The Canadian government has, for the last two decades, consistently
under supported various public institutions most notable the CBC and to a
lesser extent the postal system. While to the casual outsider observer such
cuts may look like reasonable economic policy, they are in fact ideologically
driven and could cause significant harm to Canadian's perceptions of themselves
and their place within their country and the world.
In the mid 1920s there was some concern in Canada that the
more powerful American radio stations were both buying Canadian station and
transmitting their programs across the Canadian border. There was a sense
amongst the politicians and some of the Canadian broadcasters that there needed
to be an alternative to this influence. People were acutely conscious of the
potential influences of the United States and were determined to keep Canada
different. Politicians and the general public still remembered with pride the
building of the national railroad and the decision to make it an all Canadian
route as opposed to taking the shorter route through the U.S.
In 1929, the Aird Commission (appointed by MacKenzie King) prepared a report for the Canadian government.
That report stated: "In a country
of the vast geographical dimensions of Canada, broadcasting will undoubtedly
become a great force in fostering a national spirit and interpreting national
citizenship." http://www.nlc-bnc.ca/massey/h5-409-e.html#24 The report further argued that a
national broadcasting company capable of those two things needed to be created.
For the past two decades in typical neo-liberal fashion,
various governments (both Liberal and Conservative) have reduced the funding of
the CBC and have argued at the same time that because CBC offers so little
service they really do not serve a purpose. Politicians and others who
subscribe to this view argue that private corporations can offer as good as service
as does a nationally owned broadcasting system, and that they do it a no cost
to the taxpayer. Both statements need to be investigated. To assist in this
investigation two types of programs will be discussed; sports and
documentaries. That is programs that entertain us and programs that we can
learn from.
There is no doubt that Rogers Broadcasting can and will deliver
Hockey Night in Canada as well as CBC does now. In fact they may deliver it
more effectively. But is it at less cost to the consumer? Hockey in a few years
time will only be available to those who have purchased a cable or satellite subscription; in areas where such services
are not available or the when the cost is prohibitive, people will not have
access to watching what is called our national game. It is worthwhile noting
that the Canadian Football league has not been available for a few years except
for those who have cable or satellite. Even
people such as myself who are not TV sports fans are inclined to watch at least
part of the games leading up to the final game if for no other reason than it
allows us to be part of the conversation around the water cooler. Unless I
invest in cable - I will no longer be part of that quintessential Canadian experience.
So Rogers will not be doing it at no cost to the consumer, they will just be
collecting the money differently. The neo-liberal argument that the consumer
should decide what they spend money on is somewhat specious. We pay taxes so that
there is a reasonable level of healthcare, education, a road system and parks
for us to play in. I may not use all of those services all of the time, but we
need them to be there for those who do use them. We need a strong and available
national broadcaster for exactly the same reason
Of far more importance is the quality and the content of the
programming that would be available if the CBC no longer existed. There is
already a significant reduction in the availability of educational programming.
As long as go as 2001 the New York Times reported that there were fewer and
fewer documentaries being produced for
television (New York Times).
More recently the Documentary Organization of Canada (DOC) released an alarming
report on the state of Canadian productions. Simply put - we are producing and
therefore seeing fewer documentaries on television (https://docorg.ca/en/getting-real-5-foreword)
then we use to. Already the airways are flooded with "reality"
programs being shown almost continuously only being interrupted by mundane sitcoms and "dramas" that
are both more explicit than ever before and all too frequently, unimaginative
in their plots. There is absolutely no proof that the private broadcasters have
any desire to provide a level of programming equal to our potential collective
intelligence.
In an editorial in the June edition of the Walrus (http://thewalrus.ca/)
the argument is made that CBC should not be competing with private broadcasters
in terms of either sports or the run of the mill slop (my words not theirs)
that passes for programming. That in fact what they should produce are shows
that are relevant to Canadians and that share information and perspectives that
we need to know. The Walrus also goes on to say that it is not a matter of how
many people actually watch the program but rather that the program is available
to watch if we wish. I agree - except I also think that we also need to have a
national broadcast system that allows us as Canadians to know each other and to
feel as if we belong.
But that I fear is not going to happen. The CBCs budget will
be continued to be reduced budget after budget. They will be forced to either purchase
or produce time filling, intellectually dulling programming. We will be seduced by the easy to
watch and mindless pap of our American neighbours and be diminished by it -
just as Aird and his fellow committee members feared 65 years ago.
And we won't even have the CBC to tell us it is happening
No comments:
Post a Comment