Should the CBC be privatized
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 10 Next
fifeboy @ Mon Dec 08, 2008 12:58 pm
MacDonaill MacDonaill:
Jesus. How many times are we going to debate this shit? No one will ever change their mind on the subject anyway. Shut up already.
Well, lets see! Ride wants to push his idea that there are no ideas beside Liberal ideas on the CBC. One can point out endless examples of interviews with serious rightwing thinkers being presented, or that the now deceased Barbara Frum being the host of one of the longest lasting public affairs show on CBC radio, and Ride and the other Right Thunkers will just ignore the evidence.
One other point needs to be looked at. The CBC is Canadian and therefore should reflect the opinions of Canadians. The Connies keep yelping about how the Coalition of the Liberals and NDP has brought up the Conservatives in the polls to a whopping 40%. Which means that 60% are more left leaning. 40% can produce a majority government, but it still does not represent the views of the majority of people.
Brenda @ Mon Dec 08, 2008 12:59 pm
sandorski sandorski:
Brenda Brenda:
Scape Scape:
Hard to measure that as we are measuring more than just dollars here. If there was better shows run privately in greater numbers then I would think the CBC has become redundant but I don't see that. One of the best shows on CBC radio is As It Happens and I have yet to see anything that even remotely compares to it on the private networks. It's amazing what a simple phone and a radio can do.
What makes you think the CBC should change its schedule or programs if it doesn't get government funding anymore?
I think there are lots of businesses that want to advertise on the CBC and thus pay for the shows the CBC wants to broadcast.
They already can Advertise.
Then WHY does the CBC get so much funding?
Wada @ Mon Dec 08, 2008 1:04 pm
This may be wicki but it does give some insight into public broadcasting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_television
Brenda @ Mon Dec 08, 2008 1:10 pm
sandorski sandorski:
It wasn't long ago that Telus(BCTel), BCHydro/West Kootenay Power, and all BC Highways maintenance were run as Government Corporations. These days those Corporations are mandated to provide service beyond what they would normally do simply as Private business. Having largely grown up in the Boundary area(West of the Kootenays)I remember a time when CBC TV/Radio were the only Canadian TV/Radio service available with any consistency. "Free Market" considerations have little to do with the current level of service being provided in your area.
That doesn't mean that the "Free Market" can't continue from here. Just a little historical background to things to help understand Canadian attitudes about the subject(s). Privitization of these various Services has been a real mixed bag. Electircal services seemed far less prone to problems back then, although I think that is largely due to the integration with the US Power Grid and also because I now live on the Coast where the Grid is more prone to failure anyway. Highway's maintenance seems to have suffered from the transition, but that varies from place to place and may have more to do with Provincial Government Funding/Focus.
That doesn't mean that the "Free Market" can't continue from here. Just a little historical background to things to help understand Canadian attitudes about the subject(s). Privitization of these various Services has been a real mixed bag. Electircal services seemed far less prone to problems back then, although I think that is largely due to the integration with the US Power Grid and also because I now live on the Coast where the Grid is more prone to failure anyway. Highway's maintenance seems to have suffered from the transition, but that varies from place to place and may have more to do with Provincial Government Funding/Focus.
Not many businesses have found the Boundary area, as you might be well aware of.
We now have Fortis too, though, no Rogers
I have no idea what my understanding of the history "the Canadian way" has to do with my idea of running businesses. Maybe a fresh way of thinking is exactly what the "rusty" "Canadian way" might need...
*ducks for all the attacks that are going to come her way*
Brenda @ Mon Dec 08, 2008 1:14 pm
Wada Wada:
This may be wicki but it does give some insight into public broadcasting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_television
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_television
We had public broadcasting in Holland too. Little different then here though, but the Wiki link needs to be updated...
