ehMac banner

1 - 20 of 243 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
30,834 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Sometimes these guys really, really don't get it......:mad:

Tories plan to withhold funding for 'offensive' productions

Committee to decide whether material meets new criteria

GAYLE MACDONALD
From Thursday's Globe and Mail
February 28, 2008 at 2:07 AM EST

The Conservative government has drafted guidelines that would allow it to pull financial aid for any film or television show that it deems offensive or not in the public's best interest – even if government agencies have invested in them.

The proposed changes to the Income Tax Act would allow the Heritage Minister to deny tax credits to projects deemed offensive, effectively killing the productions. Representatives from Heritage and the Department of Justice will determine which shows or films pass the test.
globeandmail.com: Tories plan to withhold funding for 'offensive' productions

what a bunch asses.

Harper is right out of the 50s - McCarthy would be proud

 

·
Resident Curmudgeon
Joined
·
86,945 Posts
Thank goodness a government has finally put a stop to funding the artsy fartsy crap that benefits no one, other than a tiny minority of artsy fartsy types.

Good on 'em and please Stephen, stay the course! :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,798 Posts
Thank goodness a government has finally put a stop to funding the artsy fartsy crap that benefits no one, other than a tiny minority of artsy fartsy types.

Good on 'em and please Stephen, stay the course!
Agreed. The government's job isn't to fund crap. If your material is deemed controversial, then go find private financing.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
17,945 Posts
I think this excerpt from the story hits the nail on the head:

“Would this committee put money into Juno? It might not want to encourage teen pregnancy. Would the government put money into a film with a dirty title, like Young People ****ing? Would they invest in something like Brokeback Mountain? They might not want to encourage gay cowboys to have sex together in Alberta.” -Toronto lawyer David Zitzerman of Goodmans LLP
This is what it's really all about. Gay cowboys in Alberta.

Art is art, it cannot and should not be censored.

M
 

·
Resident Curmudgeon
Joined
·
86,945 Posts
I think this excerpt from the story hits the nail on the head:



This is what it's really all about. Gay cowboys in Alberta.

Art is art, it cannot and should not be censored.

M
Nor should taxpayers be billed for these so called "artists" orgasms on our bill.

Sorry, but there are likely less than 10 percent of Canadians who support such crap.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,475 Posts
Yet another Blues versus Reds thread. The real issue is the fact that this current Government has begun the act of censoring what it can. What this will lead to is anyone's guess. Artsy crap or not, this is not the kind of 'leadership' I want in my Canada.
 

·
Resident Curmudgeon
Joined
·
86,945 Posts
I don't see it that way at all mrjimmy.

I see it as public funds wasted on questionable art versus stopping the funding. No politics, just the fundamental, "should we fund bad art" question.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
125 Posts
Agreed. The government's job isn't to fund crap. If your material is deemed controversial, then go find private financing.
So who defines what "crap" is? The people, a government body, hand picked Conservative supporters?

This bill seems dangerously close to censorship. Additionally, it has the potential to cripple the Canadian film industry and put people out of work. Just what the economy needs right now. :yikes:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,475 Posts
I see it as public funds wasted on questionable art versus stopping the funding. No politics, just the fundamental, "should we fund bad art" question.
I believe this is how they want to be perceived although I truly don't believe that's their intention.

This bill seems dangerously close to censorship. Additionally, it has the potential to cripple the Canadian film industry and put people out of work. Just what the economy needs right now.
This I believe fully.
 

·
Tritium Glow
Joined
·
7,141 Posts
...and why should my tax dollars fund a for profit enterprise? Many bitch about "corporate welfare" but heaven forbid the gov withdraws funding from questionable film projects. My god...they're censoring ART...art I tell ya!

There's no censorship here, no one is stopping production. Wanna make a movie, find your own funding, find investors.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,475 Posts
There's no censorship here, no one is stopping production. Wanna make a movie, find your own funding, find investors.
It's not an us versus them issue. It's not a 'my damn tax dollars' issue. It's an issue regarding a heavy handed Government that wants to model it's citizens after itself. A government that is willing to second guess itself in order to achieve this. If that's not the decree of the supreme being I don't know what is.

It's easy to get caught up in artsy bashing and tax dollar spending but realize what is at the heart of this issue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
125 Posts
There's no censorship here, no one is stopping production.
Maybe not stopping it, but certainly impeding it. I don't see how that is a good thing.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,487 Posts
...and why should my tax dollars fund a for profit enterprise? Many bitch about "corporate welfare" but heaven forbid the gov withdraws funding from questionable film projects. My god...they're censoring ART...art I tell ya!

There's no censorship here, no one is stopping production. Wanna make a movie, find your own funding, find investors.
EXACTLY! :clap: :clap:
I wish the government would get out of the arts business all together. I wish we approached the arts like we would a carbon tax. User pays! You want to watch some freakish sex movie or pay to see some feces spread on canvas? Fill your boots! Just don't expect me to pay for it.

Cheers
MacGuiver
 

·
Tritium Glow
Joined
·
7,141 Posts
It's not an us versus them issue. It's not a 'my damn tax dollars' issue. It's an issue regarding a heavy handed Government that wants to model it's citizens after itself. A government that is willing to second guess itself in order to achieve this. If that's not the decree of the supreme being I don't know what is.

