I wanted to personally respond to your editorial, Save CBC, kill CBC.
In order for public broadcasting to thrive there must be vigorous debate and your thoughts are certainly needed.
In reading the April 18 column, it reminded me of a quote from musician Roger Waters. "It should be everyone's right to have access to media whose job isn't to sell corn flakes."
If the CBC still acts like it's 1975, it's likely due to a real-dollar budget that's hardly increased since then. Governments of every ideology since 1980 have made budgetary decisions, alongside increased production costs, which have diminished the CBC's capacity to report news and promote culture.
Should the CBC make content no one else can or will, or should it be all things to all people?
It's a classic catch-22 where the CBC is damned for making niche programming, and likewise for making populist fare.
However, take the case of Rogers. They own NHL rights yet show games on CBC because of the Corp's ability to reach audiences in ways Rogers doesn't have.
The result is nearly a billion dollar subsidy transferred to a private media company using the publicly-owned airwaves.
As for the local advertising impact, CBC's online and TV programs may compete for some local dollars; however, unlike private media, the CBC doesn't have revenue streams like selling favourable news columns, front pages or current affairs airtime to anyone willing to pay for it.
CBC's news and current affairs is independent and isn't compromised by corporate or government interests. That's an important distinction.
Your column also repeats two misconceptions.
One, that public money only goes to public broadcasting. Private media gets public funding in a multitude of ways, not least of which is government spending billions of tax dollars to advertise their policies and messages.
The second misconception asserts if CBC didn't exist, private media could flourish by taking the CBC's ad dollars.
This past year, CBC received no money from HNIC broadcasts, yet other media companies who have picked up that revenue have shed jobs and cut back services.
In my 27 years, I've had the good fortune to work in private and public media outlets and yes, it's certainly a different media landscape today.
Canadians have granted access to American and foreign channels in ways few other countries have.
But over that time, CBC has consistently created Canadian cultural icons to an extent no other media outlet can boast.
My entirely personal view is that the way forward for a public service like CBC is not just about increasing funding, but spending our public money wisely to create content and culture Canadians care about.
English Canadians mostly seem ambivalent about our culture; content to watch American TV, yet we're convinced we're smarter for it. Not even the Yanks think that.
We get amped up when we play the Americans at the Olympics, but the rest of the time, we just don't put our money where our eyes and ears are.
And if we as a society don't care about something, cutting it from a budget gets a whole lot easier.
The BBC, for all its own faults, is recognized as an example of being a cultural ambassador at home and abroad.
If we watched, insisted on and supported homegrown programming to the extent the Brits do, we'd be a country with a very different reputation and identity.
And if we decided that our country and its culture matters, then we can reform how public media is funded.
Save CBC, save Canada.
Russell Bowers
Prince George
