Goodbye CONCACAF CL Coverage on CBC

[Free kick]

quote:Originally posted by kyam

CBC needs subsidies because they are the only broadcaster that is willing to take a chance on Canadian content that are often too risky for the private-sector to consider. Domestic Soccer in Canada would be considered one of those risky ventures.

The CONCACAF Champions League is in its infancy, and when funding is available, the CBC would be the only widely available broadcaster that would take a chance on a Canadian club participating in the CCL. Of course, if CBC was funded along the same level as BBC in the UK, the for-profit CBC Bold would not have been created, and instead, a CBC2 would air the CCL (similar to BBC2) would be widely available for everyone to see and build brand power of the domestic game.

When the Montreal Impact was in its infancy, Radio-Canada was the only channel that was willing to broadcast the Impact regularly. As a result, the Impact were able to get more widespread exposure and have improved brand power.

CBC was also originally the primary broadcaster for TFC in its first season...

If you broadcast it, they will come. Had TFC or the Impact failed to gain wide spread exposure, RogersSportsnet or TSN\RDS would never consider broadcasting or showing highlights of domestic club games...

Private broadcasters who air Canadian content (like Degrassi High or Corner Gas) do so for one reason, and thats to meet the bare minimum of CRTC regulations. The only way we can kill CBC, is if we ramp up the CRTC regulations on Private-broadcaster...

Otherwise, national public broadcasting should have a place for both drama and sports.

Well said, you will not find a better example to support your argument than LAST NIGHT!. Here we have the first game of the CCL being played and its not available anywhere other than a specialty channel that is owned by the club. It was arguably the biggest event in town last night judging from the turnout ( ie.: the Biggest crowd in TFC history)and the lead and billing up to game. The blue jays are out of it and CFL football is far behinf TFC in popularity. there was that buzz that we talk about. Not only in the stadium but also in the media.

And what does the private broadcaster ( in this case TSN) do? They air some meaningless MLS all star game that nobody here could give a rats ass about. So why do they air it? because its cheap programming. And that is why you need cbc because if we were to rely only on the private broadcasters, cheap programming ( and/or ROI) would always take precedence over what important and what the people want. Its cheap programming because the production costs are all born by ESPN in the US. And anything that they ( private broascadter) actually have to produce, what they'll do is hype the crap out things to spur demand and viewership regardless of the significance or important of the event.

Another excellent example from just this week. the Canadian open golf. Again, private broadcasters farm it out or outsource it to American broadcasters. And what happens, rain delays screw up the schedule forcing its completion on Monday. As result, since its of minor significance and low ratings for Americans ( but conversely much more important to canadians) they justifiably dont bother airing the conclusion on Monday so Canadians don t get to see it... I am glad that they did actually, because it teaches us all a lesson of why you need a broadcaster like the CBC and why you cant rely only on the private broadcasters in Canada.

Anything that has any kind of traction in this country, such NHL hockey, Curling, and the grey cup, is due to the CBC. Because they aired for years and it built over many years a brand, a history and culture. And its because of that that these programs/sports and brands became a valuable property to the private broadcaster to invest in and buy the rights. All things equal, had there been only private broadcasters in the 50's and 60's, we all be walking around with NC Tar heels and Duke Blue devils gear and paraphenalia.

[DoyleG]

quote:Originally posted by Free kick

Well said, you will not find a better example to support your argument than LAST NIGHT!. Here we have the first game of the CCL being played and its not available anywhere other than a specialty channel that is owned by the club. It was arguably the biggest event in town last night judging from the turnout ( ie.: the Biggest crowd in TFC history)and the lead and billing up to game. The blue jays are out of it and CFL football is far behinf TFC in popularity. there was that buzz that we talk about. Not only in the stadium but also in the media.

And what does the private broadcaster ( in this case TSN) do? They air some meaningless MLS all star game that nobody here could give a rats ass about. So why do they air it? because its cheap programming. And that is why you need cbc because if we were to rely only on the private broadcasters, cheap programming ( and/or ROI) would always take precedence over what important and what the people want. Its cheap programming because the production costs are all born by ESPN in the US. And anything that they ( private broadcaster) actually have to produce, what they'll do is hype the crap out things to spur demand and viewership regardless of the significance or important of the event.

Its easy for you to blame private media for your troubles because it's an easy scapegoat. If the CBC is so vital, then why didn't the CBC carry the game? Simple, TFC didn't want the game on any network television. If it was going to be shown, it was to be on their own network. Period.

The blame falls square on the shoulders of TFC. They have the contracts and could easily have had the game broadcast on national television. They are to blame. Full Stop.

quote:Originally posted by Free kick

Another excellent example from just this week. the Canadian open golf. Again, private broadcasters farm it out or outsource it to American broadcasters. And what happens, rain delays screw up the schedule forcing its completion on Monday. As result, since its of minor significance and low ratings for Americans ( but conversely much more important to canadians) they justifiably dont bother airing the conclusion on Monday so Canadians don t get to see it... I am glad that they did actually, because it teaches us all a lesson of why you need a broadcaster like the CBC and why you cant rely only on the private broadcasters in Canada.

