Carney pledges $150M boost to 'underfunded' CBC

Totally support that, and it's a great time for it as Canada's under threat and many Canadians are boycotting US media products.
Personally, since cutting off US media and switching to CBC, I've really enjoyed a lot of Canadian content and I've found myself more appreciative and interested in Canadian cultural products overall.

"When we compare ourselves to the U.K., France or Germany, we see that our public broadcaster is underfunded," Carney said in French during a campaign stop in Montreal. "That has to change."
"We expect that in the coming years, we will continue to increase that funding until it can be compared to that provided by other public broadcasters."
Carney also said funding of the CBC and Radio-Canada would be made statutory, meaning any changes would have to be approved by Parliament, not just the government's cabinet.
"Canadians themselves and their entire Parliament must decide on the future of Radio-Canada/CBC — not ideologues," he said.
Wow, just wow. There's more, read the article.
- It's dangerous to like a leader as much as I like this guy. There's much in his world view that inspires ambivalence. But then every actual move is just so on point that it's hard to ignore this nagging doubt -- because it's just too good to be true.
  Like what's the absolute worst thing he's done so far? In my book it was scrapping the carbon tax; it was defusing something that could cost the election, in a way that can even be easily reverted, at a time when it's about the least important short-term concern.
  
  His policy proposals are acceptable but in this day and age that is not how elections are won, especially with misinformation being pumped directly into our veins.
  Elections are won on vibes and he comes across as calm and rational in a time when Canadians are desperate for that energy (with an agent of chaos ie. Trump breathing down our collective necks).
  If we're being completely real, the liberals were getting decimated in this election regardless of who they put forth if not for Trump's aggressive threats towards Canada's sovereignty and economy.
  
  I know right? I have to fight myself to keep my skepticism healthy.
  
  Doubt your own party leader?
  This is one of those "tell me your political leaning without telling me" type comments.
  E: I acknowledge this joke didn't hit and ultimately was super unclear.
- I think everyone knows how great the BBC is. But, not everyone knows just how big and important it is. It is the largest broadcast news organization in the world. It has more than 5500 journalists and 50 foreign news bureaus. Canada shouldn't compete with the BBC, but it should at least be BBC-like within its own borders.
  Other national broadcasters are also great. Look at Australia's Triple J for example. Not only does it expose young Australians to Australian music they wouldn't otherwise hear on commercial radio, it also has science programs aimed at children and young adults. I love Dr. Karl's stuff, even though I'm definitely not in the target demographic (being non-Australian and old).
  IMO, the statutory funding isn't enough either. It's a step in the right direction. But, if all it takes is parliament voting, then it's vulnerable to the next PC majority. If it's made independent enough, that should also help it avoid accusations of being a government mouthpiece.
- Seems to be mid 20th-century liberal with national projects.
  Nice.

Now more than ever I see the value on the CBC.

Canada needs a strong public broadcaster. Conservatives hate the CBC because it isn't owned by a foreign billionaire and doesn't spew extremist right wing propaganda.
- The past few years the CBC has been leaning harder right but I think that they may have been trying to butter up the conservatives because of the, then, impending conservative win. There has been a lot of anti-electric car and anti-heat pump pieces in the past 2 years.

Sweet! Tax cuts benefiting the wealthy and new spending!
Joking aside: juicing CBC's mandate to cover local news is great. There are strong arguments that it should stop selling ads for some services (like podcasts and local news) so small producers have a shot at getting started. Hopefully that'll be included in the mandate change.
- The CBC needs to be cleaned out and returned to a fact based news company, local news and made in Canada shows that aren't stupid gimmicks.
  But there is definitely a ton of money being wasted.
  
  shows that aren’t stupid gimmicks.
  I don't own a tv, but what are the gimmick-based shows? Schitt's Creek, Baroness von Sketch Show, and Kim's Convenience are recent(ish) CBC shows that did very well.
  
  CBC's news seems fine. They do a decent job on local reporting.
  But I stopped enjoying their analysis and current affairs programming in the early 2000s. I'm not sure what changed, but the presenters and format really turned me off.

My local media just publish verbatim releases from police and corporations.
- Check and see if it's owned by Postmedia. Even if not, a lot of news media are guilty of being lazy and just pushing PR without giving it a critical look.... sometimes without even really reading over it....
  
