The Shotgun Blog
Tuesday, August 22, 2006
Congratulations to Stephen
Posted by Ezra Levant on August 22, 2006 | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Congratulations to Stephen:
Well done in getting them to admit their error.
However, all the contrition in the world can't save the CBC from its past errors, like the "Valor and the Horror" which compared Canada's soldiers to the Nazis, and said some Nazis had nothing to feel ashamed about for what they did in the war, and for supporting 9/11 in a "townhall" meeting.
Destroy the CBC once and for all. Leave no building standing, no piece of equipment to be sold = burn it all. Its archives should be sealed away for a century. This colossal and unforgivable waste of money should be silenced forever.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2006-08-22 1:34:58 PM
People can make a difference, particularly if they use new technology like the Internet and blogs to make a breakthrough in the status quo. Stephen Taylor has mastered it. It took 20 years before JFK showed the world how to use new technology like television to get elected. It took Stephen half that time … :>)
Posted by: nomdenet | 2006-08-22 2:06:03 PM
TapeScam, aka Libanonallah.
Libs are in pretzels. TDH calls Borys a Liar Liberal.
Dr. C. Bennett is after Borys's tail; she says Borys must resign his post as Ass. Critic. Is Dr. C. Bennett a surgeon?
This was on CeeBeeCee? Has anyone a tape of this conservation?
CBC reporter has allowed Lib TDH to listen to the tape.
Why? Who has privileged access to CBC tapes? How was this arranged? ...-
August 22, 2006 - Some more thoughts:
• I heard these exact words come out of the mouth of Borys Wrzesnewskyj as recorded by a CBC reporter's tape recorder:
Reporter: "Are you in favour of Hezbollah being taken off the terror list."
Wrzesnewskyj: "Yes, I would be."
Therefore, this spin that Borys is now trying to put on the situation is not accurate. As advocated by Carolyn Bennett, this guy needs to resign from his post as Associate Critic for Foreign Affairs immediately. ...-
Posted by: maz2 | 2006-08-22 2:50:43 PM
It's a victory of sorts to see the CBC forced to admit on air that there was a problem with a news report, Ezra, but I sure don't see the merest hint of a concession that they have an anti-Israel, anti-Conservative bias. The apology pointed in a completely different direction by reiterating the ombudsman's pseudo-accountable take: that it was an editing mistake which they "should have taken the time to correct."
I think that's beyond disingenuous. The *entire* piece was an artfully constructed anti-Harper missive which was entirely congruent in tone with their reluctantly admitted one supposed mistake. What about the gratuitous Bush/Harper slur? Or Lawand's sarcastic, insinuating tone in her opening line, about Harper meeting a "safe distance away", which was immediately followed by the "bhurrning women and the childrens!" protester?
They apologized for one edit in which they 'accidentally' made it appear that the PM's comments were in response to the protester's words. That's not the same as any acknowlegement that Lawand's piece was anti-Conservatie editorial/propaganda presented under the guise of "reporting".
Posted by: EBD | 2006-08-22 3:40:18 PM
Boring Borys is no match for Dr Carolyn Bennet MD
a very smart and tough Lady. Borys must be forced
to Resign or be expelled from the Liberal Party and Caucus. Martin should be expelled of course,
"let me make this perfectly clear" will never be heard again in the political Wars. Honest Reporting is focused on the CBC, and has had many, many complaints. I rarely watch CBC News
but today I caught one of Their Barbie Dolls badgering a Israeli Government PR person, who made quick work of the little lady.CBC is rated along with BBC as the most anti Israeli broadcaster in the World. Down here in the sticks of NB, we are fortunate to get access to a real Public Broadcaster PBS Boston and Detroit via Bangor Maine. CTV is not much better than the CBC, but it is time for the CBC to go.
Posted by: Jack Macleod | 2006-08-22 4:43:30 PM
The internet community has forced the CBC to acknowledge what is essentially manipulation of news.
That information is now out there for the whole world to know.
CBC news cannot be trusted for accurate news presentation, therefore the suspicion will haunt every presentation.
Paul Hunter, Ayellah, Neil, Carol, Evan, Harry, Heather and all the rest at CBC, need to know that every time they face a camera, Canadians via the internet are watching and listening with increased skepticism as to the accuracy of their particular presentation.