Yet whose been looking after the Canadian Open for all these years? None other than the private broadcasters themselves. They looked after the Canadian Open and the defunct GVO/ACC and went out of their way to promote it. Where was the CBC during this time? They didn't even bother to consider golf to be of importance. Private broadcasters won out because they could divert the resources needed to cover such an event.

Another epic fail by Freekick.

quote:Originally posted by Free kick

Anything that has any kind of traction in this country, such NHL hockey, Curling, and the grey cup, is due to the CBC. Because they aired for years and it built over many years a brand, a history and culture. And its because of that that these programs/sports and brands became a valuable property to the private broadcaster to invest in and buy the rights. All things equal, had there been only private broadcasters in the 50's and 60's, we all be walking around with NC Tar heels and Duke Blue devils gear and paraphenalia.

The Oilers were surviving long before CBC tossed them a bone. They used private broadcasters to build up their fan base. Ditto with regards to the Flames, Canucks and every other NHL team in Canada bar the Leafs.

CBC did little to promote curling in Canada. It was TSN doing the all the work for the game and keeping it in the public eye. CBC simply kept all the spoils to itself.

CTV had a very long history with the CFL including the first refusal to the Grey Cup. Yet that didn't stop them from sharing broadcasting duties with the CBC or even with the pre-Global Canadian Football Network. The CFL never threw its whole lot in with the CFL for a good reason. They left the mother corp because they knew that TSN could commit to promoting the league regardless of the cost.

Freekick has committed the most Epic Fail, which is a very spectacular fall given his previous standards.

[Marc]

Is it a more epic fail than "5-0 Portugal" or Canadian Warriors? If anyone is the resident epic fail expert around here, it's likely you.

But back on topic, it's fun to pick and choose what you like and don't in order to build an argument, but in the end, your point doesn't add up.

The reason we have such a variety of sports on TV is due to the CBC, and their support of sports in their amateur and non-mainstream phases - e.g. when they don't make private broadcasters any money.

There is a reason why we here in Canada can watch a wider variety of sports on basic cable than you can in the States - and it's not because of TSN or CanWest. CBC has created marketable entities out these things, supported them with their mandate (because they don't have to make money) and then when it becomes profitable, the other stations gobble it up.

You may be ideologically opposed to the CBC, and that's fine. But your stance, unfortunately, is not justified through the line of argumentation you're trying to use.

[Marc]

quote:Originally posted by kyam

I find CBC is NOT Toronto Centric as some make it out to be. As a Western-Canadian myself, I find Westerners whine a lot about everything being Toronto-centric, and its just not true. Toronto gets its fair-share of the market based on their size. They happen to have a larger market than the Prairies.

Lets look at Canadian Drama on CBC from the East (Maritimes) to West (Pacific). This is by no means an exhaustive list of Canadian Drama. Of course, Canadian Drama is based on CRTC’s definition of what Drama is:

- "This Hour has 22 Min" & the former in-studio "Air Farce" are based in Halifax.

- Best of Just for Laughs is from Montreal

- "Little Mosque on the Prairie" which gained International fame is from Saskatchewan

- "Heart Land" and "Wild Roses" are both based on Alberta

- Da Vinchi's City Hall is based on a character from Vancouver

- Of course, you have Toronto based Drama like The Border, Sophie and Being Erica.

Lets be clear. Just because it isn't from Alberta, doesn't automatically mean its all from Toronto..

It's funny too, because the national private networks are much more Toronto centric than the CBC. CTV is super Toronto-centric - the only non-Toronto Canadian show they have is Corner Gas - and I don't think there is one Canadian show on Global that isn't Toronto-based. And TSN is practically the Toronto Sports Network

[Free kick]

quote:Originally posted by Marc

It's funny too, because the national private networks are much more Toronto centric than the CBC. CTV is super Toronto-centric - the only non-Toronto Canadian show they have is Corner Gas - and I don't think there is one Canadian show on Global that isn't Toronto-based. And TSN is practically the Toronto Sports Network

Exactly, and that's what you would expect from private networks, they're going to tailor programing and coverage to meet the needs and interests of the largest audience which happens to be in Southern Ontario.

[Portuguese Sensation]

quote:Originally posted by Free kick

Here we have the first game of the CCL being played and its not available anywhere other than a specialty channel that is owned by the club. It was arguably the biggest event in town last night judging from the turnout ( ie.: the Biggest crowd in TFC history)and the lead and billing up to game. The blue jays are out of it and CFL football is far behinf TFC in popularity. there was that buzz that we talk about. Not only in the stadium but also in the media.

