This reads like something straight from The Onion.
What's even worse is that I guess those government services must pay royalties, so this means Canadians will be subsidising music they clearly don't like (otherwise it would be popular and this kind of law wouldn't be necessary)
Well what is to be expected of an old school nationalist government, with a mindset from another generation? Its an easy win which makes them look good. I do not have any problem with the extra money going back to Quebec artists through royalties. However I would rather have an overhaul of the royalties system, which is based on a pre-digital world. Oh well.
I would worry that the government will waste extra money paying higher royalties than private parties would for the same song since they have to license some Quebec artists song. Makes more sense to me to fund new artists with the condition that the government gets to play those songs royalty free for whatever. Celine Dion has enough money.
I worry most that policies like this will further the populist nationalist thinking, dividing people in us (white francophones of French colonial descent) and them (everybody else).
> Makes more sense to me to fund new artists with the condition that the government gets to play those songs royalty free for whatever.
I wonder if it would make sense to do both. Fund artists with the condition that their work is free for governmental use—then make sure the government actually takes advantage.
I suspect part of Quebec's goal is to give home-grown music more cultural attention, so that eventually it may become more popular in its own right. But the government won't necessarily decide to use a song just because it's free—after all, there's plenty of free creative commons music available already.
All the top music here in the US traces its roots around the world several times. You don't get today's top charts without someone messing around with a sampler from Japan in Europe in the '80s.
It's a fallacy to suggest that Canadians 'clearly don't like' something because it is not popular. A lack of exposure is one possible reason why a population may like something but it isn't (yet) popular.
I think it’s good that a government and a society resist homogenization by globalization. Cultures need protected niches to develop unique ideas.
While there are many good things coming from so many cultures around the world slowly converging further thanks to social media technology, many things are lost too
I live in Ontario, the neighboring predominantly-English province.
My gut instinct is with you. It's weird and nationalistic and what even..
But... I was born in a tiny country with tiny language. The notion of playing, I don't know, Russian or Chinese or Polish music in the government elevator or on government phone, makes me immediately have more sympathy and understanding. Like, it wouldn't even be a consideration - of course government waiting music will be in your own language.
I think that kind of disregard for their first language is exactly what is making Quebecois protective of their language and culture. Just because they are on North American continent, doesn't make their language
> this means Canadians will be subsidising music they clearly don't like (otherwise it would be popular and this kind of law wouldn't be necessary)
Are you suggesting that the popularity of music is based solely on its merits and not multi-million dollar marketing budgets of the (mostly English speaking) pop-culture industrial complex? Now that is something for The Onion.
Side note: This rule is provincial, and applies only to Quebec. Many Quebecers love their local artists. Indeed this initiative wouldn't be possible without some measure of support.
>otherwise it would be popular and this kind of law wouldn't be necessary
I think you are missing the full picture.
What I mean there is no fair free market of art, for example can my country with 20 million population create cartoons to compete with Disney? Of course not, Disney creates the generic american culture stuff, and then they can dump it on small countries and make a bit of extra profit from ads and toys.
Anyway I am not debating what laws are fair or not, just mentioning there is no fair competition and the best music, TV show or movie wins. I would personally tax foreign stuff a bit and use the money to support local production.
So what you are saying is that Disney can do it better than your small country can. Thereby we need to suppress “better” and allow for “worse” to surface.
Let me ask you this then. Who actually wins in this scenario?
For my own country market Disney can do it cheaper, free .
If I want to make a cartoon to promote say a traditional story I need to do a lot of work and then sell my work.
Disney already made a local TV channel where they just translate their existing american stuff, slap ads and profit.
So what are the upsides and downsides
- Disney makes money
- US pushes their culture(including the wird shit where is super funny to have characters tortured by explosions, dropping big objects on them or those children/teen movies where is fun to bully the dorks)
- only win is our children have more options then we had in the past
I do not want to suppress Disney, I would put a tax , use that to sponsor some local animation schools to create more content with local themes.
There are a few local cartoons, there are small budget and the reason they exist is because parents demand/appreciate such products.