It's easy to get caught up in artsy bashing and tax dollar spending but realize what is at the heart of this issue.
I sense your concern is only because it's the Cons and perhaps Harpo has far too many neo-con Reform skeletons in his closet.

Do they have an ulterior motive besides picking and choosing worth while projects? You betcha, but so do many other grants disbursement committees made up of the artsy crowd who wouldn't even dream of acknowledging Harpo's existence never mind support him.

It's not what you know, it's who you know. Many worthwhile and deserving artists get didly squat and many hacks get huge grants from these self serving pretentious freeloaders populating these committees. No one ever accuses them of censorship.
 

·
Resident Curmudgeon
Joined
·
86,945 Posts
It's not what you know, it's who you know. Many worthwhile and deserving artists get didly squat and many hacks get huge grants from these self serving pretentious freeloaders populating these committees. No one ever accuses them of censorship.
Right kps! :clap:

That is exactly what is wrong with the system. Fartsys helping artsys and artsys help fartsys.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,795 Posts
Right kps! :clap:

That is exactly what is wrong with the system. Fartsys helping artsys and artsys help fartsys.
Well, if they are the only ones in the game...

Seriously. If they were talking about picking and choosing which news stories were being told everyone would be up in arms.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,590 Posts
You know, I would have replied to this thread sooner but I just came from the studio where I've been busy working on a new series of excrement on canvas, pursuing the twin themes of obesity and pederasty, using live models. It's been fun while it lasted but oh my, the latest grant is just about used up and I still need to score some more street drugs for, you know, inspiration.

I don't quite know what the fuss is about, but I'm sensing it's the beginning of some sort of wondrous rapture. if this the new world we're spiralling into I suppose a grim wave of vigilant culture goons in suits will soon descend upon myself and my sickening cohorts and deal us the long knives. It'll be like Crystal Night, I'm sure. Yeah, get rid of the public money for museums, art appreciation programs and other "artistic" pap... nations don't need their own culture, much less to nurture and protect it - and anyone who tells you otherwise must hereafter be formally identified and rooted out like the cancerous cells they are. Why, the very notion that we need culture - it's, it's... it's fiendishly European, is what it is! Oh man, more than ever, we need to clean house and get back to a bold new spartan outlook that we're dredging up from some crusty sense of misplaced nostalgia. Let's get the likes of Ontario's beloved Mary Brown back and get busy censoring stuff - we all miss her deft, robust ways, don't we? Oh yes, we need to protect ourselves from ourselves. Raise high the banner of Community Standards, boys - and bear those truncheons smartly now! Screw "culture." That's a code word for vermin and hey - we don't want vermin loose in our newly sanitized Canuckistan. The mantra is money and the money is where it's at. Less government is better, except, of course, when we need to create social control bureaucracies established by decree to generously determine for us what is and isn't "correct" culture. Yippee skippee, the future I always wanted. The Philistines are back and they are not about to tolerate any more tolerance.

Crush the fartsies! Burn all the canvas and celluloid now! Crush their hard disks! Wreck their studios! Seize their property! Rub their noses in their own excrement! The state is all, and all is glorious!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,953 Posts
IMHO, the government should contribute a small, set percentage to a general arts fund that distributes the money on a per-capita or other fair basis to recognised arts groups.

Beyond that, it should have absolutely NO say in how those funds are used, because no matter what they fund (or don't fund) it puts the gov't in the position of being art critics.

Let local arts organisations answer to their "customers," but leave the patronage and support of the arts (generally) intact. Art may have its controversial and crap moments, but I think the case is easily made that support of the arts reaps rich rewards that far outweigh the occasional misfire.

To hear forum members arguing about how the few cents of their yearly tax bill which funds the arts might be funding "crap" they deem "offensive" when many, many DOLLARS of their yearly tax bill is being used to wage a war of aggression designed to prop up Bush ... talk about misplaced priorities ...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
30,834 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
any more questions on the ogres hanging around...

Evangelist takes credit for film crackdown

Christian crusader says he pressured cabinet ministers and PMO officials to deny tax credits to productions deemed too offensive
BILL CURRY AND GAYLE MACDONALD

From Friday's Globe and Mail
February 29, 2008 at 4:00 AM EST

OTTAWA, TORONTO — A well-known evangelical crusader is claiming credit for the federal government's move to deny tax credits to TV and film productions that contain graphic sex and violence or other offensive content.

Charles McVety, president of the Canada Family Action Coalition, said his lobbying efforts included discussions with Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day and Justice Minister Rob Nicholson, and "numerous" meetings with officials in the Prime Minister's Office.

"We're thankful that someone's finally listening," he said yesterday. "It's fitting with conservative values, and I think that's why Canadians voted for a Conservative government."

Mr. McVety said films promoting homosexuality, graphic sex or violence should not receive tax dollars, and backbench Conservative MPs and cabinet ministers support his campaign.

Tories plan to withhold funding for 'offensive' productions
"There are a number of Conservative backbench members that do a lot of this work behind the scenes," he said.
globeandmail.com: Evangelist takes credit for film crackdown

They just couldn't keep McVety muzzled.....

In case any have forgotten about the RR in Canada and Harper's connection

The Walrus >> Stephen Harper and the Theo-cons >> Canada Religion Politics
 
1 - 20 of 243 Posts
Top