Front Burner - Weekend Listen: How will Canadian film and TV change if streamers don't pay into it?

Episode Date: June 7, 2025

<p>What is Canadian content? And why does it matter? The Canadian Radio and Telecommunications Commission has been hearing very different answers to that question — as they try to come up with new CanCon rules. Commotion's Elamin Abdelmahmoud talks with storyteller Jesse Wente, policy expert Vass Bednar and showrunner Anthony Q Farrell about why getting CanCon right has never been more important.</p><p><br></p><p>Big laughs. Smart takes. Every day. Commotion is where you go for thoughtful and vibrant conversations about all things pop culture. Host Elamin Abdelmahmoud calls on journalists, critics, creators and friends to talk through the biggest arts and entertainment stories of the day, in 30 minutes or less.</p><p><br></p><p>More episodes of Commotion are available at: <a href="https://link.mgln.ai/L1GJWq" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://link.mgln.ai/L1GJWq</a></p>

At Desjardins Insurance, we know that when you own a law firm, your bar for everything is high. That's why our agents go the extra mile to understand your business and provide tailored solutions for all its unique needs. You put your heart into your company, so we put our heart into making sure it's protected. Get insurance that's really big on care. Find an agent today at Desjardins.com slash business coverage. This is a CBC podcast. Hey everybody, Jamie here. So we wanted to share an episode from our friends at commotion this week. For the last two weeks, the Canadian Radio, Television,

and Telecommunications Commission, the CRTC, held hearings to expand their definition of Canadian content or CanCon rules. One big topic of discussion was whether streamers like Netflix or Disney Plus should pay into a Canadian content fund, something every national broadcaster already does. Commotions' Alameen Abdul-Makhmoud had this great conversation with his panel of guests

this week about the future of CanCon and the uphill battle Canadian creators face finding investment. So, have a listen to that now. Honestly it is helpful that in the middle of all these annexation threats from the US, and this rush to figure out what the Canadian identity is right now, the CRTC is literally having hearings about what gets to count as Canadian content. It's a big question, it's the right time to ask it. The group chat is here. Let's go. I'm Alameen Abdul Mahmood and this is commotion.

Okay, I think it's fair to say, safe to say that you've heard of Canadian content, right? Like it's broadcasters in this country have to make room for a certain amount of Canadian content and there are rules in place that govern that. Those rules though can sometimes end up producing some quirky results. Like, not all of Drake's music or Celine Dion's music, for that matter, counts as Canadian content. But Lenny Kravitz's cover of American Woman, that one does count as Canadian content. The TV adaptation of The Hand Made Sale, based on Margaret Atwood's book, shot in Canada, not Canadian content. But CanCon rules are not new.

The world of entertainment has changed a lot though since they were put in place and it has raised some questions. The big question is this one, why do all the big broadcasters in this country, we're talking about like Rogers, Bell, but also CBC, like pay 30% of their revenue into a fund to create Canadian content and then streamers like Netflix don't really have to do that Jesse went he's here vast Bednar is here and Anthony Q. Farrell is here. Hello to all of you. Welcome to the show. Hi I'm Delighted to be resolving just a small matter what gets to count as getting a content with this illustrious panel

Look, that's I'm gonna start with you on this The CRTC just wrapped up these hearings. It took about two weeks of hearings. I mentioned the CanCon rules. It's sort of like, it's CanCon is like shorthand for all these rules that sort of govern what gets to count as getting in content. When you look at this right now, what's wrong with the rules that currently exist?

Why did we even need to look at them in the first place? Well, the reason we needed to look is to kind of play a game of catch up, right? So yes, we've always had debate simmering around the composition and definitions and kind of scorecards that you mentioned, but the broadcasters that you mentioned are licensed under the Broadcasting Act. And there's kind of through public policy, a bit of a social contract there in terms of the duty to kind of reinvest in Canadian productions and help others create content in Canada. And the digital streamers kind of accelerated at a time that they weren't brought into this

regime. So the big question is, do we pull them into the regime that we have? Do we move forward with a new regime or do we carve out and create exceptions for the digital giants? And that's kind of what the fight's all about. Oh, just a small matter. No big deal. No big deal at all. Anthony you're a writer You're a showrunner or you're speaking at these hearings just from your perspective. Why do the rules need to be updated right now?

