NP Rank:
Canada TV Tax Credits: A Comedy of Errors
Opinion
Barry Artiste, Now Public Contributor
Noted Authour Michael Coren states (in Italics):
"Authentic censorship is a problem in Canada"
To that I say to Michael, I do not know if we have a censorship problem in Canada, anyone who watches the "Trailer Park Boys" knows full well the colourful language of Ricky, Julian and Bubbles would Blanche the American Public, with Christian Mob Groups storming American Networks, Torches alight, like in a Modern Day Frankenstein Movie, along with lengthy exhaustive Congressional Hearings by Politicians wives, all at the US Taxpayers expense of course.
So censorship doesn't seem to be a problem in Canada.Furthermore Michael states (in Italics)
"Its champions are not Tories who want to cut taxes, but leftist students who ban university anti-abortion clubs, bureaucrats who persecute editors for publishing cartoons depicting Mohammad and arts councils which, for years, have funded only projects that fulfil their own left-liberal perceptions of what is acceptable.
Somehow, again, I have to disagree with Michael once again. True CBC may be Lefty dominated, but Lefty's are taxpayer's too. I am as pretty far right as Fiscal Conservative Politics fly, but I enjoy some of the "Masturbatory Arts" when it comes to Comedy.
So we really want to see more Pat Robertson style Christian Canadian TV? Perhaps some do, but I have pretty much had my fill of Benny Hinn style, "Lawd Jaysus" preferring the more sedate "Benny Hill British Comedies"Though long in the tooth, Benny Hill was funny, with a touch of the Stewie Griffin "Let's have a Sexy Party" a term Benny Hill made his trademark.
Now on the other hand, the misdirection of Canada's Tax Credits Funds to Canadian Made Television Shows and Movies, that in the "Real Entertainment World" would never see the light of day, I would agree.
If these Canadian made Tax Grant, Culture TV and Movies from Canada were ever put on the "Open Market" for Network Biggies to Bid on for their Prime Time slots in the USA or anywhere in the world for that matter,the deafening roar of "Tumbleweeds and Crickets" would overpower the Bidders voices who would most likely stay away in droves, even PBS, which will showcase pretty much "Paint Drying" would stick knitting needles in their ears and eyes before showcasing this Canadian Made Entertainment, Entertainment they rely on for Public Donations to remain viable .
Now Granted we do have exceptions in the past and present, Second City (SCTV), Trailer Park Boys, This Hour has 22 minutes, Rick Mercer,Just for Laughs to name a few. Pretty Much all Canadian Comedy, though a few Dramatic series like Da Vinci have made it into the USA.
SCTV in the early 80's was accused of not fronting Canadian Culture, thus could have lost their Canadian Tax Grant, Rick Moranis and Dave Thomas, nonplussed by CBC idiocy, invented a 7 minute all Canadian Skit titled " Bob and Doug MacKenzies "Great White North", where "Eh" was interspered with Beer guzzling contests, and Canadian Smokes Galore. Certainly not what the CBC Political Masters wanted to see, versus a Royal Canadian Air Farce, But Bob and Doug became a iconic hit around the world. So in the end Bob and Doug told CBC to "Take Off Eh !!". And two stars were born, as was the rest of the SCTV cast which found fame in the US in mainstream comedies and movies for stars all North American audiences know and love such as the late John Candy, Kathleen Ohara, Martin Short, Joe Flaherty, Eugene Levy and Andrea Martin. Now Tell me people, how many of you can name the cast of the Royal Canadian Air Farce whose debut was around the same time as SCTV in the mid 70's? Anyone? I thought so....read below on this Turkey of Canadian programming....
Of Canadian Made Turkeys, This apparent comedy "Royal Canadian Air Farce" elicited from me and many, many others a "God Please Kill me now" , perhaps one reason to give up TV entirely.
When the Royal Canadian Air Farce was taken off the air last month after a 30 year run, one reporter asked one of the Cast "why now?" To which one Geratric cast member replied, "We have been on the air since the mid 70's and felt we have said and done all we wanted to do as a Comedy Troupe". To which, if I were the reporter, the more appropriate question would have been "Why, not sooner", say 20 minutes into your first Pilot episode Comedy Skit?" But then we all know the answer to that one, when the Canadian Taypayer is fronting your Canadian made TV Series, you milk it for all it is worth.
The World needs Comedy, Good Comedy, and Good TV, but some shows should have never been made period, but will continue to be made unfortunately if Canadian Content is the prerequisite to lacklustre writing and programming.
Now that's a "Comedic Tune we Taxpayers can all cry too".
Kinky cash
Taxes should not continue to fund trashy shows watched by few
By MICHAEL COREN
I can't pretend to be a regular viewer of the television show Kink. The only episode I ever managed to catch featured a jolly 350-pound woman squeezed into a latex skirt and bra beating a similarly obese, if less jolly, man with a paddle. Entertaining enough I suppose but a little repetitive.
I mention this because the program in question is one of those that currently enjoys a tax credit. In other words, it receives public funding from you and me.
It is one of many Canadian television and movie documentaries and dramas that receive public funding and one of several dozen that seem obsessed with perversion, sadomasochism and large people in latex.
There also are some quality products that are given a tax credit, but the point about the government's proposed C-10 legislation is that it doesn't threaten anything that's any good. Only cheap trash watched by a handful of people who should really fund their pornography through their own pockets.
None of this, by the way, has anything to do with censorship. That is when the state forbids free speech and expression. Not when the state refuses to fund all speech and expression. But this distinction didn't stop various Canadian actors, led by permanently and professionally lugubrious Sarah Polley, from visiting Ottawa where they explained that the mere "whiff of censorship" was enough to be revolting to them.
