6 ms·

Canada has simply relied on supply side regulation of everything too long, while the Canadian market persists in wanting too many things which are not Canadian.

Canada has simply relied on supply side regulation of everything too long, while the Canadian market persists in wanting too many things which are not Canadian. This applies to music, film, TV, aeroplanes, and in the case of Quebec even the spoken language itself. Canada has to move to demand based thinking where if you want to sell Canadian content you have to have a need-or-wants end market for it, not simply force a quota of it on people that was produced with ever increasingly necessary subsidies thanks to how out of touch with the end market it becomes. Make Canadian content more attractive to everyone (including Canadians) and the problem would solve itself.

smoyer 12y ago
Maybe it's just a cultural disconnect but it's pretty rare that there's a Canadian television show I'm interested in ... though the number of U.S. shows I find interesting has dropped too. This sort of regulation (eventually) does a serious disservice to the industry. I've replaced television (of all sorts) with streamed video content and/or on-line reading. It's not about the delivery method it's about spending my free time watching/reading the most entertaining content. When I was little, if I hadn't brought books and magazines home from the library, the only "new" content I could be entertained by the television. New regulations on Internet content providers won't solve the CATV viewership problem it will simply push viewers from the (newly regulated) popular content providers to other providers. They're not going back to television unless someone dramatically improves the programming.
click170 12y ago
One of the artifacts of this is that Canadian music can sometimes be segregated to its own station, as if "Canadian music" was a genre. XM did this for example. As a Canadian though there are few Canadian shows I'm interested in. Maybe the occasional CBC DocZone, but that's about it. I would like to see more of BBC model over here, it seems to work out swimmingly for them. (Doctor Who, Horizon, Top Gear, This World, and that's before you get to the one-off films)
- ajlburke 12y ago
  You might want to check out "Orphan Black" then - it's a Canada/BBC co-production and really really good.
- timsco 12y ago
  But the only reason that half of the Canadian music we all know and love exists at all is because of the CanCon laws that regulate Canadian radio. FM and AM is forced to play a high percentage of Canadian music.
  - click170 12y ago
    I still feel like this is kind of backwards personally. If they're forced to play Canadian music, it would seem to me that many or most people aren't interested in where the music came from as long as it gets your foot thumping. I'm a Canadian myself and I'm not interested in where it came from as long as it sounds good to me. I feel like these laws are from a time before Youtube. In an age when anyone can post a video online and be famous if people actually like their work, why do we (Canadians) have to mandate that some of our music is Canadian?
    - gtremper 12y ago
      Agreed. I understand the sentiment, but feel increasing funding to arts and music programs would accomplish this more effectively. Help create more world-class musicians that everyone would enjoy rather than promote music just because its Canadian.
anigbrowl 12y ago
Agree in principle, but the fact is that most American content is subsidized in one way or another, and most other countries also subsidize film and TV production. From an economic view I don't like subsidies, but as someone who works in indie film I'm not going to be purist about it if one helps me get paid, it's difficult enough to fund and sell film as it is. Cultural material is not a simple commodity that you can apply laws of supply and demand to, because cultural products are not economic substitutes for each other. This is one of the few areas where I think some protectionism may be justified, because if you import all your media then it tends to crowd out one's domestic culture, which in extreme cases can lead to social fragmentation. If you don't have any kind of domestic media output then that also limits your country's potential for tourism and inward investment. I grew up in Ireland and although I was very interested in film from an early age there was very little domestic film or TV production going on; maybe 30-40% of what was on TV came from the UK and >50% came from the US (cheap for programmers to purchase given the tiny size of the market, and for political reasons we did not wish to get too much of our programming from the UK). There was only one TV channel for many years and it was quite demoralizing to realize that how little cultural output of our own there was. Apart from a documentary shot in 1934 by an Irish-American filmmaker, there wasn't a single Irish-produced feature film for nearly 50 years, until 1982 (when I was 12), and even that involved an English director. The domestic industry didn't really get going until the early 1990s. As a kid, I would borrow library books and read magazine articles about film production but even the notion of 'home movies' seemed impossibly remote - I literally never saw a video or film camera until I moved to London. It didn't occur to me to pursue a career in film as a youth because the domestic industry simply didn't exist. Even with cheap digital technology available today, making a film is quite an expensive undertaking - there's no guarantee that filmmakers will simply bootstrap themselves as the inevitable result of market forces.
- drzaiusapelord 12y ago
  Or every ethnic group isn't entitled to their own set of TV shows, movies, etc especially if there isn't enough demand to justify it. I think your way of thinking ties too closely with the failed multiculturalism experiments of the 20th century. Trying to artificially make media fit for various demographics leads to low quality media, tax increases, and ultimately a certain level of isolation. In the USA in the 70s and 80s, we tried this sort of thing. There was a cola for black people, urban newspapers for the black community, we encouraged them to go to traditionally black colleges, we encouraged them entering traditionally black jobs, staying in traditionally black communities, staying out of the suburbs, etc. Instead of trying to integrate them into the mainstream, we isolated them. It was a disservice. The same thing is happening all over the world, especially with Muslims immigrants. We can see the multicultural mindset causing problems in Europe, especially in the UK and France. Even if we took your argument on face value, what then? Some kind of quota for Irish directors? So we turn down an English director with great ideas and lots of talent for some Irish director because you feel, as an Irish person, that somehow you can feel his "Irishness" via his directorial decisions? So if he made a sci-fi film about the future on another planet, you'll absorb some level of Irishness from this? That's absurd. I think its time we put multiculturism down and accept that a certain level of assimilation is normal and healthy. If your entire cultural identity is at risk from a Michael Bay film, well, that sounds like it wasn't too strong to begin with. My parents were immigrants. I feel only a superficial connection to their culture. I don't see why that's so terrible. Their great grandparents came from another culture as well. The idea that we need to protect those from a certain culture from change is highly questionable.
timsco 12y ago
The other argument here is that 90% of everything (including and perhaps especially American TV) is crap. Because Canada makes less of everything, there is less attractive content than the US. That said, there is also less crap content but no one cares about that stat. There are some Canadian winners out there if you look for them.
- fidotron 12y ago
  There certainly are Canadian winners, but they have a habit of rapidly turning into losers. There's even a reasonably well known book about this: http://www.amazon.com/Why-Mexicans-Dont-Drink-Molson/dp/1553654064 http://www.amazon.com/Why-Mexicans-Dont-Drink-Molson/dp/1553... And I don't believe RIM are in it. There was a time around 2006 when I lived half in Montreal and half in Brixton, and at that point Arcade Fire could sell out the Brixton Academy (concert venue of about 4000 capacity), while simultaneously getting absolutely no attention in Canada at all. They aren't my taste, but it was curious that one of the great success stories of recent Canadian music was in spite of the fact they didn't secure Canadian radio play until they were popular elsewhere. I can go on about the bad side of Canadian business, but there is a fear among the more intelligent side that unless Canada snaps out of this trap it looks a lot like a third world resource extraction economy. That this is at least discussed is a cause for some optimism.