TattoodGirl @ Mon Dec 08, 2008 1:19 pm
Brenda Brenda:
sandorski sandorski:
It wasn't long ago that Telus(BCTel), BCHydro/West Kootenay Power, and all BC Highways maintenance were run as Government Corporations. These days those Corporations are mandated to provide service beyond what they would normally do simply as Private business. Having largely grown up in the Boundary area(West of the Kootenays)I remember a time when CBC TV/Radio were the only Canadian TV/Radio service available with any consistency. "Free Market" considerations have little to do with the current level of service being provided in your area.
That doesn't mean that the "Free Market" can't continue from here. Just a little historical background to things to help understand Canadian attitudes about the subject(s). Privitization of these various Services has been a real mixed bag. Electircal services seemed far less prone to problems back then, although I think that is largely due to the integration with the US Power Grid and also because I now live on the Coast where the Grid is more prone to failure anyway. Highway's maintenance seems to have suffered from the transition, but that varies from place to place and may have more to do with Provincial Government Funding/Focus.
That doesn't mean that the "Free Market" can't continue from here. Just a little historical background to things to help understand Canadian attitudes about the subject(s). Privitization of these various Services has been a real mixed bag. Electircal services seemed far less prone to problems back then, although I think that is largely due to the integration with the US Power Grid and also because I now live on the Coast where the Grid is more prone to failure anyway. Highway's maintenance seems to have suffered from the transition, but that varies from place to place and may have more to do with Provincial Government Funding/Focus.
Not many businesses have found the Boundary area, as you might be well aware of.
We now have Fortis too, though, no Rogers
I have no idea what my understanding of the history "the Canadian way" has to do with my idea of running businesses. Maybe a fresh way of thinking is exactly what the "rusty" "Canadian way" might need...
*ducks for all the attacks that are going to come her way*
Geeezzz all these damn foreigners coming here and trying to change us....We are a stubborn bunch
Wada @ Mon Dec 08, 2008 1:23 pm
CBC funding has been cut back, cut back and cut back some more over the last twenty or so years and in some ways it shows.
CBC is Canadian. You know, something we can be patriotic aboot, eh! 
Scape @ Mon Dec 08, 2008 1:24 pm
Also, the CBC has beome private as well. CBC newsworld is private and does have commercials. Decision CRTC
$1:
Both Newsworld and RDI will continue to provide services based on news and information, with at least 90% of all programming they broadcast qualifying as Canadian.
3. The Broadcasting Act (the Act) requires the CBC to provide programming that informs, enlightens and entertains. The two 24-hour news services offer a panoply of information programming choices that the main services could not duplicate. They provide a second window for important news and public affairs programs and create programs of their own that are regularly replayed on the main services. Though their operations are based on commercial revenues and subscriber fees rather than primarily on public funding, and though Newsworld and RDI report to the Commission as distinct and separately licensed entities, there exists a healthy symbiosis between core and specialty services on both the French and English sides of the CBC. They cooperate and share personnel and equipment in an effort to maximize every production dollar available for the benefit of their viewers.
3. The Broadcasting Act (the Act) requires the CBC to provide programming that informs, enlightens and entertains. The two 24-hour news services offer a panoply of information programming choices that the main services could not duplicate. They provide a second window for important news and public affairs programs and create programs of their own that are regularly replayed on the main services. Though their operations are based on commercial revenues and subscriber fees rather than primarily on public funding, and though Newsworld and RDI report to the Commission as distinct and separately licensed entities, there exists a healthy symbiosis between core and specialty services on both the French and English sides of the CBC. They cooperate and share personnel and equipment in an effort to maximize every production dollar available for the benefit of their viewers.
Link
$1:
The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) won the license for the all-news network in November 1987. Private broadcasters fought this decision of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC). In particular, Allarcom Ltd., whose own bid lost to CBC, felt that there was undue favoritism towards the national public broadcaster. After a tough challenge in a conservative parliament sympathetic to Allarcom's charges, the CRTC's decision was finally accepted, though not without delaying the network's start date for over a year. Federal cabinet actions, however, modified the conditions of the license by insisting that CBC Newsworld involve the private sector in their operations and that they develop a similar French-language service.
Channels like Newsworld represent the evolution of the CBC mandate but the base service is still very much viable as a great deal of the programming would never exist in the private market.