Good work Kate, Stephen Taylor ( the Shotgun for the bump) and those who wrote or emailed their concern to the CBC ivory tower regarding the manipulation.
Internet media watch has come of age.
Now let's focus on CTV and Global TV, they as well, suffer from the same affliction as regards to conservatism and Harper in particular.
As an aside: Bill O'Reilly, FOX TV, only a week or so ago named the CBC as liars in response to a Canadian letter writer, regarding a story (hatchet job) they did on him , some while ago.
Posted by: Joe Molnar | 2006-08-22 5:03:06 PM
It is past time that we dismantle CBC.
Here on Radio-Canada, every day we see Hezbollah Propaganda. How come a state broadcaster can do that given Hezbollah is a terrorist organization?
It appears only about one square mile of Beirut was attacked because it was where Hezbollah had its tenants. But Radio-Canada gives you the impression that half Beirut is destroyed.
Falsification of information is flagrant but if one does not take time to listen to dependable sources, it gets into its mind just like the nazi propaganda. Remember that propaganda was an important part of the nazi apparatus?
Posted by: Rémi Houle | 2006-08-22 5:11:49 PM
Excellent Comment Joe - it is simply not acceptable that Citizens of Canada cannot trust it's national broadcasters, and their "agendas"
of course they appear to be scared shitless of
Harper's intelligence and empathy with Canadians
from coast to coast. University Journalism Schools and their Marxist dogma contribute to the biased mediocrity of Canada's media. Jack MacLeod
Posted by: Jack Macleod | 2006-08-22 5:15:33 PM
Joe Molnar wrote: Now let's focus on CTV and Global TV, they as well, suffer from the same affliction as regards to conservatism and Harper in particular.
Give us a break on this subject. The only thing CTV and Global care about is that the CRTC will maintain the status quo. Restricting entry into broadcasting = lots of profits for existing broadcasters, and that is all that ultimately matters to them.
Posted by: No Spin Zone | 2006-08-22 5:48:26 PM
Yes, it is good to see them getting caught for once, but they are unreformable. For them nothing has really changed nor do I expect it to change.
So why exactly do we continue to fund it? CBC, English and French (worse yet), needs to be scrapped. They are no better than the BBC and both serve only the Leftist/Islamist cause.
It is sad to have to admit this, since once upon a time long ago the CBC and BBC were something of which to be proud.
Posted by: Alain | 2006-08-22 5:48:40 PM
Zebulon Pike wrote: Destroy the CBC once and for all. Leave no building standing, no piece of equipment to be sold = burn it all. Its archives should be sealed away for a century. This colossal and unforgivable waste of money should be silenced forever.
What a nitwit. Do you have any idea what the CBC is worth? It is one of the most technically advanced broadcasters is the world. It was the first network in the world that converted to digital. Broadcasters from around the world visit the CBC to view their technical expertise. If it was sold as it is it would be worth billions, and you want to destroy it.
Posted by: No Spin Zone | 2006-08-22 5:55:08 PM
When I refered in critical terms to the ombudsman's response to complaints, I was in error. I mistook an e-mail, re-posted in comments at Stephen Taylor's, as having been from the ombudsman, when in fact it was from by Jonathan Whitten, Executive Producer at the National.
It's an important distinction, and a bad error on my part. Ombudsman Vince Carlin's statement (cbc.ca/ombudsman/page/Lawand.pdf) is actually reasonable and appropriately critical of the Lawand's report. The larger issue of institutional bias at CBC is obviously beyond the scope of his examination, but at least his report seriously addresses some of the problems, structural and otherwise, inherent in the Lawand piece.
Posted by: EBD | 2006-08-22 6:28:38 PM
It may seem like a waste, but burning the CBC will provide a sense of closure over the issue. It's like the fall of the Bastille, the storming of the Winter Palace, the liberation of the Nazi death camps, the fall of the Berlin Wall, the end of Apartheid, or the destruction of the Saddam regime.
Not only should things end, they must be seen to be end. Just signing the act to disband the CBC isn't enough - its imprint on society must be visibly and publically removed. I personally want to drive the first bulldozer into the main door of CBC headquarters. It also serves the function of preventing any re-establishment.