I did not watched cable TV in years but last time I did there were only american translated channels for children but with youtube I could watch with my son cartoons from different countries but this cartoons don't have a giant behind them to create their own TV channels.
Now let me respond to you in a similar way you did, maybe you understand it better.
You create a cool app but when you try to sell it MS, Google and Apple release a similar app for free, you try then to make a different app but again the giant has a free offer, you do that again and again but all the time a similar but not identical free product was launched by the giants for free. Your products were better but the giants had a free shittier version so you only gained a small market. You might say that is OK you get screwed because customers got free stuff, but is it free though? The giants made the money in different way(sometimes in ilegal ways, sometimes in a l4gal but unethical way).
My point is there is no actual fair competition when you compete with a giant, so if Windows or Notepad is the most installed OS/program you would be wrong to conclude that means this is because of the quality of the product.
It is very different. A specific subsidy/promotion is very different from a broad punitive tax.
I've a lot of friends who are professional DJs and musicologists/music historians. The reality is that most people will listen whatever is a hit on the radio, TV, or Spotify, which means that any underground cultural scene that wants to make it big has to appeal to the big US/UK/EU markets.
If you want a thriving local music scene that doesn't just copy whatever gets played in London/Berlin/LA you have to do these sorts of things.
I think this is somewhat misguided. The main problem I see with the modern music scene in general is that live music is not doing very well, particularly after covid. Coincidentally, no matter where you are, having more live music is almost invariably going to be local music and is much less top heavy compared to the recording industry.
I suspect they are not pushing more live music out of concern over cost which is unfortunate.
I have close friends in this business, and you are right ; this policy will not help live music. It will boost older artists with established names and big studios who helped them many years ago. In my humble opinion, this government leads with polls, targeting specific non-urban region and older generations.
(Culture Minister Nathalie) “Roy also announced an investment of $1.1 million as part of an initiative to promote local music produced during the pandemic.”
It will pay a small wage to a few artists which makes all the difference for small local scenes.
Cultural promotion by local governments _work_. Artists can do amazing things when they don't have to ask their parents for money or depend on a shitty day job.
As a non-Canadian, the Quebecois seem to have a weird cultural narcissism. It's like there are all these little petty bureaucratic foistings of Quebec on the rest of Canada. Music that nobody wants to listen to, a language that nobody wants to learn, etc. Bizarre
I speak more Russian than I do French, but even I can recognize the wonderful culture and je ne sais quoi that comes with Quebec and French Canada's influence on Canadian culture. I'm happy that they are here and that the government has measures to support their voices that would otherwise get lost.
Québec cultural protectionism is very strong in left wing circles as well. It's really only the federalist center that caters to Anglophone montrealers that is less on board.
Quebec left wing circles can be quite right wing/populist when it comes to language issues and nationalism. Political views don’t exist along a single linear spectrum.
Hmm, not sure it's quite right wing. Left wing nationalism is actually a pretty big thing in the world outside of the anglosphere and some parts of Western Europe.
I'm not sure I'd apply a left-wing / right-wing label to it. A lot of people see French as a minority language in Canada that must be protected, others see it as an issue of pure nationalism, it can come from a lot of directions.
It's not unique to Québec either, similar programs exist among linguistic minorities in Africa, Eastern Europe and even Asia.
I live in Quebec and can speak French and English fluently.
The people of Quebec are wonderful and very friendly (seriously); especially in the Montreal area where I live..
However, there is a difference in being a proud of your culture and shoving it down other people's throats.
These things piss off the majority of us in Quebec because the government is wasting taxes of hard working people. They should spend it instead on infrastructure, education and healthcare..
Frankly such moves don't even help give expand the culture. The government hardly support the authors, musicians and other artists.
They don't attempt to make Quebec a welcoming place for all, they double down and add even more roadblocks for outsiders to get more insights on its great culture..
As an American immigrant to Canada, I've gotta say, you sound pretty ignorant about Canadian culture and history. You might wanna read up before sharing such strong opinions
You’re not Canadian and this is a really tricky part of understanding how the Canadian system works. But this is a Province of Québec policy and only impacts Québec government ministries.