smoyer 12y ago

Maybe it's just a cultural disconnect but it's pretty rare that there's a Canadian television show I'm interested in ... though the number of U.S. shows I find interesting has dropped too. This sort of regulation (eventually) does a serious disservice to the industry. I've replaced television (of all sorts) with streamed video content and/or on-line reading. It's not about the delivery method it's about spending my free time watching/reading the most entertaining content. When I was little, if I hadn't brought books and magazines home from the library, the only "new" content I could be entertained by the television. New regulations on Internet content providers won't solve the CATV viewership problem it will simply push viewers from the (newly regulated) popular content providers to other providers. They're not going back to television unless someone dramatically improves the programming.

click170 12y ago

One of the artifacts of this is that Canadian music can sometimes be segregated to its own station, as if "Canadian music" was a genre. XM did this for example. As a Canadian though there are few Canadian shows I'm interested in. Maybe the occasional CBC DocZone, but that's about it. I would like to see more of BBC model over here, it seems to work out swimmingly for them. (Doctor Who, Horizon, Top Gear, This World, and that's before you get to the one-off films)

ajlburke 12y ago
You might want to check out "Orphan Black" then - it's a Canada/BBC co-production and really really good.
timsco 12y ago
But the only reason that half of the Canadian music we all know and love exists at all is because of the CanCon laws that regulate Canadian radio. FM and AM is forced to play a high percentage of Canadian music.
- click170 12y ago
  I still feel like this is kind of backwards personally. If they're forced to play Canadian music, it would seem to me that many or most people aren't interested in where the music came from as long as it gets your foot thumping. I'm a Canadian myself and I'm not interested in where it came from as long as it sounds good to me. I feel like these laws are from a time before Youtube. In an age when anyone can post a video online and be famous if people actually like their work, why do we (Canadians) have to mandate that some of our music is Canadian?
  - gtremper 12y ago
    Agreed. I understand the sentiment, but feel increasing funding to arts and music programs would accomplish this more effectively. Help create more world-class musicians that everyone would enjoy rather than promote music just because its Canadian.