If CFL Football is so far behind the popularity of TFC, then why is the CFL consistantly on top of the ratings while TFC barely squeaks into the Top 10 - if at all?

I love TFC and I love soccer - but when it comes to Canadian teams and/or North American soccer (MLS), it's a mere blip on the radar screen.

[DoyleG]

quote:Originally posted by Marc

Is it a more epic fail than "5-0 Portugal" or Canadian Warriors? If anyone is the resident epic fail expert around here, it's likely you.

I'm more than happy to be the expert since Freekick's rant has replaced my predictions as the biggest Epic Fail? Anybody with a basic understanding of how the country works would easily avoid the failures that Freekick has made.

quote:Originally posted by Marc

But back on topic, it's fun to pick and choose what you like and don't in order to build an argument, but in the end, your point doesn't add up.

You never read the post before responding didn't you? If you did, you would easily learn that Freekick was wrong on his blame for the CCL and how golf was covered. He also has a rather poor history when it comes to sports coverage in Canada.

quote:Originally posted by Marc

The reason we have such a variety of sports on TV is due to the CBC, and their support of sports in their amateur and non-mainstream phases - e.g. when they don't make private broadcasters any money.

Nice try. If what you were saying is true, then CBC would be covering up the hilt when it comes to amateur and non-mainstream sports. Planting a flag doesn't cut it in this world, which is why those said sports you have talked about have largely left the CBC as a whole.

quote:Originally posted by Marc

There is a reason why we here in Canada can watch a wider variety of sports on basic cable than you can in the States - and it's not because of TSN or CanWest. CBC has created marketable entities out these things, supported them with their mandate (because they don't have to make money) and then when it becomes profitable, the other stations gobble it up.

Yet you fail to provide any evidence to back up your claims. You tend to give CBC far more credit than it deserves.

quote:Originally posted by Marc

You may be ideologically opposed to the CBC, and that's fine. But your stance, unfortunately, is not justified through the line of argumentation you're trying to use.

Neither is yours. The reason for CBC being in the dumps is because of people like yourself. Don't blame me or other factors for its problems. It's problems lie in the city of Toronto and people like yourself.

[DoyleG]

quote:Originally posted by kyam

Just to reiterate your point. I'm pulling this out of my head based on Journal articles I've read while completing my Masters dissertation (so correct me if I'm wrong)... based on 2006 data, the UK Government spent about $7 billion to subsidize BBC, BBC Sports and BBC Radio programming (all domestic)....

On the other hand... the Federal Government spends only $1.6 billion to fund the CBC, CBC Radio and Radio-Canada (based on 2006 data). Since CBC is severely underfunded as a Public Broadcaster, the CBC TV was forced to introduce a cost-recovery program in the form of Advertising. The BBC is commercial free, CBC Radio remains commercial-free.

Your Masters dissertation must suck or you decide to be choosy.

The journal articles you used would've told you that the BBC is funded through a "television license" that all Britons must pay. In more recent times, there's been a push to allow private British broadcasters to take some of that revenue. The only portion of the BBC that is not funded through this is the World Service, which gets funding from the Foreign Office.

[DoyleG]

quote:Originally posted by kyam

- "This Hour has 22 Min" & the former in-studio "Air Farce" are based in Halifax.

Air Farce was based in Toronto, leading them to end their old cross-country radio tours because they needed to be in Toronto to do the television program.

As for 22 Minutes, it was Toronto management that took Mercer off the show for his own Toronto-based program. 22 Minutes hadn't been relevant for a long time.

quote:Originally posted by kyam

- Best of Just for Laughs is from Montreal

Done based on the Montreal Comedy festival. Not applicable.

quote:Originally posted by kyam

- "Little Mosque on the Prairie" which gained International fame is from Saskatchewan

Done largely in Toronto with mainly Toronto actors and with a Toronto-based theme (A man going from Toronto to lead a mosque in Saskatchewan). It can be clearly seen in its production values.

quote:Originally posted by kyam

- "Heart Land" and "Wild Roses" are both based on Alberta

Based on Alberta doesn't mean anything. The latter example was clearly done for a Toronto audience. Family dramas like "Heart Land" don't count either since they can be done, and have been, by private broadcasters.

quote:Originally posted by kyam

- Da Vinchi's City Hall is based on a character from Vancouver

Which failed because people in Toronto didn't lean that one should exactly mimic real life people.

quote:Originally posted by kyam

- Of course, you have Toronto based Drama like The Border, Sophie and Being Erica.

Sophie was a rip-off of a French-Language comedy while the Border needed a star from CSI Miami to help get it off the ground.

quote:Originally posted by kyam

Lets be clear. Just because it isn't from Alberta, doesn't automatically mean its all from Toronto..

Sadly, it is from Toronto and it explains the poor performance of the CBC in recent years.

[DoyleG]

quote:Originally posted by kyam

I never understand people who advocate to disband our only National public broadcaster just to settle some partisan score...