It may seem to be a waste, but when compared to the tens of billions the CBC has wasted over the years, it is a mere drop in the bucket.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2006-08-22 6:32:03 PM
The bottom of every CBC and BBC news story should have a disclosure statement that says:
“ We believe in big government that supports us. Therefore we will distort every news report to tilt in the direction of utopian parties and we attempt to keep free-market conservatives out of power because we know they’ll close us down.
“This is not immoral behaviour it is simply pragmatic survival instincts - plus we like our little gaggle of utopians that would not be able to otherwise congregate in anything other than this anachronistic commanding heights environment.”
Posted by: nomdenet | 2006-08-22 6:39:25 PM
NOW CBC-Tv should for a change have a series of a heterosexual couple who come out of the CBC-closet to shoch and aw the CBC employees. With hatefilled left-wingers against this heterosexual couple because their Christians too!.
Posted by: Larry | 2006-08-22 7:20:52 PM
Sell the CBC. There is simply no need for the CBC.
Posted by: philanthropist | 2006-08-22 7:42:15 PM
Larry wrote: NOW CBC-Tv should for a change have a series of a heterosexual couple who come out of the CBC-closet to shoch and aw the CBC employees. With hatefilled left-wingers against this heterosexual couple because their Christians too!.
WOW. That's insightful. Do you have any more gems like that?
Posted by: No Spin Zone | 2006-08-22 8:02:21 PM
nomdenet wote: The bottom of every CBC and BBC news story should have a disclosure statement that says:
“ We believe in big government that supports us. Therefore we will distort every news report to tilt in the direction of utopian parties and we attempt to keep free-market conservatives out of power because we know they’ll close us down.
Do you think that commercial broadcasters never soften or omit stories that may adversely affect a large advertiser?
Posted by: No Spin Zone | 2006-08-22 8:04:22 PM
Zebulon Pike wrote:It may seem like a waste, but burning the CBC will provide a sense of closure over the issue.It's like the fall of the Bastille, the storming of the Winter Palace, the liberation of the Nazi death camps, the fall of the Berlin Wall, the end of Apartheid, or the destruction of the Saddam regime.
Hyperbole Alert. Hyperbole Alert. This is not a test.
Posted by: No Spin Zone | 2006-08-22 8:14:33 PM
If I've said it once , I've said it a million times. Direct-TV, baby!!! You couldn't stumble across a CBC channel if you tried. Oh, the beauty of technology.
Posted by: Bruce | 2006-08-22 8:32:43 PM
But I don’t pay for the other stations. Journalists are utopians, I can’t do much about that, I admit. I don’t buy the Red Star, but I do have to pay for the CBC although I never watch it and that inequity of my paying for the political enemy’s utopian propaganda drives me nuts.
You seem quite close to the situation. Do you see any way for us conservatives to negotiate a thaw between ourselves these CBC conservative loathers? Am I missing something? Don’t they hate us for the very pragmatic reasons I mentioned?
Posted by: nomdenet | 2006-08-22 9:40:16 PM
Sent to all MP's, the Ombudsman, C. Lawand and Jonathan Whitten of the CBC:
Whether it's photoshopped Reuter's photos or artfully edited news items, bloggers - in this case Stephen Taylor of http://www.stephentaylor.ca/archives/000653.html have again forced the mainstream media to confront their integrity and reliability in presenting the 'facts' as opposed to 'facts as we see and present them'. Click on link for brief 1:23 video.
Diana Swain on last nights CBC National News, admitted that because of editing "it appeared as if" Prime Minister Harper was callous and uncaring when "in fact" his response was to something entirely different. According to Ms. Swain "We (the CBC) did not make that clear. We should have."
CBC not so sorry, after all:
Followup from the CBC Ombudsman's report: http://www.cbc.ca/ombudsman/page/Lawand.pdf
"Jonathan Whitten, the Executive Producer of The National, replied saying, in part, that while he agreed with concerns about the structure of the report, he felt that the segment selected was not a misrepresentation of Mr. Harper’s position. He wrote that he regretted not taking the time to make it clear what prompted the Prime Minister’s response."
It is apparent that while the Executive Producer of the National regrets not 'making clear what prompted' the PM's response, he has no regrets about rejigging the editing. Knowing what lies in the PM's heart, the Executive Producer clearly believes his implication that the PM is completely callous to the pleas of the Lebanese is completely accurate.
