Why am I forced to pay for this social liberalism agenda?

[margrace]

I for one am appalled at the cost of maintaing local arenas but I stand by the right of my neighbours to have it to use if they so desire.

You don't see any contradiction in your argument? You have other neighbors who value the CBC yet you resent having to pay it?

I hope you don't think that I don't support the CBC. Go back and read a bit. I am fully in support of the best network in the world.

[Riverwind]

I hope you don't think that I don't support the CBC. Go back and read a bit. I am fully in support of the best network in the world.

Sorry mixed up your posting with Shoop's

[wellandboy]

I hope you don't think that I don't support the CBC. Go back and read a bit. I am fully in support of the best network in the world.

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.

[Riverwind]

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.

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.

[Conservative1]

The cultural benefits of supporting Canadian television production are taken care of *outside* the CBC. There is no problem with subsidies to producing Canadian TV shows.

Speaking of subsidies have you ever seen the gov't funded animated shorts on teletoon?....lol...terrible animated misadventures. I have to wonder what kind of cultural enlightenment they bring ... they appear to serve no purpose other than to break up block programming.

I have a hunch that we are over subsidizing television production,(as is evidenced by those shorts...or at least i like to believe so ).Government funding in this area should be kept to a minimum, maybe fund those "Moments in history", canadian history documentaries, and a few grants to independant films.

This Canadian Content garbage from the CRTC has to go as well.... admittedly I've enjoyed some of the programming (independant films mostly), but I absolutely cringe at the idea of my government telling me what to watch in the name of Canadian identity...thanks nanny state...they should mandate showings of Orwell's 1984 as well. (melodramatic...but you get the idea)

Ya sorry this turned into a nonsensical rant...enjoy...

[wellandboy]

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.

[shoop]

Interesting how the only real support the CBC gets is from the left.

For the rest of people it seems like it is easier to let things be than to challenge the status quo. Quite sad really.

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.

[Spike22]

The BBC funding is always brewing there. Unlike the CBC they actually have a lot of programming that people including us foreigners enjoy. [yes they have dud shows too]

[daniel]

Yes, Canada is a well balanced country. The Left is forced to subsidize militarism and multinational corporations and the Right is forced to subsidize Public Healthcare and Education.

[Riverwind]

Interesting how the only real support the CBC gets is from the left.

I am right of right center based on any reasonable definition of the term (i.e. one that does not equate social conservatism with right wing).

The problem is the people who complain about the CBC are not interested in fixing it: they want to kill eiether directly or indirectly. This means it is impossible to have a reasonable discussion about reform of the CBC or Canadian programming funding in general with those people.

Many people who are supporters of public broadcasting are not convinced that the CBC status quo is acceptable. We are just forced to defend the status quo in the face of people who see no value in public broadcasting.

[fellowtraveller]

The Left is forced to subsidize militarism

Yeah, the Canadian military scares schoolchidren and chipmunks world wide.

We are just forced to defend the status quo in the face of people who see no value in public broadcasting.

Nobody is forcing you to do anything. Perhaps you should re-examine your position, and those inconsistencies will be explicable.

[Riverwind]

Nobody is forcing you to do anything. Perhaps you should re-examine your position, and those inconsistencies will be explicable.

My point is if you are a person you does not particularly care about Canadian content in programming then you will never understand the value of an institution like the CBC.

I am sure you have encountered people who think that the Canadian military should just be disbanded because we face no real military threat. At one level they have a point, the only country that is likely to invade Canada is the US so why should we spend billions every year on a force? What such people forgot is there is a cultural value to maintaining a military that can participate in international events. You argument against the Canadian programming is no different than saying we should get rid of the military because we don't need it.

That said, the one useful proposal that has come out of this discussion is the suggestion that Canadian content could be ensured on TV by funding private networks directly. I think this would be a workable solution only if the private networks are required to carry a minimum number of hours of primetime canadian programming (excluding news and sports) per week. The last I heard was the private networks are absolutely opposed to such regulations. That means the direct funding of private networks would not work in the long run.

[Canuck E Stan]

If the CBC was removed from government payrolls today, I think there will be enough interest to develop it into a true public broadcaster,smaller,but still a public entity.

I think there appears to be interest from fans of the broadcaster to keep it going.

[ritamd]

If the CBC was removed from government payrolls today, I think there will be enough interest to develop it into a true public broadcaster,smaller,but still a public entity.

I think there appears to be interest from fans of the broadcaster to keep it going.

Why am I forced to subsidize many children families?

Why am I forced to pay infrastructure for churches?

Why am I forced to pay for schools?

The CBC is Canada and it is not a social Liberal anything,whatever that means.

[scribblet]

Interesting how the only real support the CBC gets is from the left.

I am right of right center based on any reasonable definition of the term (i.e. one that does not equate social conservatism with right wing).

Many people who are supporters of public broadcasting are not convinced that the CBC status quo is acceptable. We are just forced to defend the status quo in the face of people who see no value in public broadcasting.

