Comments on: Heritage Ministry: Censorship Board?

By: Abattoir

Abattoir — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 20:49:48 +0000

Matthew, that’s a great point. The situation has changed from 10 years ago, so what made sense then may need to be rethought now. The relative benefit to society may have declined to a point where we need to rethink the whole idea. For that matter, maybe it’s time to reconsider the whole CanCon philosophy now too.

By: Hank

Hank — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 17:04:09 +0000

You can say what you want, but it is not censorship if I refuse to buy you a bullhorn. Ditto for filming.

By: Matthew

Matthew — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 15:32:36 +0000

Wouldn’t the dawn of the internet have eliminated such a need though Abattoir? Messages that resonate don’t need high-end budgets to be effective (we’ve seen many blogging partisans create cheap yet effective TV spots on Youtube over the past couple of years) and if Canadian Nazis have an internet presence, it leads me to believe that every minority can establish some sort of following and influence in the electronic super highway.

By: Abattoir

Abattoir — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 15:01:58 +0000

You raise some excellent points Shane. I’d like to point out, though, that there is potentially some real benefit to society through government support for films that would not otherwise be produced. This is most relevant when considering subjects that would be considered unpopular at the time.

Some filmmakers may have an insight into a topic that may be controversial at the time, but later may prove to be ahead of their time. Society benefits from these points of view being expressed. Of course, other artists and private journalists may have equally valuable points of view, and yet remain unfunded. How many blogs receive public funds, after all?

Perhaps the system is being run unfairly (particulary with respect to right-of-centre views, I’ll admit), and perhaps the costs outweigh the benefits. All I’m suggesting is that there may be a place for this type of public support, and I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss it outright.

By: Charles Anthony

Charles Anthony — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 03:15:58 +0000

The way I figure, everybody should get tax breaks. The more tax-breaks, the better.

—

The film industry getting tax-breaks is no big deal. We may as well complain about people getting tax-breaks if they make a living by selling bottled air. I would rather the efforts of Josee Verner be spent on fiscal policy that affected a hell of a lot more people.

Government at various levels subsidize tons and tons of different markets. Unless you are ready to demand that the government stops handing out money willy nilly, complaining about one tiny industry getting preferential treatment is an exercise in futility.

By: Matthew

Matthew — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 22:50:43 +0000

I agree with the way philanthropist puts it. Ultimately, this bill (while appreciated personally) is wrong because it is the same as the government reacting to the CCP by giving funds exclusively to church groups and fiscal libertarians. Using public money to pay off your supporters is a Liberal/Red Tory way of doing things and the CPC should not be engaging in such corrupt ways.

By: Kursk

Kursk — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 22:14:53 +0000

Canadians are forced to fund prgrams no one else would want to make or watch, through our tax payers dollars.

Lets face it, the vast majority of Canadian programming is gawd awful and horribly produced.I have suffered through years of the Night Heat’s, the Littlest Hobo’s, the Robo cop:the series and wish they would just stop.

Lets face it, the funding was for ‘make work’ projects for the same 10 Canadian actors to perpetuate their schlock ad nauseum.Incestuous does not even begin to describe the culture of telefilm Canada.

Will somebody please put a stake through Harvey Atkins before he rises from the crypt again?

By: philanthropist

philanthropist — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 22:07:38 +0000

By taking my money away from me to give to these bums who can’t sell films - the government is censoring me, not them.

These welfare cases still have every right to make films without my money. They’re simply revealing that they’re idiots by calling it ‘censorship’ when their free ride is over.

By: John

John — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 21:59:04 +0000

The government has been actively engaged in curtailing sex, violence and religious content in broadcasting for decades.

As self-professed ‘artists’ have broken down the barriers of the former two taboos, the third remains their pinata.

Anything moral or religious is the target of these artists. They have and continue to fully expect to use the financial resources of the government to mount their attacks.

I say great, fund them, but also, give McVety and the lot the equivalent amount of funding to fire back.

Everyone else can sit back and watch the culture war as truly ‘Canadian entertainment.’