying and consuming their own culture? I work with a few French Canadians who’s been here in the bay for decades and even their kids (born here in America) watch French Canadian content (on TikTok no less!). No need to subsidize it, they just seek it because they want to watch it. When you make something that’s worth it, people simply watch it. That’s why Parasite won an Oscar. [0] https://www.huffpost.com/archive/ca/entry/cbc-the-story-of-us-representation_b_15986458 https://www.huffpost.com/archive/ca/entry/cbc-the-story-of-u... [1] https://this.org/2017/07/19/where-cbcs-the-story-of-us-went-wrong/ https://this.org/2017/07/19/where-cbcs-the-story-of-us-went-... [2] https://etcanada.com/news/217608/cbc-issues-apology-after-the-story-of-us-following-criticism-from-quebec-maritimes-viewers/ https://etcanada.com/news/217608/cbc-issues-apology-after-th... [3] https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/couillard-government-wants-cbc-to-apologize-for-errors-in-the-story-of-us/ https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/couillard-govern... [4] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/cbc-apologizes-after-canadian-history-series-sparks-uproar-in-quebec-maritimes/article34666160/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/cbc-apologizes...
- didibus 5y ago
  I mostly replied my thoughts on your other comment. But let me add that again, it isn't about French Canadians having their own content for themselves. That's again the view that's very consumer/provider capitalist driven. It is about them having a voice that reaches other Canadians, including non French Canadian ones. So in this case, yes, I'm taking a societal view, it's showing respect, interest and that we're all listening to each other to make the best society, and giving everyone an outlet. So you can easily say, ok, let 60% of all content be pure consumer/producer free market driven. But reserve a 40% to make sure Canadians of all circle of life and background have a voice that can reach other Canadians. And that would also include having voices for Ontarians, yes even truckers, or anyone else who shows interest to broadcast content, they can go to the CRTC and ask for a spot, which they'd be granted proportionally, even if their content isn't a money maker that could survive the free market.
  - 908B64B197 5y ago
    > It is about them having a voice that reaches other Canadians, including non French Canadian ones. Does it actually? Not that long ago we basically got a completely different sales and marketing team for that region; we were advised to basically treat it as it’s own thing. From my visits it’s quite… insular. I recall their newspapers having news from the province on the front page, then a page about the US and then Canadian/International news. > And that would also include having voices for Ontarians, yes even truckers, or anyone else who shows interest to broadcast content, they can go to the CRTC and ask for a spot Ahh, so they have to go vet their content and opinion to a government official before getting a government approved broadcasting right. First amendment as long as you get the government’s approval!
    - didibus 5y ago
      I'm curious what you think of an ombudsman? Do you just see them as seeking any chance to abuse their power and seek authoritarian authority and oppress your rights as well? In a democracy, the government technically works for you, you elect it, you can choose to not re-elect them, and as part of that system some institutions are in place to protect your rights. Like ombudsman, the CRTC is an institution whose mandate is to protect voices of Canadians on broadcasts that reaches Canadians. The CRTC is not a sensor, and cannot choose what programs the broadcasters choose to air or not, it can simply dictate that it has to air some amount of Canadian content, and that it has to promote and advertise some amount of it. The goals of it is to make sure various Canadians have a propertionally equal air time. That's its mandate. I'm not sure what exactly you distrust in that, a free market will govern who gets air time based on profit, revenue, and market power/consolidation. This isn't what Canadians want, they want to have a mechanism that protects their rights to broadcast themselves, even if it doesn't fit Big Media's business model of maximized revenue, or their own political leanings. So they created an institution to govern that, and make sure that within the free market, there is still guaranteed room for them to broadcast. P.S.: First amandment is a US thing. Canada has a Charter of rights and freedoms, and it's section 2(b) which says: > (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
Fogest 5y ago
The other commenter put it better than I would. But Canada is so multi-cultural there really isn't one "Canadian Culture". Most of our "Canadian content" is no different than American content, it just happens to be filmed in Canada. But even a lot of American shows do a lot of filming in Canada. There is really no "Canadian music" either, it's really just the same as American music. But it isn't just American content I get exposed to. I also get exposed to a lot of other content from all around the world. Take the recent culturally popular hit on Netflix "Squid Game". Should Netflix be forced to show me something from Canada instead of promoting Squid Game simply because they are legally forced to? Shouldn't they be showing me something they think I will like regardless of where it came from? In fact Netflix does exactly this and does suggest content that is even in other languages with English dubs or subtitles. Instead of being forced to listen or watch subsidized Canadian content I am able to watch whatever would interest me the most from anywhere in the world. In my opinion your view is an old style view that applies to a less connected version of the world. With how connected we are now and how easily I can see content from across the world it feels like an old fashioned approach to do what you are suggesting. And it feels extra silly with just how much more multi-cultural Canada has become.
- 908B64B197 5y ago
  > There is really no "Canadian music" either, it's really just the same as American music. What’s interesting is that you can see the quotas the government place on radio stations as a form of subsidies. Meaning that, according to the government, Justing Bieber signing about “Georgia Peaches” and consuming drugs in California counts as Canadian Music and Culture (he was born in Canada). > Take the recent culturally popular hit on Netflix "Squid Game". Should Netflix be forced to show me something from Canada instead of promoting Squid Game simply because they are legally forced to? Rent-seekers seem to think so! Why try to innovate and compete in a fair marketplace when you can simply have special rules that your content has to be promoted?
  - didibus 5y ago
    > Rent-seekers seem to think so! Why try to innovate and compete in a fair marketplace when you can simply have special rules that your content has to be promoted? This is missing my point, because you are reducing the content to a mindless product of consumption. The point of promoting and prioritizing Canadian content is not financially motivated. It is politically motivated. The point is to safeguard free speech and the right to be heard of Canadians within Canadian society. That means that first nations should have a proportional spot in broadcasts. If they represent 5% of all Canadians, then all broadcast should include 5% of their speech, ideas, and culture, which let their voices, opinions, values, morales, and heritage be spoken and heard through the content, be it news media, opinion pieces, talk shows, stories, etc.

