CRTC Mulls Canadian Content On the Internet 269
PsiCTO writes "The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission is going to weigh Internet content regulation — this could mean requiring some amount of Canadian content coming across Canadian pipes. The CRTC is akin to the FCC. They get that they can't 'regulate' the Internet, but are proposing to promote additional Canadian content in some way, as is currently done with radio and TV content. Likely they will discuss tax credits, subsidies, grants, or other traditional mechanisms. What do people think about this? Are there similar efforts, existing or proposed, in other countries?"
Government should not compete (Score:5, Insightful)
Doesn't make as much sense for the Internet (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course this sort of thing exists in other countries, at least for broadcast media. France, for example, has quotas on both television and radio content. [nytimes.com]
I'm not sure that it makes as much sense for the Internet, though. The French idea is that you have limited broadcast time, and without a quota, they'd be playing American music and television shows 24/7. Maybe that makes sense, but with the Internet, you don't have the same broadcasting limits. People choose what they want to listen to with ease, actively seeking out their preferred content from any number of sources.
They can promote domestic content all they want, and it might even be a good thing, but it's not going to have the same "cultural preservation" effects as with broadcast media.
Re:Government should not compete (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Government should not compete (Score:3, Insightful)
The real irony here is that Canada has produced some major acts with little help from Canadian content rules. Rush has been since the late 1970s a major act, selling out arena tours, selling tons of records, while most of it has hardly ever gotten major air time in Canada or the States. The same goes for the Band, which pretty much relocated to the US, and during its heyday, was four-fifths Canadian, and yet is now seen as being one of the most important rock and roll bands of the last half century.
Re:Doesn't make as much sense for the Internet (Score:1, Insightful)
Who then take their american casting company and film their dirty american content in Canada, where its cheaper.
Re:Net Neutrality in Action (Score:2, Insightful)
"Note: I work for the CRTC. They are not proposing influencing the content itself but rather the distribution."
In either case, the nanny state is telling me what I can and cannot watch. Whether it is the content, that is direct cesorship, or the distribution, that is the ability to see what I want without "help" from the government (that is you), it is STILL censorship. It is, like all cancon laws, tarted up censorship.
JE
Re:Net Neutrality in Action (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a great story. When they started showing SCTV down in the States, the CRTC demanded that some extra time in every episode be Canadian in content. So, feeling that this was an insane and idiotic intrusion on the show, Rick Moranis and Dave Thomas literally put a couch in front of a map of Canada, had a single cameraman rolling, and sat around being as stereotypical as possible beer-swilling inbred Ontario morons for the required number of minutes. Bob and Doug were nothing more than one big F--- You to the CRTC's Canadian content rules.
Re:Net Neutrality in Action (Score:5, Insightful)
This isn't net neutrality at all. This is a government agency requiring the exact opposite of net neutrality, namely the favoring of one kind of content over another. By the looks of things you're conflating "net neutrality" with "any government regulation of the Internet".
Re:Doesn't make as much sense for the Internet (Score:3, Insightful)
Where they also get money throw at them by various levels of government in the form of film development tax credits and grants, thus making Governor Schwarzenegger cry.
Tax funded CanCon (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't think anybody would object to you paying a few extra bucks each year to a charity that produced Canadian content if you think that makes your society richer and more interesting.
But do you really think Canadian content would die if Canadians weren't forced to pay for it? If not, why do you think it needs to be funded by taxes? If yes, doesn't it mean most of you don't think it's a worthwhile investment in your society?
Re:Government should not compete (Score:3, Insightful)
When you are a country of ~30 million situated next to a neighbour ten times your size (and that neighbour has a penchant for economic and cultural imperialism), sometimes you have to take steps to prevent the trampling of your artistic community.
Or accept that if your populations' artistic ability is about the same you'll produce 10% the amount of great art as that neighbor. It's not like US TV channels and record companies will discriminate against Canadian artists if they could squeeze money out of them.
Re:Government should not compete (Score:3, Insightful)
I'll gladly accept the insult (complement?) about cultural imperialism - you are right and the world certainly seems to import a lot of our "art". But any country who imposes Nickelback on us deserves the title as well :)
Besides, in 40 years or so we'll all be hearing more stuff like this [thefrontloader.com]...
Re:It's not about the government (Score:5, Insightful)
Canada clearly has a distinct culture, that many of its people want to preserve. However, it does seem that some Canadians do go a bit overboard with it.
When traveling across Europe, or Australia or NZ, it is quite easy to pick the Canadians out. It seems that a very large percentage keep a Maple leaf somewhere on their body or clothing. Evidently, they do not like people assuming that they are Americans due to their accent, so they over compensate.
Since many people have noticed this attitude from Canadians, they usually will not ask someone if they are American if they meet them, so as to avoid offending the Canadians. Instead, they inquire whether one is from Canada, since it seems rare for an American to be insulted by this question.
I think this is a little like a little brother / big brother rivalry. Although Canada is large geographically, it clearly does not have the population of the USA. As such, there is not a concerted effort of Americans trying to implement imperialism over Canada, it just happens due to the numbers. We can see similar examples of this in NZ and Australia. Another example would be Wales and England.
I cannot blame Canadians for trying to get their culture out there. However, going overboard just makes one look a bit silly.
Re:Tax funded CanCon (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:CanCon (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, CBC probably has some of the best radio and news content available, while I'm not personally a fan of most of their TV series.
