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?"
Net Neutrality in Action (Score:3, Interesting)
Global (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:CanCon (Score:5, Interesting)
It hasn't helped Canadian "art" flourish. Quite the opposite -- it's provided funding to drek that no one wants. Commercial art (i.e. TV and radio) needs to be competitive to survive, not propped up by tax dollars. Witness the CBC's abysmal ratings and lack of standout series for the past many years.
An article I read this weekend explained that they're talking about Can-Con for foreign web broadcasters, including some TV channels that internet broadcast from the Phillipines. I don't think I've ever heard a more ludicrous thing -- demanding that foreign stations carry Canadian content!
Rather than bleat about the competition, CBC could do like CTV and start internet broadcasting their series as streaming video. The only CanCon rules I support would be to mandate that Canadian content be internet-enabled so that it can compete. Navel-gazing demands on the content carried by foreign channels is pointless -- there is no way to enforce it and it would be considered as interference by the nations where those channels are based, and rightly so.
A silly idea, but may do some good (Score:5, Interesting)
If the CRTC wants to encourage Canadian Content on the net, maybe they could lobby Ottawa to create tax breaks for using local companies and carbon-footprint shrinking solutions. I just recently changed my host to a Canadian provider who uses Green Energy for their datacentre and I feel pretty happy about that. I suspect plenty of personal and professional Canadian users would do the same if there was even the most reasonable incentive to do so given out by the Gov.
And best thing about this plan: it wouldn't even require 1 out of every 100 homepages to be an Alanis Morsette or Celine Dion tribute page. (thank God...)
Re:CanCon (Score:3, Interesting)
Worst government waste ever. Well, not the worst, but still a huge waste.
Re:Doesn't make as much sense for the Internet (Score:3, Interesting)
The general idea seems now to be focusing on levies. In other words, there's no way to force Canadians to watch and listen to more Canadian content on the Internet, so instead we'll simply further entrench the artistic welfare. It should lead to delightful situations where a TV show gets no more than a few thousand viewers, but gets topped up from the levy.
Initiatives like this are why so much Canadian content is nothing but mediocre trash with horrible production values, terrible actors, terrible writers, while Canadian talent, in large part, simply goes down to the States where the real money is.
Translation: Dear Canadian-based providers.... (Score:2, Interesting)
Let me translate this for you:
Dear Canadian-based content providers....
We in the government would like very much if you would kindly move your servers and business operations to another country, and create a holding company that remains in Canada to distribute the income from the foreign operations.
We of course, will not make you do this, so we are now adopting regulations to make it very clear that we really want you to do it.
Thank you for your consideration.
Re:Government should not compete (Score:4, Interesting)
It's not about the government (Score:2, Interesting)
We live in a predominantly capitalist society.
Canada has about 30 million consumers, and the US has about 300 million.
Even among Canadians there are many distinct cultures that are truly Canadian.
But attempts to produce content that appeals to any fraction of Canadians can quickly get drowned out by whatever drivel all the US teenagers are interested it.
As far as North America is concerned, Canadians are a minority, and the government is trying to do it's part to make sure that the minority voice is loud enough to be heard over the endless drone of American consumerism.
Re:But all my internet content is porn (Score:5, Interesting)
Basically, yes.
Instead of attempting to regulate the internet, which would be insane at best and totally fucktarded at worst, they're probably going to try something else.
That would be grants and tax breaks to Canadian providers of internet content. Iliad (userfriendly) might get to write off (his? her?) bandwidth as a legitimate expense. If you create a blog, you might be able to get a grant. I don't know what they're planning.
The CRTC might be a huge bloated archaic corporation, but they're not complete morons.
rtard (Score:3, Interesting)
Stupid Stupid idea.
Mandatory Canadian content in Radio and TV are also stupid ideas.
I understand the reason. We Canadians are BOMBARDED by US culture, radio, tv, etc... I see the need to have some Canadian identity in there.
However they are going about it all wrong. I know some radio has a hard time meeting the content quota, and what happens is a lot of the same crappy songs get played, really only because they are Canadian. This isn't what we should be promoting.
What we should be doing is having programs and money from government to sponsor the arts. The rest will follow.
On top of that, the internet is much different than radio and TV and it makes even less sense in this context.
-1 (Score:1, Interesting)
Firstly: appeal to popularity. Check your fallacies.
Got any facts to back up the assertion that nobody wants CBC's content?
The BBC is an example of how tax-payer funded content works. Maybe CBC should just be made more independent of the government. Or are you going to try and claim that: Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy or Doctor Who aren't massively popular on Slashdot?
Re:Net Neutrality in Action (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:But all my internet content is porn (Score:2, Interesting)
*yawn*
Re:It's not about the government (Score:5, Interesting)
I wonder how many of those people proudly wearing the maple leaf are actually Americans? While traveling in Europe about 6-7 years ago, I met around four people outside bars and restaurants who were Americans pretending to be Canadians. At this point, I just assume anyone wearing a Canadian flag on them is really just an American in disguise :)
Re:Net Neutrality in Action (Score:3, Interesting)
But what if I think Canadian artists suck, and I, as a citizen of an allegedly free country, only want to listen to American artists.
Well, good thing the Internet is around, because it renders the CRTC utterly meaningless. I'll listen to whatever I want, and if the only way a Canadian band can get airtime is to actually "make it", as opposed to getting freebies because a pack of deluded, power-hungry bureaucrats deem them worthy of my ear, then so be it. If they can't make it, they can continue being half-assed garage bands. Plenty of Canadian acts have made it, in some cases made it in a huge way (the Band, Rush, Joni Mitchell and Neil Young), without the help of unaccountable bureaucratic worms.
Re:Net Neutrality in Action (Score:3, Interesting)
No, the CRTC defines the Canadian content broadcasting rules.
Which has *NOTHING* to do with the topic at hand.
If you'd do even the smallest amount of investigation [media-awareness.ca], you'd see that the statements about "The Great White North" are provably false.
Here's a quote for you:
On other words, the CRTC decides what is "Canadian" not by the script content, but by the nationality of the production (crew, writers, etc) and where it's filmed.
But of course, it's easier for you to maintain your "oh, the CRTC is so stupid" mentality if you don't actually know anything about what the rules actually are, right?