Censorship?

fireguy_31

mors ante servitium
Registered Senior Member
Canada's Radio-television Telecommunications Commission is an independant regulatory agency that is mandated, by law, to provide, " a public service essential to the maintenance and enhancement of national identity and cultural sovereignty;" among other things. In short, they, by law, ensure Canadian Content is represented and displayed equitably on television and radio broadcasts.

Being a Canadian, I understand the purpose of such an agency and agree that regulation of radio-television programming will maintain (to some degree) our cultural sovereignty. But, recently I spoke with a friend, who happens to be a police officer, and she told me that they underwent training to effectively identify illegal American Digital Satellite Receivers. In turn, an identified illegal receiver would be confiscated and the owner charged.

Doesn't this sound alarmingly similar to Censorship?
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/about.htm
 
Last edited:
This may be a side issue, but ... what does "enhancement of national identity and cultural sovereignty" mean in Canadian?

The only reason I ask is that I pick on similar ideas in the US.

As to Censorship ... it's on the line, but for comparison I remind you that, at its base, the US drug war is part of the Congressional power to regulate commerce.

The issue between regulating the information itself and the device that brings information is a difficult issue. Of course, just saying that isn't particularly helpful.
 
what does "enhancement of national identity and cultural sovereignty" mean in Canadian?

A fair question. Well, to put it simply, we here in Canada (not everyone, and definately not me) feel our identity (culture) is at risk when the mediums of media beam programming non-specific to Canadian values and, to some extent, traditions - the virtues of any culture. We in Canada are a socialist endearing type of folk; quite evident in our universal healthcare, peace-keeping military persona and centralized government. The dominate radio-television airwaves contain American programming that encompasses American values and, to some extent, traditions. The CRTC was set-up to balance those dominate airwaves with regulating what content is heard and seen on Canadian radio-television airwaves. I'm not sure if you're aware but, our television and radio contains some American programming with Canadian commercials balanced by equal, if not more, time committed to Canadian specific programming.

To expand on my original post, and to speak directly to your input; Confiscating a device, and imposing fines on its owners, that receives information sent from outside a countries borders is, without a doubt, censorship, no? Transcend that context to a place like Cuba or Saddams' Iraq.

Just something that I've been digesting, ever since my freind told me what she was being trained to do...
 
Last edited:
I really don't like the sound of this. If I want to watch programs that center around American culture - or British culture, or Japanese culture - it's nobody's business but mine. It isn't the government's job to keep culture static.
 
This issue isn’t much different than the US federal government preventing state governments from importing Canadian drugs. The US Food & Drug Administration (FDA) has a mandate to protect American consumers. Much harder to do when drugs are imported. So the FDA seeks a ban on Canadian drug imports. Such ban conveniently boosts US drug company profits, but there you go.

Likewise, the CRTC has a mandate to regulate and supervise all aspects of the Canadian broadcasting system; i.e. what Canadians see on TV. Much harder to do when broadcasts are imported. In the US there are 7 specific words that cannot be said on TV. If Canada has 15, say, how is the CRTC going to keep those Canadians who watch American TV from hearing the extra 8 forbidden words? Yes it is censorship, but presumably the majority of Canadians approve, if only by their inaction to stop it.
 
Likewise, the CRTC has a mandate to regulate and supervise all aspects of the Canadian broadcasting system; i.e. what Canadians see on TV. Much harder to do when broadcasts are imported. In the US there are 7 specific words that cannot be said on TV. If Canada has 15, say, how is the CRTC going to keep those Canadians who watch American TV from hearing the extra 8 forbidden words? Yes it is censorship, but presumably the majority of Canadians approve, if only by their inaction to stop it.
The thing is, the CRTC isn't saying that I have a right to be protected from offensive American broadcasts – it's saying that I don't have a right to watch offensive American broadcasts even if I want to. It's important to remember that someone has to make a special effort (by purchasing and installing special satellite receivers) in order to watch these broadcasts. The CRTC should have the authority to simply warn people that American broadcasts don't comply with CRTC standards, and that viewers risk being exposed to morally objectionable material if they view American channels. I'd love to hear the explanation for why it's legal for me to purchase a pornographic movie, but illegal for me to watch 'offensive' American TV shows.
 
fireguy_31 said:
Being a Canadian, I understand the purpose of such an agency and agree that regulation of radio-television programming will maintain (to some degree) our cultural sovereignty.

Cultural Sovereignty? Hahaha Ohh lord, please tell me you're joking? I had no idea that Fascism had caught on in Canada, you always seemed like such a sweet and friendly people. What in Gods name is Cultural sovereignty? No, don't answer, because I know it already, it's nothing but a hollow buzz word you designed to cover up your own claustrophobic ethnocentric ideology. If you feel that letting people watch TV or hear ideas from other nations and other peoples is going to destroy some special part about your culture, then perhaps it was best that that special little part was laid to rest.

