UN Flunks Economics Again

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by DanS
I think many of the policies y'all propose would fit right in in the Islamic Republic.

Go UNESCO!

From the Guardian...

Iran has a policy of defending itself. The US has a policy of defending itself. Thus, by DanS logic, the US = Iran

QED

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Adam Smith
The agricultural argument is current, relevant, and significant.

Indeed. What is your view on putting money in the pockets of agro-businesses?

In many ways agricultural subsidies are no different from dumping, which, IIRC, is selling products below production cost.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Notice how Hollywood and American network productions still dominate Canadian prime time, despite CanCon?

Your point (what is it?) is questionable with just a basic understanding of who gets what from Canadian broadcast spending.

My point is they have a completely protected market share and that is unfair.

[Toby Rowe]

DanS,

That article you have quoted puts things into perpective.

In the UK most don't mind US programmes, we don't mind as before series are brought our companies are quite good at seperating the wheat from the chaff, whilst in the US they must suffer the chaff to gain the wheat.

Toby

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

We resist the Americanisation of our culture, and we help others resist the Angloisation of their own cultures so that they may join the mosaic that we have sought to create and nurture for some years now.

What bull****. You guys aren't "resisting" the Americanization of your culture in anything but your own inferiority-complex addled minds. You're thoroughly a part of the "mosaic" that is American culture and your refusal to admit this truth, while occasionally humorous, is usually just sad...

Because the diversity in the American mass culture is so huge.

[Adam Smith]

Since this thread has popped up again, a few more questions spring to mind:

1. Would The Lord of The Rings be considered a US cultural product under the UNESCO resolution? Why or why not?

2. US television programs and movies sell in both the US and abroad, and US producers certainly consider foreign reveneus as part of their plans. Foreign television programs and movies sell in both the US and abroad (eg Anne of Green Gables, March of the Penguins, and just about anything from the BBC). Do foreign producers consider US revenues as part of their plans? Why or why not?

3. If the US is "dumping" cultural products in other countries, wouldn't the appropriate remedy be a dumping complaint? (Note that one would expect US cultural products to sell for a lower price in foreign countires than in the US.)

4.

"Some companies believe that to be responsible for marketing you must have roots in mainland France over several generations to understand the French consumer attitudes," according to a recent SOS Racisme report.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4399748.stm

Does marketing fall under the UNESCO agreement? Would this agreement justify the apparent unwillingness of some French firms to hire French muslims?

5.

Yet France on Wednesday renewed its threat to veto a final deal [on the Doha round of trade talks] if Mr Mandelson [EU negotiator] makes further concessions.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4401594.stm

Is this the kind of unilateralism France accuses the US of? Why or why not?

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Adam Smith
Since this thread has popped up again, a few more questions spring to mind:

1. Would The Lord of The Rings be considered a US cultural product under the UNESCO resolution? Why or why not?

I don't see the issue here. Look at who is the producer, and in case of coproductions, set the requirement in the form of a certain %.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
Because the diversity in the American mass culture is so huge.

Well, yeah.

[Fake Boris]

Sure, I can choose between Miss Congenitality, There's Something about Mary and Titanic.

[KrazyHorse]

[Kuciwalker]

are you being deliberately obtuse?

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Adam Smith
Since this thread has popped up again, a few more questions spring to mind:

This is a nice little troll of yours, but I'll try

1. Would The Lord of The Rings be considered a US cultural product under the UNESCO resolution? Why or why not?

This question is irrelevant. The UNESCO resolution isn't some firm law that punishes US cultural products, that can be dodged by producing the product somewhere else. The resolution is about the principle of allowing the countries to defend their cultures as they see fit.

2. US television programs and movies sell in both the US and abroad, and US producers certainly consider foreign reveneus as part of their plans. Foreign television programs and movies sell in both the US and abroad (eg Anne of Green Gables, March of the Penguins, and just about anything from the BBC). Do foreign producers consider US revenues as part of their plans? Why or why not?

Nobody expected March of the Penguin to be so successful in the US. Generally speaking (for French cultural products, as I don't know the others), exports to the US are rare, and fairly whimsical, because the American audience watches very few French movies. A very long engagement is pretty much the first movie that seriously aimed to make money in the US to begin with (and that's because the producer is an American major that had the business-plan to sell "local" products on the world market)
This is even more clear cut for TV series. French TV series and other TV shows are tailored for the French audience. Maybe we sell them in other francophone countries, but that's it.

3. If the US is "dumping" cultural products in other countries, wouldn't the appropriate remedy be a dumping complaint? (Note that one would expect US cultural products to sell for a lower price in foreign countires than in the US.)

This one is a really nice troll. You look almost honest
(In case you actually believe what you are writing, here's the answer: the whole debate here is not about economics. The word "dumping" is not to be taken in its strict economic meaning. It means that the US culutral industry is inundating the markets of other countries, with little resistance from the domestic domestic producers. And this is considered a bad thing, hence the derogatory words. Duh.)

4.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4399748.stm

Does marketing fall under the UNESCO agreement? Would this agreement justify the apparent unwillingness of some French firms to hire French muslims?

5.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4401594.stm

Is this the kind of unilateralism France accuses the US of? Why or why not?

France made significant sacrifices within the EU so that the CAP stays untouched until 2013. This is an international agreement with our European partners. I dislike the way Chirac manages the whole situation, however, the EU is close to betraying an agreement France paid a hefty price for.
And in any case, Chirac is an unilateralist *******. He is to the EU what Bush is to the world.

[MORON]

You people don't really want the US to achieve culture victory do you....especially considering how sucky their culture is

at least go for space victory or something......

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by MORON
You people don't really want the US to achieve culture victory do you....especially considering how sucky their culture is

at least go for space victory or something......

I think we're trying for economic victory just like everyone else.

I think the US doesn't get much sympathy for this because everyone else sees what crap our culture is though. Who cares if the movie industry does poorly. It's just movies.

[Odin]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Nobody expected March of the Penguin to be so successful in the US.

NPR talked about the that documentary a few days ago, it sounded like it had too much anthropomorphism (giving animals human-like qualities they don't really have) for my taste.