You look at the industry it's changed a little bit since 1982 Just a Smidge here. I mean, I'm also a member of the Writers Guild of America. We've been on strike three times since we changed this act because of how fast moving our, you know, this industry is. So it's important that we update it for where we are right now and hopefully look towards where we're going so that 43 years from now when we update it again, we won't have as much work to do. So I think it's just a matter of like,

the business is not what it was in 82. Like you, I mean, I'm not, I can't find any more of my VHS tapes. They've been, they've been, I mean, I have some, but I don't know. I got my wedding on a VHS tape, I think. I don't know what else I got.

First of all, 43 years sounds like a mighty long time in terms of just updating, especially for an industry that moves this fast. But also, I think there's this wider context, Jesse, of like, I was turning to you for context here in terms of these questions, but what is the point of having CanCon rules in the first place? Because I think that's something that maybe people don't necessarily spend a lot of time thinking about. So I think that's something that maybe people don't necessarily spend a lot of time thinking about. Well, I mean, the point is to have Canadian culture. Oh, okay.

I think is the determination that we want that, that that might be something that is good to have for ourselves and an admission that if we don't fund it, if we don't actively engage in allowing it to be made, we won't have it in large part because we live next to the single largest content creator in the history of the planet who have industrialized this, like they industrialize all industries to the point where no one can compete with the sheer volume and the mass of their storytelling sector. And so if you look at the history of Canada, it comes in waves. There's right after the post-second world war, we sort of found a lot of institutions.

Also in the 30s, you have the NFB and the CBC sort of become a thing. And that was the first wave of like, we need Canadian culture, so let's have institutions. And then in the 70s and in the 80s, you have these content regulations that are now, well, we have these institutions, but we need artists to actually be able to fulfill them. And so now we're going to require that we have, you know, certainly when it comes to broadcast licensing and what the CRTC oversees, is if you're going to exist and take advantage of the airspace, quite literally, then you also have to contribute

to the growth of Canadian culture, and this is how we've done it. The history of Canadian content is not exactly like Rosie, right, like there is, I think like we sort of have inherited the system, but we maybe believe it to be like, oh, we are all in agreement that this is the thing that we need to do. You know, but like Pierre Junot,

that the Junots are named after him, he was like, you know, are all in agreement that this is the thing that we need to do. You know, but like Pierre Junot, the Junots are named after him. He was a person who introduced the Canadian content system, for example, for music. And not like broadcasters were like, yeah, that's fine. We'll make sure we play 30% Canadian music. Broadcasters actually fought that for a little while. It just ended up being a kind of a hard system to undo in the end. Jesse, can you talk about whether Canadian content as a protectionist system, as a system that says,

we're gonna preserve this amount of space to remind us of who we are. Do you see that as one of our successes? Has it actually kind of worked out okay? I mean, up until recently, I would say overwhelmingly yes. Look at the fact that we have a Canadian music industry and we have Canadian music stars, like you, we don't get the tragically hip without Canadian content regulations.

Like it's, if you just look at that particular band, they were huge in Canada and, and until the end played relatively small venues in America. That's entirely because they were awesome, but also because we had Canadian content regulations that meant the big rock stations were looking for rock, Canadian rock acts to play, and there you have it. So I think on music and for a long,

for some time on TV and movies, I think it's been very effective and I think it has worked. And we should recognize that it's worked, but also recognize that these things need to be updated. And to your point, Elamin, private broadcasters, those that have existed to make money off Canadian content have fought against these regulations forever.

Like that has been their stance to this day, whether they are owned and operated in Canada or outside of Canada. Like the private broadcasters always resisted this because of the perception that Canadian cultural acts or artists do not actually meet the market demands. Yeah, I don't want anyone to get the impression that like private broadcasters are like,

we want to play this much tragically. But at first, they're like, we'd rather keep playing ACDC. But it's just a matter of actually being able to create space for things that are made in this country. Fast, I want to give people some context here. So I just want to share a bit of this context here. If we look at the current rules,

large English language broadcasters have to contribute 30% of their revenue. It's a pretty significant chunk back into Canadian broadcasting, programming. Last year, the CRTC ordered that streaming services like Netflix, like Disney, like Amazon, they have to pay 5% of their annual Canadian revenues to make Canadian content, like right here. So it's definitely not an even playing field by any stretch. The big streamers canceled their appearances of this hearing. Instead, an umbrella group showed up called Motion Picture Association

Canada spoke on their behalf. They're arguing the streamers shouldn't be expected to sort of fulfill the same responsibilities as the large broadcasters. Can you just summarize their position for us? Why, what are they saying? Sure. I mean, look, this is a conversation about power and independence, and as Jesse was saying, private interests and the public interest not always being matched up. What this group is saying and arguing as an umbrella organization is that, you know, they're sort of saying, hold the phone.