And the CBC hasn't been throughout its history?

quote:Originally posted by kyamCBC needs subsidies because they are the only broadcaster that is willing to take a chance on Canadian content that are often too risky for the private-sector to consider. Domestic Soccer in Canada would be considered one of those risky ventures.

The private-sector has taken far more risks with Canadian content than the CBC has in recent years. You're just making an excuse for poor CBC management.

quote:Originally posted by kyamThe CONCACAF Champions League is in its infancy, and when funding is available, the CBC would be the only widely available broadcaster that would take a chance on a Canadian club participating in the CCL. Of course, if CBC was funded along the same level as BBC in the UK, the for-profit CBC Bold would not have been created, and instead, a CBC2 would air the CCL (similar to BBC2) would be widely available for everyone to see and build brand power of the domestic game.

The CBC isn't carrying it which shows that they haven't really an faith in competitions outside of the World Cup. Funding has nothing to do with that.

As for CBC Bold, its in the position it is in because the CBC didn't stick to its original mandate for the network. CBC Bold began as CBC Country Canada, something that you decided not to put into your rant to begin with. We can see where your problems with broadcasting come from, and your education has let you poorly prepared for it.

quote:Originally posted by kyam

When the Montreal Impact was in its infancy, Radio-Canada was the only channel that was willing to broadcast the Impact regularly. As a result, the Impact were able to get more widespread exposure and have improved brand power.

Radio-Canada is a separate issue, and lumping it with the CBC is nothing but an insult.

quote:Originally posted by kyam

CBC was also originally the primary broadcaster for TFC in its first season...

Yet it was having Sportsnet and The Score that helped give its early profile and kept it going when the CBC magic began to wear off.

quote:Originally posted by kyamIf you broadcast it, they will come. Had TFC or the Impact failed to gain wide spread exposure, RogersSportsnet or TSN\RDS would never consider broadcasting or showing highlights of domestic club games...

RDS was broadcasting the Impact for many years before they went onto Radio-Canada. Domestic networks didn't broadcast because there was no nation-wide element to cover it. Besides, Canadian team needed their regional coverage to keep their popularity. It was the reason Sportsnet was created.

quote:Originally posted by kyamPrivate broadcasters who air Canadian content (like Degrassi High or Corner Gas) do so for one reason, and thats to meet the bare minimum of CRTC regulations. The only way we can kill CBC, is if we ramp up the CRTC regulations on Private-broadcaster...

Yet the CBC does the exact same thing and you praise them for being the great people they are? This last quote sums up how clueless you are about anything relating to Canada, especially with regards to broadcasting.

Come back when you have actually learned something correct, not because of your political bias.

[DoyleG]

quote:Originally posted by Portuguese Sensation

If CFL Football is so far behind the popularity of TFC, then why is the CFL consistantly on top of the ratings while TFC barely squeaks into the Top 10 - if at all?

I love TFC and I love soccer - but when it comes to Canadian teams and/or North American soccer (MLS), it's a mere blip on the radar screen.

The thing that was missed here was the power to put this game on a national network was in the hands of TFC. They have contracts with CBC and Sportsnet for games but didn't use that leverage. Instead, they put the game on their own network in order to try to boost sales of it to the public.

The blame for this falls on TFC alone. Yet it won't stop some fans (Freekick, Kyam, and Marc) from trying to find a conspiracy against Canadian soccer.

[DoyleG]

TFC-Houston drew 51,000 on CBC.

[Trident]

Wait...did Kyam actually say that the SRC "took a chance on the Impact in their infancy"?

I find it tough to listen to this guy, if he believes that.

[DoyleG]

quote:Originally posted by Trident

Wait...did Kyam actually say that the SRC "took a chance on the Impact in their infancy"?

I find it tough to listen to this guy, if he believes that.

He did.

[RS]

I'm glad to see DoyleG has rediscovered that chip on his shoulder.

[RS]

I'm glad to see DoyleG has rediscovered that chip on his shoulder.

[Marc]

Air Farce - yes, stopped the cross country tours. But then if that's the case, why not give Mercer credit for travelling the cross left right and centre for his "Toronto based show" when the vast majority of his content is not from Toronto? Oh, because it doesn't support your argument!

Little Mosque - strong western content can't be discounted, jsut because some of it is filmed in Toronto, where the actors, studios, and the industry is. Find me 8 trained muslim Saskatchewanian actors please Doyle, and a significant soundstage, and you'll have the same productionv alues regardless of where it was filmed. There is a reason Corner Gas is filmed in Sask - because half of it takes place outside, the need for sets is minimal, and it's full of white people.

Little mosque - 'production values': are you suggesting that Saksatchewan production values are lower than Toronto values? Do they grainy TV there? Would they build ****ty sets? What are you suggesting, that because the show is high quality it doesn't meet local production values and therefore isn't representative of Canada? WTF?

