Time to defund the CBC

[Zachary Young]

So in your opinion employees of the state monopoly on postal service (Canada Post) are not part of the government? How about a judge? He's not part of the government? A police officer?

[bloodyminded]

BM are you claiming that the CBC has no agenda and is truly an unbiased news source? I'd sorta need evidence to support that theory.

I don't imagine such a thing as an "unbiased news source" is possible within the human realm. So, no, not at all.

I'm just a messageboarder I really don't want to do research to prove my thesis here. Unless I perhaps get given a gumint grant.

Sure, and that's perfectly understandable. I don't blame anyone for that.

But when claims are made, asking for evidence is not wrong; it's not unreasonable.

And if one makes claims, but can't or won't back them up, then the claim remains bland and useless. That's ok too. But it is what it is.

[bloodyminded]

There's definitely a certain conspiratorial tone to all the frothing - usually coming from occupants of the pretty far right, libertarian types - about the CBC being a mouthpiece of The Government. And, like a lot of conspiracy theorists who're driven by emotion rather than fact-based logic, they end up throwing out such wild, unsupported claims that they end up contradicting themselves. They shout: "The CBC is institutionally lefty, endlessly broadcasting praises, subtle and overt, for Trudeau and multiculturalism!" and, at the same time, "the CBC is the propaganda outlet of The Government!" Yet, putting aside the fact that the government doesn't control the CBC beyond appointing its president, the party that presently forms the government is the Conservative Party of Canada. Is the Conservative Cabinet really commanding the CBC to spout ceaseless adulation for a former leader of the Liberal Party and his policies? What do the conspiracists think is Harper's reasoning for that?

Those are great points. If "the Government" is a bunch of lefties that hate cosnervatives and lionize Trudeau, then what....ah jeez; I cannot maintain this bizarre line of thinking. (That's to my credit, I believe! )

Edited September 16, 2011 by bloodyminded

[WWWTT]

I've read many of the comments on this thread and here is a summary in my opinion(comments against CBC):

The CBC is biased because-pro liberal and/or NDP and anti conservative.

Because they are pro liberal and/or NDP and anti conservative they are not entitled to tax payers dollars!

I have seen much criticism and hard questions directed to the NDP and liberals,but are they the government of Canada?

So why should they have to receive an amount of hard line questioning reserved for the governing party?

The CBC is doing what proper journalism dictates.Asking serious hard questions to those who are in power.But because the conservatives are in power this is now somehow being biased.Give me a freekin break!

Its actually refreshing watching tv that doesn't bend its back over backwards to kiss the ass of the conservative party like Sun tv or CTV!

Actually the CRTC should revoke the broadcasting license from Sun tv and CTV for being biased- too pro conservative!

If the CBC was biased towards the NDP and liberals it actually would be justified since more people voted for them!

WWWTT

[g_bambino]

So in your opinion employees of the state monopoly on postal service (Canada Post) are not part of the government? How about a judge? He's not part of the government? A police officer?

It's not my opinion. Canada Post and CBC employees are not part of the government, in any sense of the word; they are part of a commercial business and have no part in governing the country. Judges and police officers, on the other hand, are not parts of the government (the Queen-in-Council), but may be seen as parts of the larger apparatus of governance, as agents of the Crown; judges rule in cases on the Queen's behalf and police maintain the Queen's peace.

For a little more clarity:

Established to carry out regulatory, advisory, administrative, financial or other services or to provide goods and services, crown corporations generally enjoy greater freedom from direct political control than government departments. Although the 1951 federal Financial Administration Act (FAA) declared that crown corporations are "ultimately accountable, through a minister, to Parliament, for the conduct of (their) affairs," they are not subject to budgetary systems or direct control of a minister in the same way as government departments...

In fact, the relationships between governments and crown corporations, like most political relationships, are sometimes fractious and often characterized by bargaining, negotiations, and compromise.

The Canadian Encycopedia: Crown Corporation

[PIK]

If the govermnet ran the CBC it would have no trouble getting the paper work on how they spend thier money or even how much they pay mansbridge, but no ,they have to take them to court to get that info, and yes the CBC is very pro liberal. And as for sun tv, they go after the con goverment on alot of things. And why libs hate the sun ,because they will go after stories that the CBC would'nt dare touch.

[bloodyminded]

And as for sun tv, they go after the con goverment on alot of things.

Such as?

[Bob]

Yeah, really.

Feel free to go ahead and explain to us the mechanisms behind this "accountability" from the CBC to Parliament.

Edited September 16, 2011 by Bob

[guyser]

Such as?

Anything they can hype, blow out of proportion or entirely obfuscate on.

The CBC does items that relate to their viewers + a whole lot more.

If they dont cover it is because they see no viewers wanting to cover it or it lack newsworthiness.

Sun TV is not the opposite of CBC, it is on another plane.

What I find funny these days is the co,mplete focus of SNN and Sun newspapers against the CBC.

