dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2156
share rss forum feed


Buck Fush
Great Minds With Great Debts.

join:2001-02-24
reply to shaner

Re: Illegal Satellite Dishes in Canada?

said by shaner:
It's awful, especially if you have a large screen home theatre system.
I got a 57" HDTV, so I guess, I am looking at even horrible images. I also heard, that not all Cable channels are digital, like those low frequency ones.

DAMN Rogers
Condemn Rogers

Oh one more thing, those that know more details about ExpressVu, we currenly only have one TV, but are planning on adding 3~4 more TVs in the Bedrooms, we won't have much of an issue doing the drops with Rogers but I doubt we will stay with them so whats the procedure with ExpressVu, will I need multiple sats and recievers or could I hookup multiple receivers to the same sat, and what kind of costs are we looking at, any additional $ that would need to pay to Bell to use more receivers etc? I know they would do a new dish installation at no cost but I already ordered Rogers for the sake of trying something new. So could somebody lay out a chart at the costs we are looking at with Bell if we had multiple TVs in the home, up to 5.
--
Socialism is the answer! | Worst ISP ever! | #SympaticoSucks@EFnet for all your Sympatico Rants


shaner
Premium
join:2000-10-04
Calgary, AB

Ok. Let's assume you only have one receiver now. So you're going to need 4 more @ $169.95 apiece (model 3100).
169.95*4=$679.80 + taxes
You'll need a multiswitch to run more than 2 receivers from the same dish. ExpressVu allows you to have 6 receivers connected to the same dish. Bell World sells them for $69.95 (yeah, I know. A rip off compared to most other places which sell them for $99.95;))

$679.80 + $69.95 = $749.95

If the cable in your house is already RG-6, then there's no need to run more cable. You can just take off Rogers splitter at their demarc point and feed the signal through there. Make sure you weatherproof the multiswitch if it's going to be outside.

Oh, and there's a $4.95 a month charge for extra receivers on your account. That's not per receiver, that $4.95 is for all your receivers. Why? 'Cause every other sat company in North America charges it. Call it a cash grab if you will.

I think that's about it. Good luck.
EDIT: You might need 2 multiswitches depending on how many outputs they have. The Bell World one has 4 outputs, so I think you'd be okay with just one of those.

[text was edited by author 2002-09-25 23:45:04]


Buck Fush
Great Minds With Great Debts.

join:2001-02-24
now, I may sound cheap, but would I really need to pay that $5 charge? How would they know that I got more than one receiver on the dish? or is it, they need to be registered just like the main one? My current receiver, the 6000(paid a lot just so that expensive HDTV was worth it, and got AC-3 support as well which I discovered just a few days ago), has this Dual LNBF converter thingy which I don't know much about and it is suppose to be for multiple tv environment. Any info on that?
--
Socialism is the answer! | Worst ISP ever! | #SympaticoSucks@EFnet for all your Sympatico Rants


Mashiki
Balking The Enemy's Plans

join:2002-02-04
Woodstock, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·Rogers Hi-Speed
·Bright House

1 recommendation

reply to elias
This has always been an interesting discussion. So how about we start here:

quote:

Charter of Rights and Freedoms:
Part 1; Section 2(Fundamental Freedoms); Sub section b;

Freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;

I really hate to say this, but it doesn't get much clearer then that does it?

But, they turn around and make a law that says that US dishes are illegal. But that law violates the charter of rights and freedoms, I mean it's in black and white. But this goverment is well known to treat the charter less then the paper it's written on.

Not counting that, but if I watch an american channel the channel will be "switched" out with a canadian one. Great, so not only am I watching a candian channel that I intentionally avoided, I'm also going to miss the promo for whatever else I was waiting for.

If I want to ignore all canadian content and watch simply american according to the charter of rights and freedoms, that is my right. According the courts it isn't tho. Seems like the courts have been influenced by the law, I do have to say that if you have to pressure a law such as that into power to protect either your profit margin(starchoice / express vu), or to protect canadian content or sovereignty, there is something fundamentally wrong either with the society, or the governing body. You don't have to "force" anything down anyones throat if it's good, people will flock to it. Otherwise, they'll avoid it like it carries the plauge.


shaner
Premium
join:2000-10-04
Calgary, AB
reply to Buck Fush
said by Buck Fush:
now, I may sound cheap, but would I really need to pay that $5 charge? How would they know that I got more than one receiver on the dish? or is it, they need to be registered just like the main one? My current receiver, the 6000(paid a lot just so that expensive HDTV was worth it, and got AC-3 support as well which I discovered just a few days ago), has this Dual LNBF converter thingy which I don't know much about and it is suppose to be for multiple tv environment. Any info on that?