The rest of Canada has Canadian content rules codified in our Broadcasting Act. The idea is that it should create a market for art our various Ministries of Culture pay for via grants. But in practice, Canadian terrestrial radio plays one hell of a lot of Nickelback and Trooper…
As a British-born Canadian, my view is they have a knack of shooting themselves in the foot without realizing it.
When we moved to Canada we were allowed to be schooled in English. Within a year or two they passed a new law that said you could only be educated in English if your parents were educated in English in either Quebec or Canada (don't remember which). Coming from England, my parent's education didn't qualify. There was no grandfathering, letting us continue in English because we'd already started in English.
My parents didn't know French, and wouldn't be able to assist in learning it, or helping with homework. In response, we left Quebec and moved to the Toronto area.
If they hadn't passed their law, I would have stayed, made French friends, shopped at French stores, and generally been immersed in the culture they want to protect, and learned French. My brothers would have too. Instead, we all vaguely know grade-9 core French, but not enough to actually communicate with anyone. Pretty much the exact opposite of what they want.
Years later, they enacted French language laws, harassing stores over English signs, talking English to English customers, etc, all making it harder to be a tourist location.
All their efforts seem to be more effective at driving away the non-French as opposed to spreading adoption and appreciation of French. Maybe that's their real plan. Their calls for separation are another sign that driving away the non-French may be the real goal... they want to be left alone... Which just seems incredibly short-sighted. If you're too isolated from the rest of the world, the rest of the world will move on without you.
> Their calls for separation are another sign that driving away the non-French may be the real goal... [...] If you're too isolated from the rest of the world, the rest of the world will move on without you.
Why do you see being independent as isolating from the world? I see it more as directly integrated rather than in a diluted way. I have noticed most countries don't undo their independence willingly, so it must not be that bad.
The problem is not about being independent, it's the zero tolerance criminalization of non-French that is isolating.
It's reducing likely immigration (see my initial post), and the language laws around talking to customers and signage are likely harming tourism. I saw recently that some government forms are no longer going to be available in English. They're not being proud of being French, but actively hostile to anyone who isn't a francophone.
With fewer people visiting the province, and bringing diversity into Quebec, and with Quebec families wanting French, being less likely to visit anything outside of Quebec, then yes, it comes isolating.
Sure, some will learn another language and travel, but their government sure is working hard to ensure that's less likely. Early bi-lingualism can make it easier to pick up more languages. Equally, forced early mono-lingualism will make it harder for future Quebecois kids to break out of Quebec.
Europe has fairly open borders. Many countries citizens speak multiple languages. A store keeper in Italy won't risk a $2,000 fine for greeting a long-time foreign customer in their native tongue, but that's a risk in Quebec. They even proposed turning everyone into snitches by splitting the fines with people who turn in Anglophones ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOxpLv1j5fg ). How can all these European countries live with their openness? Is Italy living in fear of becoming non-Italian? Is Germany living in fear of becoming non-German? Outside of Europe, is Japan at risk of becoming non-Japanese? No. Everywhere else has managed to retain their culture without being actively hostile to their neighbours.
They're surrounded by 300 million+ English speakers and desperately trying to keep their language and culture alive.
I'm not saying I agree with this particular initiative, but this is about survival of their very culture, not narcism. What an awfully uncharitable thing to say.
It's funny, if the Inuit government had a similar initiative in Nunavut to support their culture, literally no-one would have a problem with it.
This is not true. I would have a huge problem with the Inuit enacted a similar initiative. I find these actions to be incredibly narcissistic, sad, and take them to be fundamentally misunderstanding how culture works.
I also find it hilarious. If you want to keep your culture alive, create laws that allow you to prosper economically or militarily. This will cause your culture to spread, slowing but not preventing the inevitable disappearance that some day comes to any society.
There you have it folks. How to solve the global problem of cultural assimilation rolled up into a single paragraph. Just have more guns and/or money then your competitor (literally impossible in this case).
This is a complex problem that has plagued cultures for thousands of years. If you're so confident to think you know the answer, I'd suggest it's you who is the narcissist.
