Majority backs public funding for CBC, poll finds

wyly · November 15, 2011

CKUA can't make it on their own.... they are seeking funding from the city (i.e. taxpayers).

CKUA dials in on city funds to help pay for relocation

i doubt I'm any different than most people who don't any attention to what station we listen let alone their name (ckau)...it's all preset or seek and scan, find the music you like and change the station when you don't like it, i couldn't identify a single station on the radio and if one went bust I could care less, another will take it's place...

cybercoma · November 15, 2011

Oh, you edited that just in time! I was going to make a joke about static shocks and wool socks.

You noticed that, eh? haha :lol:

fellowtraveller · November 15, 2011

However, the CBC is regionally focused with a national mandate. No provincial station could do that very well.

That is not the point.

What is the point is the funding model for CKUA, which by the way is the oldest public broadcaster in Canada.

There is no reason CBC could not survive and thrive using that model. Well, no reason other than the utter selfishness of the supporters who insist that others pay for their entertainment.

With CKUA, listeners fund their entertainment through donations.

CKUA can't make it on their own.... they are seeking funding from the city (i.e. taxpayers).

Yes, they often go on fundraising drives to fund their operations. The city or any other potential donor is under no obligation to fund any of it, unlike my obligation to fund CBC whether I like their brand of song and dance or not.

ckua, what a fantasy...lucky if 1% of albertans have even heard of it or even care...

Once again, you demonstrate your utter ignorance of the place where you reside.

CKUA is an odd duck for lefties like you........It is funded directly by the same community that does not pay directly for the CBC. CKUA is a kick in the groin philosophically for CBC lovers.....because it is a healthy, interesting object lesson in how to successfully run public radio. At the same time, it caters heavily to the arts community that also would nominally support CBC.....

Note that BBM no longer publishes stats on CKUA, I wonder why.

Shwa · November 16, 2011

An ugly campaign against the CBC

CBC President Hubert Lacroix is right to go as far as possible in making information about the corporation public. After all, the CBC is getting $1.1 billion in taxpayers’ money this year, and we have a right to know it’s being well spent. At the same time, it’s vital that the CBC keep its political independence from government and have a right to keep key information from its commercial competitors. That’s why the Broadcasting Act gives the CBC exemptions from federal information and privacy legislation related to its journalistic, creative and programming activities.
The CBC may have interpreted those exemptions too broadly – certainly Information Commissioner Suzanne Legault thinks so. But make no mistake about what’s driving this increasingly loud drum-beat against the CBC. Conservatives are convinced the network doesn’t give them a fair shake (neither did the Liberals in their day). And Quebecor Media Inc., one of the CBC’s biggest private competitors, is on a shrill crusade against what it labels the “state broadcaster.”

That label itself is a transparent and ridiculous attempt to equate the CBC with the likes of North Korean television or Libyan radio under Gadhafi. If it made any sense at all, it would imply that the CBC is a pliant tool of government – exactly the opposite of the complaint by right-wing Tories and columnists in the Quebecor papers and on Sun TV. In fact, it’s just a general slur against the CBC and public broadcasting in general.

There is a tinge of irony here that those Con MP's would side themselves with a media giant in a province they got wiped out in. No wonder they want to side with Quebecor so badly, because their name is mud in Quebec. Fortunately, Quebecor, in their general shrill slurring speech, appears to be implicating other large media conglomerates in their CBC witch hunt. First the Canadian Press, then the Globe and Mail, and now the Star.

Pierre Karl Péladeau, Quebecor’s chief executive, has gone further. According to him, the CBC has effectively bought off every other media company by giving them advertising, doing deals with them, or allowing their journalists to freelance on its airwaves. Apparently when the Star’s Chantal Hébert appears on the At Issue panel with Peter Mansbridge, the CBC (according to Péladeau) has bought the silence of the Star. The argument would be laughable if wasn’t also insulting. Coming from a top media executive like Péladeau, who knows better, it’s also contemptible.

Shwa · November 16, 2011

That is not the point.

No, it is the whole point. A regionally focused broadcaster with a national mandate. Like Heritage Canada, Sports Canada or any other government funded cultural department. Fishies too, if you really want to get technical.

What is the point is the funding model for CKUA, which by the way is the oldest public broadcaster in Canada.

Then they should go national and prove their funding model with work. Or, as I have already pointed out, TVOntario also exists.

There is no reason CBC could not survive and thrive using that model.

As opposed to the so-smooth sailing CKUA has had over the past 15 years, yes?

Well, no reason other than the utter selfishness of the supporters who insist that others pay for their entertainment.

Puh-lease, go talk to all those supporters of Lower Fort Garry, Banff or Jasper National Parks about all that "entertainment" that is paid for by the vast majority of people who live east of Winterpeg.

With CKUA, listeners fund their entertainment through donations.

Good for them. Kudos!

