I'm not the biggest fan of Jay Leno, I won't get into the reasons here. But I love Ron Paul. So I put aside my dislike for Jay for 9 minutes and 5 seconds to watch Ron Paul's appearance on the Tonight show last week.
It's clear that Leno doesn't agree with everything Ron stands for but to Leno's credit, Gave Ron Paul a good interview. Check it out:
▶ Ron Paul - Tonight Show with Jay Leno 9/26/13 - Video Dailymotion
Wednesday, October 2, 2013
Saturday, September 7, 2013
Harper 'Tour Tax' Leaves Much To Be Desired
Thanks to CTV News the other night who brought attention to a recent story that I somehow missed. A new 'tour tax' recently brought in by the Conservative government will make it tougher for international music acts to play gigs across the boarder. And when two of my passions in life combine (Music and Politics), I just have to comment.
Now, the Harper government isn't specifically targeting musicians but rather this an unintended side effect (a political paradox if you will) of recent changes to to the immigration act here in Canada. More specifically, the temporary foreign workers law which came into effect in August. But as I mentioned in my first post, new Government initiatives often have unintended consequences in other areas.
This new law doesn't target the bands themselves but, rather the venues they play in. Under the new law, international acts coming into Canada are considered temporary foreign workers. Interestingly, larger international acts are exempt from this fee of $275 per band member. Why?... because big acts play larger venues who's primary source of revenue is music. So a small bar owner who brings in a band a couple nights a week would have to pay up because music is not their main source of revenue.
Some are in favour of these changes saying that this will give Canadian bands a first crack at gigs. What these people don't seem to understand is that Canadian acts are already getting gigs by opening for bigger international acts. In fact, this is the most common way that Canadian Indie bands gain exposure, by opening for a larger international band that people came to the bar to see. Yeah, Canadian bands may be getting a few more gigs but what good is it if no one is there to see you play?
Most of the music I listen to is on smaller labels, what passes as popular music these days baffles me. So naturally, I'm a bit upset as this. This law targets the small business owner, the small bands that are barely getting by. Yet, the big international multi-millionaire acts like Taylor Swift and One Direction get a free pass... doesn't seem to make sense does it?
Now, the Harper government isn't specifically targeting musicians but rather this an unintended side effect (a political paradox if you will) of recent changes to to the immigration act here in Canada. More specifically, the temporary foreign workers law which came into effect in August. But as I mentioned in my first post, new Government initiatives often have unintended consequences in other areas.
This new law doesn't target the bands themselves but, rather the venues they play in. Under the new law, international acts coming into Canada are considered temporary foreign workers. Interestingly, larger international acts are exempt from this fee of $275 per band member. Why?... because big acts play larger venues who's primary source of revenue is music. So a small bar owner who brings in a band a couple nights a week would have to pay up because music is not their main source of revenue.
Some are in favour of these changes saying that this will give Canadian bands a first crack at gigs. What these people don't seem to understand is that Canadian acts are already getting gigs by opening for bigger international acts. In fact, this is the most common way that Canadian Indie bands gain exposure, by opening for a larger international band that people came to the bar to see. Yeah, Canadian bands may be getting a few more gigs but what good is it if no one is there to see you play?
Most of the music I listen to is on smaller labels, what passes as popular music these days baffles me. So naturally, I'm a bit upset as this. This law targets the small business owner, the small bands that are barely getting by. Yet, the big international multi-millionaire acts like Taylor Swift and One Direction get a free pass... doesn't seem to make sense does it?
Tuesday, August 6, 2013
How to Truly Give Sun News "Equal Treatment"
I must admit, to full disclosure that… I like the Sun News Network. Yes, the presentation is a bit cookie cutter but they bring angles on news stories the other networks don’t cover and occasionally they even break unique stories of their own.
But the SNN has been making news itself lately with word that they have asked the CRTC for mandatory coverage on your cable dial. What is “mandatory Coverage”? Basically, it’s the requirement that that cable/satellite providers must provide certain channels on their lineup. Currently about 20 channels enjoy this perk. With it, comes a low easy to find spot on the dial, signal substation and a small fee from every cable subscriber. It’s this final one that seems to be getting many people upset. “don’t force me to pay for sun news” they say. Actually, I agree with them, no person sould be forced to pay for something they don’t agree with. Fortunately, that same argument can be made about the CBC. But, I’ll digress talking about bias news coverage as there is enough meat on that bone for an entire other article.
All Sun News is asking for is an “equal playing field”. Other Canadian news channels like CTV News Channel and CBC News Network are already required viewing in Canadian homes. It seems ironic that the network that advocates for free markets and less government, is now asking for Government help for it’s very survival. Currently Sun News is losing $10 million a year and without monitory coverage, they may have to shut down.
It’s intriguing to me that the answer to all our problems always seems to be ‘more government’. Another way to put sun news on an equal playing filed would be to remove mandatory coverage for everyone. Allow cable companies to decide themselves what channels to carry and where they appear on the dial. This would lower cable costs, allow us to pick and choose exactly which channels we want to subscribe to and may even put an end to one of the most frustrating parts of the cable viewing experience… seeing the exact same show on 10 stations at the same time. Unfortunately I don’t see that occurring anytime soon.
It’s also interesting to note that Sun News HAD mandatory carriage when they first started but gave up that part of their licence. It’s a long complicated story that I won’t attempt to bore you with here.
I don’t think Sun News (or any of the other channels vying for required viewing) will win their bid, there is simply not enough bandwidth on the dial to accommodate everyone. I hope they can find a way to survive. Diverse voices in the news landscape are important and people should hear all pints of view. And if you think that all news outlets don’t have a bias… your wrong. Oh wait… I said I wasn’t going to comment on that.
But the SNN has been making news itself lately with word that they have asked the CRTC for mandatory coverage on your cable dial. What is “mandatory Coverage”? Basically, it’s the requirement that that cable/satellite providers must provide certain channels on their lineup. Currently about 20 channels enjoy this perk. With it, comes a low easy to find spot on the dial, signal substation and a small fee from every cable subscriber. It’s this final one that seems to be getting many people upset. “don’t force me to pay for sun news” they say. Actually, I agree with them, no person sould be forced to pay for something they don’t agree with. Fortunately, that same argument can be made about the CBC. But, I’ll digress talking about bias news coverage as there is enough meat on that bone for an entire other article.
All Sun News is asking for is an “equal playing field”. Other Canadian news channels like CTV News Channel and CBC News Network are already required viewing in Canadian homes. It seems ironic that the network that advocates for free markets and less government, is now asking for Government help for it’s very survival. Currently Sun News is losing $10 million a year and without monitory coverage, they may have to shut down.
It’s intriguing to me that the answer to all our problems always seems to be ‘more government’. Another way to put sun news on an equal playing filed would be to remove mandatory coverage for everyone. Allow cable companies to decide themselves what channels to carry and where they appear on the dial. This would lower cable costs, allow us to pick and choose exactly which channels we want to subscribe to and may even put an end to one of the most frustrating parts of the cable viewing experience… seeing the exact same show on 10 stations at the same time. Unfortunately I don’t see that occurring anytime soon.
It’s also interesting to note that Sun News HAD mandatory carriage when they first started but gave up that part of their licence. It’s a long complicated story that I won’t attempt to bore you with here.
I don’t think Sun News (or any of the other channels vying for required viewing) will win their bid, there is simply not enough bandwidth on the dial to accommodate everyone. I hope they can find a way to survive. Diverse voices in the news landscape are important and people should hear all pints of view. And if you think that all news outlets don’t have a bias… your wrong. Oh wait… I said I wasn’t going to comment on that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)