A Piece of the Action

The power of the media is being leveled straight at your head, and many are oblivious to the fact the campaign is not subliminal in nature. The only thing that is subliminal is a misdirection being employed.

Since March, CTV the television arm of CTV Global Media has been running advertisements stating, “For more than 50 years, CTV and ‘A’ have been proud to serve your community. We are leaders not only in the quality of our local news and programming, but also in our commitment to the community. The future of local television broadcasting, including your station, is at stake. Local news is the foundation of the Canadian broadcasting system. If we cut local roots, we lose something invaluable as a nation. At CTV and ‘A’, we want to see local television continue to strengthen our communities.”

On CTV’s campaign website they are quoted as stating, “Television service providers, including cable and satellite companies, are reaping huge profits at the direct expense of local Canadian TV stations that are going out of business.”

According to this ad campaign, current Canadian regulations are allowing satellite and cable companies to include their TV Stations to customers with no fees going to CTV. This is a relationship that has been in effect since cable and satellite service provider were introduced.

The ad campaign then alerts the viewer that CTV is at a “Crisis Point” and unless they don’t get a piece of the action from these service providers, local programming and content will be cancelled. This position has been rather effective, as CTV has compiled a long list of online signatures of viewers who are in fear of losing their local TV stations. The word has spread, and the masses are carrying the ‘the cause’ forward.

So effective is this mission that Google reports over 15,000 pages dedicated to the CTV “Save Local Television” campaign.

Why do people get so sucked in by manufactured media hype? In what way would losing a local breakfast show be the destruction of “the foundation of the Canadian broadcasting system?” Does this ad campaign step over the line of journalistic integrity by disguising a true motivation as a public ill? Is CTV abusing a public trust by forcing its journalists to participate in what is essentially a political campaign?

Part of the hype is trying to convince the local viewer that advertising dollars alone are no longer able to support conventional television. But is this not the main source of income for any form of media provider?

Television from its inception has always been provided free to the viewer. Anyone with a pair of ‘Rabbit Ears’ or a television antenna mounted to their homes can pick up the local TV stations without paying any fees to CTV. I always thought that tuning into a local station was “giving them a piece of the action,” since it is the viewership numbers that provide the likes of CTV the ability to provide advertisers, local or otherwise, the confidence to purchase a 20 second TV spot.

It seems that like CBC, CTV is looking to the public to carry them. Using alarmist language like “Crisis Point” is an abuse of their public trust since viewers tune in to be entertained and informed, and not programmed to do the bidding of the television network.

To accuse cable providers of reaping huge profits at the “expense of local Canadian TV” is also misleading, since it is not “costing” any expense to the TV station for having their channel provided to the viewer on cable or satellite. Once again, the fact that cable is enabling CTV to get more viewers is a benefit to them for generating advertising dollars. If anything, it would be reasonable to assume that cable providers and satellite companies should get a commission for generating the viewers for the local TV station.

Anyone who resides any further than 100 kilometers from Edmonton knows that rabbit ears (free-to-air) reception of CTV is like trying to look at bikini clad woman in a sand storm. It was the advent of satellite TV that allowed the likes of CTV to once again increase viewership and in turn increase advertising sales.

Perhaps instead of using valuable airtime to ruffle the feathers of their viewers, CTV should be selling that airtime to local businesses CHEAP! Maybe cut them a deal and put their ads on a timeslot that will be beneficial to the local businessperson. Instead of putting the small business on the air at 2:00AM where they maybe able to afford 20 seconds, create a local interest segment and put the message in front of the viewers that actually have jobs where they have to go to bed at 10:00 PM, so they can afford the products the advertiser is selling.

If local television is hard up for money, run a telethon to raise more funds. It would be chock full of local Canadian content, be entertaining as hell and it sure would pay the bills. Television media is a business plain and simple. It is never good business to get ‘your’ public to do your bidding. In the end it will backfire, until then I guess I have had my say.

The ORIGINal Divide

The origin of life is an interesting topic, especially to academia. It creates lines of divisions within the scientific community, theological communities and amongst non-scientific and the non-theological minded. In other words nobody has the answer, we just don’t know it yet.

Belief is a funny thing. Several years ago I was in a lounge in Vancouver with a few business partners attending Comdex, a computer exposition. Earlier in the day we had been walking in an indoor mall when the four of us entered a bookstore. As group dynamics dictate, we all split to our different interests. I was a new convert to Christianity, so I went to the religious section. One of my business partners Dale, went to the science fiction section, a section I normally would have had my nosed pressed in. I bought a non-fiction book “God and the Philosophers” and my friend bought a Star Trek book. Nothing was said to me, and we continued to Comdex.

Back in the lounge and my now slightly inebriated friend stood over me and with a slurred voice, holding his drink in one hand, Dale said, “What is with the religious book crap!” Being a confronted new Christian I replied, “What do you mean?”

"I mean, this God crap you bought in the book store, I know you man, there is no way you can be religious. You’re not fooling me!” Dale said, “Everyone knows there is no God.”

The only response I could think of was “Why don’t you believe in a God?” Dale was quick to reply, “Because there is no God, haven’t you been watching Star Trek.” To be fair to my friend, popular television has a way of writing stories that convey a particular worldview. Star Trek had at that time run a series of episodes where evolution was strongly conveyed. In one particular episode the main character Captain Picard was taken to the beginning of time, and showed a green puddle of slime and was told that one day that was going to be him. For many, Star Trek is a religion all to itself.

After a few “Why” questions to my friends response I got it out of him that it was the loss of a loved one that had convinced him that God could not be good nor real. We never spoke again of this even though we had created a line of division an understanding had been forged between two friends. That was fifteen years ago.

The debate between Creation and Evolution still wages on. Recent moves from the Alberta government allowing parents to opt their children out of classes from religion to sex education has caused a stir among members of the Alberta Teacher Association. Since the belief in Creation is viewed as pure religion, it will come under this particular legislation. Since science has not found evidence like transitional fossils or other proof of Evolution therefore making it a discipline of more faith than fact, should teaching Evolution also fall under classes’ parents can opt their children out of?

So you may ask why would I take this position? First I truly believe that since nobody really has the answer to the origins of life, both views of creation and evolution should be taught in our schools as an academic standard. This would allow a balanced education on the subject matter.

A recent article in the Edmonton Journal titles, “Human race outside Africa owes existence to a small tribe.” The article states that science have evidence that genetically links all races of man to one ancient tribe in northern Africa.

Interesting how the biblical Book of Genesis also point to a an area in north Africa where a small group of people lived, that being the biblical family of Adam, Eve, and their children which included Cain and Abel. Although to many the Book of Genesis has a rudimentary view of origins, it seems that science has provided an argument for biblical creation.

Then in the same edition another story from the scientific community stated, “Discovery of sponge-like body believed to be oldest evidence of animal life,” This story tells of fossilized life found atop a N.W.T. mountain. The angle of this piece was cited as evidence of Evolution, and pointed to what could be that green slime Captain Picard originated from.

The simple point being is that, if our children are not allowed to be educated in both disciplines of thought, stories like these would not have the same affect. Someone who is never been exposed to Creation would never get that affirmation feeling when they read of a genetic link to one tribe for all races. A feeling that even someone who had studied Evolution could get that same affirmation feeling from this same story.

The lines of division created by these two opposing worldviews, in my mind can work together to get to the truth. This is the basic goal of science. To study nature and learn the truth behind all things we observe in this world.

Meanwhile, until those in power, those who teach and those whose parent, dance around the issues of creation vs. evolution. A generation passes without the full benefit of learning both sides of the original coin. Until then we shall know the truth and the truth will set us free.