wellandboy

The assumption rather than a "bottom line" fact that any government should have a state run broadcaster is absurd. In the case of dictatorships in coup d'etat 101, one of the first order of business is to seize the broadcast media to control the message to the public. That's what dictatorships do. I can only conclude from your logic, that democracies like Canada should have a media vehicle such as the CBC to control the message to the Canadian public? Your further assertion that this role is to question what's going on is a contradiction from what you've previously said. Doesn't sound like Ms. Harrison is supporting the budgets cuts to me. In her role as CPB prez she cannot lobby Congress directly under U.S. law but has been extremely proactive in soliciting alternative sources of funding such as viewers and private foundations. My household has supported and will increase our support for WNED in Buffalo, as we are big fans and live 20 miles away. On this thread we've heard the arguments for and against CBC, but I'll tell you what the bottom line is when it comes to directly paying for CBC services. As the old farmer said- why buy the cow when you can the milk for free. It seems that some Canadians support CBC as long as those who don't support it, have to pay for it. I don't have a problem in paying my share for services to help my fellow Canadians, I just want the option whether or not I pay my share of $1 billion for the non-essential CBC.

So what? The CBC dedicates huge amounts of it's broadcasting time for two weeks on it's two networks to the Olympics. They can make that decision because they have so little to offer in the way of alternative programming the other 50 weeks of the year. Considering that amounts to 2 weeks each for the summer and winter Olympics every four years is hardly stellar programming. The CBC has some extremely good programing, but perhaps those who bash it out of hand never watch it to see? The operative word in your statement is "some". Programming has been covered extensively in this thread, demonstrating clear differences of opinion about CBC.

Further evidence was demonstrated during the election. In mid January the CBC broadcast the old Trudeau documentary and in the last week of the election dug out the Mulroney airbus piece fo the Fifth Estate. That in my view was a blatant attempt by the CBC to sway voters in critical points in an election campaign. That crossed the line from journalism to propaganda. Regardless of your political beliefs this type of action by the CBC should be very worrisome.

Valid points FTA, but I do think the good ultimately outweighs the bad on this. Most people have little or no real understanding (myself included) of our legal system. A broader exposure to the general public to the process is a good thing.

Shouldn't this be the Knights of Marx and Engel?

This argument makes no sense. Obviously your fear of the media in the free market that has to compete for your viewership is greater than a government controlled media outlet that has everything to gain by skewing the news to their partisan view of the world. The former creates wealth, the latter as in the case of the CBC creates power.

If we can't I'm sure the Americans, Aussies, Poles et al, will provide additional protection

Would you use a private clinic that offered subpar services? Probably not and neither would anyone else. So, to be profitable they have to offer superior services or they close. Something the private system has no need to do. In your last sentence, do you mean "public" instead of "private"?

Having sent my, at the time 80 year old mother, who was misdiagnosed four times for two broken vertabrae after a fall, to the the Mayo Clinic in Rochester Minnesota, I'm not confident enough in our public system. There has to be some blending to make up the catostrophic inefficiencies in our public system. Jack Layton went to the Shouldice Clinic for his hernia surgery, because it is highly regarded, efficient and paid for through OHIP. There are solid arguments to be made for publicly paid for private clinics in many areas, provided they meet standards and fall within the tariff structure of the public system. I find it irresponsible to close off discussion of these alternatives when they meet this criteria but most of all treat people in a timely fashion. This idealogical struggle we continue to go through solves little as minute by minute, day by day thousands of Canadians lives are placed at risk. This is a huge problem that has to be measured by results.

So what? The CBC dedicates huge amounts of it's broadcasting time for two weeks on it's two networks to the Olympics. They can make that decision because they have so little to offer in the way of alternative programming the other 50 weeks of the year. Considering that amounts to 2 weeks each for the summer and winter Olympics every four years is hardly stellar programming. CBC Radio 1 advertised it would broadcast the Canadian men's and women's hockey games and lo and behold, CBC Toronto chose to instead broadcast their regular drivel. Hardly, responsive to what Canadians might actually want to listen to. Oh and by the way, it was CTV that broadcast the Olympics for many years back in the 60's and 70's. Things ironically changed when Montreal got the ill fated Olympics in '76. Wonder why?

The fear of change, the fear of openness and transparency in government coming from the progressive side. Ah the irony.

The CRTC has to no moral or ethical right to keep this money from Canadians by using it for any other purpose other than return it by whatever means necessary to it's rightful owners. The arrogance of these people is unbounded.

Compared to the Liberals, whose devistatingly brilliant tactics yielded no results whatsoever.

Canadian Steve Smith aka Red Green received an Order of Canada today from GG Jean in Ottawa. He's the guy that was too controversial for the CBC. After his huge success on PBS in the United States, CBC relented after generous applications of duct tape on their egos, signed the Red Green Show to a multi year deal. My source by the way is moi in a sincere and hilarious conversation with Red or I mean Steve several years ago. The good old CBC nearly missed the boat again in promoting and recognizing Canadian talent.