How can such a hideously conservative idea exist in Canada, I wonder? As an American I see it as a liberal paradise, but to hear a phrase like “cultural sovereignty” used in such a context as this is just completely overwhelming. Before you go ballistic, don’t think I’m mocking Canadian culture and heritage, because your identify as a people, your history, that’s all beautiful and should be preserved, I don’t disagree with that, but you’re going so far as to suggest that even in our modern world, where boarders are evaporating and we’re gradually becoming more of a world community that you should completely ignore the fact that we’re living in a modern world, and that your culture is going to change as a result of that. It speaks to some instinctual fear, I suppose, plenty of people are irked by the idea of change, but for Christ sake, don’t let those frightened old white men fool you into buying into some tripe and get you thinking that somehow Canada’s past was the most beautiful and glorious time in the existence of the universe, and that no deviation from it’s example should ever occur, the rest of the world isn’t out to rob you of your identity, and multiculturalism isn’t something to be feared.
 
Nasor said:
I'd love to hear the explanation for why it's legal for me to purchase a pornographic movie, but illegal for me to watch 'offensive' American TV shows.

Probably because the Canadian gov’t cannot take the chance that the US could usurp the airwaves. TV is the most influential communication medium. It has to be controlled to maximize its effectiveness to politicians and their sponsors. If the CRTC didn’t take action now, there could come a day when US lobbies easily affect Canadian elections.
 
Mystech

You raise good points - something I'll be more than happy to speak to when I have time.

Later.
 
Fascists? No. We're quite Liberal, but I assume you would know that judging by your clever arrangement, and wide variety, of vocabulary; suggesting to me you might be well read - and if you don't know that then I question what you read. Please, don't feel threatened by a country that finds importance in preserving its cultural heritage and, moreso, don't feel threatened by its methods of doing so. Afterall, our autonomy is of no threat to the American way of life, is it? My opinion is; your opinion on how we in Canada preserve our cultural heritage means fuq-all, nor should it. Please, don't fear us. We'd sooner get drunk at a hockey game and do an ol' fashioned ass kikken' on someone not cheering for the home team and follow it up by buying the "ass kikked" a beer than project our political beliefs on another.

The rest of your post seems, to me, more like a fanatical rant rather than adhering to the threads intent - so I'll reserve my comments.

But i would like to hear your insight on the initial question. I really think you have something to offer but please, don't allow yourself to be frightened by our political differences.
 
Well, perhaps to call it fascist is just a bit over the line. None the less, the very term implies a culture of xenophobia. You’ll have to excuse my harsh reaction to this phrase, but, being a veteran of these forums, and many others on the topics of politics and culture and all that, I’ve seen quite a lot of moronic, self serving, exclusionary philosophies which people like to sum up in single phrases. “Cultural sovereignty” for me, paints the idea of a world view where all of Canada has this idea of what it is to be Canadian, and what a Canadian should think say and do, and that there are hostile foreign forces trying to change that and take that away from you. In that sense it’s not unlike phrases like “race traitor” or “mongreization of the races”, some pretty ugly words for some objectively meaningless philosophies, I think you’d agree.

My beef is mainly that it’s a very polarizing way of thinking, we have “us” who all thing and act the same way, and we have “them” who we can’t be allowed to speak with very much or somehow that beautiful gap between us will lessen somehow. It completely ignores the fact that if the prevailing social paradigm (or Zeitgeist) of Canada is to change through cultural infancies bought via American TV, or any foreign media, then that is going to be a direct result of the people of Canada deciding that that’s the sort of thing they want to see. To say that there’s some “cultural sovereignty” to give heed to is to imply that your leaders know better than yourselves how to live your every day life, and what your morals and values should be. Furthermore it implies that some vague golden ideal of Canada’s past is something that should be reached for, rather than any natural Canadian future; this is the classic conservative paradigm: prefer any past to any future. I must admit it’s a little strange hearing all of this out of Canada, as generally, especially in America, we think of it as being quite liberal.

Obviously the idea of cultural sovereignty (The right of the government to perform social engineering on it’s citizens so that they will conform to some foolish golden ideal, which has nothing to do with the people themselves keeping their culture intact) and the banning of Satellite dishes to pick up American broadcasts go hand in hand. I find both of them to be insulting and appalling, this simply isn’t how any free society should operate.


Edit: Reading through my post I thought it might be wise of me to post that my view is not based on a sense of wounded pride that Canadians would reject American TV specifically. I’ve got no great attachment to it, really, and don’t assign any stupid national pride to it just because it happens to be American (I have an Australian friend who attaches his loyalty to anything Australian regardless of what a piece of crap it may be, and I find his reasonless loyalty a bit amusing). I don’t really even bother to watch that much of it, because I realize that a lot of it is just trash and stupidness, but I’ve got absolutely no qualms with anyone who does enjoy watching TV, and think it rather unnecessary to say that just because I don’t particularly enjoy it then no one should be able to.
 
It appears to me your thoughts project or support the belief of a homogeneous cultural identity - at the cost of cultural diversity.?.?.? In no way does cultural sovereignty perpetuate the differences between cultures but rather embraces a set of values and beliefs shared amongst a group, a group that is not political or radical but cultural. There is nothing to fear in culture.

Now, back to the topic....

I think it is censorship when law provides a vehicle for government forces to confiscate a device that receives communication signals...
 
Back
Top