Guess I'm with you on that one, the status quo is not acceptable to me, I don't see why we need a state run broadcasting system, particular one that isn't always 'fair and balanced'. Some of its programming is good and probably would stand on its own, so let them get advertisers and help defray the costs.

To whoever said we pay for church's infrastructure - we don't.

[ritamd]

Yes, we do pay for religious org infrastructure, they have tax free status which is the same thing as subsidizing them.

Are you trying to say private broadcast systems are fair and balanced? As they are not. They are corpoarate shills.

Furtheremore, there are more people left of centre in Canada than right by a long shot.

[Riverwind]

particular one that isn't always 'fair and balanced'.

The fact is there is an extreme diversity of opinion in this country and it is simply impossible for a single news source to be fair and balanced from all points of view. The best a news source can hope for is to be considered fair and balanced by the broad segment of the population that occupy the middle of the Canadian political spectrum. The CBC does a reasonable job of doing this. If the CBC has appeared to favour the Liberals in the past few years is because the majority of the population favoured the Liberals or policies similar to what the Liberals advocated (although extremists at either end are not willing to admit it).

The reality is that what was considered 'fair and balanced' by the most vocal critics of CBC is often considered biased towards the right wing from the perspective of an average Canadian.

That said, the center of the political spectrum in Alberta to the right of most other places in this county. So if the CBC is pitching to the average Canadian it is going to appear to be left wing to the average Albertan.

[concerned citizen]

There is something that I don't understand (but that is nothing new ) and that is why we need a public broadcaster in the first place.

We have the CRTC to mandate the minimum amount of Canadian content that all broadcasters who air programming in Canada have to adhere to.

The CRTC is also the reason why we are limited to the number of channels that digital cable and satelite can provide as there has to be a ratio of Canadian channels to American.

The CRTC is doing a fine job of cramming Canadian culture down our throats. Let's put the money to better use (military, homeless people, healthcare, education etc) and close the CBC down.

[August1991]

There is something that I don't understand (but that is nothing new ) and that is why we need a public broadcaster in the first place.

There is good reason to have a public broadcaster.

I have followed this thread somewhat but not perfectly so some of my comments might have been made already.

First, the questions of "Canadian content" and "left-wing bias" are distinct from the CBC being a State-owned broadcaster. The CBC could remain State-owned and yet imitate Fox News or use all foreign-produced programming. Keep in mind that we have already two State TV networks and several State radio networks, each with separate editorial content. CBC and Radio-Canada do not report news the same way. Why not another English network and then we could have CBC-Left and CBC-Right?

Second, broadcasting is not like other forms of entertainment or anything else that we buy. It doesn't cost anything to let one more person watch a TV programme or tune into a radio show. In fact, anyone can with just an antenna. Broadcasters could encrypt signals and then charge for decoders but it's probably easier just to charge everyone a small fee and pay for it that way.

Private networks such as Global or CTV or TQS in effect do that now, through advertising. To take this thread's title as an example, I rarely if ever watch Global TV but I am forced to pay for Global's "agenda". When I buy products from its advertsers, they use some of my money to pay for advertising on Global - whether I like it or not, or in my case, whether I even know it or not.

My point is that we can pay for TV through our taxes or through advertising. All things considered, the tax method of payment strikes me as more sensible. TV advertising is sometimes very irritating.

[Montgomery Burns]

August 1991:

To take this thread's title as an example, I rarely if ever watch Global TV but I am forced to pay for Global's "agenda". When I buy products from its advertsers, they use some of my money to pay for advertising on Global...

No one is forcing you to buy products from the companies that advertise on Global TV. But someone is forcing you to fund the CBC. For an organization to succeed, it must satisfy the needs of its customers. A look at the ratings for CTV and Global indicates that they are more in tune with the general public. They have more viewers for their regular programming and for their national news programs (Lloyd Robertson-957,000 average viewers, Kevin Newman 771,000, and lastly Peter Mansbridge with 648,000).

The CBC is the only station allowed to have a 24 hour news channel which is hostile to conservatives--hostile to me. That's why I resent being forced to pay for it. If their views are in tune with the general public, then they should be cut off the govt tit and see if they can make it on their own--like Global and CTV.

The annual $1 billion saved could go towards lower taxation, more cops, and strenghtening our depleted military. Better priorities in my book.

[scribblet]

August 1991:

To take this thread's title as an example, I rarely if ever watch Global TV but I am forced to pay for Global's "agenda". When I buy products from its advertsers, they use some of my money to pay for advertising on Global...

No one is forcing you to buy products from the companies that advertise on Global TV. But someone is forcing you to fund the CBC. For an organization to succeed, it must satisfy the needs of its customers. A look at the ratings for CTV and Global indicates that they are more in tune with the general public. They have more viewers for their regular programming and for their national news programs (Lloyd Robertson-957,000 average viewers, Kevin Newman 771,000, and lastly Peter Mansbridge with 648,000).