anigbrowl 12y ago

Agree in principle, but the fact is that most American content is subsidized in one way or another, and most other countries also subsidize film and TV production. From an economic view I don't like subsidies, but as someone who works in indie film I'm not going to be purist about it if one helps me get paid, it's difficult enough to fund and sell film as it is. Cultural material is not a simple commodity that you can apply laws of supply and demand to, because cultural products are not economic substitutes for each other. This is one of the few areas where I think some protectionism may be justified, because if you import all your media then it tends to crowd out one's domestic culture, which in extreme cases can lead to social fragmentation. If you don't have any kind of domestic media output then that also limits your country's potential for tourism and inward investment. I grew up in Ireland and although I was very interested in film from an early age there was very little domestic film or TV production going on; maybe 30-40% of what was on TV came from the UK and >50% came from the US (cheap for programmers to purchase given the tiny size of the market, and for political reasons we did not wish to get too much of our programming from the UK). There was only one TV channel for many years and it was quite demoralizing to realize that how little cultural output of our own there was. Apart from a documentary shot in 1934 by an Irish-American filmmaker, there wasn't a single Irish-produced feature film for nearly 50 years, until 1982 (when I was 12), and even that involved an English director. The domestic industry didn't really get going until the early 1990s. As a kid, I would borrow library books and read magazine articles about film production but even the notion of 'home movies' seemed impossibly remote - I literally never saw a video or film camera until I moved to London. It didn't occur to me to pursue a career in film as a youth because the domestic industry simply didn't exist. Even with cheap digital technology available today, making a film is quite an expensive undertaking - there's no guarantee that filmmakers will simply bootstrap themselves as the inevitable result of market forces.

drzaiusapelord 12y ago
Or every ethnic group isn't entitled to their own set of TV shows, movies, etc especially if there isn't enough demand to justify it. I think your way of thinking ties too closely with the failed multiculturalism experiments of the 20th century. Trying to artificially make media fit for various demographics leads to low quality media, tax increases, and ultimately a certain level of isolation. In the USA in the 70s and 80s, we tried this sort of thing. There was a cola for black people, urban newspapers for the black community, we encouraged them to go to traditionally black colleges, we encouraged them entering traditionally black jobs, staying in traditionally black communities, staying out of the suburbs, etc. Instead of trying to integrate them into the mainstream, we isolated them. It was a disservice. The same thing is happening all over the world, especially with Muslims immigrants. We can see the multicultural mindset causing problems in Europe, especially in the UK and France. Even if we took your argument on face value, what then? Some kind of quota for Irish directors? So we turn down an English director with great ideas and lots of talent for some Irish director because you feel, as an Irish person, that somehow you can feel his "Irishness" via his directorial decisions? So if he made a sci-fi film about the future on another planet, you'll absorb some level of Irishness from this? That's absurd. I think its time we put multiculturism down and accept that a certain level of assimilation is normal and healthy. If your entire cultural identity is at risk from a Michael Bay film, well, that sounds like it wasn't too strong to begin with. My parents were immigrants. I feel only a superficial connection to their culture. I don't see why that's so terrible. Their great grandparents came from another culture as well. The idea that we need to protect those from a certain culture from change is highly questionable.

timsco 12y ago

The other argument here is that 90% of everything (including and perhaps especially American TV) is crap. Because Canada makes less of everything, there is less attractive content than the US. That said, there is also less crap content but no one cares about that stat. There are some Canadian winners out there if you look for them.

fidotron 12y ago
There certainly are Canadian winners, but they have a habit of rapidly turning into losers. There's even a reasonably well known book about this: http://www.amazon.com/Why-Mexicans-Dont-Drink-Molson/dp/1553654064 http://www.amazon.com/Why-Mexicans-Dont-Drink-Molson/dp/1553... And I don't believe RIM are in it. There was a time around 2006 when I lived half in Montreal and half in Brixton, and at that point Arcade Fire could sell out the Brixton Academy (concert venue of about 4000 capacity), while simultaneously getting absolutely no attention in Canada at all. They aren't my taste, but it was curious that one of the great success stories of recent Canadian music was in spite of the fact they didn't secure Canadian radio play until they were popular elsewhere. I can go on about the bad side of Canadian business, but there is a fear among the more intelligent side that unless Canada snaps out of this trap it looks a lot like a third world resource extraction economy. That this is at least discussed is a cause for some optimism.