tjhorton@ai.toronto.edu ("Timothy J. Horton") (06/19/89)
I was under the impression that Canadian law favors Canadian magazines, and that one major side effect is the several thousands of home-grown publications that we have here in Canada. I imagine that all this may have changed, or will change over the next 10 years, under Free Trade, but I seem to remember exclusions for this area -- as a "cultural" thing? At any rate, I believe that the historic policy of our great country is one of paternal protection for our own periodicals, and it may be that Unix Review is at the mercy of just this very law. (The rationale being that there's no other way our own companies could compete fairly, or that the Unix aspects of Canadian culture would be threatened :-) Maybe it's the case that "you can't keep out the other's guy's cake and eat it too." But I don't think that the barriers are anywhere nearly high enough to justify the Unix Review policies. After all, "Time" basically repackages it's american mag in a slightly Canadian dress, and competes head-to-head against Macleans's (though 'borrowing' so much reduces costs, of course). Does anyone out there know the truth about how the cards are stacked?
clewis@eci386.uucp (Chris Lewis) (06/19/89)
In article <89Jun19.002358edt.11715@neat.ai.toronto.edu> tjhorton@ai.toronto.edu ("Timothy J. Horton") writes: >I was under the impression that Canadian law favors Canadian magazines, >and that one major side effect is the several thousands of home-grown >publications that we have here in Canada. My understanding is that Canadian magazines enjoy preferential postal rates. Eg: somewhere on the order of 18 cents/copy when I last read about it. I believe that they started phasing this out some years ago. >At any rate, I believe that the historic policy of our great country is >one of paternal protection for our own periodicals, and it may be that >Unix Review is at the mercy of just this very law. If UNIX World can charge $24US for a one year, or $44US for a two year subscription to Canadian subscribers, I think not. UNIX Review is just being stupid - either ignorant of geography (Canada's probably in Europe somewhere), ignorant of our market (Canada is the US's biggest trading partner by a substantial margin) or just plain ignorant in the stereotypical American-centred fashion. Y'ever notice that ads in US magazines frequently only have 1-800 numbers? Fat lot of good they do us. Same mentality. -- Chris Lewis, R.H. Lathwell & Associates: Elegant Communications Inc. UUCP: {uunet!mnetor, utcsri!utzoo}!lsuc!eci386!clewis Phone: (416)-595-5425
miller@uwovax.uwo.ca (Greg Miller) (06/20/89)
In article <89Jun19.002358edt.11715@neat.ai.toronto.edu>, tjhorton@ai.toronto.edu ("Timothy J. Horton") writes: > "Time" basically repackages > it's american mag in a slightly Canadian dress, > and competes head-to-head > against Macleans's (though 'borrowing' so much > reduces costs, of course). Is it not the case that prior to the law which put barriers up to US magazines, and only Canadian magazines were favored with discounted rates at Canada Post, that TIME actually produced a Canadian edition with Canadian news not found in the US version. Thus the effect of the law was actually, in th case of TIME, to eliminate Canadian content? Greg Miller
kim@watsup.waterloo.edu (Kim Nguyen) (06/20/89)
In article <2342@uwovax.uwo.ca> miller@uwovax.uwo.ca (Greg Miller) writes:
Is it not the case that prior to the law which put barriers up to
US magazines, and only Canadian magazines were favored with
discounted rates at Canada Post, that TIME actually produced a
Canadian edition with Canadian news not found in the US version.
Thus the effect of the law was actually, in th case of TIME, to
eliminate Canadian content?
Greg Miller
Indeed I believe this is the case. I remember my father vehemently
protesting this (at the time) new law, and his refusal since then to
ever subscribe to McLeans (which benefitted greatly from that law).
Time decided not to produce a truly Canadian edition of its magazine,
since it was going to have to compete directly with highly favoured
(subsidized?) Canadian magazines.
