3 ms·
The bill’s purpose, like other past attempts at erecting moats around Canadian media in an (always ill-fated) attempt to shield it from foreign competition, fol
by StockHuman 3y ago
The bill’s purpose, like other past attempts at erecting moats around Canadian media in an (always ill-fated) attempt to shield it from foreign competition, folds internet search and social media into “broadcasting,” where a portion of ad impression revenue (etc) generated from that content gets funnelled back to Canadian media corporations.
With a conventional definition of broadcasting, a radio show (that broadly transmits on the scarce, finite, government-allocated spectrum) would be beholden to include some Canadian culture in programming, and pay Canadian creators through licensing deals.
Where we are now, Canadian media has been granted another moat as their competitiveness continues to wane (so far, only video game production remains healthy and competitive with the world without this style of protectionism). CBC, The Toronto Star, etc cannot hope to compete with the global appeal of The New York Times, BBC, Al Jazeera, etc, so they’re demanding they be made artificially competitive online through boosted presence in online spaces, and paid royalties from that arrangement.
- red-iron-pine 3y agoIn short: CYA for Can-Con, which may backfire
- soderfoo 3y agoThanks for the explainer. If they invested half the energy spent on trying to erect protective barriers on innovating and developing a better product they likely wouldn't be in this predicament. Alot easier said than done, I know. With the spate of new media failures recently (Buzzfeed and Vice), maybe this is just a really tough nut to crack.