The dual LMBF is to allow you to easily connect 2 receivers to your dish. Any more than 2, and you need a multiswitch. You will have to call ExpressVu to register the new receivers (everything's tracked by the R00#) just like you did for the first one. So yes, they will cahrge the $4.95. I'l admit, I don't understand the reason for this charge, but in their effort to remain competitive, Bell will charge everyhting their competitors do.
--
Brought to you by the William Shatner school of overacting.


shaner
Premium
join:2000-10-04
Calgary, AB
reply to Mashiki
said by Mashiki:
If I want to ignore all canadian content and watch simply american according to the charter of rights and freedoms, that is my right. According the courts it isn't tho. Seems like the courts have been influenced by the law, I do have to say that if you have to pressure a law such as that into power to protect either your profit margin(starchoice / express vu), or to protect canadian content or sovereignty, there is something fundamentally wrong either with the society, or the governing body. You don't have to "force" anything down anyones throat if it's good, people will flock to it. Otherwise, they'll avoid it like it carries the plauge.
And that's the problem. Everyone knows that Canadian TV generally sucks. So the CRTC, (Whom I wish would be gone BTW) has decided that they must preserve Canadian content in all artistic forms. It's more than ExpressVu's or StarChoice's bottom lines at stake here. All the jobs that are created by this arcane regulation are affected as well. From the Canadian Sat companies eyes, this is really about creating a level playing field in the industry.
--
Brought to you by the William Shatner school of overacting.


dirtyjeffer
Anons on ignore, but not due to fear.
Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON
reply to elias
and let's not also forget that 95% of the people that have the grey market dishes are not paying for their service...so they are stealing from the US companies, and how can the canadian companies compete when you can get it free from the grey market systems.
--
"The bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the low price is forgotten."


DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
kudos:2
reply to Mashiki
said by Mashiki:
Seems like the courts have been influenced by the law, I do have to say that if you have to pressure a law such as that into power to protect either your profit margin(starchoice / express vu), or to protect canadian content or sovereignty, there is something fundamentally wrong either with the society, or the governing body. You don't have to "force" anything down anyones throat if it's good, people will flock to it. Otherwise, they'll avoid it like it carries the plauge.
Sigh. You are missing the obvious point. In Canada rights and freedoms are never absolute. They are also not only individual. We differ from the Americans in that way. Our rights and freedoms are also held in tension with the needs of the larger society. That's why hate speech is against the law. It has a deeply negative effect on society and so is a legitimate constraint on the right to free speech.

In terms of Canadian content, our courts have held that this is a legitimate protection for the larger society and that the government has the right to make such laws as protect national culture.
--
Wherever You Go, There You Are...


shaner
Premium
join:2000-10-04
Calgary, AB
said by DKS:
Sigh. You are missing the obvious point. In Canada rights and freedoms are never absolute. They are also not only individual. We differ from the Americans in that way. Our rights and freedoms are also held in tension with the needs of the larger society. That's why hate speech is against the law. It has a deeply negative effect on society and so is a legitimate constraint on the right to free speech.

That's also the reason why seatbelt and helmet laws in Canada are never challenged, while in the States, jurisdictions have been sued and lost over something as stupid as a seatbelt or helmet law.