Da Vinci's inquest - very popular, lasted seven seasons. That's an eternity for American shows, let alone Canadian ones! If it was so unpalatable to Canadians, it wouldn't have last 13 shows, let alone seven seasons.

Just for Laughs - doesn't count? Is that because it proves you wrong? If CBC was Toronto centric, they'd have pulled the festival from Montreal to Toronto according to your logic. The show is pure Montreal, it's in every second act, they have stuff from the streets, it has a Montreal feel. Totally applicable, doesn't get invalidated because it doesn't meet your flawed line of reasoning.

Heartland - doesn't count because it can be done by anyone? WTF reasoning is this? How many Canadian family dramas do we have on the air today on other Canadian networks? Zero. So obviously it can't be done by everyone. Oh wait, there's a semi-family but mainly teen drama called Degrassi on CTV...a spin off of an old, wildly popular, very Canadian show that was on, wait, wait, wait, the CBC! Doyle + logic = window.

Wild Roses - for a Toronto audience? Where you involved in the show and the marketing? So Alberta people don't like drama made with good production values? You don't have to like it, I think it's crap personally, but that's not for a Toronto audience. A Toronto audience doesn't want to see some people preening around an oil field and a ranch...because it doesn't resonate with them. Seriously, just because it proves you wrong doesn't mean you can just swipe it off the table, once again. CBC wouldn't survive if it were for a Toronto audience, and Wild Roses definitely wouldn't, because it's in Toronto where there is the toughest competition, and therefore some of CBC's lowest viewership.

Amateur sports - the reason we don't see them on the CBC as much any more is due to the cutbacks! The thing that let the CBC show these sports was that they didn't have to pull a profit. That's the model, exactly: CBC shows something repeatedly, builds demand until it becomes a marketable product that the private networks can take over.

The problem is, you need to keep constant funding so that the CBC can build up the next round of money-losing sports. With the funding cuts, the CBC has to go for things that they can reasonably expect to develop ad revenue - which isn't javelin, skeleton, track and equestrian but instead Coronation Street, Everybody Loves Maria, and the Maple Leafs. CBC has to show fewer and fewer amateur sports because they don't bring in any money unless you show them, regularly, over a long period of time, becuase the subsidies just aren't there to sustain long-term losses. Bump the funding, you bump the amateur sports.

The CBC is one of the reasons the Olympics does so well on Canadian TV - that CBC could build it an audience, essentially devote the entire network to it (no Young and the Restless or Everybody Loves Raymond to bump) and build an audience for sports that generally, no one would watch, and that, for the most part, Canadians are not competitive in.

Now, I don't agree with my tax dollars paying for IOC TV rights, but that's another line of reasoning against the CBC - one you could make very soundly, and very easily.

Doyle, if you don't like the CBC there are so many cogent lines of reasoning that you can use; eg. waste of money; detracts from funding more important programs; the state shouldn't be in a private marketplace; distrots competition; inefficient bloated corporation; the issue of biased news coverage as CBC is scared to offend the governing party; etc - they're easy to make and are often convincing. Your vendetta, unfortunately, needs to find another outlet that is not the CBC - if you want it to make any rationale sense at all and for others to support it. But as well all know, that's not really of concern to you here.

But the argument that CBC hasn't fostered unique sports, or that it is Toronto-centric, is compeltely false, and actually, completely the opposite.

[Richard]

Well said Marc.

[Soro17]

DoyleG, we get it, you don't like the CBC. Spare us the logic-defying attempts at reasoning to jusify your dislike. Actually, keep it up - it is highly amusing display of mental gymnastics. Why don't you tell us how the overuse of clips from CBS, ABC and CNN makes CTV news better than CBC news.

[the biologist]

quote:Originally posted by Marc

But the argument that CBC hasn't fostered unique sports, or that it is Toronto-centric, is compeltely false, and actually, completely the opposite.

I'm not a CBC/SRC hater. For my part in Québec, they are way more daring than TVA, the equivalent of CTV to give an idea. Each and every week I check the ratings and TVA ALWAYS gets about 25 of the first 30 places with badly translated shows (Talkin's never synchronized with the lips, awful expressions from France like bordel de merde) like The biggest loser, So you think you can dance, America's got talent. Name it, it's there. I always knock my head on the wall when I check the ratings. At least, SRC tries something different and I think that's the same with CBC when you compare it with CTV & Global.

BUT, THAT BEING SAID...

When it comes to pro sports, it's always been Toronto-centric. FOR YEARS I'm counting the number of Maple Leafs games broadcasted compared to number of the 5 other teams. The results were pathetic. FOR YEARS AND YEARS, we were literally forced to watch on CBC 6 Montreal the Maple Leafs' game on Saturday nights. TOTALLY DISGUSTING. Now, it's been 2 years they changed their broadcast schedule trying to balance it a little bit more (do people out east and out west really prefer the Maple Leafs over the Habs...)but often it is still a local broadcasting of the game. Rememnber Ron McLean saying "Well in Québec and the Atlantic it will be the Habs and for the rest it's gonna be TO". I really don't want to insult you guys ouy there but hey the Atlantic represents only about 8% of all the population. It's worst for Ottawa, they never get their games showed outside the limits of the city.