  Nobody had to tell me to stop reading a conservative wank sheet.

I'm not sure if everyone knows this, but commercial weather forecasters get their weather information from Environment Canada, the American NOAA, and so on. Very few have their own weather satellites etc. The Environment Canada weather forecasts are pretty barebones, but they're the kind that are useful for pilots, shipping, etc. The Weather Network, Weather Channel, AccuWeather, all take that information and build on it for fancier and more user-friendly weather reports.
I think it would be great if the CBC could have a basic news wire service that commercial news services could build on. The local bureaus that Carney is recommending don't have to be full setups with reporters doing live to-camera pieces. They could be more like Thomson Reuters dispatches (a Canadian company btw). That would make the money go farther, and would provide a barebones framework for the more detailed reporting that say City or CTV wanted to do.
Anyhow, it's great that the current PM (and likely future PM) is a guy who lived and worked in London for a while, and understands how great the BBC is.
- The Environment Canada weather forecasts are pretty barebones
  I'm going to have to disagree with you on that. I actually really like how Environment Canada presents their forecasts. They have a text description for each day, which I like because it shows how much data they actually have about the forecast for that day. Also, no ads and no bullshit on their website.

Meanwhile Pollivere wants to get rid of CBC
- The "free market" should determine what the news is! /s
  Looking at the all the outlets owned by billionaires. They also don't report on wealth inequality. Isn't that a weird coincidence?
  
  Yep. Just look at the globe and mail. Today they published a hit piece fomenting Alberta separatism. They are owned by the Thomson family. The richest family in Canada. Surprise surprise.
  
  “Why do we need to tell people what they need to hear? Why can’t we just tell them what they want to hear?”
  -Ron Burgundy

I have decided to do my part and pay the $6 a month rather than just creating new email addresses when there is news I want to see or using my pihole to avoid ads.
- Same here! Can’t say I watch a ton on gen (other than local news which was free anyway) but access to CBC news network is nice. And have been getting back into 22 minutes!
  
  I have been watching several CBC shows, without ads via my pi-hole, I would watch CBC news via youtube whenever I wanted to and could because CBCNN is not always streaming but now that I am not paying for youtube and trying to get off of youtube, first by watching less US stuff. Seeing as how I got a refund for my year worth of youtube, and several other US service providers, I can afford the $6 a month to watch CBCNN ad free on the CBC app.

And just how much of it will be used in executive compensation?
EDIT: While I am in support of more funding for local news coverage my comment is in reference to the $3.3 million in bonuses paid to 45 executives after having laid off 141 employees back in August.
- Some amount. And the rest would be used to pay salaries for existing and new staff who produce Canadian news and entertainment.
- He's also expanding their mandate to cover more local news, so that's going to have a lot of costs that won't be going to executives.
  
  I’m certainly looking forward to better local coverage.
  
  Publicly funded local news is really important. The right wing propaganda often flies under the radar when it comes to local news outlets that are part of some large billionaire-owned corporation.
- In the context of executive wages, it's important to contrast this to what the industry standard is. We're not reinventing capitalism overnight (nor is it the argument being litigated), and fair market incentives must be competitive to retain talent. It's not a matter of whether someone agrees fair market is right or not - it's the reality of how society currently functions (and I point out because this is almost always the fundamental principle to most of these arguments).
  An aggregate $73k bonus is generally very small in executive talent pool - the article also goes on to point out the rest of the employee base also got $15k. Neither of these are particularly glaring.
  Instead consider Catherine Tait (CBC) - her base salary is _{$500k, with a target bonus of 7-28% (}$30k-$155k) and no additional incentives. That makes her max total compensations about $700k at best (and generally more like $600k). This is super low for a typical pay band at the CEO level.
  Contrast this to Andrew MacLeod (PostMedia) - his base salary is $1.1M, with his incentives (bonus, rsu/PSU, stock, etc.) in the same 2024 year $785k, making his total compensation $1.89M, or triple Taits.
  Looking around at a number of these, the CBC is pretty consistently on the low end of these ranges, especially when considering the size of the organization.
  I'm essentially pointing out your comment argued the opposite of your stance.
  
  You’ve given me a lot to read up. I appreciate the write-up.