Yes, they often go on fundraising drives to fund their operations. The city or any other potential donor is under no obligation to fund any of it, unlike my obligation to fund CBC whether I like their brand of song and dance or not.

Your "obligation" to fund the CBC is a complete red-herring. The only "obligation" you have is to pay your taxes. Once that happens, you have no more obligations. If you don't like what the majority wants, move.

fellowtraveller · November 16, 2011

A regionally focused broadcaster with a national mandate. Like Heritage Canada, Sports Canada or any other government funded cultural department. Fishies too, if you really want to get technical.

and what benefit is provided every single one of us that pays the $1 billion per annum? Specifically and without any of the usual 'cultural bonding/national institution' bullshit.. I can tell you what I get for the $120 per annum I send to CKUA.

Then they should go national and prove their funding model with work. Or, as I have already pointed out, TVOntario also exists.

Why would they do that? Their funding model works just fine, and has been amply demonstrated. Why wouldn't it work nationally. All it takes is all the mouths that claim to support CBC to step up and prove it. Nothing complicated there.

As opposed to the so-smooth sailing CKUA has had over the past 15 years, yes?

They did have a rough patch in the transition from wholly govt support to where they are now, in large part to a corrupt board. But they are doing just fine now thank you, and will soon move into new digs. Thanks for asking.

Puh-lease, go talk to all those supporters of Lower Fort Garry, Banff or Jasper National Parks about all that "entertainment" that is paid for by the vast majority of people who live east of Winterpeg

Very weak, worse than usual for you. National Parks have a legimate cultural and natural heritage to preserve, contained in a clear and concise mission statement. Not only that, unlike CBC they have significant user fees that apply only to those that enjoy their premises/services. Try again.

Your "obligation" to fund the CBC is a complete red-herring. The only "obligation" you have is to pay your taxes. Once that happens, you have no more obligations. If you don't like what the majority wants, move.

No, I have to pay my taxes or go to jail. I have no choice in having to pay for your entertainment, and complete choice in paying or not paying for my entertianment CKUA. I hope you will be as supportive of the democratic process when the elected members of your elected government vote to leave you with a big hissing sound on the radio dial and an eternal ant race on Channel whatever on your TV. That would be much more fair, wouldn't you agree?

dre · November 16, 2011

and what benefit is provided every single one of us that pays the $1 billion per annum? Specifically and without any of the usual 'cultural bonding/national institution' bullshit.. I can tell you what I get for the $120 per annum I send to CKUA.

Why would they do that? Their funding model works just fine, and has been amply demonstrated. Why wouldn't it work nationally. All it takes is all the mouths that claim to support CBC to step up and prove it. Nothing complicated there.

They did have a rough patch in the transition from wholly govt support to where they are now, in large part to a corrupt board. But they are doing just fine now thank you, and will soon move into new digs. Thanks for asking.

Very weak, worse than usual for you. National Parks have a legimate cultural and natural heritage to preserve, contained in a clear and concise mission statement. Not only that, unlike CBC they have significant user fees that apply only to those that enjoy their premises/services. Try again.

No, I have to pay my taxes or go to jail. I have no choice in having to pay for your entertainment, and complete choice in paying or not paying for my entertianment CKUA. I hope you will be as supportive of the democratic process when the elected members of your elected government vote to leave you with a big hissing sound on the radio dial and an eternal ant race on Channel whatever on your TV. That would be much more fair, wouldn't you agree?

No, I have to pay my taxes or go to jail. I have no choice in having to pay for your entertainment, and complete choice in paying or not paying for my entertianment CKUA.

So what? Everyones tax dollars contribute to some programs they dont like. I pay taxes to explode random dark skinned folks in the middle east. I pay for a judicial system I dont use. I pay for police I never call. I give welfare to wealthy corporations. Apparently I even give aid to communist China.

That what happens when youre a member of society.

cybercoma · November 16, 2011

Welcome to the Social Contract.

blueblood · November 16, 2011

So what? Everyones tax dollars contribute to some programs they dont like. I pay taxes to explode random dark skinned folks in the middle east. I pay for a judicial system I dont use. I pay for police I never call. I give welfare to wealthy corporations. Apparently I even give aid to communist China.

That what happens when youre a member of society.

That's the beauty of democracy, we get to pick what party has the best plan concerning our tax dollars. If the CBC goes, it goes and to the benefit of taxpayers everywhere.

dre · November 16, 2011

That's the beauty of democracy, we get to pick what party has the best plan concerning our tax dollars. If the CBC goes, it goes and to the benefit of taxpayers everywhere.

As was pointed out, most of the tax payers want to keep it. So its really to the benefit of a small minority.

Smallc · November 16, 2011

As was pointed out, most of the tax payers want to keep it. So its really to the benefit of a small minority.

At what expense though? After all, as you point out, we're in a deficit. We're talking about $1.16B per year.