However, the Ombudsman clearly sees it differently than the Executive Producer:
"In this case, the most dramatic element of the item was just unfair and, as I said above, violated the direct prohibition on using an answer from one question as if it were an answer to another. The producer argues that Mr. Harper’s views were fairly stated, but the context and structure were such as to mislead the viewer."
It seems that Executive Producer Jonathan Whitten just doesn't get it. He is unable to divorce his personal evaluation of the Prime Minister from his job of accurately and fairly reporting the news.
But since the Ombudsman closes with "I applaud the willingness (of the CBC or Executive Director?) to revisit the issue." It seems there is a wee bit of contrition but still no responsibility for a direct violation of the Journalism Standards and Practices Code.
Mr. Whitten needs to go back to Journalism school.
Posted by: Randy | 2006-08-22 10:00:06 PM
"It's a victory of sorts to see the CBC forced to admit on air that there was a problem with a news report, Ezra, but I sure don't see the merest hint of a concession that they have an anti-Israel, anti-Conservative bias. The apology pointed in a completely different direction by reiterating the ombudsman's pseudo-accountable take: that it was an editing mistake which they "should have taken the time to correct."
I think that's beyond disingenuous."
What's disingenious is Ezra Levant's blog post suggesting this is an admission of "anti-Israel, anti-Conservative bias."
Posted by: Ian Scott | 2006-08-22 10:15:57 PM
When Ahmedinejad was talking about some spectacular events occuring on Aug. 22, I was thinking along the lines of maybe nuclear war or something. But this! Nothing could have prepared me; the CBC admitted to making a mistake! I nearly crapped myself (after I fainted of course). And then to top it off, I just heard Keith Bogus on the National say that the "liberals have been outperformed by their rivals, the conservatives" on the middle-east foreign policy issue. I then lost control of all bodily functions, and am now considering quitting booze cold-turkey.
Posted by: Big Makk | 2006-08-22 10:20:32 PM
nomdenet wrote:You seem quite close to the situation. Do you see any way for us conservatives to negotiate a thaw between ourselves these CBC conservative loathers? Am I missing something? Don’t they hate us for the very pragmatic reasons I mentioned?
The problem I see with the CBC culture is that they believe they are the last bastion that is saving Canada from the evils of American broadcasting / culture.
However, I believe that the CBC is irrelevant. Its audience numbers are so low that virtually nobody watches it, and if things continue the way its going, no amount of money will save it.
As far as I’m concerned there are two components to the solution. First, privatize the CBC and make it accountable to its shareholders or turn it into a PBS type specialty channel where viewers and corporations subsidize it.
Second, get rid of the broadcasting component of the CRTC and allow anybody that wants to broadcast to do so. There are spectrum issues but those are resolvable. Let the marketplace decide who wins and loses the battle for eyeballs. The advertisers will go with whoever can deliver the type of audience that they want. If CBC, CTV or Global can’t adjust their businesses to meet this new market dynamic them they will fade away and someone else will fill the gap.
Posted by: No Spin Zone | 2006-08-22 10:34:32 PM
I do think that something important is signalled by this event. In the past, the CBC used to want us to watch them. Now they're finding out that we are using new technology to actually *watch* them. I don't know what this means, yet, but I do think we may be witnessing something seminal. My kudos to Mr. Taylor.
Posted by: Vitruvius | 2006-08-22 10:50:19 PM
No Spin Zone, instead of insulting posters here with your stupid and uniformed long fanciful comments-do think of something original yourself or at least post a reply to the question. Read the question than post a comment regarding it.Even lefty's such as yourself can at times actually comment on the question. You your self are a big time spinner.
Posted by: Larry | 2006-08-23 12:33:47 AM
The CBC also did a story tonight that actually articulated a scenario for unprecidented nuclear destruction.
I know it's a baby step, but this is progress!
Posted by: Pete E | 2006-08-23 12:59:24 AM
It wasn’t an ‘editing mistake’.
It was ‘a misleading use of editing’. (Vince Carlin, Ombudsman, CBC) http://www.cbc.ca/ombudsman/page/Lawand.pdf
Truly not a subtle difference.
Posted by: Mike D | 2006-08-23 4:06:40 AM
The damned twitheads at CBC did not give a heartfelt apology, they are not capable of that. Listening to Diana Swain talking without moving her lips, it's hard to call it an apology. It sounded more like they were making excuses, blaming editing, not Lawand, for skewing the facts and putting Harper's comment right where it would do the most damage. It's too cute by half, don't buy it, it was totally set up and they know it. Let's hope the government, Bev Oda in particular, is looking at ways to clean up CBC so we can watch the news from our National broadcaster free of biased reporters skewing facts to manipulate opinion.