908B64B197 5y ago

> Free market is nice, but applying it to culture is saying you're okay to see your culture lose to another. If people want to keep it alive, they’ll simply consume it. If you can’t sell it without having to subsidize it and make special laws to force people to watch it, maybe the people already made their choice. > And even more so, I think it's a good idea if it should make sure to always include a little bit of First Nation material, a little bit of French Canadian material, etc., to give proportional representation to our minority groups as well, and support their culture and heritage too. Weren’t the state media making blatantly racist “historical documentary” (with taxpayers money) a few years ago? [0-4] Are people ok with this? I get the minority content but aren’t the French Canadians notorious for buying and consuming their own culture? I work with a few French Canadians who’s been here in the bay for decades and even their kids (born here in America) watch French Canadian content (on TikTok no less!). No need to subsidize it, they just seek it because they want to watch it. When you make something that’s worth it, people simply watch it. That’s why Parasite won an Oscar. [0] https://www.huffpost.com/archive/ca/entry/cbc-the-story-of-us-representation_b_15986458 https://www.huffpost.com/archive/ca/entry/cbc-the-story-of-u... [1] https://this.org/2017/07/19/where-cbcs-the-story-of-us-went-wrong/ https://this.org/2017/07/19/where-cbcs-the-story-of-us-went-... [2] https://etcanada.com/news/217608/cbc-issues-apology-after-the-story-of-us-following-criticism-from-quebec-maritimes-viewers/ https://etcanada.com/news/217608/cbc-issues-apology-after-th... [3] https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/couillard-government-wants-cbc-to-apologize-for-errors-in-the-story-of-us/ https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/couillard-govern... [4] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/cbc-apologizes-after-canadian-history-series-sparks-uproar-in-quebec-maritimes/article34666160/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/cbc-apologizes...

