The BBC received £3.6B ($5.7B CAD) in public funding from the television license fee in 2012. For comparison, the CBC received $1B in public funding for the same year.
Per capita annual public funding:
BBC: $91.2
CBC: $29.0
In other words, the BBC receives more than triple the amount of public funding per citizen that the CBC does. If we want our public broadcaster to rival that of one of the best in the world, perhaps we should fund it similarly.
that's why in the quote I said revenue outside the license fee
the article states that the CBC receives 450m in commercial revenue, it's not a huge amount but it adds quite a large percentage of the CBC's revenue
the main point was the quality though, I understand the BBC is more heavily funded, yet it wouldn't be if it was producing crap like the CBC currently does. It's a chicken and an egg thing, does the funding come first or should the network at least show some type of ability to create quality and commercially viable entertainment outside HNIC
I would like to see what a different group of people would do with the CBC
So the only thing that matters is dollars and cents? There's no intrinsic cultural value to having a state-run broadcaster?
There is as much value to having a state-run broadcaster *today* as there would be to having state-run blacksmiths or buggy manufacturers. The network structure of the CBC was appropriate in the 1930s, when it was founded, and in the 1950s, when it moved into television. Broadcasting equipment was expensive, transmitting signals (especially TV) over large areas was technically difficult, the skills to produce good programming were rare, and the infrastructure of over-the-air broadcasting was hugely expensive compared to the resources of the country. None of those things are true any longer.
Quote:
There aren't more inefficient, wasteful, government programs that lose more money, that bring less to the table, than the CBC?
There are plenty. They should also go. Is there some rule saying that only one thing can ever be cut?
Quote:
I don't really dislike the TSN product, but I do not want my only sources of hockey to be CTV/TSN and Sportsnet.
Why, because they are commercial broadcasts? But HNIC has always been a commercial broadcast. There is absolutely no reason for it to be run by the government.
Quote:
There are always ways you can make something more efficient. Thinking the solution would be 'just turn it off' is extremely shortsighted.
An efficient white elephant is still a white elephant.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Jay Random For This Useful Post:
the main point was the quality though, I understand the BBC is more heavily funded, yet it wouldn't be if it was producing crap like the CBC currently does.
Talk to any British TV viewer, and you'll discover that the BBC produces crap by the carload. You don't hear about the crap over here, because for the most part, it isn't exported to other countries. Every country has its own lowest-common-denominator TV shows, and doesn't need to import them from England.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jay Random For This Useful Post:
Buried deep in the government’s latest Omnibus Budget Bill is an insidious plan to take control of the lion’s share of CBC spending, a move that will undermine the CBC’s editorial independence.
If this provision becomes law, Stephen Harper will become the ultimate boss at CBC with all employees, including journalists, beholden to him.
This is a move that could turn our national public broadcaster into a politically controlled propaganda machine. It would prevent the CBC from playing its critical role in holding governments of all stripes accountable to Canadians.
Our right wing posters won't need Sun TV.
With this going on, is the CBC in position to make a serious bid for HNIC?
With this going on, is the CBC in position to make a serious bid for HNIC?
instead of having evil Prime Minister Harper in control of a government broadcaster, why not just get rid of the state run broadcaster thus eliminating the threat? This would leave only independent broadcasters like CTV and Global that couldn't be influenced by that villain Harper!
instead of having evil Prime Minister Harper in control of a government broadcaster, why not just get rid of the state run broadcaster thus eliminating the threat? This would leave only independent broadcasters like CTV and Global that couldn't be influenced by that villain Harper!
Why would Harper gas a made-to-order propaganda machine?
This can't be overstated. I was watching a game at the bar one time and joked to a guy sitting nearby:
Me: "TSN - the Toronto Sports Network, eh?"
Him: "Uh, yeah."
Me: "You know, because it's like the network is actually the Toronto Sports Network."
Him: "Well yeah. It is."
Me: "Uh, no. It's The Sports Network. Supposed to be national."
Him: "Oh" [shrug].
Turned out he was from Toronto. Honestly thought TSN was the Toronto Sports Network. At least CBC has to make some concessions to being a national broadcast. TSN will simply follow the money. And by money, I mean people.
Population of Ontario: 13.5 million
Population of Alberta: 3.6 million
A shrug by that narrow minded Torontonian, that's exactly what my sig is all about! It's true that Ontario has the population but not all of them are Leafs fans. In eastern Ontario the Sens and Habs are more popular.
I agree with freeing the CBC. Free them from Government control and with that subsidy as well. If they don't want anyone looking over their shoulders they can find the money to operate privately like the rest of the private broadcasters who also happen to have their spending governed by shareholders and board of directors. Can't have your cake and eat it too but it appears the CBC wants and expects just that.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Erick Estrada For This Useful Post:
I agree with freeing the CBC. Free them from Government control and with that subsidy as well. If they don't want anyone looking over their shoulders they can find the money to operate privately like the rest of the private broadcasters who also happen to have their spending governed by shareholders and board of directors. Can't have your cake and eat it too but it appears the CBC wants and expects just that.
So the other networks don't receive any funding from the government? This thread suggests otherwise.
So the other networks don't receive any funding from the government? This thread suggests otherwise.
Okay, the CBC can receive the exact same funding from the government as private broadcasters receive in return for not having to answer to the government when it comes to how they spend it. Happy?
Okay, the CBC can receive the exact same funding from the government as private broadcasters receive in return for not having to answer to the government when it comes to how they spend it. Happy?
Okay, the CBC can receive the exact same funding from the government as private broadcasters receive in return for not having to answer to the government when it comes to how they spend it. Happy?
The desire isn't to be free of oversight, it's freedom from the leader of a political party and I think you already know that. Whether that concern is real or perceived is another story.
So CBC is not likely to be holding a garage sale featuring Don Cherry's suits any time soon. It might have to hold a bake sale though, because the public broadcaster is going to have to pay substantially more than the $100 million it shelled out in its last deal.
No worries for the CBC we all know the tax fairy will take care about the millions of dollars to be paid to the owners of the NHL to the delight of the hypocrytes. You know the same owners that when they want tax aid to build a new arena the hypocrytes change their tone to a adamant group of opposers.
Oh I'm sure that someone will chime in and say that the CBC makes money off of HNIC which is a silly argument considering taxpayers should care if the CBC makes money as long as it's not in the red. In fact any profict the CBC makes should go back to taxpayers. Spending more taxpayer money in hopes the CBC breaks even or makes a little profit is hollow as when it cost $100 to make $5 it was one thing but paying $250 to make $5 is just wasting $150.
NHL hockey belongs on CBC on Saturday nights because of tradition alone. Why is our culture so dismissive of tradition as a value?
HNIC is an institution. TSN is a broadcast. There is no comparison.
Here's an option. Ask the players what they would like to see happen for Saturday nights. Some of them will take the Bell money for sure. But I think most would choose CBC. Even after all these years and their rich lifestyles, you can still tell it is a privilege to put on that white towel and be interviewed by HNIC at ice level.
HNIC commentary might not be to everyone's liking - but surely it is better than what TSN gives us on That's Hockey. What a bunch of blowhards.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Corral For This Useful Post:
It's true that Ontario has the population but not all of them are Leafs fans. In eastern Ontario the Sens and Habs are more popular.
