Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!ubc-vision!alberta!ncc!danger!neil
From: neil@danger.UUCP
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: 'Free' Trade?
Message-ID: <466@danger.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 19-Feb-87 20:47:20 EST
Article-I.D.: danger.466
Posted: Thu Feb 19 20:47:20 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 20-Feb-87 22:49:14 EST
References: <12419@watnot.UUCP> <1469@hcrvx1.UUCP> <827@ubc-cs.UUCP> <228@pembina.alberta.UUCP>
Distribution: can
Organization: Alberta Public Safety Services
Lines: 88
Summary: wait a minute

In article <228@pembina.alberta.UUCP>, bjorn@alberta.UUCP (Bjorn R. Bjornsson) writes:
> 	In the media and cultural markets small companies cannot
> 	possibly succeed when competing with larger companies.
> 
> Even if this were true (which it isn't) another approach is obviously

You have to be kidding! In a mature market, the possibility of a small
company becoming big is remote. With the television media, big means lots
of influence, that means the power to get people to accept garbage. What!
You don't think people can be made to accept mediocrity? :-)

> not to compete, but offer something that the giants don't.

A fine solution, don't compete! The giants institutionalise mediocrity
so much that it takes external factors to create change. The US
did the world a favour by raising the price of oil to what it was really
worth. (actually a bit beyond that but that's another story!) If the US
auto industry had been committed to providing a better throughout the
'502 '60s and '70s, the Japanese would never have made inroads.
> 
> If Canadians would rather view US programming (and I'm not saying
> that this is the case) than that supplied by Canadian companies,
> then I ask you:
> 
> 	Whose material is more relevant to (those) Canadians?

You presume that they are making a consious rational choice when in
fact it is the product of what is available, and how much of it is there.
I'm not saying that people mindless zombies, I am saying that often
people people turn on the TV as a "pass-time", they really don'y care 
what they watch so long as it isn't totally boring for them. In other
words, the reasons people watch what they watch are not based on simple
choice.
> 
> that it was not paying off.  What's your gripe?  Canada has
> plenty of news magazines that compare favorably with TIME as far
> as quality goes and are devoted strictly (more or less) to
> Canadian subject matter.

TIME is a perfect example of the myopea of American media. It is 
practically impossible to get any foreign news coverage in any US 
media. Any foreign coverage is invariable chosen because there is
an American interest. Is that wrong you ask? You bet, it entrenches
the Americans simplistic view of the world. Why should they hear about
these things? First, they have no choice in the matter, the US networks
do not have any programs that report them. Second, the attempt of
aspiring to a well rounded news system is, in and of itself, a good thing.
It is impossible to point to specifics, but the argument is identical
to the one use above for the US auto industry.

> >     There's that word again!!  Why is it that whenever anyone
> >suggests that maybe something people see has a negative influence
> >on the society, someone screams "Censorship!!"?
 That's not the reason they yell censorship....there are three valued
judgements here, (1) people nice of you to include me without asking,
(2) negative influences, one man's meat is another man's poison.
(3) society, again I'm being included, I probably don;t view society
anything like they way you view it!!

Canada should, ought must strive for a pluralistic society. It is the
freedom to be anything you want in Canada, that sets us apart from
the US. IT is that pluralism that ensures a rich vibrant society. That
allows people to go to Cuba, to criticise Mulroney, that allows me
the privacy of my bedroom.

> >>                  ...  What I'm seeing is `cultural nationalism'
> >>and an inferiority complex....
> >
> >     Canadians have an inferiority complex because everyone else
> >thinks we're inferior.  A possible exception is Africa, the only

Nonesense, people don't think Canadian's are inferior, only Canadian's
think they are inferior, and they're wrong. Perhaps it's because
Americans think they are superior to the rest of the world, they really
do too! I suppose when you define your own yard sticks, you'll convince
yourself that you are superior, but you'd be wrong. Do you really
believe the New York Giants are world champions. They do!!

I just wish Canadians would stop apologising for themselves. Funny how
Canadians who criticise the US are derisorily labelled anti american,
but somehow the sources of the derision aren't called anti canadian.
It's almost as if being anti canadian was ok.

All sweeping statements above are exactly that, we're dealing in
generalities here.

Neil McCulloch
alberta!ncc!danger