--
Kim Nguyen kim@watsup.waterloo.edu
Systems Design Engineering -- University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canadatom@mims-iris.uucp (Tom Haapanen) (06/20/89)
Timothy J. Horton <tjhorton@ai.toronto.edu> writes: > At any rate, I believe that the historic policy of our great country is > one of paternal protection for our own periodicals, and it may be that > Unix Review is at the mercy of just this very law. PC Week does offer free subscriptions to Canada, so I don't think that's the case. \tom haapanen "now, you didn't really expect tom@mims-iris.waterloo.edu my views to have anything to do watmims research group with my employer's, did you?" university of waterloo
theriaul@mdivax1.uucp (Roger Theriault) (06/22/89)
In article <2342@uwovax.uwo.ca> miller@uwovax.uwo.ca (Greg Miller) writes: >In article <89Jun19.002358edt.11715@neat.ai.toronto.edu>, tjhorton@ai.toronto.edu ("Timothy J. Horton") writes: >> "Time" basically repackages > it's american mag in a slightly Canadian dress, >> and competes head-to-head > against Macleans's (though 'borrowing' so much >> reduces costs, of course). > >Is it not the case that prior to the law which put barriers up to US magazines, >and only Canadian magazines were favored with discounted rates at Canada Post, >that TIME actually produced a Canadian edition with Canadian news not found >in the US version. Thus the effect of the law was actually, in th case of >TIME, to eliminate Canadian content? > I believe that this is more related to tax writeoffs for advertising expenses by Canadian corporations. Revenue Canada keeps Molsons (for example) from placing ads in US magazines DIRECTED AT CANADIANS or in US border TV stations in order to get them to advertise here in Canada, thus spending the tax-deducted dollars here, to (one hopes) Canadian publishers and broadcasters. In my humble opinion, TIME is just trying to make more $$ by putting out a Canadian (not really) issue. The ad bucks go to New York, as do our subscription fees, and Canadian publishers lose out (but the advertisers still get a write-off and some lucky printer in T.O. gets paid:-). Roger -- Roger Theriault Internet: theriaul@mdivax1.uucp UUCP: uunet!ubc-cs!van-bc!mdivax1!theriaul
dave@lsuc.on.ca (David Sherman) (06/23/89)
theriaul@mdivax1.uucp (Roger Theriault) writes: >>Is it not the case that prior to the law which put barriers up to US magazines, >>and only Canadian magazines were favored with discounted rates at Canada Post, >>that TIME actually produced a Canadian edition with Canadian news not found >>in the US version. Thus the effect of the law was actually, in th case of >>TIME, to eliminate Canadian content? > >I believe that this is more related to tax writeoffs for advertising expenses >by Canadian corporations. Revenue Canada keeps Molsons (for example) from >placing ads in US magazines DIRECTED AT CANADIANS or in US border TV stations >in order to get them to advertise here in Canada, thus spending the >tax-deducted dollars here, to (one hopes) Canadian publishers and broadcasters. First of all, Revenue Canada merely enforces the law, which is passed by Parliament -- in this case, sections 19 and 19.1 of the Income Tax Act. Yes, these provisions provide that advertising expenses (which are of course normally deductible as business expenses) cannot be deducted, where the advertising is placed in a foreign publication or broadcast by a foreign broadcasting undertaking and is directed primarily at Canadians. So it doesn't stop the advertising from taking place, it just forces it to be done with after-tax dollars, making it much more expensive. However, section 19, the one which deals with publications, was amended at the time of passing of the Free Trade Agreement. I don't have the text in front of me, but they essentially defined foreign as excluding the U.S. They might as well have repealed the entire section. Section 19.1, dealing with broadcasting, is still in place. David Sherman Toronto -- Moderator, mail.yiddish { uunet!attcan att utzoo }!lsuc!dave dave@lsuc.on.ca
clewis@eci386.uucp (Chris Lewis) (06/23/89)
