Federal, Media

PBS Model – not more Corporate Welfare

Leave a comment

Should the media conglomerates Machiavellian “save local television” campaign manage to con Canadians into demanding their MP’s impose a new tax on Canadians and use the revenue to bailout/save the media conglomerates from the consequences of their own bad decisions and management the federal government should say NO loudly.

Rather than rewarding the duplicitous nature of this campaign by using a new tax on Canadians to provide ongoing corporate welfare for the Canadian media conglomerates, the federal government should tell the media conglomerates to take a lesson from PBS and its pledge drives.

Local PBS stations depend upon donations from local viewers, running pledge drives throughout the year to raise the funds they need to continue broadcasting. Vancouver’s “local” Seattle PBS station receives a significant proportion of its donations from the lower mainland. Proof residents of the lower mainland are willing to support financially television they judge worthy of support.

Citizens should be permitted to clearly indicate whether they support the giant media conglomerates that control Canadian media or whether they would prefer the return of local media to local ownership,

Indeed, given the ethically questionable nature of the “save local television”, and that the media has chosen to beguile local charities into endorsing this disguised political campaign, the CRTC needs to impose sanctions on those who formulated and implemented this hustle.

Caveat emptor, Issues

Caveat Emptor

Leave a comment

Machiavellian, manipulative flimflam and devious are a few of the words that came to mind as I watched the slick media campaign commercial seeking to convince Canadians to urge their MP’s to impose a special tax on Canadians in order to fund corporate welfare to save the media conglomerates from their own bad management and decision making.

A glib campaign camouflaged as “save local television” since Canadians are very unlikely to support another corporate bailout; especially one funded by the imposition of a new tax.

It appears that the media conglomerates learned a lesson from the cold reception their earlier attempt to sell a new tax on the internet to fund a bailout of their newspaper assets from bad management and decisions received.

This time around they are running a slick media campaign to hoodwink Canadians into demanding the federal government “save local television” through the imposition of a new tax to fund the proposed corporate welfare.

Stephen Harper has demonstrated that he is quite happy to provide $billions$ in corporate welfare or welfare for the rich while denying help to the working poor, those living in poverty and other Canadians at the lower end of the wealth spectrum. However, given the number of unemployed and working poor who find themselves facing the real possibility of joining the ranks of the homeless and the financial strains the recession is imposing on many other ordinary Canadians imposing a new tax on Canadians to bailout media conglomerates would be politically unwise.

Unless somehow Canadians could be persuaded to demand a new tax be imposed to fund corporate welfare to save Media from its own mismanagement.

So it is we find ourselves assailed by the slick “save local television” campaign.

This campaign is not about “save local television” but about saving the media conglomerates from the consequences of their decisions.

Unlike the conglomerates or that pseudo-capitalist Mr. Harper I see no reason to save businesses from the consequences of their own bad decision making and bad management practices.

Despite the fear mongering attempts to panic the public neither local television or local newspapers will disappear if the media conglomerates go under. What will disappear are the conglomerates, so it is hardly surprising that the conglomerates are desperate for corporate welfare to bail them out.

With the bankruptcy of the conglomerates their assets will be sold off in order for the lenders recover as much of the monies owed as possible.

The most likely outcome of this process is to return control of local television and newspapers to local ownership rather than continuing to have local television and newspapers answer to distant corporate interests and policies.

An outcome I consider to be highly desirable since it is my opinion that the interests of Canadians have been badly served by the creation of media conglomerates where local television and newspapers are driven to maximize profits to benefit corporate headquarters and answer to said corporate headquarters.

It is this “in the best interests of the conglomerate” that leads to questionable editorial and ethical standards; standards that would benefit substantially from local ownership.

It is not the deceptive nature of the “save local television” campaign and its hidden agenda to save the conglomerates through the imposition of a new tax burden on Canadians that causes me to state ethical standards would benefit from local ownership.

It is the misuse of local charities to endorse the campaign and the apparent disregard concerning the consequences misusing local charities to endorse this campaign could have on the charities that I find unacceptable.

It was quite disappointing to see charities such as the United Way, the Salvation Army, the Vancouver Food Bank and others endorsing a campaign to benefit media conglomerates via a new tax on Canadians.

Especially since the nature of their involvement could easily raise questions about the motivation of these charities for their endorsements.

Moreover I was rather shocked that these charities would jeopardize their charitable status through involvement in a political campaign; an action specifically prohibited under by the legislation governing the granting AND revoking of charitable status (the ability to issue tax receipts for donations received).