BTW, did SNN cover the increase in funding that Harper gave CBC ?Anyone of the 9 viewers able to answer?

Edited September 16, 2011 by guyser

[fellowtraveller]

The CBC does items that relate to their viewers + a whole lot more.

So what? Every other entertainment provider/media outlet on the planet relates to their viewers. In fact. every private sector outlet does it better because they have accountability for what they do that is not required of a publicly funded broadcaster. CTV, as just one of many examples, cannot bluster behind the fatuous and pompous baloney of 'national institution'. Nobdoy pays them for anything but meeting the needs of their constiuents, paying constituents at that.What specifically does CBC do that makes it worth $1 billion per annum in taxpayer dollars?

Sun TV is not the opposite of CBC, it is on another plane.

In reality, the only substantive difference between these two entertainment/information sources is the source of their funding.

[Zachary Young]

Look - if you people like CBC, then that's fine. Once we privatize it you can pay them for the service. But why should you be able to steal money from me in order to support programming that you enjoy and I don't watch? That's not fair at all. Why are you trying to get stuff for free? Why don't you stop mooching off other people and pay for the stuff you want, and let us pay for the stuff we want, instead of trying to use the government to force us to subsidize stuff that you want? If you wanted groceries would you go out and point a gun at your neighbour and say 'give me $5 so I can buy some watermelon'?

[g_bambino]

Feel free to go ahead and explain to us the mechanisms behind this "accountability" from the CBC to Parliament.

I already have; about three times now. Again: The CBC, as a Crown corporation, is established and its mandate set out by an act of parliament, its budget is decided and passed by parliament, and it is accountable to parliament via the Minister of Canadian Heritage. If you don't hear enough about the CBC in parliament, it is not because the CBC isn't ultimately the responsibility of parliament, it's because no MPs care to bring it up (or, at least, not very often).

[guyser]

So what? Every other entertainment provider/media outlet on the planet relates to their viewers.

My post was in reply to "Sun tackles issues the CBC wouldnt dare.

No more no less.

In fact. every private sector outlet does it better because they have accountability for what they do that is not required of a publicly funded broadcaster.

According to the numbers they do not do it better. All but CTV lags behind.

CTV, as just one of many examples, cannot bluster behind the fatuous and pompous baloney of 'national institution'. Nobdoy pays them for anything but....

....anything but paying the bill themselves.

CTV lines up for the hand outs just the same as the rest of them.

[g_bambino]

But why should you be able to steal money from me in order to support programming that you enjoy and I don't watch?

"Steal" money from you? Conversely, why are you able to steal money from me in order to support the defence of your area of the country, where I don't live?

This "what the Hell's in it for me?" attitude is narrow and highly selfish.

[guyser]

Look - if you people like CBC, then that's fine. Once we privatize it you can pay them for the service. But why should you be able to steal money from me in order to support programming that you enjoy and I don't watch? That's not fair at all. Why are you trying to get stuff for free? Why don't you stop mooching off other people and pay for the stuff you want, and let us pay for the stuff we want, instead of trying to use the government to force us to subsidize stuff that you want? If you wanted groceries would you go out and point a gun at your neighbour and say 'give me $5 so I can buy some watermelon'?

Simpleton reasoning.

Why do you want to steal money from me in order to teach your kids ?

Stop mooching off other people and pay for it yourself instead of of trying to get the govt to to force us to pay.

I and the rest of us have to pay the teachers salary since youre so lazy to do it yourself.

Yea, didnt think it through huh?

[g_bambino]

CTV lines up for the hand outs just the same as the rest of them.

That is another fact that seems to get intentionally buried so that it can be ignored. Private broadcasters (including SUNTV) may not receive tax funds in as direct a manner as the CBC, or as much, but they are subsidised, nonetheless. I guess admitting that kind of undermines the whole free-enterprise dogma of those on the uber-right who have a pathalogical need to attack the CBC for any reason, whether imagined or not.

[Zachary Young]

I don't have any children, and I agree with your point. People that have kids should pay for their own damn schooling, not force me to pay for it. Actually the public school system is terrible. That's what happens when you have a government monopoly. We are still using the same outdated system the Prussians invented! If we had a free market in schools you would see dynamic education. Schools would innovate in an effort to attract customers. Instead of having a centralized model where every student in the entire province is taught the same manner teachers and parents would have real input and we would try dozens or hundreds of different models and find what works best. The current education system is a joke - we should privatize it fully immediately.

[WWWTT]

Here is another summary of another observation I have from people making comments on this thread:

Anti CBC=pro conservative

Pro CBC=pro lib,NDP

I guess it is possible there may be some who are pro conservative that are also pro CBC but if there is anyone here who disagrees with this assesment please clarify,thnx.

Aswell there is a myth here that is being implied that the private sector broadcasters in Canada are 100% free or independant of/from government grants or tax shelters which equate to a tax payer hand out.

