CBC - What is it good for?
- Thread starter Ceiling Cat
- Start date
I just heard a cbc radio program called ideas and they broadcast the monk debates, featuring a discussion of the coming world order relating to east vs. west, or u.s.a. vs. china (henry kissinger was one of the four debaters)...........where does one hear intelligent in depth discussion like this on commercial radio?? vive le cbc!
That's CBC Radio not CBC TV. The TV branch could be sold off while the relatively inexpensive radio programming could remain extant. There is no alternative to CBC Radio's talk/news format in Canada, except in Alberta and BC which have a vibrant talk radio culture on the AM dial. And, NPR in the States provides the same level of programming, privately funded and through donations.
Come on CG, the CBC is the CBC. splitting it would be the death nell of the corporation, unless of course that's your goal. I'm not quite sure where you get the idea that here is no alternative to news/talk radio. I don't know where you live, but in TO, there are two channels that I know of, besides CBC, both with good following. The CBC is also divided in CBC1 and CBC2, both very different.The NPR operates in a country with 10 times the population, so donation is possible.
And there's no alternative to CBC-TV's Canadian content either. NPR is great, but perpetually starved for funding, which severely limits its programming possibilities and its broadcast reach. Just try to pick it up in TO.
What it comes down to is, we gotta pay. We pay through prices inflated by advertising costs and thru cable bills, or we pay thru taxes. But we gotta pay.
And if we don't like the CBC programming we pay for, we can get our MP up on her feet making a fuss about it. Don't have that chance when BCE tells their subsidiary looking more American is good for their bottom line.
So you're basically saying that the government should only pay for vital services and that any non-vital services are matters of taste that should be funded by those who want them badly enough to pay for them out of their own pockets. So what services do you consider vital?
I think it's safe to say that the CBC provides quite a lot more programming about Canadian culture and history than we get from privately owned broadcasters. Since you're calling for the CBC to be dismantled or funded on a user-pay basis, it's obvious that, by whatever yardstick you're using to define vital, you don't consider the broad dissemination of Canadian culture and history to be sufficiently vital for the government to pay for part of the cost. Please keep in mind that the CBC is a hybrid with approximately 40% of revenue coming from commercial sources and 60% from the gov't.
Since you can't see why governments should pay towards cultural/historical broadcasts, you must also have big problems with governments paying for non-vital subjects like history, music, literature, humanities, art, civics, languages, politics, athletics and a great many others to be taught in our public schools. Same for museums, art galleries, national and provincial parks, cultural events like the Calgary Stampede, Gay Pride etc. - all decidedly non-vital / matters of taste. It would be difficult to pretend that little Johnny's history classes at school are any more vital than the availability of prgrams like "Canada - A People's History" on TV. http://www.cbc.ca/history/
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying.
Looking at the demographic challenges ahead, I think our country is going to face some tough choices when it comes to decisions about how to best spend taxpayers' dollars. I think we will have to prioritize, and most of what CBC provides doesn't need to be funded by government (we can have a separate debate about ensuring remote communities get access to local news, but that's a very small piece of the pie).
What do I think the priorities should be? I would focus on things such as health, education, policing and national security. I would definitely cut funding for things such as the Pride Parade, and our friend Fuji might be interested to know that I would also cut funding for the Calgary Stampede.
You forgot to mention defunding sports and their infrastructure. If we're not willing to fund the stuff that makes for healthy minds, what's the point of healthy bodies to carry them around?
And surely the guys who can pay for golds and corporate boxes can pony up for kiddie rinks and Little League diamonds. Looking at football, we can leave it out, except as a metaphor for selling out to American culture 'cause, we know nothing of our own. But no NFL FordDome paid outta taxes on our waterfront.
You've given a couple more examples of what you think governments should be paying for but you haven't said whether they should be funding matter-of-taste items like museums, art galleries, national and provincial parks or public education in subjects like history, music, literature, humanities, art, civics, languages, politics, athletics etc. Yes, our governments have some hard decisions ahead as our aging population inches its way towards mass decrepitude but that is peripheral to the central question about the role of governments in general. The government either should be paying towards these matter-of-taste items or it shouldn't. Where do you stand on funding for the items I've mentioned?
Broadcasting is too important to be left to the invisible hand of the marketplace. Bell Media and the rest of the private enterprise models are after one thing only, profit. Buy cheap, sell high.