>This is not true. I would have a huge problem with the Inuit enacted a similar initiative.
Okay, I'll correct myself. No-one I know (across three different provinces), would have a "huge" problem with a marginalized culture on the verge of extinction supporting their own culture, using their own money. But then again, people sure seem addicted to being outraged for little to no reason.
As a Quebecer, I will allow myself to highlight the intention behind this surprising proposal. Quebec's French-speaking artistic community is very rich and very lively. The musical tastes of Quebecers are also very diverse, in both English and French. Only, from a commercial point of view, English-speaking music enjoys a very large exposure and it is very easy to forget that other music also exists. Canada, from a constitutional point of view, officially recognizes 2 languages: English and French. Laws impose on the broadcaster a certain percentage of content in these 2 languages. However, French does not benefit from the strength of attraction of English on the North American continent. The Quebec government has therefore decided to do its part to increase the visibility of French-language music in Quebec, more specifically, Quebec French-language music. It is an action of resilience, one among many others that we feel obliged to do to avoid disappearing like all the other French-speaking populations of America.
This sounds like you didn't even try to look at this from their perspective. What reads as narcissism to you reads to them as a necessity for cultural survival: is this a good way of dealing with the perceived anglophone takeover? are their fears unfounded and will Quebec still be the thriving French-speaking province it has been, a thousand years from now? I know neither answer to these questions, but I can on paper understand their sentiment: they are the only French speakers on their continent (barring the pockets in louisiana or French Guiana), and neighbours to the biggest cultural powerhouse of the last 50 years. Learning English to get better job opportunities seem like a no brainer for the majority of their youth, and leaving to the US is a dream for many of them. Their film producers, musicians, writers, and other artists are deeply talented in their own right, yet struggle to be known outside of Québec or francophone Europe. Who wants to be stuck in that market ? Some bear it, but others cater to the anglophones to benefit from the americans who export their culture to the entire rest of the world. It's nearly impossible to make it in the western world in any other way. If the Chinese ever achieve cultural rayonance as well as the Americans have achieved, or if spanish suddenly gains a much higher rate of usage in the US, I am confident thousands of anglophone will change their tune and opt a position much closer to the québécois.
I think it’s a debate between wether you allow culture to propel itself or do we need to augment it and push it in some direction.
If Quebec lost the French language overtime that would be an organic cultural correction in line with what the majority wants. If they didn’t want it, they’d preserve it.
But if we want to shape culture and protect the past, why not go further in the past and promote indigenous languages too? They were there first.
Language is an evolving tool. If we’re to protect English today from 600 years ago then we would still be speaking Germanic or something like that.
61 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 117 ms ] threadWhat's even worse is that I guess those government services must pay royalties, so this means Canadians will be subsidising music they clearly don't like (otherwise it would be popular and this kind of law wouldn't be necessary)
I wonder if it would make sense to do both. Fund artists with the condition that their work is free for governmental use—then make sure the government actually takes advantage.
I suspect part of Quebec's goal is to give home-grown music more cultural attention, so that eventually it may become more popular in its own right. But the government won't necessarily decide to use a song just because it's free—after all, there's plenty of free creative commons music available already.
Policies like this do their small part to help prevent the whole world from turning into a United States pop music mono-culture.
While there are many good things coming from so many cultures around the world slowly converging further thanks to social media technology, many things are lost too
My gut instinct is with you. It's weird and nationalistic and what even..
But... I was born in a tiny country with tiny language. The notion of playing, I don't know, Russian or Chinese or Polish music in the government elevator or on government phone, makes me immediately have more sympathy and understanding. Like, it wouldn't even be a consideration - of course government waiting music will be in your own language.
I think that kind of disregard for their first language is exactly what is making Quebecois protective of their language and culture. Just because they are on North American continent, doesn't make their language
I don't think there's really much about liking music that decides that it will be played.
The music that is played is chosen by wealthy people, and forced on the listeners. People like things they are exposed to often
Are you suggesting that the popularity of music is based solely on its merits and not multi-million dollar marketing budgets of the (mostly English speaking) pop-culture industrial complex? Now that is something for The Onion.