Their radio shows are all available online as podcasts, and they produce excellent content that I'm proud to sponsor with my tax money.
Re:Net Neutrality in Action (Score:3, Insightful)
Thousands of people are homeless and our medical system has 6-month waiting lists for surgery, but what we really need, clearly, is the government to pay for more horrible "content" on the freakin Internet.
Holy balls. Get out of my wallet.
Re:CanCon (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Net Neutrality in Action (Score:3, Insightful)
Then fuck you and the horse you rode in on. I don't need some government functionary telling me what I should and should not be watching. You tell me it is to save Canada's identity. What is the difference between that and the Quebec Language Police (don't laugh, they are real) who will fine and drive a company out of business in Quebec if they have the unbelievable gall to put English or any non-French word over their store front even if their clients are non-french! In a bilingual country! (This is real... if you cater to a German or Italian clientele, you can't put German or Italian... or English even... on your signs or you will receive hefty fines, and repeated 'offenses' can result in the seizure of your store/business... this went to the world court where Quebec lost and this was named a human rights violation which they ignored and continued to do anyway.)How is telling me what I can watch on TV on public airwaves any different than what the Quebec government does with their Language Police. It is after all in the name of preserving their French culture. Even if it is committing human rights violations, telling me or my kids what language I can put on my store, or what language they use in the playground at recess? There is no difference. It is censorship and a power trip by you, the mind police. Fuck off and die.
If I want to watch 6 channels of HBO (not this bullshit 'HBO Canada' that you so graciously grant us) then I should be able to watch it. Instead you ban me from watching HBO in Canada, and bar me from buying satellite TV from an American firm. Dishnetwork is made Illegal in Canada by the CRTC because their Mind Police don't want us poor Canadians to be overly influenced by American TV. Hey Mind Police: blow me. If I want to immerse myself in pure Americana television then piss off and let me. If I want to watch wall to wall BBC then go blow water buffaloes if you don't like it. If Canadian television were worth watching, I would watch it. But stop forcing me to pay for productions of that pathetic fucking Royal Canadian Air Fucking Farse. The worst shit on TV and we have to pay for it on government funded C fucking BC TV.
And this is such a joke anyway when Canadians continually subvert themselves. It is rich when it is the non Christian immigrants to Canada who complain the most when that Jewish Woman judge insisted on removing a Christmas tree from a Toronto court house at Christmas time because it was offensive to non Christians. What the fuck? Thanks God for the non Christian immigrants who had the temerity to tell people how stupid that was. It was their influence that had a lot to do with bringing the tree back in to show that some small part of the country was celebrating a special day (what? you mean Canada was founded by Christians and it is a mostly Christian society, and many people who came here realized that and saw how stupid it was for us to have our way of life and faith stomped on?... well never mind then!). How ridiculous that the Ontario government actually considered allowing Sharia law for Muslims in family courts. Want to keep a Canadian identity? Then straighten out that kind of bullshit thinking first. Never mind keeping the functioning of the courts and their decisions secular, but Sharia... holy fuck!?
Dude, keep the Canadian Roadblock To Communications the hell out of my life. You all ought to be shot and pissed on. The CRTC: a monument to censorship and back room deals to cable companies, big telecoms, and the RIAA. Good riddance to you.
Re:Net Neutrality in Action (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, this raises my big question about how they are going to categorize "Canadian" content
With TV/Radio the question is not that hard to answer, but when you are talking about websites, it really gets kind of confusing.
Now I didn't read the article, but the summary specifically says "Internet" not "Web." So what content does this apply to then?
Sigh, if only slashdot comments could hold 2 dimensional wikipedia style tables...
Re:It's not about the government (Score:4, Insightful)
When traveling across Europe, or Australia or NZ, it is quite easy to pick the Canadians out. It seems that a very large percentage keep a Maple leaf somewhere on their body or clothing. Evidently, they do not like people assuming that they are Americans due to their accent, so they over compensate.
1. How is wearing a maple leaf overcompensating for a reasonable problem?
2. How many of those folks wearing a maple leaf are Americans who don't like people assuming that they are Americans?
Re:Net Neutrality in Action (Score:3, Insightful)
What is worse is that in Canada, many of the descendants of people who arrived here from roughly 75 to 300 years ago (the now politically correct WASPS) seem to think that the government should be the entity to 'keep the culture' when in fact the culture is kept by the people whether they know it or not. So now Canada has a culture of legislated political correctness complete with the mind police and 'hate crimes' breeding smug narrow minded people content that "we are fighting off the evil American empire" ... who happen to be our biggest trading partner and without whose business we would be broke and not able to afford to hold the collective nose up at American culture. This kind of system crossed with peanut butter gives you the taste of shit stuck to the roof of you mouth. A good culture is dynamic and stands on its own two feet. Standing it on a bureaucracy is like adding an odd weighted third leg shoved up our collective ass.
Ah well... My brother once told me after I got reamed by a Canadian border guard on returning to my own country ("where are you going?", "what are you going to do?"... like he can deport me if he doesn't like the answer)... they are bureaucrats, you don't want them to think, it is beyond them. They are supposed to follow rules.
After moving back to Ontario after nearly 25 years away I am stunned by the Napoleon complex it has toward the United States. The War of 1812 ended almost 200 years ago, get over it. :/