A country as large as Canada NEEDs a well funded CBC!!

[GreatTallNorth2]

Okay, living in the UK has given me a new perspective on my home country. The UK is basically a small island, much smaller than one of our provinces. The entire country feels connected by the BBC, which has 4 main TV channels, plus kids channels and news channels. Also there are 4 main bbc radio stations. Did I mention bbc iplayer, which is catchup tv with all the shows anytime you want them? The BBC is truly world class entertainment.

In Canada, there is one CBC main channel plus the news channel and bold(?) and 2 radio stations that i know of. The programming of the CBC is very poor compared to the BBC and I know of no plans to improve it.

You would think a large spread out country, where the provinces and regions feel isolated would warrant having a great network like the BBC, but unfortunately Canada has sat back and let ourselves be entertained by the Americans. To me it's a real shame that I've seen better documentaries about Canada on the BBC than on the CBC. If you ever get a chance, watch Billy Connolly's "Journey to the Edge of the World", which will show Canadians our great country like you've never seen it before.

Anyways, why hasn't Canada built a great broadcaster like BBC?

[MolsonExport]

There is also Radio-Canada (French). All across Canada. And it is not at all just a french translation of the English counterpart.

[GreatTallNorth2]

See why we need a better broadcaster? I didn't even know there were French people in Canada?

[SignalHillHiker]

If our government recognized it as a national stability and security tool, it would be properly funded to the extent of BBC. However, the U.K. hasn't been successful in that regard... Scotland is going to be out anyway. So it's a difficult argument to use to get money.

Also, I'm a little pessimistic about our ability to transcend regionalism. I think increasing funding for the CBC (which I support) will only lead to having bigger and better productions but still largely regional programming.

We'll basically just get more Toronto-based television shows and more radio programs about Newfoundlanders.

[GreatTallNorth2]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

If our government recognized it as a national stability and security tool, it would be properly funded to the extent of BBC. However, the U.K. hasn't been successful in that regard... Scotland is going to be out anyway. So it's a difficult argument to use to get money.

Also, I'm a little pessimistic about our ability to transcend regionalism. I think increasing funding for the CBC (which I support) will only lead to having bigger and better productions but still largely regional programming.

We'll basically just get more Toronto-based television shows and more radio programs about Newfoundlanders.

I disagree. First of all, Scotland isn't out. The vote has not been taken yet. If anything, the BBC has helped keep 4 countries together. Canada is so much bigger and isolated and I think a strong CBC would unite the country in a way that can't be done otherwise. Remember that travel is much cheaper in the UK than Canada and all parts are accessible. In Canada, most people on the east coast or Ontario/Quebec will never even visit western Canada. We need something to overcome Canadians ignorance of our own country.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by GreatTallNorth2

See why we need a better broadcaster? I didn't even know there were French people in Canada?

Funny guy.

[SignalHillHiker]

Originally Posted by GreatTallNorth2

In Canada, most people on the east coast or Ontario/Quebec will never even visit western Canada. We need something to overcome Canadians ignorance of our own country.

I never thought of it in those terms before. That's really sad. I think, no matter where you're from, travel gives you a love for the world and your home.

However, to overcome this ignorance, I think a better education system is a more critical piece than a well-funded CBC.

I was shocked by how many residents of Boston knew St. John's, and knew it better than mainland Canadians even in the Maritimes. That's education. They study our provinces in school.

We don't.

I don't recall ever hearing another province's name in all my years of school.

[PoscStudent]

Why do cities with numerous other media outlets need a well funded CBC?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by PoscStudent

Why do cities with numerous other media outlets need a well funded CBC?

Perhaps because most private media outlets have a mandate to spit out CSI and Lady Gaga as much as possible, as opposed to fostering Canadians' understanding of each via the mediums which are television and radio.

[240glt]

I do appreciate the CBC when it comes to serving remote communities that oherwise would have no outside connection as commercial radio is not viable in many of those locations. When at our cottage in a remote area of the Cariboo region of BC I listen to the CBC radio usually in the mornings, just to keep tabs on what is going on in the world

[GreatTallNorth2]

Originally Posted by PoscStudent

Why do cities with numerous other media outlets need a well funded CBC?

So the focus can be on high quality Canadian content and serving the country as a whole, not just trying to make a quick buck replaying U.S. programs. Why is it that the BBC can have such quality and variety of shows and Canadians get squat? I would do away with all the broadcasters to have what the BBC offers. It's something that you don't know about, but then once you have it, you can't live without it.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

If our government recognized it as a national stability and security tool, it would be properly funded to the extent of BBC. However, the U.K. hasn't been successful in that regard... Scotland is going to be out anyway. So it's a difficult argument to use to get money.

Also, I'm a little pessimistic about our ability to transcend regionalism. I think increasing funding for the CBC (which I support) will only lead to having bigger and better productions but still largely regional programming.