Side note: This rule is provincial, and applies only to Quebec. Many Quebecers love their local artists. Indeed this initiative wouldn't be possible without some measure of support.
I think you are missing the full picture. What I mean there is no fair free market of art, for example can my country with 20 million population create cartoons to compete with Disney? Of course not, Disney creates the generic american culture stuff, and then they can dump it on small countries and make a bit of extra profit from ads and toys.
Anyway I am not debating what laws are fair or not, just mentioning there is no fair competition and the best music, TV show or movie wins. I would personally tax foreign stuff a bit and use the money to support local production.
Let me ask you this then. Who actually wins in this scenario?
For my own country market Disney can do it cheaper, free . If I want to make a cartoon to promote say a traditional story I need to do a lot of work and then sell my work. Disney already made a local TV channel where they just translate their existing american stuff, slap ads and profit.
So what are the upsides and downsides
- Disney makes money
- US pushes their culture(including the wird shit where is super funny to have characters tortured by explosions, dropping big objects on them or those children/teen movies where is fun to bully the dorks)
- only win is our children have more options then we had in the past
I do not want to suppress Disney, I would put a tax , use that to sponsor some local animation schools to create more content with local themes.
There are a few local cartoons, there are small budget and the reason they exist is because parents demand/appreciate such products.
I did not watched cable TV in years but last time I did there were only american translated channels for children but with youtube I could watch with my son cartoons from different countries but this cartoons don't have a giant behind them to create their own TV channels.
Now let me respond to you in a similar way you did, maybe you understand it better.
You create a cool app but when you try to sell it MS, Google and Apple release a similar app for free, you try then to make a different app but again the giant has a free offer, you do that again and again but all the time a similar but not identical free product was launched by the giants for free. Your products were better but the giants had a free shittier version so you only gained a small market. You might say that is OK you get screwed because customers got free stuff, but is it free though? The giants made the money in different way(sometimes in ilegal ways, sometimes in a l4gal but unethical way).
My point is there is no actual fair competition when you compete with a giant, so if Windows or Notepad is the most installed OS/program you would be wrong to conclude that means this is because of the quality of the product.
I've a lot of friends who are professional DJs and musicologists/music historians. The reality is that most people will listen whatever is a hit on the radio, TV, or Spotify, which means that any underground cultural scene that wants to make it big has to appeal to the big US/UK/EU markets.
If you want a thriving local music scene that doesn't just copy whatever gets played in London/Berlin/LA you have to do these sorts of things.
I suspect they are not pushing more live music out of concern over cost which is unfortunate.
(Culture Minister Nathalie) “Roy also announced an investment of $1.1 million as part of an initiative to promote local music produced during the pandemic.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grimes_(musician)#Early_life
Cultural promotion by local governments _work_. Artists can do amazing things when they don't have to ask their parents for money or depend on a shitty day job.
I speak more Russian than I do French, but even I can recognize the wonderful culture and je ne sais quoi that comes with Quebec and French Canada's influence on Canadian culture. I'm happy that they are here and that the government has measures to support their voices that would otherwise get lost.
I'm not sure I'd apply a left-wing / right-wing label to it. A lot of people see French as a minority language in Canada that must be protected, others see it as an issue of pure nationalism, it can come from a lot of directions.
It's not unique to Québec either, similar programs exist among linguistic minorities in Africa, Eastern Europe and even Asia.
The people of Quebec are wonderful and very friendly (seriously); especially in the Montreal area where I live..
However, there is a difference in being a proud of your culture and shoving it down other people's throats.
These things piss off the majority of us in Quebec because the government is wasting taxes of hard working people. They should spend it instead on infrastructure, education and healthcare..
Frankly such moves don't even help give expand the culture. The government hardly support the authors, musicians and other artists.
They don't attempt to make Quebec a welcoming place for all, they double down and add even more roadblocks for outsiders to get more insights on its great culture..
