Canadian Mac Forums at ehMac banner

The Trouble With Canadian Content*Regulations

2K views 34 replies 9 participants last post by  Macfury 
#1 ·
A good piece with an accurate overview of the CRTC and Canadian content rules.

Former CBC and CRTC president Pierre Juneau died last week at the age of 89, and the requisite obituaries followed. Almost all of them congratulated Mr. Juneau on his most well-known achievement: having mandated minimum standards for Canadian content on radio and television. It is an unfortunate legacy.

The troubles with CanCon requirements are both moral and practical: It is not simply wrong to try to forcibly engineer a population’s taste in music in television. It is also impossible. People like what they like, and if what they like is Canadian, they will watch and listen to it even absent rules dictating that they must. If what they like isn’t Canadian, rules saturating the airwaves with all the Loverboy ditties in the world won’t make them tune in.

So even if you aren’t bothered by CanCon rules’ violation of freedom of expression, you should at least ask yourself how effective the regulations can possibly be — especially today. More and more people are selecting their music and television shows on their own, now, picking an episode from iTunes here, a free song download from a band’s webpage there. The idea that the nation’s culture can be shaped by mandating the nationality of prime-time content on TV networks and radio stations is as antiquated as it was flawed to start with. And we’re wasting money and time by continuing to force media outlets to comply.

The fact is that Canadian artists are strong enough to hold their own without government “protection.” While it would be going too far to say that the Neil Youngs, Rushs and Bryan Adamses of the world have achieved their international success despite CanCon rules, they certainly don’t owe the CRTC any debts. Some people are simply so talented (and a little lucky, because “making it” is always partly reliant on luck too) that their eventual breakthrough is a matter of time and perseverance. It’s insulting and silly to suggest that such acts would never receive a domestic, let alone world, audience absent rules mandating their work be aired in Canada.

But those are big acts, CanCon boosters argue. Maybe they’re OK on their own, but we need CanCon rules to help the little guys — emerging bands and writers and actors who aren’t established yet. The argument has a certain visceral appeal since the conventional wisdom is that we’re too bombarded with fully-formed American culture (and cheap American content) to be able to notice a fledgling Canuck trying to find his artistic wings (and an audience).

The trouble is that CanCon rules do nothing for such small fry anyway.
Marni Soupcoff: The trouble with CanCon regulations | Full Comment | National Post
 
#3 ·
It's been forty years but I still cringe when I hear "Snowbird".

Ironically it was Calgarians and Edmontonians who suffered the most. Most other Canadians were close enough to the border to tune in to Stateside broadcasters when they needed a break from Ann Murray and Gordon Lightfoot.

Nowadays I burn my own mix CDs for road trips. Together with iTunes at home this has freed me from the taste of programmers. Especially useful for those long stretches in Wyoming that feature the worst of C & W interspersed with Barf Limburger and Liar O'Reilly
 
#4 ·
The weirdest stuff was when they took U.S. hits and substituted Canadian performers. The Theme From SWAT, for example, was performed by Rhythm Heritage in the U.S., but we were given a version by The THP Orchestra. Billy Don't Be A Hero is by Paper Lace, but we got Bo Donaldson and the Heywoods. How weird is that?
 
#5 ·
Sort of the opposite of Elvis doing Early Morning Rain.
 
#6 ·
Mr. Juneau brought in the regulations to spur a commercial and cultural legacy for all the talent in Canada.

As usual it is industry, that only care about making a buck, no matter who is being screwed. Blame government, blame the talent but let's not look at the truly greedy, miserable, grasping hucksters, that have let down all Canadians.

So greedy, that they want the law changed, so they can sue their own customers if they don't buy the latest format from the insatiable pigs.

It has been said many times in the past "no one else should steal from our talent, that's our business."
 
#7 ·
To progressives, even the entertainment industry needs to feel the heavy hand of government so that we can produce "the proper outcome." There is no matter so picayune that government is not required to set it right.
 
