Slashdot Mirror
CBC Opens ZeD.cbc.ca Code
ivar writes "The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation has open sourced (Apache License 2.0) the code used to build ZeD.cbc.ca. The corresponding TV show (typically consisting of content uploaded by the community) aired the announcement last night (Jan 6_, along with the Canadian broadcast premiere of Revolution OS. It's always heartening to see cool things come from a state run corporation..."
CBC has some really great stuff, it's sad more people don't pay attention...
Since moving to Britian, I've seen how far something like the CBC could go: The BBC.
The BBC kicks serious ass. Wide range of great programming. Really insightful stuff...
http://www.bbc.co.uk
And it's not fear mongering like the American news channels. (and yes, we got plenty of them in Canada...)
I saw this on CBC as well. At first I thought "that's cool", but then I went to the site. All it is is a standard website - there is no great CMS or anything else here. I can't imagine there is much below the HTML here... some simple server-side stuff, but nothing special.
On that note though - I do applaud the idea. All company websites' code should be Open Sourced under a free license IMO. After all, the company is not making revenue by selling that code, so what good is it to them?
I'm surprised the blurb never mentioned the actual show. It was a great documentary on the free software / linux movement. I remember reading about it online every step of the way but it was totally amazing hearing what was happening directly from the people.
You'd probably never catch that kind of open-minded programming on corporate television because it flies in the face of the conventional outlook. My favourite part was seeing Linus bring his two beautiful daughters on stage while RMS was proselytizing.
CBC is not run by the Canadian government. It's FUNDED by the Canadian government.
If the CBC were run by the government they wouldn't send so much time bashing the government. (Sometimes rightfully, sometimes not.)
Personally I think we should cut all their funding since they run advertisements just like any other station.
I caught a bit of this last night. My favourite quote came from Stallman: "Giving the Linus Torvalds Award to the Free Software Foundation is a bit like giving the Han Solo Award to the Rebel Alliance."
I had to track down this quote this morning after hearing it last night.
Oh well, no point in steering now.
Since when did we get states in Canada? did I sleep through that meeting too?
Jojo
"It's always heartening to see cool things come from a state run corporation"
Yes, it is heartening to see my money(tax dollars), run me out of business.
Why is it particularly heartening to see these things come from state run corporations?
Because it shows that the state has taken notice of free software. You're a bit quick to label someone as pro-communist, I think.
Are you sure you're not a little too emotionally invested in the idea of total capitalism?
Nice to see people in general in private and public sector funded groups dishing out the code.
Not that useful? So what.
Its like that ugly tie from your sweet 80 year old Aunt --- its the thought that counts.
ACK
The CBC (a Canadian Crown Corporation) is a large media organization with diverse interests and actors. Internally it is divided into three distinct branches: Television, Radio, and New Media. While there is no official "pro open source" policy at the CBC, there are large numbers of us who promote open source at every opportunity.
.asp and the funds and will do not seem to be present to follow the model of zed in embracing free and open source software. With that said, cbc.ca does use apache/linux servers from akami...
Zed is based in Vancouver and is somewhat independent from the core of CBC's new media efforts, and as a result have had the freedom to do what they've done re: build and release an open source app. Unfortunately a great deal of the cbc.ca content system is based upon microsoft
The next step as others have noted would be for the CBC to join the BBC wrt codec development.
Back in the 80's the CBC FM would just put canned classical music on at late night - no hosts no nothing. Somehow, they completed deviated from their classical/jazz lineup and as an experiment Brave New Waves was born playing alternative music when it was alternative. A wide variety of stuff - Einsturzende Neubauen, Pogues, Butth0le surfers, Skinny Puppy, Jesus Mary Chain... It had a really cool hostess Augusta Le Pay who would munch on pizza while interviewing Laurie Andersen and a pyschic before playing an hour of the sound of fences howling in the wind. Remember this was at a time when alternative music got no air play and on a network known for it's news and playing Vivaldi's 4 seasons every 20 minutes.
Hopefully Zed will be the net version of this with just completely off-the-wall content. I'm not that optimistic - but we'll see. A lot of Brave New Waves success had to do with Augusta's and her producer's skill walking the thin line between quirky and interesting and stupid and dull...
And get over this "state run is crap" stuff (friggin' Enron fanboys...) - the CBC and BBC for that matter do occasionally provide programming that is a counterpoint to for example, Fox's "Who's your Daddy?"...
Anyone care to explain what this is, to those of us too lazy to read the article, and ignorant enough to not already know what it is?
--
The last digit of pi is four.
The CBC recently moved from Real formats to Windows Media formats for streaming audio.