Next time you watch a program that has some Canadian content(regardless of what station you are watching the program on) or that has bein filmed in Canada or has some connection to Canada(studios,producers,ACTRA)Watch the credits roll at the end and you may catch a glimpse of a grant provided from the government of Canada or a Canadian province.

In light of this fact I have come to the conclusion that I have stated at the begining of my comment!

WWWTT

[Zachary Young]

I am anti-CBC, anti-conservative, anti-liberal and anti-ndp. Am pro liberty & freedom.

[g_bambino]

I am anti-CBC, anti-conservative, anti-liberal and anti-ndp. Am pro liberty & freedom.

We have an anarchist amongst us.

[g_bambino]

Here is another summary of another observation I have from people making comments on this thread:

Anti CBC=pro conservative

Pro CBC=pro lib,NDP

I guess it is possible there may be some who are pro conservative that are also pro CBC but if there is anyone here who disagrees with this assesment please clarify,thnx.

I don't think it's terribly helpful to categorise people so rigidly. Putting aside the political labels, the matter is nuanced enough that one can be in favour of keeping the CBC while still harshly criticising it. Keeping it as is or dismantling it completely are not the only two options (just as people can't be neatly divided into left and right).

[WWWTT]

I don't think it's terribly helpful to categorise people so rigidly. Putting aside the political labels, the matter is nuanced enough that one can be in favour of keeping the CBC while still harshly criticising it. Keeping it as is or dismantling it completely are not the only two options (just as people can't be neatly divided into left and right).

I believe that this is an observation that I have made.

I also believe it to be a somewhat acurate one aswell(Zachary Young has voiced where he stands).

I have never claimed that the CBC was free of criticism nor are they immune from such.

The comments I have bein making in this thread are related to this thread(time to defund the CBC)

Are you suggesting that I am doing something wrong by not helping the discussion get "off topic"?

WWWTT

[segnosaur]

But why should you be able to steal money from me in order to support programming that you enjoy and I don't watch?

"Steal" money from you? Conversely, why are you able to steal money from me in order to support the defence of your area of the country, where I don't live?

Because, as with many other government services (defense, roads, heath care, etc.) you also benefit from money that he (and everyone else) have paid in. Everyone pays, everyone benefits (or should I say almost everyone, just in case someone tries to mention some hobo living in the back woods or something.) Yeah, your tax money is going to pay for defending his area of the country (and possibly for roads, etc.), but his taxes, as well as other people's, is going to pay for your defense/roads/etc.

On the other hand, the CBC has no such "universal" benefit. If you are not using the CBC for its television or radio services, you are using private companies for the same thing, which are (for the most part) NOT subsidized (or may have minimal government support, but nowhere near that of the CBC.)

This "what the Hell's in it for me?" attitude is narrow and highly selfish.

Yet the "what's in it for me" attitude seems to be the basis that many CBC supporters have. "What's in it" for them is content they like, even if the rest of us don't.

So, does your complaint of the "whats in it for me" extend to all areas of government spending? Should we stop complaining about things like the Harper government possibly misspending on the G8/G20 summit, or Chretien misspending on the HRDC and ad-scam scandal? What about when the government supported the creation of a "dumb blond" joke book? After all, someone eventually benefited from those (even if most tax payers didn't.) So complaining about them is still arguing "what's in it for me".

Edited September 17, 2011 by segnosaur

[segnosaur]

I am anti-CBC, anti-conservative, anti-liberal and anti-ndp. Am pro liberty & freedom.

We have an anarchist amongst us.

Not necessarily. He could be a libertarian.

An anarchist wants the elimination of all government.

A libertarian still believes in the existence of a central government, but that its functions should consist only of those necessary to maintain peace and order (e.g. defense, policing/court system.) A libertarian will reject the left wing economic policies (higher taxes, more social spending) of the NDP, but will also reject the right wing social policies (e.g. anti-drug policies) of the conservatives.

[segnosaur]

why should you be able to steal money from me in order to support programming that you enjoy and I don't watch?

Simpleton reasoning.

Why do you want to steal money from me in order to teach your kids ?

There are a few reasons:

- While your tax dollars may go to educate his kids, its also true that someone else's tax dollars went into your education. So there is no "direct" payment (person X pays for education Y), but its a system where everyone pays and everyone benefits.

- Society as a whole benefits from an educated work force. Your money money may go to teach other kids, but at least some of those kids will become the doctors, engineers, businessmen, and scientists that help keep our country successful. On the other hand, you listing to CBC radio or watching CBC television does not really provide any benefit for anyone else.

- Its generally assumed that a basic education is a "right" of every person. As such, the government does have an obligation to support it. There is no such "right" to entertainment or other material as provided by CBC. (Note that I am using the word "right" in a very broad sense here.)

Yea, didnt think it through huh?

Not sure if the previous poster did, but many of us HAVE thought it through.