Cbc Past Present

Cbc Past, Present & Future Essay, Research Paper

Introduction

In the words of Prime Minister R.W. Bennett Canadian Broadcasting could be “a great agency for the communication of matters of national concern and the diffusion of national thought and ideas.” Does the CBC fulfil the mandate originally set forward by the Aird Commission. Does the CBC’s current mandate reflect its original purpose. How has the CBC coped with the changes brought about by technology. Theses are questions that must be answered if the CBC is to preserve Canada’s unique cultural environment from the ever growing threat of Americanization. It must make an honest and focused effort to meet the needs of all Canadians. The CBC has been a significant cultural force in Canada since the inception of the CBRC in the 1930’s and continues to foster national unity today in the form of the CBC. If the CBC is going to continue to provide a Canadian voice, it must undergo serious change to meet the new challenges that technology has presented. Faced with satellite television that offers hundreds of chancels and the popularity of the Internet, Canadians have never had more foreign influences present in the media. This cultural imperialism is a clear threat to Canadian culture, a threat that must be taken seriously by all Canadians. We watch American television and films, we read American books and magazines far more often than we watch or read Canadian media. The effect of this cannot be taken lightly. We are in danger of cultural assimilation, now more than ever.

The CBC was created, in part, to counter the influx of American media in Canada. Ironically there is a significant presence of American programming on CBC television. This is counter productive and hypocritical. This paper will examine the forces which led to the creation of the CBC, its mandate, both historically and contemporarily and finally, make suggestions for the future.

The Aird Commission

In 1928 the Canadian broadcasting scene was a scattering of private broadcasters mostly in and around the urban centers. The small broadcasters were either owned by large corporations or depended on advertising revenues for their survival. There were two factors that led to the need for change in the government policy toward broadcasting. First was the demand for licences by religious organizations and second, the lack of wavelength availability to accommodate the demand for licenses.

The practice of broadcasting Sunday services was becoming increasingly popular in urban areas and several religious organizations had obtained licenses. The problem was that the government could hardly grant licenses to one religion and deny the application of another. With the limited wavelength ability they could not all be granted licenses. The non-renewal of five licenses in 1928 changed the licensing from a technical problem to a political issue.

The problem of wavelength availability was caused by the ineducable distribution of wavelengths between Canada and the U.S. The demand for licences in the Toronto area was steadily increasing and so too was the controversy over whose applications were granted and whose were denied.

The increasing controversy led to the formation of what would be known as the Aird Commission. Its purpose was to enquire into the broadcasting situation in Canada and advise to its future administration, management and control. The goal was to set up a regulatory system that put more emphasis on public service. The commission was also fueled by concern over the vulnerability of the Canadian market to the flood of American popular culture that was pouring over the boarder.

The fate of the Canadian film industry was still fresh in the minds of concerned Canadians and they wanted to protect radio from the same fate. The momentum was gathering for change, and most agreed that there were three choices; establish one or more group(s) of stations operated by private owners but subsidized by the government, establish a government owned and controlled group of stations, or establish a series of provincially owned and operated stations. After touring Europe, the U.S. and Canada the commission could say one thing for certain, the state of broadcasting in Canada was deplorable. Reform was needed. Most broadcasters favored private ownership with government subsidies to augment the coverage area. The private owners claimed that government ownership would make the broadcaster a political tool for the government but they were in favor of government regulation to ensure the quality in broadcasting.

However the private broadcasters felt the commission was moving steadily toward the opinion that Canada needed a national broadcasting system, organized for public service rather than profit. The commission also felt that Canadians were not particularly interested in listening to advertising but wanted more educational material. There was an obvious threat of American domination in a private market and the quality of programming would surely decline in a profit driven market.

The commission concluded that private broadcasters could not cope with the revenue shortages of a small, widely disbursed market. The need to counter the inundation of Canadian youth with American ideas and opinions would be best served by a publicly owned broadcaster. It made recommendations for the establishment of