didibus 5y ago
I mostly replied my thoughts on your other comment. But let me add that again, it isn't about French Canadians having their own content for themselves. That's again the view that's very consumer/provider capitalist driven. It is about them having a voice that reaches other Canadians, including non French Canadian ones. So in this case, yes, I'm taking a societal view, it's showing respect, interest and that we're all listening to each other to make the best society, and giving everyone an outlet. So you can easily say, ok, let 60% of all content be pure consumer/producer free market driven. But reserve a 40% to make sure Canadians of all circle of life and background have a voice that can reach other Canadians. And that would also include having voices for Ontarians, yes even truckers, or anyone else who shows interest to broadcast content, they can go to the CRTC and ask for a spot, which they'd be granted proportionally, even if their content isn't a money maker that could survive the free market.
- 908B64B197 5y ago
  > It is about them having a voice that reaches other Canadians, including non French Canadian ones. Does it actually? Not that long ago we basically got a completely different sales and marketing team for that region; we were advised to basically treat it as it’s own thing. From my visits it’s quite… insular. I recall their newspapers having news from the province on the front page, then a page about the US and then Canadian/International news. > And that would also include having voices for Ontarians, yes even truckers, or anyone else who shows interest to broadcast content, they can go to the CRTC and ask for a spot Ahh, so they have to go vet their content and opinion to a government official before getting a government approved broadcasting right. First amendment as long as you get the government’s approval!
  - didibus 5y ago
    I'm curious what you think of an ombudsman? Do you just see them as seeking any chance to abuse their power and seek authoritarian authority and oppress your rights as well? In a democracy, the government technically works for you, you elect it, you can choose to not re-elect them, and as part of that system some institutions are in place to protect your rights. Like ombudsman, the CRTC is an institution whose mandate is to protect voices of Canadians on broadcasts that reaches Canadians. The CRTC is not a sensor, and cannot choose what programs the broadcasters choose to air or not, it can simply dictate that it has to air some amount of Canadian content, and that it has to promote and advertise some amount of it. The goals of it is to make sure various Canadians have a propertionally equal air time. That's its mandate. I'm not sure what exactly you distrust in that, a free market will govern who gets air time based on profit, revenue, and market power/consolidation. This isn't what Canadians want, they want to have a mechanism that protects their rights to broadcast themselves, even if it doesn't fit Big Media's business model of maximized revenue, or their own political leanings. So they created an institution to govern that, and make sure that within the free market, there is still guaranteed room for them to broadcast. P.S.: First amandment is a US thing. Canada has a Charter of rights and freedoms, and it's section 2(b) which says: > (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication

Fogest 5y ago

The other commenter put it better than I would. But Canada is so multi-cultural there really isn't one "Canadian Culture". Most of our "Canadian content" is no different than American content, it just happens to be filmed in Canada. But even a lot of American shows do a lot of filming in Canada. There is really no "Canadian music" either, it's really just the same as American music. But it isn't just American content I get exposed to. I also get exposed to a lot of other content from all around the world. Take the recent culturally popular hit on Netflix "Squid Game". Should Netflix be forced to show me something from Canada instead of promoting Squid Game simply because they are legally forced to? Shouldn't they be showing me something they think I will like regardless of where it came from? In fact Netflix does exactly this and does suggest content that is even in other languages with English dubs or subtitles. Instead of being forced to listen or watch subsidized Canadian content I am able to watch whatever would interest me the most from anywhere in the world. In my opinion your view is an old style view that applies to a less connected version of the world. With how connected we are now and how easily I can see content from across the world it feels like an old fashioned approach to do what you are suggesting. And it feels extra silly with just how much more multi-cultural Canada has become.

908B64B197 5y ago
> There is really no "Canadian music" either, it's really just the same as American music. What’s interesting is that you can see the quotas the government place on radio stations as a form of subsidies. Meaning that, according to the government, Justing Bieber signing about “Georgia Peaches” and consuming drugs in California counts as Canadian Music and Culture (he was born in Canada). > Take the recent culturally popular hit on Netflix "Squid Game". Should Netflix be forced to show me something from Canada instead of promoting Squid Game simply because they are legally forced to? Rent-seekers seem to think so! Why try to innovate and compete in a fair marketplace when you can simply have special rules that your content has to be promoted?
- didibus 5y ago
  > Rent-seekers seem to think so! Why try to innovate and compete in a fair marketplace when you can simply have special rules that your content has to be promoted? This is missing my point, because you are reducing the content to a mindless product of consumption. The point of promoting and prioritizing Canadian content is not financially motivated. It is politically motivated. The point is to safeguard free speech and the right to be heard of Canadians within Canadian society. That means that first nations should have a proportional spot in broadcasts. If they represent 5% of all Canadians, then all broadcast should include 5% of their speech, ideas, and culture, which let their voices, opinions, values, morales, and heritage be spoken and heard through the content, be it news media, opinion pieces, talk shows, stories, etc.