Time to defund the CBC

[segnosaur]

"You're" not paying him anything. The 'separatists' that vote for Duceppe and his acolytes also work and pay their taxes to the Canadian government. The day you kick them out of the country or refuse their fiscal contribution will the be day you'll have the legitimacy to complain about Duceppe's salary as a MP.

Minor little point....

You are right in that Duceppe's salary as an MP came largely from Quebec taxpayers. However, overall, Quebec is a have-not province. They receive more from the federal government (in equalization payments, EI insurance, etc.) than they pay. As such, his salary as an MP WAS partly paid for by those outside the province.

Of course, I also believe that MPs should have the right to hold any opinion they want on Quebec separation, even if that opinion is idiotic.

Edited August 19, 2011 by segnosaur

[Black Dog]

Yes, because for some reason, no party has the political will to actually remove the subsidy and/or privatize the CBC.

Why defund (read: shut down) or privatize the CBC? What's the argument against public broadcasting?

Edited August 19, 2011 by Black Dog

[segnosaur]

Why defund (read: shut down) or privatize the CBC? What's the argument against public broadcasting?

Because at this point in time it is simply not necessary. There are a multitude of private media outlets that an individual can use to get their information and entertainment, even in remote areas of the country. I see no need, as a taxpayer, to fund the news/entertainment choices of people who choose to use the CBC.

[Black Dog]

Because at this point in time it is simply not necessary. There are a multitude of private media outlets that an individual can use to get their information and entertainment, even in remote areas of the country. I see no need, as a taxpayer, to fund the news/entertainment choices of people who choose to use the CBC.

That's not the purpose of the CBC.

[segnosaur]

Because at this point in time it is simply not necessary. There are a multitude of private media outlets that an individual can use to get their information and entertainment, even in remote areas of the country. I see no need, as a taxpayer, to fund the news/entertainment choices of people who choose to use the CBC.

That's not the purpose of the CBC.

That may not be the stated mandate of the CBC, but it is a purpose.

Another poster has already posted a copy of the mandate. (You can see it here: http://www.cbc.radio-canada.ca/about/mandate.shtml). A point by point analysis:

...be predominantly and distinctively Canadian, reflect Canada and its regions to national and regional audiences, while serving the special needs of those regions,

Yes it has a high degree of Canadian content. But it also tends to have very low ratings. Few are watching.

Its a part of the mandate which is, for the most part irrelevant.

...actively contribute to the flow and exchange of cultural expression,

And such things are done through private media as well. Heck, CFMT (a private Ontario broadcaster) does a better job at contributing to cultural expression than the CBC does.

...be in English and in French, reflecting the different needs and circumstances of each official language community, including the particular needs and circumstances of English and French linguistic minorities...

...strive to be of equivalent quality in English and French,

Ummm... OK, so they're in English and French. That's an operating practice, not a purpose.

...contribute to shared national consciousness and identity,

If their ratings are low, then few people are watching them. As such, they contribute little to 'national identity'.

...be made available throughout Canada by the most appropriate and efficient means and as resources become available for the purpose

Again, other private media sources are available throughout Canada.

Their claim of 'efficient means' is dubious, since private sources can typically do a much better job at targeting their content at those who have an interest.

...reflect the multicultural and multiracial nature of Canada."

Again, there are private sources for those interested in other cultures, including private broadcasters (such as CFMT), foreign language newspapers, the internet, etc.

[Saipan]

Why defund (read: shut down) or privatize the CBC? What's the argument against public broadcasting?

Because many people don't want to pay for liberal mouthpiece.

[Black Dog]

Because many people don't want to pay for liberal mouthpiece.

There's a lot of shit "many" people don't want to pay for; that doesn't make it a good policy rationale.

Now would probably be a good time to mention that the CBC is the worst funded public broadcaster in the western world. It's costs to the taxpayer? About $75 a year.

Edited August 19, 2011 by Black Dog

[segnosaur]

There's a lot of shit "many" people don't want to pay for;

Yup there is...

But the government making a bad spending decision in one area doesn't mean that we should ignore all areas where government is spending money foolishly.

that doesn't make it a good policy rationale.

Nope, what makes eliminating government subsidies of the CBC a good rationale it simply doesn't need to be spending that money, regardless of whether there are other areas of government waste.

Edited to Add...

Now would probably be a good time to mention that the CBC is the worst funded public broadcaster in the western world. It's costs to the taxpayer? About $75 a year.

Ummm, so?

That's $75 (I assume its per taxpayer) out of my pocket to subsidize a radio station I never listen to, and a television station I think I've watched 3 times in the past year.