And then again you've got Don Cherry who'd kill his mother if it could permit the Maple Leafs to kick Ottawa's or Montreal's ass. CBC has some regards over the NHL schedule as it is one of the major broadcasters in the league. It gives some jewels like "Every first Saturday of new regular season has to have the Maple Leafs at home against either the Sens or the Habs", "Every Hockey day in Canada, the Leafs must play at home", etc. Even if there's no game in TO, all the staff is in TO like the private broadcaster TSN is doing.

As for the CFL, when they were showing games, it was like TO: 10, EDM: 6, MTL: 5 and the rest 4, 3, 3, 2, 2. It was so obviously TO-biased that only people from TO didn't (and still don't ?) realize.

As for the MLB, did they ever show Expos games ? THEY NEVER DID. It was all about the BJ. Wait, they did broadcast some... it was on Canada days AGAINST TORONTO, IN TORONTO.

As for the NBA, did they ever show Grizz games ? So why the Raptors ?

As for Soccer, they were NEVER interested in that sport until TORONTO FC made its apparition, and then zoooooo... we've got a deal with MLS to show some TO-based soccer. Very good for the cause for sure, BUT WHY NOT THE IMPACT AND THE CAPS ??? Radio-Canada already has a deal with the USL, so if CBC REALLY WANTS to show some soccer, why don't they fight to get the rights for USL in Canada ?

Final point: the color commentary and analysis. If your team was/is unfortunately playing against TO, then good luck having them neutral. I must admit it has changed a bit but remember Bob Cole saying "OH BABY WHAT A GREAT MOVE, WHAT A GOAL" if Mats Sundin scored and if it was Saku Koivu, "Well it looked like nothing but the puck found the net" was all he would get from him.

CBC is the public broadcaster so its mission is not to please the greater audience possible (you achieve that by being TO-centric and by giving importance only to net ratings), but to please people from the most regions, cities and provinces possible at the same time.

[Marc]

Hahahahahahaha oh I hear ya, Cherry and Cole drive me nuts too! Ohhh baby!, I agree when it comes to Hockey Night in Canada specifically.

But that's a symptom of the problem, I think...while it's always been an issue with top tier pro sports to some extent, and HNIC specifically, it's gotten worse over the last five to ten years.

I agree that the CBC is supposed to represent/pander to/placate all regions equally, and I think as a whole they do a pretty good job, but the problem is that, with funding nosediving, they have to make up those dollars through advertizing.

Which team will garner the best ad revenue? The Maple Leafs, unfortunately for us non-Leaf fans, and other Toronto-based teams.

When you start cutting their funding, it all becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

[DoyleG]

quote:Originally posted by Marc

Air Farce - yes, stopped the cross country tours. But then if that's the case, why not give Mercer credit for travelling the cross left right and centre for his "Toronto based show" when the vast majority of his content is not from Toronto? Oh, because it doesn't support your argument!

If it's not the vast majority, why move him? He was doing the exact same things with 22 Minutes and would travel the country to do his work. CBC brass could easily keep him in Halifax at their studios and provided work for people in Halifax by using his show.

So why go to Toronto? Guess the CBC wanted to make sure that the network didn't become a victim of his jokes. Your own inability to figure this out is rather troubling.

quote:Originally posted by Marc

Little Mosque - strong western content can't be discounted, jsut because some of it is filmed in Toronto, where the actors, studios, and the industry is. Find me 8 trained muslim Saskatchewanian actors please Doyle, and a significant soundstage, and you'll have the same productionv alues regardless of where it was filmed. There is a reason Corner Gas is filmed in Sask - because half of it takes place outside, the need for sets is minimal, and it's full of white people.

Hard to respond to a quote with a lot of spelling errors in it. Quite clear that you didn't think before you posted. It's also clear that you must have been drinking when you made such stupid comments. Corner Gas has the same level of production as Little Mosque but did their work at SaskStudios, which is more than equipped to handle television production. As for the need for "trained Muslims", I didn't realized that Toronto was the only place where bigotry was legal.

You tend to forget that part of the CBC mandate is to bring new talent on stage. Yet you would rather use Toronto actors because they are from that city. No wonder why Little Mosques ratings have gone downhill.

quote:Originally posted by Marc

Da Vinci's inquest - very popular, lasted seven seasons. That's an eternity for American shows, let alone Canadian ones! If it was so unpalatable to Canadians, it wouldn't have last 13 shows, let alone seven seasons.