You are so right, firstly a lot of the cost overrun was created by people who diliberately freeped the site to create chaos. How do we know that this was not done in large part by the American gun lobby. Huh ! How in ell can you 'freep' the gun registry site, whatever that means. I hear rumours that say the true cost of the gun registry is up to $4 Billion, if so, this is good news, should help kill it and keep the liberal heads down for a while . What's $4 billion amongst friends.

So now we know who really controlled Harper. A lot of Mulroney and some of Harris's main men are surfacing. All I can say is the Canadians are pretty nieve. Yeah and why Harper asked the most qualified man for the job, David Emerson to stay on in International Trade.

Are you talking about the same news organization that has failed to break any major investigative news stories in the last 12 years, like HRDC, Gun Registry and the scandal of scandals, Adscam under the Liberals. Maybe if you watched something other than CBC and read a cross section of papers, you would actually see how flawed your arguments are. The CBC has a tradition of sucking up to the powers that be; which is why this discussion is taking place.

THe BBC does not need to deal with people whining about every cent of funding they get. They also have a core market 4-5 times the size of english canada and only deal with a tiny geographic area. Actually as far as funding goes, the BBC faces ridicule constantly and yes, you make some valid cases regarding market size, which I construe as meaning the BBC is able to achieve economies of scale that the CBC is otherwise unable to do. The point I was attempting to make is the value received for the money we spend. Nobody can seem to make that case other than the blind acceptance that CBC is sacrosact, that there is little or no bias in it's news division and it's actually accountable. It is not truly representative of Canadians and as such can not and should not be given the unbridled financial support it receives.

The best network in the world. You're kidding right? Do a comparison with what BBC does with their funding: Radio- 5 international, 5 domestic channels. TV- 8 channels plus other sundry international marketing channels ie). BBC Canada. CBC is pathetic and inefficient by comparison. A good comparison for the CBC is the Long Gun Registry. While there is some merit to both's existence, the price paid is far too high for the benefits achieved under each's current funding structure.

FTA, I understand your frustration, but the people who want the gun registry don't want people to have guns plain and simple. They don't like hunting but mainly don't like hunters. It is viewed as a cruel and primitive sport , that doesn't fit within their view of the world. I should point out that I'm not a hunter but a serious angler and hear these arguments all the time. This is the same Federal government that wanted to ban all lead sinkers for fishing based little or no science. When challenged by groups like the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters, they couldn't and haven't provided any evidence in two years. This issue should die, thankfully. The good story about registering a shotgun came from a friend of mine. When the paperwork came back as incomplete, he spent hours calling the firearms Centre. When he finally got through he was told his Winchester shotgun didn't exist because it wasn't in their database. Pictoral evidence ,a notarized submission by the OPP and six months of silliness passed before he finally got things resolved. There are thousand of these stories.

You are so right, firstly a lot of the cost overrun was created by people who diliberately freeped the site to create chaos. How do we know that this was not done in large part by the American gun lobby. This was ill-planned and ill-conceived from the get go. Placing the obscene cost overruns on law abiding citizens is as insulting as it is incorrect. The responsibility for this scandal and it is a scandal, must be placed wholly upon the Federal Government.

The day that Canada becomes what you've described is the day that I'll be on the streets. The Muslim community needs to give their heads a collective shake. This entire furor is about tradition and has nothing to do with the Qu'ran., just like all the other fine oppressive Muslim traditions that are exceedingly cruel towards women, for instance. This is just more attempted oppression from the morally indignant.

I have a copy of the platform. Nowhere does it have any mention of your patriarchal fiction. The rest is hearsay form dubious sources.

No you simply insist on a solution that will result in the abolishment of the CBC. The market dynamics in the US are different therefore you cannot apply a US model here no matter how much you would like to. So what's the answer do nothing, say nothing, accept the status quo. I simply pointed out a different model on which to examine a publicly funded broadcaster based on the rush by others to make make their arguments reflective of the US. This is a Canadian situation or problem depending on which way you look at it, that requires a Canadian solution. If we want to make comparisons we can examine the BBC. Big direct funding, license fees but excellent results. Is there an argument in the other direction towards a BBC model?

There is no declaration in the Qur'an about pictoral depictions of the Prophet. This is part of Abrahamic tradition that is similar to orthodox Jews not depicting Yahweh. This is the part of Muslim argument I have a problem with. I would certainly be more sympathetic if this were part of the Qur'an. Like women wearing the Hijab and the blatant discrimination of women in the Muslim world, traditions fall into this nebulus world between the actual written religious laws and frankly midieval social norms. Certainly these individuals have the right to protest, but, the protesters must be honest about what they are protesting about.