Instead of that $75 being taken from my pocket to subsidize the CBC, I could have used it to go to the movies 7 times (thus providing jobs to the ushers at the local movie theater). I could have gone to several concerts featuring local musical talents. I could have gone out to dinner at least 3 times, providing jobs to my local restaurant industry.

The fact that other countries take more money from the average taxpayer to subsidize their national broadcaster does not subsidize our subsidies to the CBC, any more than the fact that Pol Pot's genocide doesn't justify me beating up old ladies on the street corner. Wrong is wrong.

Edited August 19, 2011 by segnosaur

[Black Dog]

That may not be the stated mandate of the CBC, but it is a purpose.

Another poster has already posted a copy of the mandate. (You can see it here: http://www.cbc.radio-canada.ca/about/mandate.shtml). A point by point analysis:

...be predominantly and distinctively Canadian, reflect Canada and its regions to national and regional audiences, while serving the special needs of those regions,

Yes it has a high degree of Canadian content. But it also tends to have very low ratings. Few are watching.

Funny, I don't see anything about popularity in its mandate.

...actively contribute to the flow and exchange of cultural expression,

And such things are done through private media as well. Heck, CFMT (a private Ontario broadcaster) does a better job at contributing to cultural expression than the CBC does.

And how do you measure that? From what I can see, CFMT is primarily syndicated dreck like Two and Half Men and ethnic programming.

...contribute to shared national consciousness and identity,

If their ratings are low, then few people are watching them. As such, they contribute little to 'national identity'.

Yet pols continue to show a healthy majority of Canadians would rather keep the CBC. Also, teh CBc is more than just the TV network you know.

...be made available throughout Canada by the most appropriate and efficient means and as resources become available for the purpose

Again, other private media sources are available throughout Canada.

Their claim of 'efficient means' is dubious, since private sources can typically do a much better job at targeting their content at those who have an interest.

Yup. "So You Think You Can Dance" for example.

...reflect the multicultural and multiracial nature of Canada."

Again, there are private sources for those interested in other cultures, including private broadcasters (such as CFMT), foreign language newspapers, the internet, etc.

You're misreading this one completely. It's not about serving ethnic communities.

Edited August 19, 2011 by Black Dog

[Black Dog]

Yup there is...

But the government making a bad spending decision in one area doesn't mean that we should ignore all areas where government is spending money foolishly.

Nope, what makes eliminating government subsidies of the CBC a good rationale it simply doesn't need to be spending that money, regardless of whether there are other areas of government waste.

Since don't believe in public broadcasting period, there's not much point in having a discussion about it, is there?

Personally I believe it's important to have non-commercial public alternatives. The CBC IMO, should be strengthened and rededicated to promoting Canadian culture and the arts instead of joining the cultural race to the bottom.

Edited August 19, 2011 by Black Dog

[segnosaur]

That may not be the stated mandate of the CBC, but it is a purpose.

Another poster has already posted a copy of the mandate. (You can see it here: http://www.cbc.radio...mandate.shtml). A point by point analysis:

...be predominantly and distinctively Canadian, reflect Canada and its regions to national and regional audiences, while serving the special needs of those regions,

Yes it has a high degree of Canadian content. But it also tends to have very low ratings. Few are watching.

Funny, I don't see anything about popularity in its mandate.

No, but if a station is not popular/has few viewers, then its not really reflecting Canada. The CBC may be presenting what it thinks Canadians want/should be, but its not "reflecting Canada".

..actively contribute to the flow and exchange of cultural expression,

And such things are done through private media as well. Heck, CFMT (a private Ontario broadcaster) does a better job at contributing to cultural expression than the CBC does.

And how do you measure that? From what I can see, CFMT is primarily syndicated dreck like Two and Half Men and ethnic programming.

And CBC television shows American shows like Ghost Whisperer and Wheel of Fortune. Not exactly a step up.

And while CFMT shows syndicated U.S. programs, they also have blocks of programming dedicated to various ethnic groups, often in their native languages. (See: http://www.omnitv.ca/ontario/tv/)

...contribute to shared national consciousness and identity,

If their ratings are low, then few people are watching them. As such, they contribute little to 'national identity'.

Yet pols continue to show a healthy majority of Canadians would rather keep the CBC.

Yes they do... but the fact that "Canadians want funding of the CBC" does not mean its actually contributing to national identity.

Oh, and by the way, the fact that a majority want funding to continue does not necessarily mean that they are right. There have been a wide range of areas where the minority has expressed an opinion which has spread to become the dominant one over time.

Also, teh CBc is more than just the TV network you know.

Yup, its also a cable news station (which of course competes with private news networks), radio stations (which compete with private broadcasters who don't get the same subsidies), web sites, heck, even costume makers.

All of which can be done by the private sector.