That it is a political campaign is evidenced by the call for people to put pressure on federal politicians to impose a this new tax and bailout the media conglomerates.

All of the charitable organizations involved need to rethink their endorsement and involvement while seriously considering adopting AA’s 6th tradition “An A.A. group ought never endorse, finance or lend the A.A. name to any related facility or outside enterprise, lest problems of money, property and prestige divert us from our primary purpose.”

In light of these facts Canadians should be contacting federal politicians to make it very clear they have no interest in being taxed to benefit media companies or save them from the consequences of their own actions and decisions.

Canadians should also make it clear to those running this campaign of misinformation that they find this behaviour unacceptable and have no interest in bailing out media companies.

Tell your federal politicians you say no to these new taxes and corporate welfare.

Addiction, Issues, Media, Provincial

Help Wanted.

Leave a comment

What do you call the recent arrest of 8 senior members of the UN gang?

An employment opportunity.

Not a pretty reality, but reality nonetheless. A reality highlighted by police statements that the public should not expect these arrests to effect drug supplies, gang activity or gang violence.

That the arrests represent an employment opportunity should come as no surprise in light of what Abbotsford’s Chief Constable had to say about the lure of the lucrative gangsta lifestyle. Given our societies distorted emphasis on money and the things it can buy as measurements of success and a key to happiness no one should be flabbergasted by the scramble for the $$$ to be found in the drug business.

Indeed, given the reality challenged social and economic policies of both the federal and provincial government and our current economic recession, more and more heretofore honest citizens will find themselves faced with a choice between poverty and homelessness OR involvement in drugs …. Tough choice to find one’s self faced with.

Of course if the federal Conservatives or the provincial Liberals were in touch with reality Canadians would not be subjected to the Conservatives enthusiastically patting themselves on the back for progress made toward enacting legislation to jail large numbers of addicts, while at the same time substantially increasing time spent in jail.

Removing their ideological blinders and ceasing their naval gazing would perhaps allow the federal Conservatives and/or provincial Liberals to learn from the experience of states in the United States were they have been pursuing this lock ‘em up policy for a period of time.

The State of New York (and increasing numbers of other states) have abandoned this policy.

Why? It was gutting state programs across the board and literally bankrupting the state(s) to pay the skyrocketing costs incurred in incarcerating an every increasing number of people.

Faced with either significant tax increases or spending the budget, for the most part, solely to lock people up rather than on roads, social programs etc New York did what anyone with common sense would do upon finding themselves in a hole – stop digging.

Thus it is that after more than a decade of “locking them up for long sentences” New York and other states have stopped this insanity.
A wise decision in light of the studies evaluating this policy that found the only things the policy accomplished was to make incarceration a lucrative business, to drive states to the brink of bankruptcy and to criminalize addiction (which is a physical and mental health issue).

This is the current situation California finds itself in, hovering on the edge of bankruptcy and facing the need to reduce the prison population by 70,000 over the next 18 months.

The costs of building and funding prison spaces for 70,000 prisoners were so prohibitive California was not able to increase prison cells. Faced with a deluge of new prisoners California packed its existing prisons to the rafters. Conditions became so inhuman even the Bush appointed conservative US courts ordered the release of 70,000 prisoners to reduce overcrowding.

Like a true capitalist (as opposed to a Harper Conservative pseudo capitalist) the governor of California wants to repair California’s finances by recovering at least a portion of the funds squandered on a policy (lock ‘em up for years) that proved ineffective and contributed substantially to California tottering on the edge of bankruptcy.

To save the state from bankruptcy California’s governor has called for the legalization of marijuana. Between the taxes raised and the funds saved, California would have the funds to focus on the truly important issues facing the state such as ensuring a supply of potable water.

Given the results and experiences of US states following a policy of locking up increasing numbers of people for increasing lengths of times it is nonsensical, bordering on out-and-out stupid, for Canada to pursue a policy that has proven to be pointless and costly to the point of beggaring anyone short-sighted enough to pursue this policy.

Given Mr. Harper’s behaviour to date the probability of common sense and experience winning out on this matter over Mr. Harper’s ideology approaches zero.

So it was that the media circus staged by the Abbotsford Police Department in arresting Tim Felger seemed to provide an appropriate exclamation point to emphasize the futility of current policies vis-à-vis the drugs society chooses to label “illegal”.

“Without reflection, we go blindly on our way, creating more unintended consequences, and failing to achieve anything useful.” Margaret J. Wheatley