ALTERNATE TARGETSReally? They should, then, be campaigning for magazines such as Maclean's and Catholic Insight, websites like Free Dominion and Five Feet of Fury and a whole bunch of journalists who are currently under attack by numerous federal and provincial Human Rights Commissions for indulging in genuine freedom of speech without any fatties in latex or government handouts.
But we all know that this has never been about defending freedom, but all about the chattering classes defending the right of people with whom they agree to exploit our absurdly generous public grants system.Otherwise we would have to ask where Polley and her comrades were when Rush Limbaugh and Dr. Laura Schlessinger were removed from Canadian airwaves and why all those famous actors didn't support Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell when there was a concerted campaign to censor them in Canada.
They obviously didn't support these people's views. Fine. But the glorious essence of free speech is that it's supposed to apply to everybody and in particular to those who drive you crazy. I have no time for most of the anti-intellectual, tendentious perversion and bad acting that passes for entertainment in this country, but I'm not about to ban it. Nor, however, should I have to subsidize it.
Authentic censorship is a problem in Canada, but its champions are not Tories who want to cut taxes, but leftist students who ban university anti-abortion clubs, bureaucrats who persecute editors for publishing cartoons depicting Mohammad and arts councils which, for years, have funded only projects that fulfil their own left-liberal perceptions of what is acceptable.
FASCINATING STUFFIt always fascinates me how the first people to cry censorship when conservatives merely suggest a level playing field are just the sort of people who write letters to newspapers calling for people like, well, like me, to be fired.
By the way, one movie that was given a grand tax credit by Ottawa was called The Masturbators.
Abuse yourself or abuse public money -- the same thing in the end.
News Tools
April 19, 2008 at 10:09 am by Barry Artiste, 338 views, 9 comments





Add a comment
Comments (9)
at 15:07 on April 19th, 2008
I for one do not believe in government subsidies...to anyone or anything (yes, including industry). But let me for a minute play devil's advocate. It is similar to the free speech argument. Here goes: if shows are popular they should not need a subsidy to be successful. It is only those programs which are unpopular that require help to make them commercially viable. So it goes than that Kink and other niche programs that will never have broad appeal are exactly the kinds of programming that can be justify government help. That is it.
I once had an economics prof at SFU who was a staunch advocate of free markets. He, like me, didn't support government intervention into the lives of free people. He, like me, wanted the government out of the entertainment business. He recommended that governments subsidize only the most unpopular, offensive and objectionable programming and do so in an up-front and open way. Only then would the taxpayers demand an end to tax dollars being funneled into the entertainment industry. With that in mind maybe the Conservatives are way off base with this legislation.
at 15:18 on April 19th, 2008
As for your comments EastVanray, all I have to say is "Damn Straight" glad you dropped by to give a true commentary in what is Canada Entertainment at the Taxpayers Expense over Quality.
at 15:26 on April 19th, 2008
Funding from sources other than advertising seems necessary, as apotheosis of the current model is reality TV: cheap to make, easily digested, high-profit for networks. The only problem is that, creatively speaking, reality TV sucks: it's quite literally cheap entertainment. We'd never get a show like Six Feet Under on NBC: the subject matter is too daring for the networks, who are, by job description, risk-averse.
(I had to pay a TV licensing fee in the UK, but BBC had no adverts and could air some pretty creative stuff, insulated from the demands of the advertising market- that was awesome. Now, though, they're showing lots of the same "unscripted entertainment" as other networks around the world: how many remodeling shows can one person sit through?!)
at 15:32 on April 19th, 2008
When I was stationed in the Netherlands, The only BBCs show I thought were worth watching were Monty Python, Black Adder, Mr. Bean, Keeping up Appearances, and if there was really nothing else on TV, Benny Hill. Funding from other sources, okay, but do they really have to make dismal programs knowing the taxpayer will pick up the tab regardless how good it is? As for Reality TV, well those shows blow Humongeous Donkey Dinks, as you say, the only reason they are made is because they are so cheap, and an audience whose intelligence must rival a Jerry Springer "Guest Lineup".
at 15:46 on April 19th, 2008
Tied into this issue, for me, is that of quality as a breeding ground for future Canadian content... our best and brightest actors, directors, producers, and writers head for greener pastures in LA, as our own industry remains relatively underdeveloped: shows like JPod should be the rule, and not the exception. When people think of American movies and TV, many times they're actually thinking of Canadians:
Keanu Reeves, Kiefer Sutherland, Ivan Reitman, Mike Meyers, Jim Carey, and the list goes on... but they tend not to work on local stuff.
at 15:59 on April 19th, 2008
Of course not, Canadian actors pay, is not even close to american salaries, as they say, you get what you pay for, and in Canada I guess that holds true with our quality programming. I know if I were them, I would be ghandi for the states for the bucks, staying in canada is a death knell for most actors looking for fame.
at 16:08 on April 19th, 2008
It would seem to me that subsidizing unpopular (weather good or bad quality) entertainment is not way to retain our talented workforce. The truly talented will go where great entertainment is made. If that is Canada then great. We are world class in some areas (documentaries and comedy for instance). Other than that what we are really talking about is taxpayer funding artistic lifestyles.....otherwise known as welfare. And what's worse: welfare for those who do not need it. When we are experiencing a crisis in our healthcare system I cannot find a moral argument in favour of this kind of spending.
at 17:44 on April 19th, 2008
But you can't know if something is going to be popular or not until it airs. Focus groups are useless as predictors for popularity. As for private-sector funding, money and talent will follow production/writing quality, which is admittedly a bit of a catch-22.
at 17:44 on April 19th, 2008
For some actors it is welfare and they need it, as they couldn't makie it anywhere else, unless community theatre pays, which it doesn't