#8 ·
To the right-wingers, culture is just a commodity, which lives or dies in the market. In the 1980s, when I worked in radio, can-con was a big deal. It also gave local talent airplay they wouldn't have otherwise been able to garner. Today, with YouTube and the otherwise liberating mechanism of the global internet, this is less of an issue. But I see nothing wrong with there being funding and regulatory provisions that create a space for Canadian culture to at minimum attempt to maintain some kind of character in the face of overwhelming production from hollywood.
 
#9 ·
I can't comment on the rest of the country but here our neighbourhood pub showcases Canadian talent four nights a week with one of them being an open jam where anyone can sit in. The place is packed to the rafters those four nights. Ditto for the city of Edmonton with an amateur music scene that is alive and vibrant in many genres and venues. Neither the talent, nor those who appreciate it, look to TV or radio or the CRTC for any of it and local artists easily make a living at paid performances. Useful regulations once upon a time, but ineffective and restrictive to media nowadays.
 
#10 ·
:clap:

I wasn't aware of CanCon Regulations ever existing regarding local live performance.

Why anyone would derail a discussion of National Broadcast CanCon Regulation with talk about some area of the arts and entertainment scene that has never been under CanCon regulation as being relevant to the discussion of National Broadcast Issues is beyond reason.
 
#12 ·
As usual the union mentality cannot grasp the relevancy here. The legislation is touted as helping develop Canadian talent and my point is that development is happening without any assistance from the CRTC. That same philosophy should be applied to so-called professional performers whose work Canadian radio stations are forced to play in quantity in spite of the fact few local listeners want to hear it.

And as usual, I see through your attempt to once again take pokes at me and start an altercation. Be aware that I refuse to stoop to your level. You simply are not worth it.
 
#13 ·
iTunes and stuff like that might work for music, but what about TV shows? I am not sure how much of viewership shows like Republic of Doyle or Little Mosque in the Prairie have, but I am almost sure that it is not high enough for advertisers to be attracted; and thus these shows (without CanCon rules) would either be cancelled PDQ or would have never seen the light of day.

Even shows like Flashpoint, which have very good production value and stories, would fall under this category I am sure.

These shows may not be available on iTunes or anywhere if they never saw the light of day in the first place.

Cheers
 
#15 ·
Consider that Corner Gas, a pure Canadian show was wildly popular and was indeed available on iTunes. I know because I bought the entire series available there. That happened because the show was accepted and loved by a majority of Canadians. If other shows miss that level of popularity, they should die a quick death, not be continued by enforced content rules that do little more than prolong the agony.

I have long considered Little Mosque on the Prairie for example, a CBC ripoff of Corner Gas and not worth viewing. Apparently, more Canadians than not agree with that assessment given its current status on iTunes and TV ratings in Canada. TV shows either make it or break it and most Canadian productions fall into the latter category. None of my tax dollars are appreciated propping up such shows.

As for attracting advertisers, they are astute enough to know if the public don't want to see it, they stay away in droves which is the case for most CanContent.
 
#16 ·
I am a proponent of CanCon regulations. Is it a perfect system? No. Is it a fair system? Not always.

What kind of music industry would Canada have without it? None.
What kind of broadcast (I'm primarily interested from a radio view, not television) industry would Canada have without it? American.
All the programming would be from the US. There would be little t no chance for a majority of Canadian talent to be heard anywhere but in small live venues like bars and coffee houses. And you can bet, the same Corps that ran the radio industry would also be running the promotional aspect of their acts and artists, so likely many of those venues would be under contractual obligations of US promoters, and so you would get American talent running through those venues anyway, ahead of Canadian and local talent.

All you righties who think that good talent would rise to the top and be heard because the market would demand it- dream on. Completely wrong. The recording industry is in a shambles because they operate exactly counter to that. You hear what they decide you will hear.