The rest of Canada has Canadian content rules codified in our Broadcasting Act. The idea is that it should create a market for art our various Ministries of Culture pay for via grants. But in practice, Canadian terrestrial radio plays one hell of a lot of Nickelback and Trooper…
When we moved to Canada we were allowed to be schooled in English. Within a year or two they passed a new law that said you could only be educated in English if your parents were educated in English in either Quebec or Canada (don't remember which). Coming from England, my parent's education didn't qualify. There was no grandfathering, letting us continue in English because we'd already started in English. My parents didn't know French, and wouldn't be able to assist in learning it, or helping with homework. In response, we left Quebec and moved to the Toronto area.
If they hadn't passed their law, I would have stayed, made French friends, shopped at French stores, and generally been immersed in the culture they want to protect, and learned French. My brothers would have too. Instead, we all vaguely know grade-9 core French, but not enough to actually communicate with anyone. Pretty much the exact opposite of what they want.
Years later, they enacted French language laws, harassing stores over English signs, talking English to English customers, etc, all making it harder to be a tourist location.
All their efforts seem to be more effective at driving away the non-French as opposed to spreading adoption and appreciation of French. Maybe that's their real plan. Their calls for separation are another sign that driving away the non-French may be the real goal... they want to be left alone... Which just seems incredibly short-sighted. If you're too isolated from the rest of the world, the rest of the world will move on without you.
Hmmmm...
Why do you see being independent as isolating from the world? I see it more as directly integrated rather than in a diluted way. I have noticed most countries don't undo their independence willingly, so it must not be that bad.
It's reducing likely immigration (see my initial post), and the language laws around talking to customers and signage are likely harming tourism. I saw recently that some government forms are no longer going to be available in English. They're not being proud of being French, but actively hostile to anyone who isn't a francophone.
With fewer people visiting the province, and bringing diversity into Quebec, and with Quebec families wanting French, being less likely to visit anything outside of Quebec, then yes, it comes isolating.
Sure, some will learn another language and travel, but their government sure is working hard to ensure that's less likely. Early bi-lingualism can make it easier to pick up more languages. Equally, forced early mono-lingualism will make it harder for future Quebecois kids to break out of Quebec.
Europe has fairly open borders. Many countries citizens speak multiple languages. A store keeper in Italy won't risk a $2,000 fine for greeting a long-time foreign customer in their native tongue, but that's a risk in Quebec. They even proposed turning everyone into snitches by splitting the fines with people who turn in Anglophones ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOxpLv1j5fg ). How can all these European countries live with their openness? Is Italy living in fear of becoming non-Italian? Is Germany living in fear of becoming non-German? Outside of Europe, is Japan at risk of becoming non-Japanese? No. Everywhere else has managed to retain their culture without being actively hostile to their neighbours.
These are extreme populist measures to appease the average nationalist-bended Québécois and guarantee re-election.
That is the goal
I'm not saying I agree with this particular initiative, but this is about survival of their very culture, not narcism. What an awfully uncharitable thing to say.
It's funny, if the Inuit government had a similar initiative in Nunavut to support their culture, literally no-one would have a problem with it.
Make of that what you will.
I also find it hilarious. If you want to keep your culture alive, create laws that allow you to prosper economically or militarily. This will cause your culture to spread, slowing but not preventing the inevitable disappearance that some day comes to any society.
This is a complex problem that has plagued cultures for thousands of years. If you're so confident to think you know the answer, I'd suggest it's you who is the narcissist.
>This is not true. I would have a huge problem with the Inuit enacted a similar initiative.
Okay, I'll correct myself. No-one I know (across three different provinces), would have a "huge" problem with a marginalized culture on the verge of extinction supporting their own culture, using their own money. But then again, people sure seem addicted to being outraged for little to no reason.
a.k.a. please don't feed the trolls
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
If Quebec lost the French language overtime that would be an organic cultural correction in line with what the majority wants. If they didn’t want it, they’d preserve it.
But if we want to shape culture and protect the past, why not go further in the past and promote indigenous languages too? They were there first.
Language is an evolving tool. If we’re to protect English today from 600 years ago then we would still be speaking Germanic or something like that.
https://youtu.be/8fxy6ZaMOq8
It's the government of Quebec, not Canada.
The article didn't go out of its way to make that clear. But it did say so.