We do invest in Canadian cultural productions on our own terms. We've been creating jobs through the investments we make. So they're exhibiting a preference for, we do want to deploy dollars into the Canadian broader ecosystem, but we want to do it kind of on our terms at our discretion. And we don't want to be compelled to kind of, you know, come into the system. There's also an element of kind of the algorithmic control, right?

The discoverability. So it's not just what's made, but what people can find and how they find it. So that's going to be a future hearing at the CRTC. There's actually some more kind of really incredible hearings coming up. But back to the motion picture association, they're also saying, yeah, you know, we're, we're global, we're digital. This is just so different than kind of what you're used to that we shouldn't be kind of brought into the system.

But I really think you do have to look at the message that's been sent by not even indulging our parliamentary processes and attending the hearings and what that says. And you know, we're in a different cultural moment. And if we're not ready as Canadians, forget redefining Cancon. It's really tough. And I was like kind of scared when you started talking about it, that you would come to me first. I was like, oh no. If we don't assert and reassert our digital cultural sovereignty, then we're just gonna barely be renting space on other people's platforms and not even making stuff.

Like, no, really, really. Okay, Q, I wanna get you in on this in just a moment. But just to give people maybe an example to wrap your head around. You know, you go to Disney Plus, which is the broadcasters. That's where you go all the time. Where I go all the time, but also they carry Shogun, right? Shogun wins a historic amount of Emmys.

That show is shot in this country, it's shot here in Canada. The streer position, if I understand it correctly, is saying like, we'll invest in your industry on our own terms, which is to say, we'll shoot our shows here but we won't necessarily make a show that is specifically Canadian or that money will have necessarily have to stay in Canada. What's on the line of these big streamers don't buy into the same level that the broadcasters are buying? Like in terms of just like if they don't pay an equal share what's on the line here?

Higher barriers to entry for artists and creators, little to no investment in the next generation of content creators, a loss of voices and diversity and perspectives and richness. It's not just paying into the system, it's also again about control. You use the word protectionist and that's tough, I think, because it sounds so defensive,

like we're always kind of pushing others away. And I do think it's more about being assertive and recognizing that there's a role for the state to make these markets more free and fair and tailor them in a way that works for Canada and is aligned with our values and what we care about, and what we care about for future generations. So a lot is at stake, but you know, it's going to be kind of dressed up and dressed out. It's going to be framed like past hearings were, which is, oh, the government's slow and clunky and doesn't understand this wonderful digital stuff. So I'm sorry, that's why I also come back to the element of control and our algorithmic kind of sovereignty in our everyday lives, because I can't program my discoverability. I can't say on Netflix or on YouTube,

you know, I'd like to see either a certain proportion of Canadian content or show me more films made by women. You know, you can, you're always dependent on their categorizations and kind of what they're surfacing. So it really is about us versus digital forces and kind of a data-driven context where we're losing power, not just as Canadians, but we're losing power as consumers too, right?

So this is the production element, but in terms of our ability to choose what we enjoy and what we support with our time and attention and our money, that's at risk too. Yeah. I hear you when you say that that's a reaction to the idea of the word protectionist, right? It sort of scans us that way, scans us defensively. But I'm not sure that it is. I think sometimes it can be quite an assertive position to say, no, no, no, like we deserve some space here.

How much space that is, that's sort of up to us to sort of argue about. Can you let me ask you this? The streamers already have so much power here. What is their stance in this position, the stance that Vast just outlined, what does their stance tell you right now? Pardon the cusp, but that's malarkey

That's not a custom but Malarkey, sir. Okay. That's a Canadian term It's let me just take a sip of my maple syrup So here's the thing right they're not the streamers are not here in Canada because they want to make Canada a better place. They're here because we're convenient. They're here because we're good at what we do. They're here because we are right beside America. Like, you know, like Jess was saying, like we are, they are the biggest exporter of, of content. We understand them.

