Saturday, October 22, 2005
More on funding
I think, in the case of the CBC, that parliament might want to consider a new classification; the Crown not for profit Corporation, although this should be applied to the CBC I think Parliament might find it useful in other areas as well in the future. The idea behind the Crown not for profit corporation would be that, obviously, it is expected to provide a service, but not to turn a profit - it would be subsidized by the government but would also be able to accept tax-deductible contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations.
It must also be made clear though that nothing is purchased with a donation. So, in the case of the CBC, a foundation could not say 'we've made significant contributions and now we demand air time'.
This would allow additional revenue to flow to the CBC, aside from the additional appropriations mentioned in my last post.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Aren't we talking basically about the PBS model?
Possibly a variation on it, but not completely. The problem with the PBS model is that the government subsidy is in a constant downward spiral. What I'm talking about is a guaranteed subsidy that increases with inflation. PBS, because of diminishing revenue has to spend more and more time and effort on fundraising - to the point where some stations now devote 8-10 weeks of air time a year to fundraising.
I don't think that CBC, or the proposed branches, should devote any air time at all to fundraising - set it up so that CBC can accept donations, but does not devote air time to asking for money - the money that comes in, comes in and the department that handles it can set up their own advertising, communications etc., to get the word out and invite people to donate. It may seem like a subtle distinction but it makes a huge difference. Ironically it seems that all the fundraising is actually contributing to the decline in viewership for PBS.
Post a Comment