🚀 go-pugleaf

timmer@io.org (Remain Calm!) wrote:

>Well, you illustrate the extreme, but consider my point as this:
>The pursuit of the "bottom line" and the largest "common denominator"
>breeds neither diversity nor quality.  It results in a bland, broadly
>accepted, painfully conventional and uniform glut of sameness.
>Whether in entertainment (us television) or food (Mc'whatever) or beer
>(molson/labatt taste free alcohol beverages) you end up with a great
>deal of mediocrity and very very little quality.  Indeed, the mediocre
>behemoth inevitably crushes whatever quality it finds.  This in the
>name of the "bottom line".

I completely understand your point.  And it's well put.   My only
problem with it is who is supposed to pay for this diversity ?  For
example, I've listened to "Edge" radio CFNY maybe 3 times in my life.
But the station offers a viable option to the mainstream 'rock' and
Hot A/C offered by the majority of Toronto stations.  In many ways,
CBC is the same way.  It offers a lot of optional programming for
people who don't like "America's funniest home videos". (I rarely
watch tv..  can't think of a better show...).  Anyway, who should pay
to keep these options on-air ?  (It's a rhetorical question, I'm not
asking for answers).  

>If you have a problem with the CBC (and there are many) I think it
>should be discussed and debated but I believe that Coren and his ilk
>engage in grievous dishonesty and deception when they invoke the
>jingoism of this war against public institutions.

Good point.  As far as Michael is concerned, I woudn't be so arrogant
as to "help"  try and defend his positions, but 9 times out of 10 I
agree whole heartedly with them.

Iain.