- Reaction score
- 9,100
- Points
- 1,360
Freedom Convoy protests [Split from All things 2019-nCoV]
- Thread starter Quirky
- Start date
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 9,549
- Points
- 1,260
- Reaction score
- 9,100
- Points
- 1,360
- Reaction score
- 9,100
- Points
- 1,360
More irrefutable proof:
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 6,972
- Points
- 1,040
Insisting on looking for "big changes" will miss causes-and-effects and is just a convenient rhetorical device for avoiding criticism.
Almost everyone and everything runs close to the edge of financial risk. All those stories about Canadians living one or two paycheques away from disruption? People highly indebted, who knows how many maxed out? Governments highly indebted, deficit spending to the limit of what they imagine/assume/hope is prudent? Medical system operating near max capacity under normal conditions? Widespread just-in-time logistics? Energy production calibrated to closely meet demand, because large projects are expensive and time-consuming and constantly at risk of being thrown into disarray by short-term-obsessed politicians?
Small perturbations can have large effects. Equally, small differences in the amount of perturbation - a little less government spending, for example - can substantially change outcomes.
Almost everyone and everything runs close to the edge of financial risk. All those stories about Canadians living one or two paycheques away from disruption? People highly indebted, who knows how many maxed out? Governments highly indebted, deficit spending to the limit of what they imagine/assume/hope is prudent? Medical system operating near max capacity under normal conditions? Widespread just-in-time logistics? Energy production calibrated to closely meet demand, because large projects are expensive and time-consuming and constantly at risk of being thrown into disarray by short-term-obsessed politicians?
Small perturbations can have large effects. Equally, small differences in the amount of perturbation - a little less government spending, for example - can substantially change outcomes.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 12,429
- Points
- 1,140
- Reaction score
- 18,488
- Points
- 1,360
Minor correction, OS.
I thought Bill C-11 was dead?
I remember when it was first defeated, to great fanfare. Has it been rekindled from the dead?
Is that possible/allowed?
(How can a party introduce legislation that gets defeated in the house, and then introduce it again a year or so later?
With the NDP not blindly supporting the Liberals anymore, I’d have thought the prospects of it passing would be even worse…
Referring back to another thread that strung at our passions, we discussed constitutional law & how laws passed in Parliament go through enough scrutiny that they are assumed to be constitutional.
How do we feel about a government (and one that consistently does the opposite of what it’s citizens want) deciding what content Canadians can access & what they can’t?
It's not dead. The Senate committee examining it just finished their consideration a couple weeks ago before the Christmas break, and proposed quite a number of amendments that should remove most of the real concerns, particularly by ensuring that user created social media content is not captured by the bill's language. It looks liek the Senate is performing the role it's expected to perform on this one.
Senate Committee Completes Its Review of Bill C-11: What Comes Next? - Michael Geist
The Senate Standing Committee on Transport and Communications completed its extensive review of Bill C-11 last week. After a review for grammatical, editorial, and translation issues, the committee is expected to finalize its report back to the Senate later today. While the next steps for Bill...
www.michaelgeist.ca
The committee's observations are noted here: https://sencanada.ca/content/sen/committee/441/TRCM/Reports/C11Observations_EN_FINAL_e.pdf
Next step would be second reading in the Senate.
- Reaction score
- 5,285
- Points
- 1,040
The Online Streaming Act in the Senate
What does CRTC getting authority over streaming services got to do with dissident roundups?
What does CRTC getting authority over streaming services got to do with dissident roundups?
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 12,429
- Points
- 1,140
You should look at my 20 minute primer of "How to be a Dictator".
One of the main things you need to do as a dictator is seize control of the media and silence the critics. This is one way of doing that.
Something something dictatorship something internet.
- Reaction score
- 5,285
- Points
- 1,040
By turning everything into Beachcombers and Heartland?
I think the more realisitc concern is that the legislation as written is potentially harmful to actual Canadian content creators because of how it's defined and potentially implemented. So shows filmed and edited in Canada with a lot of Canadian actors and suppliers (Supernatural etc) aren't considered Canadian content if the producer isn't Canadian, and smaller folks on You tube etc may get caught up in it as well. The bit about changing algorithms is potentially huge, as understanding how those work is a pretty big part of success on internet businesses.
There are already lots of subsidies and tax breaks to encourage that, we don't need excessive controls on the output as well.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 12,429
- Points
- 1,140
I call some Canadian TV shows "30 percenters" because the network (CTV and CBC generally) must have 30 % Canadian content. Marilyn Dennis and that stupid Corner Gas are but two examples of sub standard "Canadian"TV - cause the real good ones are Stateside.
lenaitch
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,937
- Points
- 1,160
It might be a good idea but I'm not sure how the feds could do that under the Constitution; both property rights and municipalities are provincial powers, and federal encroachment in provincial jurisdiction is bad, at least in the west apparently.