...be made available throughout Canada by the most appropriate and efficient means and as resources become available for the purpose

Again, other private media sources are available throughout Canada.

Their claim of 'efficient means' is dubious, since private sources can typically do a much better job at targeting their content at those who have an interest.

Yup. "So You Think You Can Dance" for example.

If people want to watch dreck like "So you think you can dance" on CTV they should have the right. It does not affect me. On the other hand, I do not think I should be forced to subsidize other people viewing Wheel of Fortune on CBC, because that does affect me... it requires money to be taken from my pocket.

...reflect the multicultural and multiracial nature of Canada."

Again, there are private sources for those interested in other cultures, including private broadcasters (such as CFMT), foreign language newspapers, the internet, etc.

You're misreading this one completely. It's not about serving ethnic communities.

No, not really misreading it. Providing news/entertainment from other cultures is reflecting the multicultural nature of Canada.

[segnosaur]

Since don't believe in public broadcasting period, there's not much point in having a discussion about it, is there?

In the past I have had my opinions changed, when a compelling argument has been provided to do so.

You, on the other hand, have not provided any sort of argument that is convincing in the very least to change my viewpoint.

Personally I believe it's important to have non-commercial public alternatives.

Good for you. Except you've never really pointed to any sort of reason to justify your position, or indicate why you should be taking money out of my pocket to support your entertainment preferences.

The CBC IMO, should be strengthened and rededicated to promoting Canadian culture...

And once again... CBC ratings are usually low. If few people are watching/listening to something, then it isn't really indicative of "Canadian Culture". Its what the CBC thinks/wants Canadian culture to be, which is something different.

... and the arts instead of joining the cultural race to the bottom.

And that is a value judgement which does nothing more than indicate a certain amount of snobishness.

I have never watched American Idol. I think "So you can Dance" is an idiotic concept. I hope the cast of Jersey Shore gets struck by Flesh Eating Disease. But it is not my place to decide (with other people's money) whether any of those shows should be watched.

If its a 'quality' Canadian show or other entertainment product, it will attract viewers. This should allow it to survive via ad revenue. If people don't care enough to support it (regardless of how "culturally lofty" it is, then its not really reflective of Canadian society and I see no reason to see my tax money taken so that the minority of people who do have an interest can watch/listen to what they like for free.

[capricorn]

It's right in your face:

I don't equate that to be remotely related to political commentary. If that's what you read into it, fair enough.

Of course if the CBC stuck to purely cultural matters, you and yours would whinge about that as well.

My view of a public broadcaster in a country such as Canada is fairly simple. It is to project the image of a big, united country and strives to bring citizens together in a common purpose. I suspect that the CBC started off that way but veered from that purpose a long time ago.

Prove it.

Most people would agree that there are savings to be made if the federal workforce is reduced. The Liberals proved in the 90s with their program review.

[Saipan]

There's a lot of shit "many" people don't want to pay for

Long gun registration comes to mind. "multiculturalism" and "art" are also in that category. Glad we agree on something.

It's costs to the taxpayer? About $75 a year.

Would you pay for national conservative broadcater if we did away with CBC?

[Shwa]

Would you pay for national conservative broadcater if we did away with CBC?

Would you?

[Sandy MacNab]

...

Now would probably be a good time to mention that the CBC is THE worst, funded public broadcaster in the western world. It's costs to the taxpayer? About $75 a year.

That's what you are being told, fer crissake! They have to get better or lose their funding.

[Sandy MacNab]

Would you?

Possibly, but I wouldn't have it funded by tax money. I'd contribute personally unlike the Liberals and other socialists who think the world owes 'em a living.

[Shwa]

Possibly, but I wouldn't have it funded by tax money. I'd contribute personally unlike the Liberals and other socialists who think the world owes 'em a living.

Then we agree, in a sense. You would agree to personally fund a public broadcaster and I agree that it is OK for my taxes to go, in part, to the CBC.

[scribblet]

Sun TV's parent company receives some very generous subsidies from the Canadian taxpayer via the Canada Media Fund and grants from Canadian Heritage, as well as tax breaks. So let's defund the CBC, right after we defund all the "private" broadcasters who so eagerly suckle at the public teat.

Do you have a source or a link for that - thanks

[Saipan]

Would you?

Wrong answer.

[Shwa]

Wrong answer.

Dodger.

[Saipan]

Dodger.

Still wrong answer.

Dodging?

[Shwa]

Still wrong answer.

Dodging?

Still dodging eh Saipan? Can't answer your own question?

[Saipan]

Still dodging eh Saipan? Can't answer your own question?

Do you ask question you have answers for?

[Shwa]

Do you ask question you have answers for?

Do you try to hide behind rhetorical questions?