The very thought of a new season of "Politics with Don Newman" is enough to make one cringe.
Posted by: Liz J | 2006-08-23 5:54:35 AM
Thanks, I agree with your solution.
But the problem isn’t what CBC thinks “defending us from evil American culture” because the inanity of TV is a global phenomenon –there are very dumb shows in Italy etc
Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (pretty smart for a Democrat) had a term for the ongoing dropping down to the lowest common dennominator as a democracy matures; he called it “Defining down decency.”
However, I think it is “evil” of the CBC to distort the news by being like Sid Ryan’s CUPE and favouring the PLO terrorists over a democracy –Israel. I first noticed how extreme that distortion could be with the Jenin Massacre in 2002. In my discussions afterwards with people about the distortion, it was too late, the damage had been done, CBC actually single headedly caused anti-Semitism in Canada. That’s evil. Also, the BBC instead of helping Churchill with his Gathering Storm pronouncements pummelled him and spoke highly of Hitler. So state-owned broadcasting distortions are not new. Why do they do this, what’s their motivation? It must be a sub-conscious Faustian deal between the utopians and the fascists as an ally against the capitalists.
Posted by: nomdenet | 2006-08-23 6:52:22 AM
Dismantle the CBC and sell it for parts. If you just sold it as a whole you'd have the same problem but without the subsidy (although that would at least save us a billion a year.)
The other thing we need to do is scrap the CRTC and all the production grants. The CRTC protects insiders, liberals and other vermin. Grants give left-wing mandarins the ability to fund propaganda. If our culture needs "support" (which I don't buy to begin with) just lower taxes on production to zero. Lots of stuff would get done but it wouldn't be controlled by the left.
Posted by: Warwick | 2006-08-23 7:42:25 AM
Culture does need support. It’s somewhat like the military, it’s not an investment, there is no return, but we have to defend who we are.
The next election should include a package that uses the saved money from the CBC and CRTC and channels it toward Canadian production with tax incentives as Warwick suggested.
Posted by: nomdenet | 2006-08-23 7:58:27 AM
Several Years Ago, PM Chretien, not noted for listening or viewing CBC programs, requested an overview of CBC operations in the first instance, focused on Quebec based French language broadcasting, which he and his inner circle recognized after discussions with MP's and
Provincial politicians was and remains a centre for Separatism and anti Jewish comment. The discussion also moved towards complaints from Bell Media plus Rogers Media, very big financial supporters of the Liberal Party, about CBC subsidies. Several years ago our group submitted a complaint to the Federal Competition Bureau, and a rather pompus young lady informed me in both official languages that the CBC a "Crown Corporation" was not subject to regulations related to competition legislation in Canada. The CBC could be disposed of by eliminating up to 80% subsidies, and analysis of asset management, eliminating expensive real estate in Canada. The CBC is worth "millions" maybe, but only if their resources can be optioned and sold to new private sector investors. Technical people and some in house management retained but the personalities can go to WalMart, sooner the better. MacLeod
Posted by: Jack Macleod | 2006-08-23 8:20:40 AM
Peter Pansbridge and all his Tinkerbell "experts" would make wonderful greeters at Wal-Mart.
Posted by: nomdenet | 2006-08-23 8:41:40 AM
nomdenet: Please, the last people we want to meet is Mansbridge et al at Wal-Mart. For gawds sake what would that do for business?
Posted by: Liz J | 2006-08-23 8:54:34 AM
You're right Liz J , it might drive them to unionize , then there'd be no smiles from glum greeters giving out copies of Outreach.
Posted by: nomdenet | 2006-08-23 9:22:37 AM
Wal-mart is too good for them.
My suggestion: give them jobs with other networks where business matters and they actually require integrity.
The CBC has had such an easy ride that I don't think they could adapt to the real world. Too bad for them.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2006-08-23 11:30:43 AM
Warwick wrote: Dismantle the CBC and sell it for parts. If you just sold it as a whole you'd have the same problem but without the subsidy (although that would at least save us a billion a year.)