We can make shows similar to them. We can make, can do a lot of those things for less of a price tag, right? They're not, so they're here because we're good for them. So for them to say like, we're already putting money into the system. That yeah, you're doing that because it's helpful to you. Like what you should be doing is you are, you've got to play like everyone else. Like, and I'm saying this is, I have Disney Plus, I have nothing, it's a TV writer.

I also have cable. So my Roger subscription, money goes back into the system. My Netflix subscription, no money goes back into the system. And if people are cutting Canadian cable and just going to American streamers, how are we going to protect Canadian artists to make future shows? And if they're saying, well, we're already given a bunch of, you know, we're given all

the key grips and we're given all the service production people money, cool, but how are we going to be able to make more Canadian content unless we're actually filling back up those coffers, right? So what they're asking for is not a lot considering, I think they were suggesting 5% where other Canadian broadcasters are getting, are having to give 30. Yeah.

That's not a lot. You're already making money. It's not like we're taking money you don't have. It's based on your revenue, right? So I personally think, I think I understand the fight because these big corporations are always going to be trying to figure out ways to keep their profits as high as possible. So I understand the fight and I understand where they're coming from. But I also feel like I hope the CRTC is seeing all this and, you know, we'll get a we'll get a ruling hopefully, you know, in the next year or so.

And then we'll get, you know then we'll be able to build our business back up because it has been a struggle with the Canadian industry over the last few years especially. So it'll be good to be able to get people working again. At Desjardins Insurance, we put the care in taking care of business, your business to be exact. Our agents take the time to understand your company so you get the right coverage at the right price. Whether you rent out your building, represent a condo corporation,

or own a cleaning company, we make insurance easy to understand, so you can focus on the big stuff, like your small business. Get insurance that's really big on care. Find an agent today at Desjardins.com slash business coverage. Fighting for care doesn't stop when all the votes are counted. No, fighting for care is an ongoing commitment to Canadians. It's time to turn campaign promises into health care policy that delivers better outcomes for patients, doctors and communities.

It's time to fix the system with real solutions to real healthcare challenges. The Canadian Medical Association is ready to help you get it done. Learn more at cma.ca slash fighting for care. I can't believe that this is a story that makes Q cuss on the radio and say the word malarkey. My name is Elamina. This is Kamotion. Faz Bednar is here. Anthony Kufarel is here, Jesse Wente is here. We're talking about CanCon rules and they're about to change, so how could that affect you as a listener? I think that's really important to sort of highlight here.

Jesse, right now, a show or a movie qualifies as CanCon based on who makes it and where it's made. That's interesting to me because we're sitting sitting a couple days after The Apprentice, the Donald Trump movie, won best picture at the Canadian Screen Awards. Famously, Donald Trump, not Canadian. But very few of the cast are. You have someone like Jeremy Strong, you have someone like Sebastian Stan. That's a movie by Daniel Berkman, Canadian producer. That movie is made in conjunction with a Canadian production company,

so it becomes a Canadian picture. One of the suggestions floated was that to qualify as CanCon, a show would have to look and feel distinctly Canadian. I don't know what that means. What are the pros and cons of expanding the definition to consider the Canadian-ness of a story here? And maybe help us out with like maybe an example that is like a show that is technically CanCon,

but doesn't maybe feel like it. What comes to mind for you? Boy, I'll have to think about that last part for a second, Elamin. But in terms of adding sort of Canadian-ness, I like you would struggle to understand what exactly that is. I mean, beyond like Anne of Green Gables, as maybe the most

persistent sort of Canadian myth sort of thing, storytelling. Like beyond that, I don't know what else that would be other than, you know, I flash back to Score the Hockey Musical as like, you know, like infusing that sort of thing. My approach to this has always been I care much less about the what is being made and like the storytelling and I care much more about the who. And I come from this, as you know, Elamin and the audience does, for years I've been advocating for Indigenous people to have space. And it wasn't so that they could tell a specific story. That wasn't the point, because I don't know what stories indigenous storytellers are going to want to tell.