- Reaction score
- 5,285
- Points
- 1,040
@OldSolduer Sure, but there are other pretty good ones that just happen to be set in Canada but are otherwise the same as any other US show (Flashpoint, Durham county and Intelligence come to mind) and in a few cases the entire cast/production company shifted over to US network shows that didn't count as Canadian content, but still put a lot of money in Canada.
LetterKenny is a pretty big hit on the streaming side and growing outside of Canada (and Shoresy also seems popular) but I think the whole 'Canadian content' requirement just forces a lot, and it would probably be cheaper to just have funding grants contingent on 'Canadian content' for production vice the overhead for CRTC overview of all that.
The beauty of streaming services is that it's now easier than ever to see foreign content, but also means that if you make something it's a hell of a lot easier to license it internationally, so I think we'd get a lot more actual Canadian content by just encouraging filming etc in Canada, as there is already a pretty good ecosystem on the filming side of things that naturally gives opportunities for Canadian stories if you really want to see something set in Toronto or Vancouver (and not just see the CN tower in the background for 'NYC', or have Hamilton set up as Bagdad).
LetterKenny is a pretty big hit on the streaming side and growing outside of Canada (and Shoresy also seems popular) but I think the whole 'Canadian content' requirement just forces a lot, and it would probably be cheaper to just have funding grants contingent on 'Canadian content' for production vice the overhead for CRTC overview of all that.
The beauty of streaming services is that it's now easier than ever to see foreign content, but also means that if you make something it's a hell of a lot easier to license it internationally, so I think we'd get a lot more actual Canadian content by just encouraging filming etc in Canada, as there is already a pretty good ecosystem on the filming side of things that naturally gives opportunities for Canadian stories if you really want to see something set in Toronto or Vancouver (and not just see the CN tower in the background for 'NYC', or have Hamilton set up as Bagdad).
Ahem... any reference to Corner Gas being sub standard is blasphemy...
(Agree with the rest of your post tho)
Thank You for clarifying that for me. I was under the impression it was no longer a thing...It's not dead. The Senate committee examining it just finished their consideration a couple weeks ago before the Christmas break, and proposed quite a number of amendments that should remove most of the real concerns, particularly by ensuring that user created social media content is not captured by the bill's language. It looks liek the Senate is performing the role it's expected to perform on this one.
Senate Committee Completes Its Review of Bill C-11: What Comes Next? - Michael Geist
The Senate Standing Committee on Transport and Communications completed its extensive review of Bill C-11 last week. After a review for grammatical, editorial, and translation issues, the committee is expected to finalize its report back to the Senate later today. While the next steps for Bill...
The committee's observations are noted here: https://sencanada.ca/content/sen/committee/441/TRCM/Reports/C11Observations_EN_FINAL_e.pdf
Next step would be second reading in the Senate.
Personally, I feel that ANY proposal of legislation that even hints at internet censorship is wrong. Period.
We have laws in place that prohibit the showing of people being victimized in non-fictional ways, such as child porn, murders/executions, etc
Like has been said above, making grant funding available would probably encourage more stuff to be shot here in Canada, without the CRTC overhead.
Let me ask this...is there anything inherently wrong or broken with how things are done now? Is a change even needed?
If not, why bother introducing C-11 at all?
- Reaction score
- 1,588
- Points
- 1,190
If I didn't know your post history, I'd think you were joking.
Man, the tin hats have more numerous on this site.
Bill C-11 isn't an attempt to by the government to undermine civil liberties and control the narrative en route to a dictatorship.
Bill C-11 is nothing more than an attempt update and modernize our broadcasting and content rules to reflect the modern nature of streaming service and online content.
No one ever had a real problem with the fact that we had rules in place to protect and encourage Canadian content. You might think some of it is trash (Coner Gas = trash, Letterkenny = amazing), but no one ever thought these rules were so that the Canadian government could manipulate you through the control of information, and that is not going to change with Bill C-11.
One of the things that our existing legislation never covered (because no one predicted it) was the monopolization of social media content (i.e. you tube channels). Before, YouTube was just a place to upload an share videos, but now, you have content creators with millions of followers making high quality content and racking in huge profits from their ad revenues. The traditional media (tv and radio) have regulations for their content, so why shouldn't a YouTuber? You people are insinuating that the government is going after "the little guy", but they are not; they are going after big fish that are using a platform (such as YouTube) which was traditionally inhabited only by small fish, but has now become something more.
Similar threads
