this post was submitted on 28 Sep 2024
126 points (99.2% liked)

Canada

7215 readers
272 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities


💵 Finance / Shopping


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 91 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Under those rules, streaming services that are not Canadian-owned and have more than CAD $25 million (approx. USD $18.5 million)  in revenue in Canada annually are required to pay 5% of that revenue into funds that subsidize Canadian content and creators.

Under that plan, 1.5% of music streamers’ revenue would go towards subsidies for local radio stations.

Lol, yea, pay your fucking taxes, grifters.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Unfortunately, that 5% fee means Spotify prices are going up 10%

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Sure. That just means that Canadian consumers of Spotify will be indirectly subsidizing Canadian artists.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I see no problem here.

Well, assuming you see having domestic content as a valid goal, anyway, which isn't necessarily a given.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Sure but then they pay more taxes. Increase in price means more revenue which means more taxes. It’s just a circle.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

That's why they raise it by 10%, not 5%.

Say sub is currently $100/year, they now have to pay $5, they get $5 less. If they raise by 5% to $105, they have to pay $5.25, they get 25c less than originally. But if they raise to $110, they have to pay $5.50, and suddenly they are getting $4.50 more than before, even though they are paying more taxes. And they can blame it on this so people don't hate them as much and accept it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If I remember something kn my econ 101 class, they're going up 2.5%, because taxes are not entirely pass to the consumer, they take a part of the company earnings too.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

He ce Spotify prives going up 10, to make sure company profits are covered and then some

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Interesting that they're pumping back money into traditional radio.

The letter argued that Canada’s radio regulations were designed to address the problems created by its vast geography, its “linguistic duality” (English and French), and the fact that space on analog radio is limited, making decisions about what gets broadcast necessary.

Gee, that's not the history I remember. I'm not super familiar, but wasn't it about holding back Americanisation? (We have radio band allocations separately)

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 month ago

Awww those poor poor billion dollar corporations.... So sad.... /s

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Does the CRTC do anything to help Canada at this point? They've allowed all telecoms/media to be merged down to 2 and a half entities. They've allowed cell and internet service prices to be the highest in the western world. They've forced CanCon rules that subsidize media monopolies while driving viewers to non-Canadian platforms. And now they are going to drive other services out of Canada at the request of those same media monopolies.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You think Spotify is going to pull out of Canada because they make $23.75m a year instead of $25m? 🙄🙄🙄

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

There are streaming services that already are not available in Canada because we are too small of a market to be worth the hassle. Increasing that hassle will not make the situation better.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The letter argued that Canada’s radio regulations were designed to address the problems created by its vast geography, its “linguistic duality” (English and French), and the fact that space on analog radio is limited, making decisions about what gets broadcast necessary.

Citation needed DiMA. Way to try framing the issue to look in your favour.

Instead of those "issues" we now have locked down apps and opaque algorithms that reduce user control.

To be fair I have found some good stuff through the recommendations, but I also don't know how often they try to boost certain artists because of back room deals. Companies need regulations to keep them slightly honest.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

My understanding was always that Canadian media is dominated by American creations in the art world. The regulations were put in place to subsidize the Canadian artists to help create a national identity separate from the US.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago

Oh no, don't tax the megacorps, that's mean CRTC, how could you?

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 month ago

Fuck 'em. They are parasites on the artistic world.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago

I can't believe you would stab me right in the profits!

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

If the music industry is against it, I'm for it. I don't even need to know what it is.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Funny how it's never the artists themselves who have concerns

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The CRTC absolutely needs to adapt and relegislate/reinforce CanCon for the digital era. Ensuring Canadian artists get represented in Canada on some of the biggest streaming platforms is super important.

[–] brax 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

If CanCon gave more visibility to ALL Canadian artists, sure. The way it is on the radio, it seems that you don't have to be a good Canadian band, you just have to be a Canadian artist.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

This hasn't been the case since the 1990s or so, when CanCon started to actually get good.

I will agree it sucked through the 70s and 80s, though. There was a looooong incubation period between the time CanCon took effect and the time it bore fruit in, eg, Canadian bands stopped sucking en-masse.

Alan Cross has a good podcast on CanCon and the long tail it required. I don't think modern governments can or will do anything like that again, where the payoff is decades after the costs and implementation.

[–] brax 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'll have to check that Alan Cross podcast out. I used to love his History of New Music shows on the radio. I never really got into the podcast thing, but I could see myself getting into one if it was hosted by him

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

The only issue with the podcast is that he cant get rights for the entire song, so it's not quite the same as radio.

It's still as wonderful as the show was in all the other ways.