Edited November 16, 2011 by Smallc

blueblood · November 16, 2011

As was pointed out, most of the tax payers want to keep it. So its really to the benefit of a small minority.

Depends on what party the people pick. In western democracies, politicians are picked to lead, not set up referendums on everything. Deep sixing the CBC wouldn't hurt anything.

Edited November 16, 2011 by blueblood

Shwa · November 16, 2011

and what benefit is provided every single one of us that pays the $1 billion per annum? Specifically and without any of the usual 'cultural bonding/national institution' bullshit.. I can tell you what I get for the $120 per annum I send to CKUA.

Really? You have no idea? You should educate yourself for that billion dollars you are paying.

Why would they do that? Their funding model works just fine, and has been amply demonstrated. Why wouldn't it work nationally. All it takes is all the mouths that claim to support CBC to step up and prove it. Nothing complicated there.

I do support the CBC and have stepped up to support it. Just like Heritage Canada, Parks Canada, CIDA...

They did have a rough patch in the transition from wholly govt support to where they are now, in large part to a corrupt board. But they are doing just fine now thank you, and will soon move into new digs. Thanks for asking.

National mandate needs no "rough patches."

Very weak, worse than usual for you. National Parks have a legimate cultural and natural heritage to preserve, contained in a clear and concise mission statement. Not only that, unlike CBC they have significant user fees that apply only to those that enjoy their premises/services.

CBC has a legitimate cultural and historical heritage to preserve contained in a clearn and concise mission statement. Not only that, but the CBC also has user fees to apply to those that want to enjoy their broadcasting services. They are called commercials. :rolleyes:

Try again.
No, I have to pay my taxes or go to jail. I have no choice in having to pay for your entertainment, and complete choice in paying or not paying for my entertianment CKUA. I hope you will be as supportive of the democratic process when the elected members of your elected government vote to leave you with a big hissing sound on the radio dial and an eternal ant race on Channel whatever on your TV. That would be much more fair, wouldn't you agree?

I already have a "hissing sound" on my television dial, it's called SunTV. And I am paying for it without anyone asking me if I wanted it as a part of my cable bill. So boo-hoo.

dre · November 16, 2011

At what expense though? After all, as you point out, we're in a deficit. We're talking about $1.16B per year.

At what expense though?

Ill gladly hook you up with someone that can answer that.

We're talking about $1.16B per year.

cybercoma · November 16, 2011

We could eliminate the military and post office too. That'll save taxpayers money. :rolleyes:

fellowtraveller · November 16, 2011

I do support the CBC and have stepped up to support it.

Then post your receipt for the money you paid for your entertainment bill at CBC..

I can only laugh at the doofus above who equates the police he never calls with the forced entertainment he places as a higher priority. Rick Mercer vs RCMP. Duh.

fellowtraveller · November 16, 2011

We could eliminate the..... post office too

Agreed. The private sector can handle 99% of addressed mail at far less cost, and the other 1% we can subsidize, also at far less cost.

Smallc · November 16, 2011

Ill gladly hook you up with someone that can answer that.

:rolleyes: I'm talking about long term expenses. Money that could be better spent, or better yet, saved. The military has a purpose in Canada today. The CBC....I'm not sure.

dre · November 16, 2011

I'm talking about long term expenses. Money that could be better spent, or better yet, saved. The military has a purpose in Canada today. The CBC....I'm not sure.

The thing is its always going to come down to personal opinion what spending is "better". Im a fence sitter as far as the CBC goes. I only watch it once a week when hockey is on IF that.

But the majority of peole think it is good spending.

If the government wants to balance the budget it should make a few blind cuts. 1% across the board for ALL government programs. Then at least they would piss everyone else off equally.

Smallc · November 16, 2011

That's what they're doing. 5 - 10% cuts to all federal program expenditures.

cybercoma · November 16, 2011

Agreed. The private sector can handle 99% of addressed mail at far less cost, and the other 1% we can subsidize, also at far less cost.

Why not privatize the military too? Blackwater, anyone? Pardon me... Xe Services, anyone?

Shwa · November 16, 2011

Then post your receipt for the money you paid for your entertainment bill at CBC..

Taxes.

I can only laugh at the doofus above who equates the police he never calls with the forced entertainment he places as a higher priority. Rick Mercer vs RCMP. Duh.

Someone is forcing you to watch the CBC? Oh dear.

CPCFTW · November 16, 2011

The thing is its always going to come down to personal opinion what spending is "better". Im a fence sitter as far as the CBC goes. I only watch it once a week when hockey is on IF that.

But the majority of peole think it is good spending.

If the government wants to balance the budget it should make a few blind cuts. 1% across the board for ALL government programs. Then at least they would piss everyone else off equally.

And the majority of people would think giving every Canadian a $10,000 cheque is good spending too. Doesn't mean we should borrow $350 billion from China to make it happen. Most individuals are ill-equipped to participate in national economic decision-making.