Fox News says boycott Canada

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Wezil
I can agree with the CanCon as it applies to TV/video.....but what about music? Surely our music industry is mature enough (unlike TV/video) to survive on its own merits now?

NYE?

That's a good question. Radio is kind of strange now. Talk is taking over, which should be 'local'. For stations that are still music, it isn't very hard at all to come up with CanCon that people want to listen to.

I think for radio it is more of a relic from a time when it was required to assure exposure for Canadians.

Do you know if there is any current controversy within the radio industry over it?

[Zero]

bill o'reilly = troll

[Wezil]

I don't know of any controversy. My guess would be that is b/c there is plenty of CanCon music to be had, hence programming isn't really a problem.

Thirty years ago our music industry was in its infancy as well (much like our visual media now). I see the need in music thirty years ago but not now.

I'm tempted to put movies in the same category as well. I think what industry we have (separate from Hollywood North productions) is sad in it's content. I suspect if theatres had a 100% CanCon requirement we would simply stop going to the movies, rather than pay for crap. Of course there are exceptions in Canadian film but they are truly exceptions. I can spot the average Cdn flic in about 30 seconds and am usually bored 30 seconds later.

[Berzerker]

I'd love to see you guys cope with a next door neighbour with 3 billion people. It would be really funny to watch you squeal like stuck pigs.

That is the same scale, btw. 30 million - 300 million - 3 billion.

Why would I care, I'd watch what the 3 billion have to offer on TV. If it sucked, there would be an incentive for people in my country to develop some programming. But you didn't respond to my point, Hollywood was a private venture and you guys complain about it's dominance while also claiming private ventures can't create a sufficient entertainment industry in your country.

Oh wait, you're already crying the blues about competing with China, and they are an ocean away and only 1 billion. Heh. My heart bleeds for you, darling.

I'm not crying about China, where did you get that bit of convenient speculation? Can you respond to what I said instead of telling me what I didn't say and don't even think?

[notyoueither]

Oh come on, Berz. That would be no fun at all.

[Berzerker]

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yeah, even when the film industry that it creates is an economic boon to the country and the Lord of the Rings has generated more tourism publicity than the combined public and private efforts of all New Zealanders in the history of our country.

Yeah even when. Sorry, I guess unlike you I don't compromise my beliefs when there may be an economic benefit in one instance.

[Kuciwalker]

Re: Fox News says boycott Canada

I agree; boycott Celine Dion!

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Yeah even when. Sorry, I guess unlike you I don't compromise my beliefs when there may be an economic benefit in one instance.

Only because your beliefs all revolve around economic benefit in the first place.


I think his point was that they where arguing it to be a waste of money, though.

[Imran Siddiqui]

It may have only been part of their beliefs. The main belief was probably that the government shouldn't get involved in funding the arts because it isn't proper for the government to choose which art gets promoted.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
It may have only been part of their beliefs. The main belief was probably that the government shouldn't get involved in funding the arts because it isn't proper for the government to choose which art gets promoted.

I'm not going to argue about what the opinions of a bunch of compelte strangers may or may not be, but that's a pretty silly belief to hold.

First of all I need to point out that your implication of the government "choosing which art gets promoted" is wrong. It only chooses which art it promotes - it doesn't stop anyone from promoting other art, does it? (Well, yes, it often does. But outside of the typical censorship, i mean.) And where would the arts be without grants?

Oh, yes. I guess your idea of 'art' consists of glossy advertisements and mass-produced gimmickry. Which would explain why you would think that private buisnesses are the only entity suitable for "choosing which art gets promoted"

[Zylka]

Originally posted by General Ludd


I'm not going to argue about what the opinions of a bunch of compelte strangers may or may not be, but that's a pretty silly belief to hold.

First of all I need to point out that your implication of the government "choosing which art gets promoted" is wrong. It only chooses which art it promotes - it doesn't stop anyone from promoting other art, does it? (Well, yes, it often does. But outside of the typical censorship, i mean.) And where would the arts be without grants?

Oh, yes. I guess your idea of 'art' consists of glossy advertisements and mass-produced gimmickry. Which would explain why you would think that private buisnesses are the only entity suitable for "choosing which art gets promoted"

you're a *ing total douchebag, man

[Imran Siddiqui]

that's a pretty silly belief to hold

Why? Because you don't agree with it? Many people, including you, I'm sure have argued what areas the government should and should not get involved in.

First of all I need to point out that your implication of the government "choosing which art gets promoted" is wrong. It only chooses which art it promotes

Duh... that's kinda obviously what I meant . It's government discrimination based on favored art.

And where would the arts be without grants?

You mean it would have to be worth something to the people to survive? Wow... what a thought!

Furthermore, I oppose government subsidies to business and anyone who is would have to oppose government funding of the arts to be consistent. The government is funding a business - what, you don't think the artists sell their paintings or have exhibits where you have to pay?

you're a *ing total douchebag, man

Indeed, Zylka, indeed .

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Why would I care, I'd watch what the 3 billion have to offer on TV. If it sucked, there would be an incentive for people in my country to develop some programming. But you didn't respond to my point, Hollywood was a private venture and you guys complain about it's dominance while also claiming private ventures can't create a sufficient entertainment industry in your country.

NOOOOO there wouldn't be any incentive. We call it cultural steamrolling, a process which has always existed. However the law of markets are making it even harder to overcome it, especially since the ********* in Washington and in the WTO want to make culture a PRODUCT.

EDIT: the problem with yanks - even the moderate ones - is mostly their completely idiot belief in the laws of market. This belief is due to your success - the moment you would stop being successfull, as Osweld pointed out, you would be weeping like any baby.

[The Mad Monk]

the problem with scientists - even the moderate ones - is mostly their completely idiot belief in the laws of science. This belief is due to your success - the moment you would stop being successfull, as Osweld pointed out, you would be weeping like any baby