And I want them to have freedom. This is the point, the freedom to tell whatever that looks like for them, but for that to be considered. And so for me, it's, I think, you know, to your point, we've always the way the point system has worked for at least for, and this is true actually in music too, they would classify above the line talent. And so for folks, what that means is the folks who make the creative decisions, basically, the producer, the writer, the songwriter, the artist, it matters less where, although in music it does very much matter where it was recorded, but it doesn't so much matter for that on film and TV. So we've famously made American movies like X-Men movies and all of this stuff in Canada for decades and decades.

And to the point, I think this always gets back to what do we, what does Canadians, what do Canadians want? Because the choice point is ultimately, you could just become a service sector for America, which is what they do with like China when it comes to their manufacturing, right? They outsource all the making of the thing to a different country, but all the money returns to America. And we have that, like we already have a significant amount of the sector that already does that, we call service productions to the US.

But what you don't necessarily get out of that is our own stories. And that's ultimately what we're asking for. In terms of a show that might seem Canadian, I'm struggling to think of one that would seem Canadian and isn't, because that's usually not the way, the way is usually the reverse of the way around, is how to make Canada look, like the one I always laugh at,

and I remember reviewing this on the air, was the Jackie Chan movie, Rumble in the Bronx, which I said is a lot more like Rumble in Stanley Park. The entire thing is shot in Vancouver. That's mostly been the story of those cross-border projects. Yeah. I kind of like this too, though, because this is a moment for discoverability of our own, understanding that system, right? It's an imperfect system, oft criticized, but when you do sit down and look at it, it has some flexibility built in. The

scorecard, the kind of six out of 10, it's like you're an undergrad, right? If you got to see, you're good, move on. You're seeing it. Can eat enough. But what an opportunity for us to help people understand how that system is right now, because there's a lot of delight I'm having in hearing about the Jackie Chan film or understanding some of those differences and also what we value. We're talking about people a lot of the time now,

right? People, jobs, their creativity. What else is at stake? Do you want to consume culture in the future that is computationally generated? Do you want systems to be trained on what we watch and consume? Do you want to see a human actor or a computer actor? Do you want to hear a human voice or a computer voice? Do you want to see a Canadian landscape or a digital background? I Worry that I am sounding like a weird Cassandra or Vassandra. Yeah

Yeah, but like these are the conversations that have been more sophisticated in the US I worry that I am sounding like a weird Cassandra or Vassandra. Yeah. But like these are the conversations that have been more sophisticated in the US in one of your many guilds, Anthony, than we've had here in Canada. And that's what we need to stand up against and protect our cultural future in Canada. Two things. One, Cassandra dies in that story. So I don't wish that for you, for telling the truth. Spoiler.

Just to put that on the table. That's one, and then number two, Anthony, what comes to mind for me as I hear all this is that again at the Canadian Screen Awards, the TV show that won best drama was in fact Law and Order Toronto, right? Which is an interesting question is to say, hey, does this look and feel Canadian?

Because it's a format that was perfected and developed in the United States. And then we've adapted it to some of our headlines that we're dealing with here. So what do you make of that idea, that a story should somehow feel distinctly Canadian? What does that mean to you? So I was actually a part of the workshops

the CRTC was holding when they were talking about what's Canadian content. So I've been having this conversation for feels like a year now, even before that actually, but officially for a year. And all I have to say is like, just kind of like what Jesse said, who is making it is what's important to me. If a Canadian is creating it and behind is the creative force of the series, is producing the series, I think is Canadian. To tell someone in Halifax that, you know, what you're doing is specifically Canadian,

but what someone in Burnaby is doing is, well, it's different than what's going on in Halifax, so that can't be Canadian, too. Canada is so diverse. There are so many things that are Canadian to try and defy. You would, a book even bigger than any dictionary to define what Canada is, right? Because there are so many people and it's growing. Anytime you people come here, you are Canadian. You, your voice is now Canadian. So it's about where the stories are coming from.

Who's telling these stories? If you're Canadian, that's Canadian content. So that's kind of where I'm coming from with it. I, I, it's hard to define it anyway. And also I'll just point out for, you know, for a lot of people when you say something looks Canadian, that doesn't always mean a positive thing. They don't mean it can be a stereotype. Yeah. Yeah.

