The CBC is cultural and intellectual infrastructure. In addition, it completes its mandate while stimulating the Canadian economy, nationally and regionally. It gives Canadians enhanced connectivity from Coast to Coast to Coast while providing programming that can enhance Canadian well being. It fulfils a vital role that private broadcasters cannot fulfill because it has a goal of enhanced Canadian
well being, not simply profit.
http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/arts/story/1.999030
Quote:
|
In calculating CBC's overall impact, Deloitte considered the effect of a CBC that did not have a public mandate or a parliamentary allocation and was forced to rely on advertising and other commercial revenue streams. This kind of broadcaster would contribute much less to the economy because it would be forced to buy more foreign programming, would crowd out private broadcasters and would contribute less to creative communities across Canada, the study says.
|
Oversimplifying the government funding of public broadcasting to "I pay for it whether I use it or not" or "I can get all of that from the internet" is ridiculous. It sounds like statement straight out of the Edmonton Oiler book of management. Maybe I should have "a choice" to Cherry pick what infrastructure projects I choose to fund because I don't have the mental capacity to understand the complexity involved in bringing products to and from market. Oversimplifying things to this kind of rhetoric is toxic.
The benefits of utilizing infrastructure (physical, cultural , or intellectual) are not straightforward. Like most economic development, it's diverse, variant. And much like venture capitalism, it is highly unpredictable to discern where and when MASSIVE benefits that dwarf the original investment can and will occur.