this post was submitted on 29 May 2026
268 points (99.6% liked)

Canada

12018 readers
356 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
top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 9488fcea02a9@sh.itjust.works 2 points 29 minutes ago

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.

[–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 39 points 1 day ago

Only American?

Seems like any foreign interest in a nation's media sources would be an issue.

[–] bedwyr@piefed.ca 27 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You see, you're wrong here, for the sake of democracy, and everything that is good and right, hedge funds should be prevented from existing. They are parasites.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 day ago

I mean if we're going to be ambitious, we should ban private capital altogether.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If it were an AM station its ownership structure would have been more scrutinized by the CRTC. But a newspaper conglomerate? Meh.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

That's how it is globally.

Regulating the ise of the public airwaves is a different thing than regulating people who own a printing press

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

That is just not true. France caps non-EU ownership at 20%. Cyprus at 50%. Korea caps foreign ownership at 30%. Australian law gives the government the power to regulate the entire media sector as a "proscribed sensitive sector" when it comes to foreign ownership. Japan has a very similar system, but more restrictive. The UK restricts foreign ownership when foreign state interests are at play.

So, no, it's not how it is globally. There is nothing that says Canada could not adopt a more restrictive system. And given the American threats, I think it absolutely should.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 day ago

You had me at banned from owning Canadian.

[–] GodofLies@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 day ago

Just banned from owning Canadian newspapers? What kind of shortsighted headline is that. Canada has been consistently sold off and facilities shut down over time. And this all happened with the stamp of approval from our federal governments (both Liberal and Conservative).

Look at our natural resources sector for example. We ship raw materials out (lumber, oil, minerals) for cheap and it is sold back to us at a premium. We need to keep these resources here so that people here can turn them into goods that is sold at a higher premium. This elevates our wages and allows our government to collect more taxes which in turn improves public services. Alas, our politicians are not only bought and paid for, but love to stick to their neoliberal ideology. It's all short term gains.