So it's one of those things where it's like why would you like we don't think we need to Define that part of it. I think you know if a show looks like if a show looks like sort of awesome great If a show looks like like Popularity papers awesome great. Those are both Canadian shows. They're trying to reach different audiences their Visual aesthetic is tied to the type of show that it is. Both Canadian, both great. I don't think we... I think trying to define that is just, we're just gonna be talking in circles like I kind of am right now. What I appreciate about that framing is that it's a framing

at the end of the day tethered to sovereignty, right? Because it's not about, you know, it's not about the maple syrup-ness of the story. It's not about it being score, the hockey musical. It's about being like, did a Canadian, you know, it's not about the maple syrup-ness of the story. It's not about it being score, the hockey musical. It's about being like, did a Canadian make the decision to tell the story? And we're talking about a certain level of creative decisions that went into it. Which is to say, maybe that's the argument for why The Apprentice, the Donald Trump movie, can be counted as a Canadian film because we had a producer who was a Canadian producer

who made the creative decisions that made some of the creative decisions that are involved in the story. Okay that's just for me it's not it's not too much of a leap this reminds me a little bit of the conversations that Sweden is trying to have right now. Like so like so Sweden's sort of going through this idea of like hey what gets to count as Swedish culture? I don't know what that is and I don't get to define it. I go like, IKEA, question mark? But do you think this current geopolitical moment, when you sort of think about all the pressures

that we're under from Donald Trump, the 51st state rhetoric, do you think that requires us to sort of have a similar national conversation in this country? I think that could be very productive. It'd be very muddled, it'd be very messy, but it could be the right moment. I mean, we also have government to help facilitate tough conversations. Earlier when Anthony was mentioning, you know, it's about people and putting people first when we regulate products.

Sorry, don't fall asleep, but you know, the competition bureau, we do have rules around like made in Canada product of Canada. And there's been a lot of discoverability and kind of or discovery rather where people are kind of into understanding those nuances. And maybe moving forward, there's an opportunity to introduce more of a tiered system or something that is a standard we want to hold, you know, in higher regard to say that it has a particular level on the scorecard or that again, from a people first perspective, I don't have a

way to define that, but if we want to kind of recalibrate the system, if we're truly hearing from Canadians that it seems kind of frumpy or outdated or from industry that it's not working as well as it could be, or that people are kind of exploiting, um, its loopholes and we're losing something, then yes, that could be part of a conversation.

We do have a prime minister who wrote a book called Values about values-based governance. I find myself flipping through it quite a bit, kind of looking for clues and waiting for this government to actually assert more of a vision around what does that mean beyond some of these initial trade conversations that are more kind of concrete and immediate. Yeah, on the one hand, I thought they'd be sort of more explicit about that. On the other hand, it's been five minutes, right? So maybe it'll... Yes.

Yeah. No, no, I'm with you. That might still... I'm still in my optimistic phase and I'm willing for it to go all summer. That's very, very generous of you. Jesse, it's not lost on me, but just to take it back to what we were saying at the start, is that if this conversation was happening a year ago, the CRTC hearings would be covered by some people, we would be covering it on the show, we'd be interested in this conversation,

but it wouldn't have implications, I don't think, for the national identity, or at least I don't think people would be necessarily framing it in that way. But since the anxiety that has kind of like entered the national consciousness about like what is Canadian and how do we protect what is Canadian, suddenly these hearings and these conversations have seemed to have anyway, much higher, even maybe existential kind of stakes. How often do you think we engage with this question of like, hey, who are we as a nation? Do you think that question is like relatively awake in us often? Or is

this moment an invitation to go, boy, have we been asleep at the wheel for a little while? Well perhaps not surprisingly, I'll probably say the latter. I think it's mostly, and not to say for everyone, but I think in general, Canadians have been satisfied with the national story and identity for a while. And there's been moments where some of us have been trying to unsettle that, that comfortableness to try to move that identity a bit. I think, so I think it's really, for folks like me, and I think, so I think we, it's really for folks like me,

and I think the rest of the panel, like I'm so thrilled that we have, we're gonna have this conversation because it does seem like some of us are engaged in at an ongoing basis, but not on a math scale where you actually have radio shows and people are actually interested in things like CRTC hearings.

