Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Canada to regulate podcasts

podnews.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 105 posts

Re: Canada to regulate podcasts

#21

Post by sojournerc »

SiempreViernes wrote: post #12
huijzer wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody is forcing anyone to watch it. Many people watch it voluntarily. If we are so sure that these media are so bad for people, why are so many people still watching it? If the answer is that these media "hack" the human brain, then I don't think that banning the producers is the right way to go. The root cause is that people are too easily tricked. Banning the producers will only cause other media, such as YouTube…

So instead of banning the bad products, do you propose modifying the human genome or pretending that there's no problem at all?

The point is there is not and will never be consensus on what is "bad", so it ultimately is decided by power imbalance rather than some higher moralilty.

In a liberal society we allow things we don't like in order to maintain individual freedom as a higher good than "perfect" society.

Those who do envision "perfect" society and pursue it with the power of the state are the worst sort of authoritarians, because it's all done "for your own good", no matter what you think.

Re: Canada to regulate podcasts

#22

Post by cmrdporcupine »

goda90 wrote: post #20
jpalawaga wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody was forcing anyone to drive cars fuel powered by leaded gas either, could it have been so bad? And if it was so bad, why were so many people using it? I would say that the answer to solve this is education, but unfortunately many states have decided that education is the bad thing, instead of blantantly misleading information. Even if you could teach it successfully in school, how many adults are going to go b…

> Nobody was forcing anyone to drive cars fuel powered by leaded gas either, could it have been so bad? And if it was so bad, why were so many people using it? I wouldn't say this is a great analogy, because leaded gas was the only gas available, and alternatives to cars were disappearing in many cities. If you wanted to participate in the economy, you pretty much had to use gasoline.

I mean, you're not really correct. The first 10 years of my life every gas station had both "leaded" and "unleaded" options and it was regulations that forced car manufacturers to remove the the requirement for the former type of fuel.

You could argue the market would have gone there anyways, but it's actually insane how much damage to human health and the environment was done in the interim until regulation forced the matter.

Re: Canada to regulate podcasts

#23

Post by monlockandkey »

spiderfarmer wrote: post #7
victorbstan wrote: post #5

Because the “free for all” market that gave rise to Alex Jones and FOX news, etc. really improved American society…

For an outsider it's baffling to see 50% of the US slowly getting brainwashed to the point where they reject all facts out of spite, and think it is important to be contrarian on literally every social issue.

Which half are you talking about :D

The reason for the two alternate realities in the same country is primarily to do with what information you consume.

As an exercise, go to the front page of Reddit everyday. You will almost always notice on the first page or the first few there are always posts on politics. And the vast majority of these posts are the "bad" takes/actions/scandals on rebuplicans/conservatives.

If you go to r/conservative , you will see the "bad" takes/actions/scandals of the democrats/liberals.

On Reddit the echo chamber for democrats is the entirety of Reddit except for a select few subs. The echo chamber for conservatives is in their own subreddits. On conservative websites this is the opposite.

If one looks only at the Reddit front page, no doubt they would not like the republicans because it's a highlight of their low points. I.e a Reverse Instagram, post all the bad parts of your life.

This is the issue. The two realities is from getting information about how "good" your side is and a feed about all the bad stuff from the other side.

The reason why you think 50% of the population is like that is precisely because the information you have received about that side is their bad highlight reel. And they will equally think the other 50% of the aisle is brainwashed because of all they are viewing your bad highlight reel

Re: Canada to regulate podcasts

#24

Post by bhdlr »

huijzer wrote: post #8
victorbstan wrote: post #5

Because the “free for all” market that gave rise to Alex Jones and FOX news, etc. really improved American society…

Nobody is forcing anyone to watch it. Many people watch it voluntarily. If we are so sure that these media are so bad for people, why are so many people still watching it? If the answer is that these media "hack" the human brain, then I don't think that banning the producers is the right way to go. The root cause is that people are too easily tricked. Banning the producers will only cause other media, such as YouTube…

Tons of people were using lead paint and asbestos insulation, why did we ban those products?

Re: Canada to regulate podcasts

#25

Post by pookha »

victorbstan wrote: post #5

Because the “free for all” market that gave rise to Alex Jones and FOX news, etc. really improved American society…

This sounds like the official signaling coming out of the US' nation-state George Creel-styled media. I'm personally grateful for the distributed and non-curated media. DC is just going to have to get over itself and adjust to the changing landscape. There's good and bad. When the original printing press came out the #1 books were for witch hunting and yet society -- in the end -- was better off for it.

Re: Canada to regulate podcasts

#26

Post by kshahkshah »

victorbstan wrote: post #5

Because the “free for all” market that gave rise to Alex Jones and FOX news, etc. really improved American society…

The free for all market also gave me access to a hundred chefs who vastly improved my cooking. It also gave me access to a dozen woodworkers who taught me how to work safely and efficiently. A whole host of gardeners in my USDA zone with hyper local content relevant to me and taught me about native plants.

The free market has saved me thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars in home repair costs. From changing my blower motor, to installing my Ecobee w/o a common wire, to installing ceiling brackets correctly, repairing my garage trolley.

The free market gave me podcasts and podcasters which taught me a ton about international conflicts and their history. Gave me access to brilliant environmentalists and conservationists doing incredible field work.

The real price I had to pay was hearing people endlessly, endlessly, endlessly complain about, and in so doing, amplify people that they don't listen to, disagree with, and think are harmful.

Re: Canada to regulate podcasts

#29

Post by mrpotato »

didibus wrote: post #19
johnp271 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The CRTC News Release explicitly states: "Today, the CRTC is advancing its regulatory plan to modernize Canada’s broadcasting framework and ensure online streaming services make meaningful contributions to Canadian and Indigenous content." I would ask, who decides what is 'meaningful'? This sounds like an open door to censorship to me. Was not the requirement to make 'meaningful' contributions to society the excuse u…

From what I know, it's just that you need a specified amount of air time from Canadian, French and indigenous presenters. What they choose to do with it is up to them. It's more of a pass the mic around so every group gets some airtime law, and not so much a you cannot talk about this or that. The idea is that it acts a bit like human rights, at balancing majority rules. Where financial incentives would prefer to alw…

> it's just that you need a specified amount of air time from French Canadian and indigenous presenters.

It's only specific to Canadian and Indigenous content. The content does not have to be French.

Post reply on HN