While I can't stand the CRTC 99.9% of the time, CANCON is not necessarily a bad thing. I do think the amount of required content should be reduced so that the really good stuff comes to the top.
--
Brought to you by the William Shatner school of overacting.


nevertheless
Premium,VIP
join:2002-03-08
St Catharines, ON
kudos:4
said by shaner:
While I can't stand the CRTC 99.9% of the time, CANCON is not necessarily a bad thing. I do think the amount of required content should be reduced so that the really good stuff comes to the top.
As The Boss said, 57 Channels and nothing on. Now we have over 100 channels, and most of the time, nothing is ~STILL~ on. (I know, I have to make sure the picture still shows, but there's still nothing on)

Personally, I really appreciate the Canadian produced News, the Canadian produced Satire shows (22 Minutes, Air Farce), the Canadian produced sports shows (Hockey Night in Canada, Canadian Olympic Coverage, The Labatt Brier, Tournament of Hearts, OUAA hockey coverage on TSN, Heck--The CFL wouldn't exist without Cancon). I also appreciate a few of the Canadian produced series, (Forever Knight was great, I watched Degrassi Junior High when I was younger, and several other shows). I think Mr. Dressup was Canadian too.

There's LOTS of good Canadian content being propped up by Cancon regulations.

Do we miss out? Not on anything carried by the major US networks, and if it's on a specialty channel, you'd have to pay for it in the US anyway. (As opposed to ~stealing~ it from a satellite network as you're doing now in Canada)

The only one I'm bitter about is the SciFi channel, I would like to have watched Farscape as the episodes first aired (may it not rest in peace and let it come back).
--
Some people think I'm an idiot. I disagree, but idiocy is subjective--so they may well be right. With this in mind, take everything I post with a grain of salt, eh?


DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
kudos:2
reply to shaner
said by shaner:
That's also the reason why seatbelt and helmet laws in Canada are never challenged, while in the States, jurisdictions have been sued and lost over something as stupid as a seatbelt or helmet law.
And both measures have proven to reduce fatalities and injuries... which in this country reduces our tax cost for health care.
--
Wherever You Go, There You Are...


DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
kudos:2
reply to nevertheless
said by nevertheless:
The only one I'm bitter about is the SciFi channel, I would like to have watched Farscape as the episodes first aired (may it not rest in peace and let it come back).

You mean Space? There is probably a reason for that. Contact me privately and I may be able to help you.
--
Wherever You Go, There You Are...


Mashiki
Balking The Enemy's Plans

join:2002-02-04
Woodstock, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·Rogers Hi-Speed
·Bright House


1 recommendation

reply to DKS
said by DKS:
Sigh. You are missing the obvious point. In Canada rights and freedoms are never absolute. They are also not only individual. We differ from the Americans in that way. Our rights and freedoms are also held in tension with the needs of the larger society. That's why hate speech is against the law. It has a deeply negative effect on society and so is a legitimate constraint on the right to free speech.

In terms of Canadian content, our courts have held that this is a legitimate protection for the larger society and that the government has the right to make such laws as protect national culture.

Am I really missing the point? How about Fundamental Freedoms(Part 1, Section 2)

quote:

fun·da·men·tal (fnd-mntl)
adj.
Pertaining to the foundation or basis; serving for the foundation. Hence: Essential, as an element, principle, or law; important; original; elementary; as, a fundamental truth; a fundamental axiom.

quote:

free·dom (frdm)
n.
The condition of being free of restraints.
Liberty of the person from slavery, detention, or oppression.

Political independence.
Exemption from the arbitrary exercise of authority in the performance of a specific action; civil liberty: freedom of assembly.
Exemption from an unpleasant or onerous condition: freedom from want.
The capacity to exercise choice; free will: We have the freedom to do as we please all afternoon.
Ease or facility of movement: loose sports clothing, giving the wearer freedom.
Frankness or boldness; lack of modesty or reserve: the new freedom in movies and novels.

The right to unrestricted use; full access: was given the freedom of their research facilities.
The right of enjoying all of the privileges of membership or citizenship: the freedom of the city.
A right or the power to engage in certain actions without control or interference: “the seductive freedoms and excesses of the picaresque form” (John W. Aldridge).

n 1: the condition of being free; the power to act or speak or think without externally imposed restraints 2: immunity from an obligation or duty

Maybe I'm missing the point that Fundamental Freedoms, enable me to do whatever I want, and watch or read whatever I want. And since the words Fundamental Freedom come strait from the paper of the charter of rights and freedoms. I have the right.

I'm sorry but I strongly disagree with you, no goverment which gives it's people the fundamental rights to exercise, the rights of freedom of the press, media or other forms of communication should be legally able to make a law to take those rights away.