And I think to me, it actually touches on one of the things that goes unsaid, even as we've had this conversation, but it's maybe easier to understand again, from someone who advocates for voices that are not in the mainstream to be in the mainstream. Which is I advocate for that because I think there is value and they have a perspective that does not exist in that space. And what I would say to Canadians is do you think Canadians have a perspective that is valuable and distinct and useful? Then if you do, if you're, if anyone who hears that is nodding, then you want

Canadian content, like we need to have fostered that otherwise Otherwise I agree entirely with Vast. Like I think, and maybe again, this comes from my perspective. When you have folks that are willing to erode your culture, you have folks that are willing to erode your borders and your sovereignty, like that is just how this works and for Canadians, it may be the first time they're confronting us from a different perspective, but this is how this works, right? They come for your language and they come for your culture and they will tell you that it, it's all good. They will even tell you, you get to keep it, but that is not how this will work.

Right. And so you have to defend it and you have to ask your leaders to defend it. I'm a big believer that one of the, maybe the most important roles of government is to protect us, the people, particularly against forces that are beyond us that they can deal with. So the protectionist is for us, the humans that live here, and they should be protecting us more from industry than they have. And this is one area where we don't know, we can't quantify the value of the data that these companies are taking out of Canada. I would like the

government to try to value that and try to retrieve some of that like they would if these folks came for the oil or the forests. We have very big regulations around how we monitor those things and what foreign companies can do. Like our existence and activity on these platforms to me is as valuable as those natural resources. And we should not be allowing companies to come and strip mine us of that. And we don't have a window on those sorts of things. So if you think Canadians have a valuable perspective, then we need to have ways to share that with the world. And we have to recognize that we are,

from a people's perspective, small, and that in order to have our voice heard, and I say this again from my perspective, when you are a small community and you want your voice to be heard, you have to press levers and take moves where your voice breaks through. And that should be what Canada should be seeking to do while we hold pressures that threaten those things, while the government holds those at bay. I think Canadians should, and Canadians have struggled with this in my lifetime, is respecting yourselves and the value that you bring and the things that you create. They're as good and as valuable as anything that has an American stamp on it. And we should celebrate that much more often than we do.

And I'm not saying in a nationalist way, I'm just saying we are also humans on this ball floating through earth, and we have the same value. And maybe, in fact, to end, I would say, maybe our values are what the world needs in this moment. Because if we want that culture, we can also see where that culture is going. And I would hope Canadians, certainly, I know Anishinaabe, see that and go, yeah, we're not that interested in that. This is why we want to tell other stories. Yeah. I'll tell you this, Kiu. Last week, I saw Paul Simon, and Paul Simon opened his set with America. And he told the story about how, you know, this is a song about two kids who set off

looking for the America that they've been promised as they grew up. And then Paul Simon sort of ends the story with, like, I seem to have found it here in Canada. And there was applause to this and I was like, boy, I think I'm a little bit troubled by some of that, you know, because no, Paul, these seem to be actually kind of distinctly Canadian values

that maybe are eroded where you are currently living. But there was like this big sort of like, you know, round of applause for that. And I understand where that sentiment comes from. But let me tell you the story. I was talking to a journalist let me tell you the story. I was talking to a journalist who was telling me the story about how during the uproar

of negotiating NAFTA and how intense that negotiation was, there was all kinds of like, hey, we have to protect all these different Canadian industries. And at the end of the day, they ended up being a part of NAFTA. So they opened up for competition for trading with the United States. And one of the questions that journalists were posing at the time was like, hey, is Canadian

culture going to be for sale as a part of NAFTA? And repeatedly they were told Canadian culture is not for sale. And then they'll go, well, are Canadian culture production businesses for sale then? Or like, are they available to also be taken over? And then they were like, well, yeah, that's a different thing, you know? Like the they were like, well, yeah, that's a different thing, you know? The idea of culture as a business, that's a different thing. And I'm looking at this and I'm seeing the same thing play out, you know, 30 years, 37 odd years later. There's something interesting to me about the recurring echoes of history here. Do you think Canadian culture has been for sale for some time, Q? Or are we doing okay kind of protecting ourselves, do you think? I think we're doing okay protecting ourselves, but I think also like I'm okay selling my wares to the world. Are you, are they paying?