How would you have the same problem? If a group of private investors bought the CBC and turned it into a commercial network then profit would be the motivating factor. If viewers didn’t like what they put on air they would go out of business. If you sold it off piecemeal only the stations in large markets would survive. You only realistically have two options; shut the whole thing down or sell it as a complete network
Warwick also wrote: The CRTC protects insiders, liberals and other vermin.
The CRTC protects existing broadcasters, regardless of their political bent. Why do you think that there are essentially only 4 private broadcasters in Canada, Bell Globemedia, Global , Corus and Alliance Atlantis? Unlike the FCC in the US which has no mandate to regulate cable, the CRTC does. And it uses that power to restrict new entrants, keeping existing broadcasters happy and rich.
Warwick also wrote: Grants give left-wing mandarins the ability to fund propaganda. If our culture needs "support" (which I don't buy to begin with) just lower taxes on production to zero
Very little money actually goes out as grants. Most of it is in the form of production write-offs / tax credits. Why do you think the Americans shoot TV shows and movies here?
Posted by: No Spin Zone | 2006-08-23 11:52:07 AM
Zebulon Pike wrote: My suggestion: give them jobs with other networks where business matters and they actually require integrity.
Integrity? News is a commodity. The days of Murrow and Cronkite are long gone. It makes little money for commercial networks. There’s a saying with a lot of broadcasters; no news is good news.
Posted by: No Spin Zone | 2006-08-23 12:02:15 PM
Sell the CBC. Faithful CBC viewers, of which there are apparently trillions, will certainly pony up the cash to buy it and keep it going. This infusion of cash would allow it to offer even more Canadian programming - and editorial direction from the viewing owners, they would be so pleased to be able to attack anyone they want constantly. The CBC sucks so bad I don't watch it anyway, but I shouldn't have to pay for it still.
Posted by: philanthropist | 2006-08-23 12:26:08 PM
You have a lot of knowledge. I have a lot of bias. I’d like to improve my knowledge. Please help me here.
4 National broadcasters is a lot in a country Canada’s size; it’s like 40 in the USA. For example, I’d sure like to have 4 utilities competing with Ontario Hydro. Similarly, it’s like Canadians dumping on the banks. We have 7 or so nationwide banks clubbing it out on price and products. The USA doesn’t have 70 banks doing that; they have a lot of little oligopolies overcharging in their counties – that is rapidly changing.
Anyway how many networks should we have? Is there a point of diminishing returns in these quasi utility-like enterprises? I sort of think so, but I also like the freemarket.
Would you close down the CRTC?
Would you at least take cable away from it?
In short, I really think you know a lot about broadcasting, please share it with us. I’m all for free-markets but I don’t want to destroy enterprises and people’s jobs overnight just to suit my ideology. If I were Harper, I’d like to allow for a sensible transition. I think you could offer suggestions. Thanks.
Posted by: nomdenet | 2006-08-23 12:37:16 PM
Now it only remains to be seen if the CBC is waking up from a self-induced coma of how important their view of life in Canada and the world is...perhaps now they will realize that there are some people in the audience who are fully awake, thinking Canadians, and a little more than ticked-off at all the BS we've been fed.
Posted by: anonymous | 2006-08-23 1:56:07 PM
As for the CBC, shutting it down was my point. Selling it for parts means just that - parts. Buildings, equipment, etc. Not divisions. I want it gone.
I meant the broadcasters and media people when I said insiders. All the broadcasters have had cosy relationships with the Liberal party. Every one. Because they had to...
Billions are spent on grants directly to Canadian production. This is on top of generous tax breaks (which Hollywood and other foreign production companies are eligible for.)
Here's a list of subsidy granting agencies (I've included arts as well as broadcasting but not listed and exhaustive list.)
I have not listed any of the funds set up by the broadcasters and cable companies as mandated by the CRTC. These companies are forced to offer grants and subsidies in order to maintain their licensing.
A Guide to Federal Programs for the Film and Video Sectors - January, 2006
This one will you won't believe...
A one-stop shopping area for freeloaders making things cultural: (also federal)
Special mention goes to this section:
Posted by: Warwick | 2006-08-23 2:42:41 PM
Hollywood comes to Ontario to make movies cheaper - using Toronto as a stand-in for urban areas (like the movie "Narc", set in Detroit but filmed in Toronto because it looked more run down.)