It's simply one step down the wrong road, taking the wrong path that leads to disaster. Because, once the goverment "protects" society or "natural culture" you enforce stagnation upon it. The ideas behind it grow weak and it becomes lethargic and falls apart from the inside.

A strong idea or set of ideals will ensure that people will flock to it, hence the popularity of the american culture. For better or worse, the idea of living free, with no restrictions within the bounds of laws; and living how ever you want without goverment interference is appealing to a good many people around the world.

Edit: typo
[text was edited by author 2002-09-26 13:53:07]


Stec$
Coke Addict
Premium
join:2002-05-23
Welland, ON
Well said Mashiki! You got a good way of words you speak for me
--
Coke Good/Pepsi Bad


markwp2001
Spreadhead
Premium
join:2002-05-25
Long Beach, MS

1 recommendation

reply to nevertheless
said by nevertheless:
said by elias:
But my basic understand was that the government is trying to control what people can and cannot see on TV, much like in Cuba?
even Shania Twain and Celine Dion get their first leg up by doing well in the Canadian market.

Surely this is enough evidence to get the law overturned??


Mashiki
Balking The Enemy's Plans

join:2002-02-04
Woodstock, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·Rogers Hi-Speed
·Bright House
reply to Stec$
said by Stec$:
Well said Mashiki! You got a good way of words you speak for me

Thanks, being that I've been to a good number of places where personal freedoms and personal expression are non existent I suppose gives me a unique insight into what if fundamentally going wrong in this country. I've seen and watched what has happened to the french language, changing words is a no no, and expanding the vocabulary is simply bad. It's now considered a dead language. Now if you take ancient hebrew in it's purest for it's a great language but very limited, but with isreal as it stands now, it's given a dead language new a new birth and is more robust then many others. But this is getting abit off topic.

Ha...maybe I should consider a job in politics.


Michael
Premium
join:2001-05-06
Canada
said by Mashiki:
But this is getting a bit off topic.
said by Mashiki:
Ha...maybe I should consider a job in politics.
It's amazing how well the two quotes go together.
--
The views expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect the views of the poster.


Mashiki
Balking The Enemy's Plans

join:2002-02-04
Woodstock, ON
kudos:1
I thought someone might catch that, Michael.


kim
That Chick
Premium,Mod
join:2001-03-25
ON
kudos:8
Reviews:
·Cogeco Cable
reply to elias
Let's put aside who is stealing what from who for a minute and try this example:

John moved here from Poland with his parents when he was 5. He speaks english well having been raised here but his parents, well it's harder. They try though. Direct TV offers (hypothetically since I have no idea) Polish programming or better yet there is a satellite with all Polish TV on it. Is it fair to make receiving that signal illegal? Why shouldn't they be able to watch all the Polish TV they want?

Just a thought, try not to abuse me too much
--
Trying to get an education here is like trying to drink from a firehose!


nevertheless
Premium,VIP
join:2002-03-08
St Catharines, ON
kudos:4
reply to markwp2001
said by markwp2001:
even Shania Twain and Celine Dion get their first leg up by doing well in the Canadian market.
Surely this is enough evidence to get the law overturned??
A dig on Shania Twain and Celine Dion, or an actual statement?
--
Some people think I'm an idiot. I disagree, but idiocy is subjective--so they may well be right. With this in mind, take everything I post with a grain of salt, eh?


Mashiki
Balking The Enemy's Plans

join:2002-02-04
Woodstock, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·Rogers Hi-Speed
·Bright House

1 recommendation

reply to kim
said by kim:
Let's put aside who is stealing what from who for a minute and try this example:

John moved here from Poland with his parents when he was 5. He speaks english well having been raised here but his parents, well it's harder. They try though. Direct TV offers (hypothetically since I have no idea) Polish programming or better yet there is a satellite with all Polish TV on it. Is it fair to make receiving that signal illegal? Why shouldn't they be able to watch all the Polish TV they want?

Just a thought, try not to abuse me too much

Under the charter they have the right to watch, whatever they want, read whatever they want as well. Regardless if it's american, japanese, french, polish, german or chinese. And if they want to ignore everything produced by the canadian media that is also their right.

The problem being, the satellite compaines would complain that it's cutting into their profit margin. Well the obvious answer would be to carry those other channels right? I mean that's a massive forehead smacking thought. The other is the CRTC's and Canadian goverments thoughts that this will "erode" canadian society. Well, I've already argued this point, but if you don't let new things in it simply becomes stagnet.