Kyam was using Da Vinci's City Hall. Different show. Try again.

quote:Originally posted by Marc

Just for Laughs - doesn't count? Is that because it proves you wrong? If CBC was Toronto centric, they'd have pulled the festival from Montreal to Toronto according to your logic. The show is pure Montreal, it's in every second act, they have stuff from the streets, it has a Montreal feel. Totally applicable, doesn't get invalidated because it doesn't meet your flawed line of reasoning.

You obviously never watch the program. The comedians that are shown on the CBC show are generally non-Canadians. In the eyes of the CANCON fanatics, this is a violations of such rules. Yet when the CBC break the, you find all the stupid excuses to avoid the subject. While that is going on, you accuse the private networks of just filling the requirements. Don't complain when I use your own standards against you. Try actually being sober before you even post again.

quote:Originally posted by Marc

Heartland - doesn't count because it can be done by anyone? WTF reasoning is this? How many Canadian family dramas do we have on the air today on other Canadian networks? Zero. So obviously it can't be done by everyone. Oh wait, there's a semi-family but mainly teen drama called Degrassi on CTV...a spin off of an old, wildly popular, very Canadian show that was on, wait, wait, wait, the CBC! Doyle + logic = window.

Yet you wouldn't Call Degrassi that since it was originally a CBC production. Yet it goes to CTV and you dismiss it as nothing. Once again, family-friendly dramas are easy to do because they just become filler. What does Heartland go up against on Canadian televison? A Canadian comedy called 'Da Kink in My Hair" that is shown on Global. Once again, I use the standards that you apply to broadcasting. So quite being a whinny bastard when someone actually applies your standards.

BTW, the current Degrassi is a continuation, not a spin-off.

quote:Originally posted by Marc

Wild Roses - for a Toronto audience? Where you involved in the show and the marketing? So Alberta people don't like drama made with good production values? You don't have to like it, I think it's crap personally, but that's not for a Toronto audience. A Toronto audience doesn't want to see some people preening around an oil field and a ranch...because it doesn't resonate with them. Seriously, just because it proves you wrong doesn't mean you can just swipe it off the table, once again. CBC wouldn't survive if it were for a Toronto audience, and Wild Roses definitely wouldn't, because it's in Toronto where there is the toughest competition, and therefore some of CBC's lowest viewership.

A drama with the subplots of money and sex. I've seen the show myself and it certainly isn't quality drama. It certainly seemed to resonate with Toronto since it was the only place where it drew ratings before it was canceled. People in Alberta were quick to learn that it was a cheap Dallas knockoff, which only people in the big city of Toronto could enjoy. After all, it fits with your cities political stereotypes.

quote:Originally posted by Marc

Amateur sports - the reason we don't see them on the CBC as much any more is due to the cutbacks! The thing that let the CBC show these sports was that they didn't have to pull a profit. That's the model, exactly: CBC shows something repeatedly, builds demand until it becomes a marketable product that the private networks can take over.

Yet you haven't provided any evidence of that occurring as I had demanded. Any proof? Didn't think so.

quote:Originally posted by Marc

The problem is, you need to keep constant funding so that the CBC can build up the next round of money-losing sports. With the funding cuts, the CBC has to go for things that they can reasonably expect to develop ad revenue - which isn't javelin, skeleton, track and equestrian but instead Coronation Street, Everybody Loves Maria, and the Maple Leafs. CBC has to show fewer and fewer amateur sports because they don't bring in any money unless you show them, regularly, over a long period of time, becuase the subsidies just aren't there to sustain long-term losses. Bump the funding, you bump the amateur sports.

Nice excuse. Funding has **** all to do with their covering of amateur sports. They lose their sports becuase they've spen so much time pissing people off that they take their business elsewhere. The COA did that with it's part in Olympic broadcasting rights. CBC could easily have matched what the private consortium was proposing (when these same people would try and slit each others throats). Instead, they go an antagonize the COA by choosing to go against amateur sports and lost the television rights.

You claim funding shortages but the CBC breaks the bank for HNIC and for FIFA events. Yet they have never granted amateur sports nothing more than a couple of hours on a Saturday to ply their trade. Except, you have to give that spot to TFC because you would burn down CBC headquarters if you didn't get what you wanted.

That's management problems, not financial ones. Clearly you can't tell the difference between the two.

quote:Originally posted by Marc

The CBC is one of the reasons the Olympics does so well on Canadian TV - that CBC could build it an audience, essentially devote the entire network to it (no Young and the Restless or Everybody Loves Raymond to bump) and build an audience for sports that generally, no one would watch, and that, for the most part, Canadians are not competitive in.

Yet you would be far more offended if they did show amateur sports since many of them would lead to TFC getting knocked off the air. Yet you accuse me of having warped thinking.

quote:Originally posted by Marc

Now, I don't agree with my tax dollars paying for IOC TV rights, but that's another line of reasoning against the CBC - one you could make very soundly, and very easily.