Hollywood comes to Alberta to make better movies. Witness the beautiful cinematography of 1978's "Days of Heaven" and 1994's "Legends of the Fall" - both of which won Oscars. "Unforgiven" was also filmed here, and well the results were phenomenal. If you need a beautiful location, you can scarcely do better than Alberta.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2006-08-23 4:14:16 PM
nomdenet wrote: 4 National broadcasters is a lot in a country Canada’s size; it’s like 40 in the USA. For example, I’d sure like to have 4 utilities competing with Ontario Hydro. Similarly, it’s like Canadians dumping on the banks. We have 7 or so nationwide banks clubbing it out on price and products. The USA doesn’t have 70 banks doing that; they have a lot of little oligopolies overcharging in their counties – that is rapidly changing.
I didn’t say national broadcasters, I said private broadcasters. Two of the four I mentioned, Corus and Alliance Atlantis, are cable only. The only national terrestrial broadcasters are CTV and Global. All the others are local, independent stations.
You can’t compare Canadian and US broadcasters because they regulated differently. In the US a single network cannot own stations with more than 40% national market share. In Canada both CTV and Global own all their own stations.
nomdenet also wrote: Anyway how many networks should we have? Is there a point of diminishing returns in these quasi utility-like enterprises? I sort of think so, but I also like the freemarket.
That depends. If you are willing to watch Canadian made programming then you could have 4 or 5 more. If you want to watch The Simpsons and CSI Miami they all you need is what we have now because CTV and Global will continue to act as portals to US programming. BTW. That’s were they make the bulk of their profits.
nomdenet also wrote:Would you close down the CRTC?
The CRTC does more than just regulate broadcasting. It manages the spectrum, regulates telephone, satellite, etc. They should be out of regulating cable. What cable makes available should between the cable operator and the customer.
nomdenet also wrote: I’m all for free-markets but I don’t want to destroy enterprises and people’s jobs overnight just to suit my ideology.
How’s this for a suggestion. Offer the CBC to Newscorp. And get them to commit to say 40% Canadian content. If Rupert took them up on it the broadcasting landscape in Canada would be altered so radically that we would probably wonder why we didn’t do it sooner.
Posted by: No Spin Zone | 2006-08-23 5:32:32 PM
NSZ I Like it.
BTW I never got a reply from the CPC - surprise surprise - on my request to have Sheila Fraser do an audit as we discussed previously.
I have since seen info that Hockey suposedly earns $30 million for CBC , less than I thought.
Posted by: nomdenet | 2006-08-23 6:00:36 PM
* Regarding CBC-TV,upon loosing Hockey Night In Canada, they should air The United Soccer League and the MLS plus all the CFL games too perhaps.Do like CBC-TV Saturdays Late Night Movies especially the classics and Royal Air Force.But CBC should hire some Canadian-conservative minded personal at all levels.Plus be not so negative towards heterosexuality-for without the human race would have died out naturally long ago also Christianity too which is a major part of real Canadiana-most Canadians have been Christian and still are.Also more ballance towards homosexuality.Too many times the CBC radio and tv act like cheer-leaders only for homosexuality. Hey homosexual couples have their conflicks and break-aparts too and lesbians are not all beautiful.But CBC is part of Canadiana although more so before than the recent 15 years.CBC need's to again reflect not only minority Canada but also majority Canada mostly and it's real history not political correct Canadian history with good common sense too.
Posted by: Larry | 2006-08-24 3:23:10 AM
In actual fact the CBC a Crown Corporation does not qualify for Tax Credits nor Investment Tax Credits because the Corporation does not pay taxes. Today, Production Tax Credits in the Federal Sector are very limited and confined to
Canadian Production Companies, a situation brought upon by misuse of ITC's by a large Quebec based corporation some years ago. Agreed Alberta has created an outstanding Film Industry their use of Provincial Tax Credits and related programs is impressive The main complaints about the CBC are focused on their news broadcasting on radio and television, and their typical CBC "spin" on hard news. The late Barbara Frum would be appalled at the bullshit which is generated by CBC News under the direction of Tony Burman. In actual fact the CBC has about 5% of the Canadian viewing and listening public, as reported in their Annual Report to the Government of Canada. The CBC can be disposed of using the same formula the Fed's use to "privatize" government resources, MacLeod
Posted by: Jack MacLeod | 2006-08-24 3:56:11 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.