In article <1989Jun21.200421.9494@mdivax1.uucp> theriaul@mdivax1.uucp (Roger Theriault) writes: |In article <2342@uwovax.uwo.ca> miller@uwovax.uwo.ca (Greg Miller) writes: |>that TIME actually produced a Canadian edition with Canadian news not found |>in the US version. Thus the effect of the law was actually, in th case of |>TIME, to eliminate Canadian content? Canadian content in a popular American owned mag ain't nearly as bad as no Canadian content in a popular American owned mag. And I would contend that the opposite effect happened - the effect was to *increase* Canadian content, for once TIME realized that it needed to be collected anyway, it began to bleed back into the American issue (which is a *very* good thing) because, inspite of those expatriate Canucks at National Lampoon, we're not *quite* as boring as they thought. (well, I guess, at least a bit amusing if nothing else ;-) |I believe that this is more related to tax writeoffs for advertising expenses |by Canadian corporations. Revenue Canada keeps Molsons (for example) from |placing ads in US magazines DIRECTED AT CANADIANS or in US border TV stations |in order to get them to advertise here in Canada, At least as far as US border TV stations, that seems pretty pointless. CRTC policy has been to allow (if not require) cable companies to substitute Canadian broadcasts of shows for American. Eg: If an American and a Canadian station were broadcasting Dallas at the same time, the cable company would insert the Canadian feed (with its commercials) into the American's channel on the cable. Even if Molson did place ads in US TV to advertise in Canada, we wouldn't see 'em. [I always thought that was theft and piracy. So did the Americans.] |In my humble opinion, TIME is just trying to make more $$ by putting out |a Canadian (not really) issue. The ad bucks go to New York, as do our |subscription fees, and Canadian publishers lose out (but the advertisers |still get a write-off and some lucky printer in T.O. gets paid:-). On the other hand, one might say TIME is simply trying to sell its magazines. As does MacLeans. The fact that TIME came out with a Canadianized (though, perhaps not most wonderful thing) version rather than abandoning us dam-commie- furriners is credit to them. AND, the upshot of this policy was that Canadians got jobs and money from TIME - ie: some of the money *stayed* in Canada. Not a bad trade. [I'm of mixed feeling about the law that led to this, but mindless bashing of the corporations involved bugged me.] -- Chris Lewis, R.H. Lathwell & Associates: Elegant Communications Inc. UUCP: {uunet!mnetor, utcsri!utzoo}!lsuc!eci386!clewis Phone: (416)-595-5425
mdfreed@ziebmef.uucp (Mark Freedman) (06/25/89)
Speaking of apparent false advertising,
I sent in the subscription card for MIPS (new magazine dedicated to high-
performance computers / workstations). The "charter subscriber" offer included
a moneyback guarantee during the subscription period, and NOWHERE in the ad or
on the card was Canada mentioned (as in "add $10 for subscriptions to Canada"
or "Offer is not valid in Canada").
MIPS thanked me for my inquiry about their subscription rates to Canada,
and ignored my attempt to utilize the special offer for charter subscribers.
Did anyone else waste a stamp on this sham ??gvcormack@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Gordon V. Cormack) (06/27/89)
In article <KIM.89Jun19202959@watsup.waterloo.edu>, kim@watsup.waterloo.edu (Kim Nguyen) writes: > > Time decided not to produce a truly Canadian edition of its magazine, > since it was going to have to compete directly with highly favoured > (subsidized?) Canadian magazines. The "canadian" time was hardly "truly canadian". It was the regular magazine with a couple-of-page insert on Canadian affairs. Mind, you the insert was a pretty good encapsulation of current events in Canada. If Time had a true Canadian edition, it would have qualified for the same status as any other Canadian magazine (advertisements were tax deductible for business). -- Gordon V. Cormack CS Dept, University of Waterloo, Canada N2L 3G1 gvcormack@waterloo.EDU gvcormack@uwaterloo.CA gvcormac@water.BITNET