Conservatives Move to End All CBC Funding

bobby boondoggle wrote:

I was once a staunch supporter of the CBC but now realize without legislated protection from political manipulation, there can be no justification for public funding for what has become just another corporate broadcaster. [...] Good riddance to the corporate media including the CBC and Peter Mansbridge.

Yeah, and while we're at it, our public schools suck, they're just instruments for imbuing kids with ruling class propaganda, and our so-called health care system, you can die waiting for treatment and all it does is enrich Big Pharma, and don't get me started about our hydro utilities, they give bargain basement deals to the rich multinationals and screw the working people, ... There can be no justification for public funding for what has just become another corporate education/health care/utilities system.

Oh, did I mention government? Serves the rich, right? Let's have less of it. I prefer to keep my taxes, cuz I know my money will go for progressive causes.

It's always nice to have a pseudo "leftwing" take on why we should support Stephen Harper.

Am I sounding sarcastic? Testing 1, 2, 3... Better now?

Nertz to all that brainiac jazz; I like The Debaters and The Irrelevant Show.

Of all the 100+ channels I have available to me, it's the CBC that I watch at least 40% of the time, and usually more often.

What about TVO, SCN and KNOW? Threats? Probability of scrapping/demise? I'm a fan - Steve Paiken's Harper tartan coat-lining notwithstanding.

absentia wrote:

What about TVO, SCN and KNOW? Threats? Probability of scrapping/demise? I'm a fan - Steve Paiken's Harper tartan coat-lining notwithstanding.

SCN was to be shut down last April - we raised a stink and it has been sold.  It is no longer a public broadcaster.  The CRTC ruling on whether the new owners will continue to have "must carry" status for the station will determine whether SCN continues to exist at all.  The decision should come down shortly.  Meanwhile, many content producers here have lost an entire production year waiting.

Distinctly unladylike expletive, followed by quiet sobbing.

George Victor wrote:

 

"All the world's a stage, And all the men and women merely players; They have their exits and their entrances, ..."

 

"Unfortunately CBC or no CBC makes no difference at this stage."

 

 

Two "big picture" observations.

 

 

I strongly disagree... especially with respect to radio. And if you have to take a road trip this season I'd suggest keeping your radio dial on commercial stations for a demonstration of how different it could be.

There are a lot of things which have gone wrong with the CBC in recent years, but there are still enough people there who are doing things right which no other news organization has the power and inclination to do.

Until community radio has a national network with the power of the CBC (as well as overseas bureaus)  there is nothing else that can fill the role it does.

And although a lot of community stations have multi-language broadcasting, there is no other broadcaster which provides french and english broadcasting throughout the country, and coverage to all outlying regions - nor is there likely to be if they lose their mandate.

This may not be as apparent in larger centers where there are some who might fill the void.

<joke>  I suppose if I cut out some eye holes I could drive around with a tin bucket over my head. Then I wouldn't have to listen to what anyone else has to say at all </joke>

If is is any consolation, I think Stephen Harper feels just as offended by the CBC, though about different things. The fact that he and his ministers are avoiding interviews and attempting to cut off funding says to me the CBC is not quite as servile as he would like.

It isn't just about current news content or slant - neither of which meets my standards of objectivity or journalism. It isn't just about other fact-based content - which is far superior to commercial stations, or even about fiction - devoid of torture scenes! - which might not appear anywhere else, ever.

It's about the simple fact of national mass media. However weak, timid and debased, it exists. As long as it exists, it can be rehabilitated. Once gone, it must be recreated, in some unforseeable, very different, future.

Funny, i've been predicting the end of the world as we knew it, yet every time another pillar topples, i mourn it as if it the destruction were a surprise.

Quote:

It's about the simple fact of national mass media. However weak, timid and debased, it exists. As long as it exists, it can be rehabilitated. Once gone, it must be recreated, in some unforseeable, very different, future.

Thanks for saying that, as it saved me the trouble, although I'm not so confident that once gone, the CBC could be recreated.

Actually, I'm quite certain that if we lose our public broadcaster, we will not have one for the foreseeable future.  The CBC was created in a very different time and broadcast media has changed into something that would have been unimaginable then.

Public broadcasting in general is having to adapt to a very quickly changing landscape - I was at a documentary festival in the UK last month, and attended quite a few panel discussions, and it seems that the BBC is under some similar pressures.  Of course, they're a larger organization so there are some differences.  I found it quite interesting that the threat to and complaints about public broadcasting go beyond borders. 

Timebandit wrote:

remind wrote:

It could also mean you know which side your bread is buttered on, and made every effort to appease those who might want to purchase your offerings in the future. Hedging your bets so to speak.

Anyhow, I do know and don't really care which it is, as I am not paying for your "product" to be viewed timebandit.

stated what I believe in the oil sands thread

Sorry, not clear on what you mean by "I do know". 

My sincere apologies.

As I did not come back and read it after posting as I had to dash for a bit. I left out the most important word NOT, have changed it now to read as I thought it out.

Quote:

Not sure why you need scare quotes around "product", either. 

Not scare quotes, was just indicating your work is a product that needs to be sold, and if you have a bias one side or the other this would perhaps in future mean either side would not utilize another "product" that you had produced. As such, you have to hold a public balance as a small independant operator, as opposed to the CBC who does not have to.

Quote:

 My personal philosophy of bet hedging is to produce good work.  Good story, solid writing, high production values.

Agree completely, but also realize that you are a smart business woman who is successful and will become moreso.

Quote:

  Impugning my integrity by suggesting that I suck up rather than tell the truth of what I find in a story could also be considered a personal attack. 

Again my apologies for not reading my final result, and thus skewing what I meant by accidentily leaving out the "NOT". Absolutely do not think you would be sucking up by hedging your bets, as IMV you are a business woman first and foremost.