Another example of your warped thinking. You miss the whole point of funding amateur sports to begin with.

quote:Originally posted by Marc

Doyle, if you don't like the CBC there are so many cogent lines of reasoning that you can use; eg. waste of money; detracts from funding more important programs; the state shouldn't be in a private marketplace; distrots competition; inefficient bloated corporation; the issue of biased news coverage as CBC is scared to offend the governing party; etc - they're easy to make and are often convincing. Your vendetta, unfortunately, needs to find another outlet that is not the CBC - if you want it to make any rationale sense at all and for others to support it. But as well all know, that's not really of concern to you here.

But the argument that CBC hasn't fostered unique sports, or that it is Toronto-centric, is compeltely false, and actually, completely the opposite.

Blame Haper-Bush politicians, budget cuts, private broadcasters for CBC's problems. Everyone is to blame but yourselves.

The CBC is in the position that it finds itself now because of supporters like. You talk about building national icon but don't want to be bothered with doing what it took to maintain it. You cry about the lacks of coverage for amateur sports but you would cry more if it prevented you from seeing your favorite programs. Its people like you that have turned me off CBC since you people are afraid to admit that CBC management is to blame, regardless of how much money goes in. To criticize would be basically committing a sin. You are clearly someone who doesn't want to work to make things better but only do what is the minimum required. No need for politics or funding in that regard.

You helped create the problems at CBC. Not me.

[the biologist]

quote:Originally posted by Marc

Hahahahahahaha oh I hear ya, Cherry and Cole drive me nuts too! Ohhh baby!, I agree when it comes to Hockey Night in Canada specifically.

But that's a symptom of the problem, I think...while it's always been an issue with top tier pro sports to some extent, and HNIC specifically, it's gotten worse over the last five to ten years.

I agree that the CBC is supposed to represent/pander to/placate all regions equally, and I think as a whole they do a pretty good job, but the problem is that, with funding nosediving, they have to make up those dollars through advertizing.

Which team will garner the best ad revenue? The Maple Leafs, unfortunately for us non-Leaf fans, and other Toronto-based teams.

When you start cutting their funding, it all becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

You said it yourself: it's been an issue for a while now. It's not worst, it's just the same old sh*t going on again and again. It's not financial</u>, it's cultural</u>.

During the "golden years" (sic) of Jean Chrétien, CBC/SRC funding was pretty high and the situation was absolutely the same. Liberals have their core in the TO area, so the funding goes principally for a TO-based content. Sadly, we can't argue that Toronto + Liberals + CBC = Reality. I agree the cut is far to be a valuable argument to excuse their TO-biased & Liberals-biased vision of the network.

But still, I'm totally against the way Harper is treating the public TV. The problem is it's always about politics, this time is no different. But as any other public company, politics will always have full control on its fate.

[RS]

quote:Originally posted by DoyleG

Blame Haper-Bush politicians, budget cuts, private broadcasters for CBC's problems. Everyone is to blame but yourselves.

The CBC is in the position that it finds itself now because of supporters like. You talk about building national icon but don't want to be bothered with doing what it took to maintain it. You cry about the lacks of coverage for amateur sports but you would cry more if it prevented you from seeing your favorite programs. Its people like you that have turned me off CBC since you people are afraid to admit that CBC management is to blame, regardless of how much money goes in. To criticize would be basically committing a sin. You are clearly someone who doesn't want to work to make things better but only do what is the minimum required. No need for politics or funding in that regard.

You helped create the problems at CBC. Not me.

I learned something new today.

In the DoyleG Universe, the TV viewer has to "work" to create content that he wants to see. If a Canadian TV station is not producing shows that DoyleG wants to see, it's clearly the other TV viewers' fault for not "working" beyond the "minimum" requirements of television viewing (whatever those are).

Especially if they happen to be from Toronto.

DoyleG, I suppose you're going to blame people who drive Pontiac cars for that company's financial troubles too, right? It's the same logic, blame the consumer for a product's faults rather than the producer.

All piss-taking aside, I'm glad you're back to your neo-con blowhard self. It was getting boring around here.

[Marc]

quote:Originally posted by the biologist

You said it yourself: it's been an issue for a while now. It's not worst, it's just the same old sh*t going on again and again. It's not financial</u>, it's cultural</u>.

During the "golden years" (sic) of Jean Chrétien, CBC/SRC funding was pretty high and the situation was absolutely the same. Liberals have their core in the TO area, so the funding goes principally for a TO-based content. Sadly, we can't argue that Toronto + Liberals + CBC = Reality. I agree the cut is far to be a valuable argument to excuse their TO-biased & Liberals-biased vision of the network.

But still, I'm totally against the way Harper is treating the public TV. The problem is it's always about politics, this time is no different. But as any other public company, politics will always have full control on its fate.

Golden years with Chrétien? The Liberals cut CBC funding by 30 percent from 1993 to 1998, and then more afterward. They started the whole mess, Harper's just being consistent the federal Liberal legacy (not that I agree with either of their actions.)