The problem is that broadcasting is not simply about entertainment, it is also about the showing of cultural norms. And about teaching how to behave in society.
American programming does not accurately reflect the reality of Canadian culture, but as we continue to import it for entertainment, it changes the fabric of our society and Americanizes us.
Further, private broadcasters often over look small markets in Canada that are simply too small to broadcast into.
The problem is that broadcasting is not simply about entertainment, it is also about the showing of cultural norms. And about teaching how to behave in society.
American programming does not accurately reflect the reality of Canadian culture, but as we continue to import it for entertainment, it changes the fabric of our society and Americanizes us.
Further, private broadcasters often over look small markets in Canada that are simply too small to broadcast into.
Another good reason for the CBC, Marketplace.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life...draising-than-research-report/article2088132/
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life...draising-than-research-report/article2088132/
I disagree with at least part of your premise. I don't consider education to be a matter of taste, and have already said it should be funded. In terms of the priorities for the curriculum, that should be based on what produces the best outcomes for students. There's nothing in your list of public education subjects that I disagree with, recognizing that public education isn't my area of expertise.
Regarding some of the other items on your list, I'm not sure I would make sweeping generalizations. For example, a historical museum may serve as an extension of our public education goals, and may be worthy of public funding. But comedy festivals, museums of comedy, and the like should be paid for by users, in my opinion.
As for the NFL Fordome that oldjones mentioned -- absolutely not.
Remembering, of course, that there's no evidence that the CBC produces minds that are any healthier than the minds of people who don't watch or listen to CBC.
By the way, Sun News Network is running an online poll asking whether the CBC should be privatized:
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/
You don't have to guess how I'm voting.
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/
You don't have to guess how I'm voting.
Well I guess I could counter that by saying there's no evidence that CBC doesn't produce healthier minds, kind of silly.
Yet there are suspicions that Sun TV can be unhealthy. Just read the comments in this thread.
When something costs $1.5 billion per year, I don't think it's "silly" to ask whether or not Canadians are getting anything for their money.
Does CBC provide entertainment, news and current affairs. Sure, but so do the private networks. Some of the assumptions in this thread -- that CBC makes viewers/listeners smarter than people who watch the private networks, or more cultured, or gives them a better sense of the country's history -- seem to be no better substantiated than the existence of the Tooth Fairy.
Certainly, if some of the findings released over the years by the Dominion Institute are any indication, the CBC is definitely failing the test when it comes to promoting Canadian history:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/canada-is-failing-history/article1184615/
You might be confusing cost with the budget of ~$1.7 billion to actual government costs of ~1.1 billion. That sounds like a lot, but once more look at it as $35 per person
Apparently others feel different than you with respect to costs; http://www.canadians.org/campaignblog/?p=8265
The Globe and Mail reports, “…If the government privatized the CBC (Canada would lose) at least $1.3 billion in economic activity, says a report prepared for the public broadcaster by Deloitte & Touche. …The report, released Wednesday, is the first major study of the CBC’s economic role commissioned by the public broadcaster and pegs its overall economic impact at $3.7-billion. The CBC (which includes Radio-Canada) receives $1.1-billion in government funding every year toward its budget of $1.7-billion – the difference is mainly made up from TV ad revenue – and Deloitte, using standard measures of direct and indirect impact, estimates that budget generates $3.7-billion of activity in the Canadian economy.”
“A privatized CBC that would commission less Canadian content, spend more money on foreign programming and compete more heavily with existing broadcasters for ad revenue would generate only $1.16-billion in overall economic activity. Meanwhile, the economic impact of redirecting the CBC’s grant back into general revenues would be $1.8-billion, assuming the money was used according to the government’s current spending profile. But other private broadcasters and media would take a $500-million hit to their economic impact as they faced a new commercial competitor. So Deloitte’s final measure is that privatization would leave the Canadian economy with a loss of about $1.3-billion – or, in the language of the report, the CBC’s net value added is $1.3-billion.”
“As well as the economic impact, the report lists several ’spill-over effects’, other key areas where the CBC’s presence is felt, including the independent production community, where the broadcaster spends millions of dollars and promotes a variety of programming, and local economies, where the broadcaster’s presence helps to create a creative cluster, particularly in Montreal. It also argues that the whole broadcasting sector benefits from the CBC’s role in implementing new technology, promoting digital content and nurturing Canadian talent.”
The Council of Canadians is a long-time supporter of the CBC and public broadcasting in Canada.