Brenda @ Mon Dec 08, 2008 1:31 pm
TattoodGirl TattoodGirl:
Brenda Brenda:
*ducks for all the attacks that are going to come her way*
Geeezzz all these damn foreigners coming here and trying to change us....We are a stubborn bunch 
Brenda @ Mon Dec 08, 2008 1:34 pm
Wada Wada:
CBC funding has been cut back, cut back and cut back some more over the last twenty or so years and in some ways it shows.
CBC is Canadian. You know, something we can be patriotic aboot, eh!
CBC is Canadian. You know, something we can be patriotic aboot, eh!
Which is EXACTLY what it should stay, BUT...
uwish @ Mon Dec 08, 2008 1:40 pm
sell it. If it is any good it will survive. If it isn't see ya
as a taxpayer I am getting tired of funding things "Canadian" just so they can be ..Canadian.
ridenrain @ Mon Dec 08, 2008 1:45 pm
fifeboy fifeboy:
MacDonaill MacDonaill:
Jesus. How many times are we going to debate this shit? No one will ever change their mind on the subject anyway. Shut up already.
Well, lets see! Ride wants to push his idea that there are no ideas beside Liberal ideas on the CBC.
Get real, you 'tard. I didn't even start this thread. This is my second post in it and I'm probably one of the few Tories who said we should keep it. Just because you want to save you're overpaid, lazy ass CBC job, don't start blaming me.
I do think we should have a bare bones, basic national network. Something like the weather channel with news. No studio band or billion dollar olympic specticals, just unbiased Canadian news, education, history.
On a parting shot. Mansbridge must be fired. No senate seat or cushy government appointment for him. .. and the toupe is CBC property!
Brenda @ Mon Dec 08, 2008 1:49 pm
$1:
I do think we should have a bare bones, basic national network. Something like the weather channel with news. No studio band or billion dollar olympic specticals, just unbiased Canadian news, education, history.
bootlegga @ Mon Dec 08, 2008 1:51 pm
Brenda Brenda:
But does that mean they need SO much funding?
Why would a private company broadcast what a public network does? I think the CBC can survive on advertisement, and still be the network they are.
Why would a private company broadcast what a public network does? I think the CBC can survive on advertisement, and still be the network they are.
Given that TV shows and movies cost a small fortune to produce, yes. Passchendaele, Paul Gross' homage to WW1 cost $20 million alone to make. The documentary The Arrow cost several million, and that was almost a decade ago. Many TV shows, even in Canada cost almost a million dollars per episode. If we paid stars what they paid in the US, it would be in ten-twenty million per episode.
It's funny, lots of people bitch about the poor quality of Canadian-made shows, but don't want to pay to make them either. It's a catch 22. No money means poor quality (sets, props, acting, scripts, etc), which usually translates into low ratings, while more money generally equals a better product and better ratings.
Brenda @ Mon Dec 08, 2008 1:55 pm
bootlegga bootlegga:
Brenda Brenda:
But does that mean they need SO much funding?
Why would a private company broadcast what a public network does? I think the CBC can survive on advertisement, and still be the network they are.
Why would a private company broadcast what a public network does? I think the CBC can survive on advertisement, and still be the network they are.
Given that TV shows and movies cost a small fortune to produce, yes. Passchendaele, Paul Gross' homage to WW1 cost $20 million alone to make. The documentary The Arrow cost several million, and that was almost a decade ago. Many TV shows, even in Canada cost almost a million dollars per episode. If we paid stars what they paid in the US, it would be in ten-twenty million per episode.
It's funny, lots of people bitch about the poor quality of Canadian-made shows, but don't want to pay to make them either. It's a catch 22. No money means poor quality (sets, props, acting, scripts, etc), which usually translates into low ratings, while more money generally equals a better product and better ratings.
I watch a lot of Discovery Channel... They are a private company, right? Talking about documentaries, and history...
I understand your point, but what I don't understand, is why it should come out of the pockets of the taxpayers.
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 10 Next