We'll basically just get more Toronto-based television shows and more radio programs about Newfoundlanders.

I think a discussion about regionalism is important, but I don't think it is as immediately vital as having a conversation about how our entire nation gets its political information.

How successful has the CBC been at criticising all political parties? How successful has the CBC been at allowing all the political biases to argue with each other (via pundits)?

The BBC is the UK's ultimate resource for political arguments from all sides of the political spectrum. It is a democracy-strengthening tool; a balance is achieved with the accompaniment of the private news broadcasters. Has the CBC helped to create this for Canada?

I want it to. This is why I fully support a better funded public broadcaster, more easily justified through a money-saving amalgamation in which the CBC and Radio-Canada would be merged under one roof in Montreal, at the national level.

I'm sorry, Toronto, but the public broadcaster needs to consolidate and begin addressing some of its long-term spending, if it ever wants to be refreshed with an investment, especially during these austere political times.

[RWin]

Originally Posted by GreatTallNorth2

So the focus can be on high quality Canadian content and serving the country as a whole, not just trying to make a quick buck replaying U.S. programs. Why is it that the BBC can have such quality and variety of shows and Canadians get squat? I would do away with all the broadcasters to have what the BBC offers. It's something that you don't know about, but then once you have it, you can't live without it.

I would guess that tax $ (or £) don't go as far when you have half the population on 75 times the land area.

I would also guess that there may be political reasons.

[roccerfeller]

I don't understand you land argument...Britain's population is twice Canada's. More money goes to BBC.

OP, fwiw, I am from the UK originally

[bulliver]

Since I've started working out on the road I listen to Radio One almost constantly. It has its quirks, but overall I think the programming is fantastic. Especially As It Happens...that show is just gold everyday. Love it.

CBC television I am not such a huge fan of. In fact, I could probably be convinced a publicly funded national broadcaster has no business producing original content unless it is documentary or otherwise educational. Most of it is rather poor. Every once in a while you get a gem like Kids in the Hall or Davinci's Inquest.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by GreatTallNorth2

So the focus can be on high quality Canadian content and serving the country as a whole, not just trying to make a quick buck replaying U.S. programs. Why is it that the BBC can have such quality and variety of shows and Canadians get squat? I would do away with all the broadcasters to have what the BBC offers. It's something that you don't know about, but then once you have it, you can't live without it.

The BBC's annual budget is multiples that of CBC, which might have something to do with it, no?

I'd start by consolidating CBC's English and French language television service into a single bilingual broadcaster.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by RWin

I would guess that tax $ (or £) don't go as far when you have half the population on 75 times the land area.

I would also guess that there may be political reasons.

We can most likely address the first issue with some success (a sensible first step would be to consolidate the public networks into one framework, sharing studios while maintaining separate channels for CBC and Radio-Canada) -- but, the political disgust for the CBC is something that disturbs me and it is something I hope dwindles as much as Quebecois support for separation.

The ramifications of not having a healthy public broadcaster are dangerous: your country's democracy becomes more vulnerable to special interests, like unions, corporations, and even not-for-profit political activist groups because these organisations influence private broadcasters (or even outright own them).

Unlike Global News' bias, I will say that I cannot overly criticise CTV for being strongly bias; but I can criticise them for too much celebrity news. Call the CBC snooze news all you want. There are many Canadians out there that don't mind (and actually prefer) news that gets a bit more in-depth than the average Canadian's attention span would tolerate.

(...the kids these days, eh?)

A country cannot have a healthy democracy if the public solely relies upon private corporations for information. Look how stupidly issues are debated in the United States. *NO, THANK YOU.*

Public broadcasting needs to be part of the news mix. This is a must.

There are ways we can do this more efficiently and more affordably.

[mistercorporate]

The UK has a television tax that funds the BBC. Something like $360/per household. The BBC is considered an extension of the British foreign service and it not only promotes the English language internationally, but British government biases, educational priorities, perspectives and economic interests via BBC News and BBC World (in dozens of languages). It is a very useful, albeit now expensive, tool for educating its populace and spreading its cultural influence.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by mistercorporate

The UK has a television tax that funds the BBC. Something like $360/per household. The BBC is considered an extension of the British foreign service and it not only promotes the English language internationally, but British government biases, educational priorities, perspectives and economic interests via BBC News and BBC World (in dozens of languages). It is a very useful, albeit now expensive, tool for educating its populace and spreading its cultural influence.

How can the BBC be considered an extension of British government biases when the BBC spends so much time criticising all the political parties and every government that is formed?

[Reesonov]

Originally Posted by RyeJay

How can the BBC be considered an extension of British government biases when the BBC spends so much time criticising all the political parties and every government that is formed?

I imagine that mistercorporate means the export of the biases and values of western liberal democracy or, more specifically perhaps, the British parliamentary system/British political culture, rather than the biases of any particular government or party.