4 ms·

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 think

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.

anigbrowl 12y ago
I'm talking about countries offering subsidies and/or setting programming standards for indigenous film production within their own borders. As an Irish person, my view and experience is that it was a good thing for the Irish government to invest some Irish money in the development and production of Irish films, and likewise I think there may be good reasons for the Canadian government to take the approach they do to supporting Canadian content. In Canada. This is pretty much the opposite of what you are complaining about.
- golemotron 12y ago
  I'm fine with subsidies. It's the programming standards that should go away. In economic terms, they are a moral hazard. There's less incentive to make good films and shows when you know they are going to get preferential treatment in programming. Aside from that, it's a burden on companies that really have no responsibility for Canada's self-perceived problem.
  - cdmckay 12y ago
    A burden on which companies? Rogers and Bell? The companies that a making money hand-over-fist? I think that they're doing fine, even if they have to show more content from the country in which they're based.
    - golemotron 12y ago
      Er, Netflix - a non-Canadian company.
bsder 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. There is plenty of evidence that the "market" is NOT always right. Where is your evidence that is is correct in this case? In addition, there is a big difference between "no demand" and "so much cheaper to buy somebody else's." Like many things, movie production has an economy of scale. Peter Jackson proved that by basically subsidizing an entire movie industry in New Zealand.
frandroid 12y ago
This is not about creating content for every ethnic group in Canada. This is just about creating Canadian content for Canadians. It's not about multiculturalism, it's about supporting Canada's homegrown television and film production sectors. Also, I thought the 70s and 80s were about DE-segregating people. I thought that's what the Freedom Riders went South for. There is already more than "a certain level of assimilation" going around in Canada, for example. Content laws are there to make sure it doesn't turn to total assimilation.
- Natsu 12y ago
  > This is just about creating Canadian content for Canadians. It's not about multiculturalism, it's about supporting Canada's homegrown television and film production sectors. Well, the thing about that is that it's simply not going to work if Canadians themselves don't buy it to begin with. But that's already happening and a few silly media laws requiring the production of content almost nobody wants isn't really going to turn back the tide. I mean, Tim Hortons sold out. I'm pretty sure that the handwriting on the wall is up to at least 'מנא, מנא, תקל' by now...
- Frozenlock 12y ago
  " This is just about creating Canadian content for Canadians." How about American (not USian) making content for Americans? Or Terran, making content for Terrans? Why this divide? As someone who lives in Canada, why should I let someone else decides what I'm going to watch? Why should Québec and New Hampshire be so different? They are geographically close. It would make sense for them to tend to become more and more alike. If anything, those laws are artificially creating different cultures. It's not 'assimilation', it's living with other people. Do you think of yourself as 'assimilated' if you start playing the same games as one of your friends?

anigbrowl 12y ago

I'm talking about countries offering subsidies and/or setting programming standards for indigenous film production within their own borders. As an Irish person, my view and experience is that it was a good thing for the Irish government to invest some Irish money in the development and production of Irish films, and likewise I think there may be good reasons for the Canadian government to take the approach they do to supporting Canadian content. In Canada. This is pretty much the opposite of what you are complaining about.

golemotron 12y ago
I'm fine with subsidies. It's the programming standards that should go away. In economic terms, they are a moral hazard. There's less incentive to make good films and shows when you know they are going to get preferential treatment in programming. Aside from that, it's a burden on companies that really have no responsibility for Canada's self-perceived problem.
- cdmckay 12y ago
  A burden on which companies? Rogers and Bell? The companies that a making money hand-over-fist? I think that they're doing fine, even if they have to show more content from the country in which they're based.
  - golemotron 12y ago
    Er, Netflix - a non-Canadian company.

bsder 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. There is plenty of evidence that the "market" is NOT always right. Where is your evidence that is is correct in this case? In addition, there is a big difference between "no demand" and "so much cheaper to buy somebody else's." Like many things, movie production has an economy of scale. Peter Jackson proved that by basically subsidizing an entire movie industry in New Zealand.

frandroid 12y ago

This is not about creating content for every ethnic group in Canada. This is just about creating Canadian content for Canadians. It's not about multiculturalism, it's about supporting Canada's homegrown television and film production sectors. Also, I thought the 70s and 80s were about DE-segregating people. I thought that's what the Freedom Riders went South for. There is already more than "a certain level of assimilation" going around in Canada, for example. Content laws are there to make sure it doesn't turn to total assimilation.

Natsu 12y ago
> This is just about creating Canadian content for Canadians. It's not about multiculturalism, it's about supporting Canada's homegrown television and film production sectors. Well, the thing about that is that it's simply not going to work if Canadians themselves don't buy it to begin with. But that's already happening and a few silly media laws requiring the production of content almost nobody wants isn't really going to turn back the tide. I mean, Tim Hortons sold out. I'm pretty sure that the handwriting on the wall is up to at least 'מנא, מנא, תקל' by now...
Frozenlock 12y ago
" This is just about creating Canadian content for Canadians." How about American (not USian) making content for Americans? Or Terran, making content for Terrans? Why this divide? As someone who lives in Canada, why should I let someone else decides what I'm going to watch? Why should Québec and New Hampshire be so different? They are geographically close. It would make sense for them to tend to become more and more alike. If anything, those laws are artificially creating different cultures. It's not 'assimilation', it's living with other people. Do you think of yourself as 'assimilated' if you start playing the same games as one of your friends?