The CBC is the only station allowed to have a 24 hour news channel which is hostile to conservatives--hostile to me. That's why I resent being forced to pay for it. If their views are in tune with the general public, then they should be cut off the govt tit and see if they can make it on their own--like Global and CTV.

The annual $1 billion saved could go towards lower taxation, more cops, and strenghtening our depleted military. Better priorities in my book.

Good post MB, couldn't agree more.

[Spike22]

There is something that I don't understand (but that is nothing new ) and that is why we need a public broadcaster in the first place.

We have the CRTC to mandate the minimum amount of Canadian content that all broadcasters who air programming in Canada have to adhere to.

The CRTC is also the reason why we are limited to the number of channels that digital cable and satelite can provide as there has to be a ratio of Canadian channels to American.

The CRTC is doing a fine job of cramming Canadian culture down our throats. Let's put the money to better use (military, homeless people, healthcare, education etc) and close the CBC down.

Maybe not close - it privitize it.

August 1991:

To take this thread's title as an example, I rarely if ever watch Global TV but I am forced to pay for Global's "agenda". When I buy products from its advertsers, they use some of my money to pay for advertising on Global...

No one is forcing you to buy products from the companies that advertise on Global TV. But someone is forcing you to fund the CBC. For an organization to succeed, it must satisfy the needs of its customers. A look at the ratings for CTV and Global indicates that they are more in tune with the general public. They have more viewers for their regular programming and for their national news programs (Lloyd Robertson-957,000 average viewers, Kevin Newman 771,000, and lastly Peter Mansbridge with 648,000).

The CBC is the only station allowed to have a 24 hour news channel which is hostile to conservatives--hostile to me. That's why I resent being forced to pay for it. If their views are in tune with the general public, then they should be cut off the govt tit and see if they can make it on their own--like Global and CTV.

The annual $1 billion saved could go towards lower taxation, more cops, and strenghtening our depleted military. Better priorities in my book.

How about more tax cuts instead of continually spending our $$$'s. Ever look at how much government services we already have in this country. Cut bureaucracy within the entire federal government. (I am sure the civil servants will love this). I have seen more useless positions creating meaningless reports/studies etc. that never see the light of day but seem all so important to the departments doing them and you ask yourself when reviewing this nause "is there any benefit to Canadian taxpayers with this S**t?" The answer invariably is 'NO', however you get sucked into this federal civil servant mentality within any fed department(CBC, tresury board, PWGSC etc) that this is the way the organization works and you just kiss 'The Man's' ass. Someone has to stand up and stop the insanity - spending taxpayers money to study the sex life of fruit flies. Come on now...wait a minute that might make a good CBC documentary or 5 part mini series [estimated pricetag $1.2 mil]

[Riverwind]

The CBC is the only station allowed to have a 24 hour news channel which is hostile to conservatives--hostile to me. That's why I resent being forced to pay for it.

So what? 'Conservatives like you' resent paying for anything that does not directly benefit you and would happily shut down the entire gov't.

If their views are in tune with the general public, then they should be cut off the govt tit and see if they can make it on their own--like Global and CTV.

The general public is perfectly happy paying for CBC with their tax dollars.

[margrace]

The CBC is the only station allowed to have a 24 hour news channel which is hostile to conservatives--hostile to me. That's why I resent being forced to pay for it.

So what? 'Conservatives like you' resent paying for anything that does not directly benefit you and would happily shut down the entire gov't.

If their views are in tune with the general public, then they should be cut off the govt tit and see if they can make it on their own--like Global and CTV.

The general public is perfectly happy paying for CBC with their tax dollars.

It is apparent that CP people do not like having some of their agenda made public. The same with the American Governments cut back on Public Television. Having a news source that tells us everything is not the way to control people

However I have to voice my opinion that the CBC is very aware of where their money comes from and as they saw that there might be a Conservative win the certainly backed off in honest reporting of the Conservative agenda.

Now we are beginning to see that Harper did have a hidden agenda, and that people are going to suffer for it. So being publicly funded is not the win all it should be.

[scribblet]

The CBC is the only station allowed to have a 24 hour news channel which is hostile to conservatives--hostile to me. That's why I resent being forced to pay for it.

So what? 'Conservatives like you' resent paying for anything that does not directly benefit you and would happily shut down the entire gov't.

If their views are in tune with the general public, then they should be cut off the govt tit and see if they can make it on their own--like Global and CTV.

The general public is perfectly happy paying for CBC with their tax dollars.

It is apparent that CP people do not like having some of their agenda made public. The same with the American Governments cut back on Public Television. Having a news source that tells us everything is not the way to control people

However I have to voice my opinion that the CBC is very aware of where their money comes from and as they saw that there might be a Conservative win the certainly backed off in honest reporting of the Conservative agenda.

Now we are beginning to see that Harper did have a hidden agenda, and that people are going to suffer for it. So being publicly funded is not the win all it should be.

Its apparant that some people have no idea what the CPC agenda is cos they've never read up on it, Oh I know...LOL that darned 'secret agenda' gotta get James Bond out of retirement.