this post was submitted on 29 May 2026
345 points (99.7% liked)

Canada

12022 readers
509 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 Sports

Baseball

Basketball

Curling

Hockey

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 9488fcea02a9@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Although i agree with banning foreign ownership, it doesnt really solve the real problem which is media being the mouthpiece for billionaires.

Regular folk clearly dont want to pay for journalism, and thats how we ended up with billionaires owning all the news outlets.

We ban the foreign billionaires and then what? Canadian billionaire owned news? The lesser of two evils i guess.

Ask new brunswick how it went with the irvings owning all the news in the province.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 12 hours ago

Then the CBC is so scared about their budget they nerfed themselves into irrelevant.

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

People didn't pay for news before the super rich controlled the media as such, this is a new phenomena, that is not due "people not paying for news."

If news was all pay news, it would create other intractable problems, like the masses having ONLY people playing them telling them what is going on, following cynical snakes, is that what you want?

[–] 9488fcea02a9@sh.itjust.works 2 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

People didn't pay for news before the super rich controlled the media

where did people get all this free news from before? Internet blogs dont count as news...

Reputable news outlet revenue was always a mix of subscription and ads... i'm talking physical newspapets here... then with the internet, people stopped paying those subscriptions and news was funded by just ads, which wasnt sustainable.... so now we have ads and billionaires funding the news.

i'm not sure what you mean "this is a new phenomena"... journalism has always cost money. It was never free/gratis.

If news was all pay news, it would create other intractable problems

Sure, i agree. I didnt say subscription was the best revenue model. You also have the guardian's non-profit, or publicly funded media. But those have problems and biases too.

But surely all those models are better than what we have now

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 1 points 17 hours ago

It's damned if you do damned if you don't at this point with tech sucking up all the ad revenue that is for sure.

Even before that though, the media has been consolidating, around 2001 there were like 10 companies that owned about every major outlet and network, and it's just gotten worse, and the internet wasn't sucking up all the ad revenue back then. That is the cause of a lot of this, obviously a large factor is tech being allowed to lawlessly lord over the internet and get their grasping hands on all that ad revenue while cheating everyone else downstream.