Quote:

 So actually, you have paid for my work to be televised.  Thank you.

Nope, my money went to "The Path to Shaolin". ;)

Quote:

As for your comments in the oil sands thread, I disagree with you.  Perhaps we can agree to disagree.

Great with me, as I can see where you personally are coming from.

And again apologize profusely, for my negligence, as I have said before, I think your work is very good and would like to see you very successful.

Fine with me, as there is nothing to lose. So you cannot lose something that is not there and perhaps has not been for decades.

It is not a 'public rersource', it is a propaganda tool used against us that we fund. It is completely controlled by the private sector already, only they are getting the monetary and philosophcal breaks from it, as we are paying for it, to our own detriment.

For example, we need only look to; Pamela Wallen, Michelle Jean, Adriane Clarkson, Don Cherry, Don Newman, and more recently Kevin O'Leary, Evan Solomon, and the coast to coast news teams that state, and have stated, exactly what the corporations and their politicians want them to, for personal gain, not for Canadians at large who paid, and pay their wages.

My aplogies to the rest of the CBC hacks that I did not mention by name.

I used "Boot to the Head" as my closing theme when I did an open music show many years ago.

I still use a voice clip of Allan McFee interrupting me every once in a while on my current show.

6079_Smith_W wrote:

I thought about this a bit more while walking to work.

If we don't recognize these public resources as something which rightly belongs to us, not the politicians, then what is the difference between our approach and that of the libertarians and neo-conservatives who also want to break down public ownership and turn it all over to the private sector?

If we don't see it as ours, and aren't prepared to fight for it, we WILL lose it.

 

Exactly. And that's what I was trying to express [url=http://rabble.ca/babble/media/conservatives-move-end-all-cbc-funding#com....

Your complaint about "paying" for a public broadcaster is a Conservative lament, Remind. We really pay bugger all by comparison with BBC viewers, and I'm not sure who would be playing what to FN folks across the north if the CBC did not.  Does the CBC's work of keeping Canadians in touch with each other mean sweet nothing?   Can you imagine what would replace it?

I've seen Don Newman and Susan Bonner (as well as Evan Solomon) really attack the Conservatives on occasion. I'd say those two were balanced in their coverage between the Cons and Libs, with the NDP and BQ way behind, as well as the Greens - although they had E. May on for heaven knows why, considering the Greens never had any seats in the House. Maybe E May was on "Politics" on a very slow news day. I'm going to be very pissed off if the Cons are able to completely shut down the CBC.

Arts of May wrote:

When I started this discussion, I didn't realize the interest it would generate.

I want to say you're welcome to Unionist who thanked me upthread.

Much of what I believe has been stated already.  So, I'll just say that I believe the CBC needs strengthening, not destroying when it's already in a weakened state.  Its public nature is very important in this era of privatization and attacks on the public sector.  I also agree that the CBC needs to be free from political interference. 

Now, how all this comes to pass is the big question for those of us who feel the CBC is valuable.

This is exactly how I feel Arts of May. Once you destroy a public service, good luck ever getting it back. Of course we have seen the damage done in the last decade or more but the infrastructure is there to restore the CBC to something that is stronger and more reflective of all Canadians.

There's lots of repeat programming these days on CBC 1 but I have to say that that program that highlights programming from the past (can't remember the name but it was on this early afternoon) is a joy to listen to. Sure some of the programming dating back to the 40s and 50s was kind of earnest and naive but so where we as a nation.

Unionist wrote:

George Victor wrote:

Your complaint about "paying" for a public broadcaster is a Conservative lament, Remind.

That is exactly the point. It's ok if private billionaires run roughshod over public opinion, but woe betide the public broadcaster that steps out of line on my dollar.

Thanks for this, George.

Give it a rest you 2 on the casting aspersions of it being a 'Conservative lament' and thereby trying to diminish my POV. I could say the same damn things about several of your 2 positions, at any given time.

Public broadcasters should not be; promoting propaganda of any sort, and failing to report the actual news, full stop. If they do, they are NOT a public broadcaster, they are covertly and corruptly using Canadian dollars for corporate master's interests, in order to feather their personal nests.

It is the same thing actually.

If they are doing things they should not be doing, quite obviously the opposite is what they should be doing, but are not.

Oh yes, Anna Maria Tremonte, Gomeshi et al are so "progressive". Have not heard anything left on CBC radio for decades either. in fact, 101 Classic Rock out of Vancouver has more left content, and it is almost nil there too, other than for sarcastic commentary and twisted tunes.

But I like your analogy and agree with it.

Slumberjack wrote:

The save the CBC crowd reminds me of an overgrown youngster who still insists on dragging around that stain encrusted, threadbare security blanket which hasn't seen a rinse in years, despite the fact that the tattered shreds represent a bio-health hazard on so many levels.

Harper puts out feelers to stop funding the CBC - and some babblers start listing how bad the CBC is (as if this is some kind of revelation to anyone left of Genghis Khan).

Predator, meet prey.

Now, what about them horrible wait times for surgery? You can get anything yanked or chopped fast in the U.S.!!

Do you listen to CBC Radio one? Extensively or not at all?

"...if you don't "do" CBC radio, just say so," please.  (And if you don't , look nextdoor at CBC Nerds and see what you missed. (or will?)

Unionist wrote:

Harper puts out feelers to stop funding the CBC - and some babblers start listing how bad the CBC is (as if this is some kind of revelation to anyone left of Genghis Khan).  Predator, meet prey.

Similar I suppose to when the mainstream media establishment informs us of how bad the troublesome left has become, after being led to a few broken windows by an equally shocked mainstream left.  Where do these good for nothings get off with disturbing things in such a manner.