91–100 of 105 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are referring to the CanCon rules https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/cancon.htm The rules have been around for 40+ years in one form or another.
A lot of the links on that page don't work, but I infer that it only applies to radio and TV, and it's not going to apply to podcasts just yet (perhaps in the future). Still, not much concrete info.
Maybe I misunderstand, but this is a requirement for platforms to register (Apple, Google, Spotify, Twitter, etc). The fear is of indirect censorship. As was the case with law enforcement/intelligence informally requesting take downs in the US, Canada will be making this process formal.
Can you explain what is indirect censorship? I personally don't know why people fear anything here. All you have to do to comply is add some Canadian content to your platform and recommend it and promote it in listings. You don't need to take down any other content or omit certain topic/subject matter. The only question is, does it work? Does it really help promote Canadian made content and Canadian thoughts and idea…
Because the “free for all” market that gave rise to Alex Jones and FOX news, etc. really improved American society…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Also from an outsider, you're talking about the Democrats -- right?
But from where I’m standing, only one party is committed to cutting off its nose to spite its face… and it’s not the Dems.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also from an outsider, you're talking about the Democrats -- right?
As an insider I genuinely cannot tell whether this is a sarcastic comment But from where I’m standing, only one party is committed to cutting off its nose to spite its face… and it’s not the Dems.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is that if a Canadian wishes to make a podcast the biggest platforms may be closed to them because of onerous regulation they've opted out of. That's bad.
That’s not how it works. Applying for CanCon status confers certain tax and subsidy incentives. You can forgo the onerous application process and operate as a normal business.
And given this newest revision is talking about Canadian values you might be regulated on the content of your show with that one or two man team to deal with the show and any issues.
It's great for large businesses but not small. It's going to be great for cbx and global who can hire someone whose whole job is dealing with regulatory burdens and applying for grants. but Joe entertainer doing his podcast on YouTube is going to have a tough time dealing with the regulations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of the links on that page don't work, but I infer that it only applies to radio and TV, and it's not going to apply to podcasts just yet (perhaps in the future). Still, not much concrete info.
It will indeed apply to online services and affect their recommendation algorithms.
On one hand, it is wrong to limit people’s opinions to be discussed and talked about, and I am sure there are a lot of issues when it comes to Canadian politics, economics, etc. On the other hand, since probably around 2014, we have a lot of grifters surfaced online who are only interested in monetizing their content with no integrity or accountability, across the whole political spectrum. So I don’t know how to feel…
On one hand, it is wrong to limit people’s opinions to be discussed and talked about, and I am sure there are a lot of issues when it comes to Canadian politics, economics, etc. On the other hand, since probably around 2014, we have a lot of grifters surfaced online who are only interested in monetizing their content with no integrity or accountability, across the whole political spectrum. So I don’t know how to feel…
What sort of "accountability" do you have in mind?
On one hand, it is wrong to limit people’s opinions to be discussed and talked about, and I am sure there are a lot of issues when it comes to Canadian politics, economics, etc. On the other hand, since probably around 2014, we have a lot of grifters surfaced online who are only interested in monetizing their content with no integrity or accountability, across the whole political spectrum. So I don’t know how to feel…
That’s not “on the other hand.” Thats part of the free speech you claimed to support.