The industry is incapable of promoting and developing its own wealth of talent, incapable of being the stewards of homegrown talent . They will go with the easy cheap solution every time. Even with CanCon, the radio broadcast industry has continually shot itself in the leg by going with the easiest cheapest route- playing the same basic stable of artists over and over again.

CBC radio has a mandate to promote Canadian culture. They can play all Canadian music all day every day, and they do, and they promote and develop homegrown, local, and nation talent continually. And the programming doesn't suck- the talent is here, but you would never hear 99% of it if it is left up to commercial broadcast corporations.

We have all kinds of regulations in industry, finance, education, etc to ensure that our country is not sold out from underneath us, and to ensure we get Canadian content and ownership.
 
#20 ·
<shaking head>What are you on about, now.</shaking head>

The issue of local talent being enjoyed locally isn't anything new. When Anne Murray started out she was performing locally and then auditioned for a National TV show Singalong Jubilee.

While she was doing that, other Atlantic Region performers, such as Ryan's Fancy, Matt Minglewood, Gene Maclellan April Wine, Dutch Mason, John Allen Cameron and Shirley Eikhard were all doing the local music scene as well as shows such as Don Messer and Singalong.

Some citizens may be familiar with these artist some may not. Some of these musicians are still preforming some are dead. Some of these performers have children that are today playing and entertaining locally and nationally.

All were helped by CanCon. All were working musicians and played locally and because of CanCon were signed to recording contracts and toured the country in support of the recorded music and therefore moved beyond local gigs.

I'm sure bands like Crow Bar, The Stampeders, Guess Who, and many more across the Nation were all helped from CanCon rules and moved from Local to National and some eventually International stages.

Today artists do not need Recording Companies as much as they did back in the day. Independent acts can produce quality recordings that can compete with the Major Labels and the Majors don't want to work too hard and would prefer not to have to compete with the Indies.

The Major Labels wish to use their clout to get their stable of artists played. The Majors don't want compete on a level playing field with the Indies for air play to meet minimum content rules.

Media can play an indie just well as a major to meet content rules, well except that media ownership is so concentrated that the Labels and the Media outlet are owned by the same people.

These rules do not fit the Big Music Business' plan, they have to work harder to make their money. I believe CanCon helps many Canadians today as it did back in the day.

So what does Big Music Business do, go crying to Government that the rules aren't required they're just too hard on the poor old Companies.
 
#21 ·
All were helped by CanCon. All were working musicians and played locally and because of CanCon were signed to recording contracts and toured the country in support of the recorded music and therefore moved beyond local gigs.
Anyone is helped if you stack the deck in their favour. Doesn't make it a good idea. Forcing radio stations to play their stuff is a serious abrogation of freedom that doesn't justify the results.
 
#22 ·
Knew it! Eh! Eh! Nudge, nudge, wink, nudge, say no more, say no more.
 
#25 ·
I have a very good knowledge of how Canadian content rules were employed. I simply don't agree with it. I don't believe it's the role of government to help pick winners in the marketplace, even if those winners are Bim, Eugene Smith, or General Motors..
 
#28 ·
If you actually knew, you wouldn't be making the statement about the government "picking winners". The government, doesn't "pick winners" at all. Never did.
Of course it does. By instituting the MAPL system in the 1970s, it carved out air time for Canadian acts meeting the MAPL criteria. The Canadian government essentially decided that the radio stations (and the listeners requesting to hear certain music) could not be trusted to choose the content they wished to play and hear. Instead, it chose to tilt the playing field in favour of Canadian acts.
 
#27 ·
<SHAKESHEAD> Some mother's children. </SHAKESHEAD>
 
#35 ·
That's my feeling about it as well.

To me, CanCon regulations make as much sense as telling car dealerships that they need to devote 20 per cent of their lot to selling Canadian cars, or telling grocery stores they need to feature a box of corn grown in Ontario beside the one featuring corn grown in Iowa.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top