I'm happy, I'm happy to spread some Canadian culture around the world and get some, get some dollars in my pocket. Like for me, when I look at it like that, I feel like you know, I Feel like yes, we're making content one of the things one of the ways Production companies and creatives and one of the ways we make money Doing Canadian TV is by selling it internationally because you know, there's we got like 40 million of us here is I don't know eight billion other people that might wanna nationally because you know, there's, we got like 40 million of us here is, I know, 8 billion of the people that might want to, you know, or by the Schitt's Creek. Let's yeah, like let's, let's find some other people too. So I, I, I don't

want Canadian culture to be adjusted by outside, you know, but people to tell us what our Canadian culture is. Like we, we're here. We know what our Canadian culture is. We, it's different with everybody. Everyone's got their own definition of it. And I think that's all well and good. And when we put that on, on screen or on wax or on, I don't know what, whatever an MP3 is, whatever, whatever we put it on and we send it out to the world.

I think, yeah, let's, let's do that. And let's, let's share cause like, you know, we are, we're pretty good at a lot of things. And so why not share that stuff with the world? I'm gonna go have just a quick round of recommendation from each of you about a place where we should get our Canadian content right now. Desi, I'll start with you.

Where should we go to get our Canadian content right now? Well, I mean, I can only say one. Well, then I would say, I'll name the streaming service that I think most Canadians should belong to, but probably don't, which is APTN Lumi. I think it's a great streaming service that we have has lots of great shows on there is the lower T is free, I believe. And then, then if you want to pay, I think it's like five or six, like it's not at all expensive compared to the large

multinationals and there's great stuff on there. Q, same question to you. Where are you going for your Canadian content right now? Oh, there's lots of places guys. There's lots of places. I would say if I have to choose one to get a bunch of stuff on, I think right now there's a lot of interesting stuff on Crave. choose one to get a bunch of stuff on. I think right now there's a lot of interesting stuff on

Crave. I mean, you can see my show Shell. Yeah, lovely episodes for you to watch. There's also like a lot of cool stuff that they just released, like late bloomer season two came out. And I think you can get Children Ruin everything on there as well. I think there's a lot of cool stuff that's on there right now. That's great Canadian content that's also selling very well internationally. I swear to God, I'm not mentioning it just because I work here, but you should get CBC Gem because CBC Gem has North of North, which became the most watched thing on the streaming platform since its launch. That show is incredible, but also there's just so much else

for you to watch on CBC Gem. Last word to you, pal, what do you got? Physical places, live concerts, buying the merch, lower the markup. You want me to go to a place. Independent bookstores, let's go, message me, get an extra ticket, sneak me in, see you guys there. But don't tune out, enjoy and support Canadian culture,

but the second war of trade war is war, and that's a very serious word. war of trade war is war, and that's a very serious word. And yes, everything is up for grabs. The digital sales tax, the digital streaming tax, culture, supply management, all these things that kind of we laugh or scoff at. These are serious conversations that we need to support Canadian politicians on defending Canada. Peak of Sandra right there. I really. I just watched the game. I didn't know what happened to me at the end of that story.

I just watched the game. It was at Stratford. Yes. Stratford. I just watched. Truly. Crow's Nest. Yeah.

Let's go. Crow's Nest. Soul Pepper. Obsidian. We'll just say all the theaters. Just do it. I really appreciate it because now you guys are just naming Canadian theater companies. That's great.

I love this for all of us. Well, they're like, there's so many and I was like, can you tell me some more? Because I was like nervous what my answer would be. And then you named so many different places. There's a hundred. I'm like, oh no. I mean, I think the takeaway is be conscious, right? Be conscious of the stuff that you're consuming and be deliberate about going to a place where Canadian culture is being made. I gotta leave it there, you guys, but I really appreciate your time. You guys are the best. Thank you so much for this. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much for this. Thank you.

Thank you, thank you. Thank you so much. Jesse Wente is currently a storyteller in residence at Toronto Metropolitan University, and while he was not speaking to us in his official capacity today, he's also the chair of the Canada Council for the Arts. Vass Ben-Nar is a policy expert at McMaster. She's also in Toronto. Anthony Cufarrel is a screenwriter and showrunner.

He was at those CRTC hearings making his case for the Writers Guild of Canada. Fun fact about the CRTC, the R does not stand for radio, it stands for radio television. The T stands for telecommunications, who knew? My name is Elamin Abd al-Mahmoud, this show is called Comotion. We'll be back tomorrow. We'd love to see you then. All right, that was an episode from Comotion with my friend Elamin, Alp de la Mound. You can find more episodes of Commotion every weekday wherever you get your podcasts and be sure to follow so you don't miss an episode. For more CBC podcasts, go to cbc.ca slash podcasts.