If you take a look back in previous civilizations you can see this all over the place, the same is happening to the french right now. It's a dying culture by no ones hand but their own.


Vendetta950

join:2000-09-16
Winnipeg, MB
reply to elias
Mashiki, you feel our Canadian culture is dying because of TV? Or am I reading what you are saying incorrectly?

I remember growing up before even cable TV was in everyone's home and how peaceful it used to be. Now, with the advent of kids watching TV from the major cities in the US, everybody wants to be a gang-banger wannabe.

The US Entertainment Machine has done (IMHO) more harm than good - to ours, and other cultures around the globe. I applaud what the CRTC has done and hope they continue to do so for it does help ensure that we become less "americanised".
--
"The art of secrecy lies in being so open about most things that the few things that matter are not even suspected to exist." - B.H. Liddell Hart


nevertheless
Premium,VIP
join:2002-03-08
St Catharines, ON
kudos:4
reply to Mashiki
said by Mashiki:
The problem being, the satellite compaines would complain that it's cutting into their profit margin. Well the obvious answer would be to carry those other channels right? I mean that's a massive forehead smacking thought.
Uhh...you do realize that they cannot broadcast each and every channel in existence, right? They only have room to broadcast, say, 200 channels. If they could offer a 'better' product (ie, more channels), they obviously would--given that there's enough Canadian content on the feed to meet regulations.

quote:
The other is the CRTC's and Canadian goverments thoughts that this will "erode" canadian society. Well, I've already argued this point, but if you don't let new things in it simply becomes stagnet.
And if we let all of our artistic talent move to the US because there's no market for them to create their stuff here? What will happen to Canadian Culture then? We'll just as surely be destroyed by being absorbed by our neighbours to the south. Culturally, if not politically.
--
Some people think I'm an idiot. I disagree, but idiocy is subjective--so they may well be right. With this in mind, take everything I post with a grain of salt, eh?


DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
kudos:2
reply to Mashiki
said by Mashiki:
A strong idea or set of ideals will ensure that people will flock to it, hence the popularity of the american culture. For better or worse, the idea of living free, with no restrictions within the bounds of laws; and living how ever you want without goverment interference is appealing to a good many people around the world.
That's the difference between Canadians and Americans. Americans believe in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Canadians believe in peace, order and good government.

And the assumption that a strong set of ideals being equal to "good" isn't exactly true. There are lots of ideals in the world. Not all are good. And not all are strong. Sometimes "good" ideals need some help along. Sometimes, so does good culture.
--
Wherever You Go, There You Are...


dirtyjeffer
Anons on ignore, but not due to fear.
Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON
reply to elias
i say, we just make some super huge world satellite (maybe modify the international space station) that has capacity for 1,000,000 channels from every country available and you can pick and choose whatever you want (there would even be over 100 polish channels ) for a certain monthly charge.

no CRTC intervention allowed.

p.s. and bell would own 51% of it
--
"The bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the low price is forgotten."


markwp2001
Spreadhead
Premium
join:2002-05-25
Long Beach, MS
reply to nevertheless
said by nevertheless:
said by markwp2001:
even Shania Twain and Celine Dion get their first leg up by doing well in the Canadian market.
Surely this is enough evidence to get the law overturned??
A dig on Shania Twain and Celine Dion, or an actual statement?

Just making a (bad) joke.

Mark


corster
Premium
join:2002-02-23
Gatineau, QC
[rant]I HATE BELL. IT'S ALL THERE FAULT THAT THESE DISHES ARE ILLEGAL[/rant]

Ok, but it's true. I have a directv system sitting in my closet because it's illegal for people to program the cards. And i'm not buying a loader. So i'm stuck with Rogers Digital Cable.
--
Me Use Netscape Seven. I Like, I Like


shaner
Premium
join:2000-10-04
Calgary, AB
said by corster:
[rant]I HATE BELL. IT'S ALL THERE FAULT THAT THESE DISHES ARE ILLEGAL[/rant]

Ok, but it's true. I have a directv system sitting in my closet because it's illegal for people to program the cards. And i'm not buying a loader. So i'm stuck with Rogers Digital Cable.

Really Corster? It's their fault for playing by the rules and expecting the competition to do so as well? Bell would wholeheartedly welcome competition from DirecTv if they had to follow the same CANCON rules that ExpressVu and StarChoice do.
--
Brought to you by the William Shatner school of overacting.


Mashiki
Balking The Enemy's Plans

join:2002-02-04
Woodstock, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·Rogers Hi-Speed
·Bright House
reply to Vendetta950
said by Vendetta950:
Mashiki, you feel our Canadian culture is dying because of TV? Or am I reading what you are saying incorrectly?

I remember growing up before even cable TV was in everyone's home and how peaceful it used to be. Now, with the advent of kids watching TV from the major cities in the US, everybody wants to be a gang-banger wannabe.

The US Entertainment Machine has done (IMHO) more harm than good - to ours, and other cultures around the globe. I applaud what the CRTC has done and hope they continue to do so for it does help ensure that we become less "americanised".

Just as a note, from this message on my response may or may not make perfect sense. The ol migraines are kickin' in.

You are misreading. I have a feeling, I'm going to discuss the fundamentals of, evasive and invaseive culture and how it can strengthen and weaken other cultures.

What culture we have is and or dying because of the lack of choice IMHO or forced choice. Forceing ideals is always bad, giving a choice is good. The canadian goverment along with the CRTC, requireing the swap out of commericals and block american TV, along with news publications, and information in general.

When you force a form of media for the sake of "protection of identity" the goverment is nothing better then a dictatorship. It is after all controling what the populace sees and hears. Now, if a culture is strong, it will either embrace the outside influences, or can simply shrug them off. A society with a weakend culture either due to lack of intrest, or what people find boring, will eventually try to protect what little values it has left either by forceing what they will against everyone, or simply against everyone by folding in on itself, similar to the old days of china, and japan.

Now Vendetta, I'm not going to discuss parenting or lack of in current society(ala gang wanna be's and supposed hoods), that's a topic for another day. Make a new one up and I'll be glad to join in.

The thing that you need to realize is that we live in a world where communication is not limited, we can freely exchange and expand our knowledge by talking to people in other countries. I can't emphasize this enough that a culture that is strong in it's values needs no protection.

The main point is, if it's good people will flock to it. You do not need to force anything on anyone, people will watch and listen. If people didn't find american media appealing they wouldn't watch it, they wouldn't listen to it and they would ignore it.


Mashiki
Balking The Enemy's Plans

join:2002-02-04
Woodstock, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·Rogers Hi-Speed
·Bright House

reply to nevertheless
said by nevertheless:
Uhh...you do realize that they cannot broadcast each and every channel in existence, right? They only have room to broadcast, say, 200 channels. If they could offer a 'better' product (ie, more channels), they obviously would--given that there's enough Canadian content on the feed to meet regulations.
Really? Then why is it at my cousins place in the states with their US DSS dish they currently have 400 channels that they are paying for? I've seen bootleg setups with almost 900 channels on it. 200 channels? Perhaps cable, but even in woodstock with digital they are only useing 80 of them. There is a better product and it's not carried by anyone here, hence the reason to block the american satelite providers from selling their service here.

quote:

And if we let all of our artistic talent move to the US because there's no market for them to create their stuff here? What will happen to Canadian Culture then? We'll just as surely be destroyed by being absorbed by our neighbours to the south. Culturally, if not politically.

Is that because there is no market? Or because people here simply don't like them? Or perhaps the fact that the market isn't large enough? I've said this already, but if a culture is strong it doesn't need to be protected, it can either embrace and coexist with another, or can simply shrug off the outside influences by populace will. Goverment intervention guarentees that in general that the country will slowly move further towards a dictatorship where the goverment has absolute control of all forms of communication to "protect the canadian identity", doesn't that sound familiar? I thought so, sounds like the party line that's going on in communist china right now.

For politics though, start another thread. I'll join in and be more the happy to discuss the finer points and flaws of the canadian system. I'm not a fan of it.

But regardless, I've lived in the US. Have you? That's probbly one of the reasons that my views of canada and it's control of media makes me angry. I don't like big goverment.

edit: clairty, typo
[text was edited by author 2002-09-27 00:09:33]