After receiving complaints about the proprietary nature of their formats, they started experimenting with Ogg Vorbis streaming.
This is really encouraging to see the the public service broadcasters 'getting' open source and trying to contribute to the community. If this could take off it could be a great boost to the entire copyleft/open-source ideas.
However I would warn that in the UK the content industry is sharpening its knives over The BBC Creative Archive. I attended a conference given at Westminster Media Forum where the representatives of the content industry where rabid about copyright and patent law and extremely hysterical about 'idea theft' as it was colourfully termed. When they heard about the Creative Archive plan... Phew! Some scary people were there... And they are not impressed with Creative Commons - who were shouted at, verbally attacked and generally given a very very frosty reception...
Strangest contribution (and it was a difficult choice considering the crazy assertions and unsubstantiated nonsense spoken) has to be the Arlene McCarthy MEP linking copyright, patent and 'idea' theft with 'Organised Crime', 'Paedophilia', 'Pornography', 'Terrorism' and 'Paramilitary Organisations'... She was truly loopy, and more worryingly serious!
John Naughton was fantastic castigating the dangers from 'slavish legislaters' (she didn't like that!) and gave a really excellent and balanced presentation calling for caution against listening to only the interests of the media corporations and content industry.
Most scary person (again a difficult choice) was Lavinia Carey, Director of FACT who told us that '65% of people didn't think it was a problem to share stuff' and that 'consumers have to be protected from themselves' and those who didn't were 'gonna get a shock'. To get a feeling for the balanced tone see the campaign to link copyright 'theft' and terrorism... Scary!
---- The Open Source Record Label : : LOCARECORDS.COM
It's too bad ZeD still has "grabby" Terms and Conditions. Basically when you submit work to the ZeD, you're giving the CBC the work to use forever, in any medium, without restriction, for profit, and you're giving CBC the right to license your material to third parties. Canadian submitters even waive their moral rights, which means that the CBC can bastardize the contributor's work with impunity. It's all in the fine print. And we all know how many people read that.
Contibutors don't get paid. The CBC is a for-profit corporation. So if you're submitting, for example, a song to CBC's ZeD TV, just be aware that the CBC can use it as the title track for a new TV show, and never pay a cent in royalties. You're not even guaranteed credit for the work--credit is displayed "where applicable."
Basically for the cost of producing the low-budget ZeD TV, the CBC has built themselves a huge library of content which they can repackage and resell without restriction until the end of time.
Excerpt from ZeD Terms below
===Content may be used by CBC===
By voluntarily submitting or uploading content or material to the website (the "Submission"), you expressly consent to the use by CBC of such Submission on any CBC website, CBC television/radio program, CBC recording, and CBC marketing material or other paraphernalia related to CBC programming. You grant CBC a royalty-free, perpetual, non-exclusive, irrevocable, unrestricted, worldwide license to: (i) use, reproduce, store, modify, make derivative works from, transmit, distribute, publicly perform or display such Submission for any purpose, and (ii) to sublicense to third parties the unrestricted right to exercise any of the foregoing rights. In addition. you agree to: (i) waive all moral rights in any Submission in favour of CBC, (ii) consent to your name, address and e-mail appearing as the contributor of any Submission, where applicable, and to the disclosure and/or display of such information and any other information which appears in or is associated with a Submission, (iii) acknowledge and agree that CBC is not responsible for any loss, damage, or corruption that may occur to your Submission, and (iv) acknowledge and agree that any Submission you provide for display on the Website will be considered non-confidential.
The content is (mostly) available on the rather nifty website; most of the show's content originates from it. Think DeviantART, except for all types of media, and with a TV show that showcases the best of it.
You can enjoy anything with no commercials in it... I live with a Brit.. she can't stand North American tv commercials...and to be honest I constantly wonder why we pay so much for cable that consists of 60% or more commercials.
I am going to hell and I am going to take all of you with me.
Please, don't bring up the BBC, then someone will bring up the fact that everone HAS to buy a TV license if they have a TV
Interestingly enough that is almost the same way CBC receives much of its funding. In Canada, if you want wo have *cable or legal satellite* television you MUST pay a fee to CBC. This fee is hidden in your cable or satellite bill. In return, we get the CBC--by law, all cable and satellite providers in Canada must provide CBC Newsworld, and one channel each of the CBC main network and Radio-Canada (French CBC). I *AM* glad that we don't have that silly license scheme here though.
Then someone with a complete lack of understanding of the way the BBC works, will call it a puppet of the government.
Cant speak for the BBC, but the CBC seems fairly independent of government, and is quite regularly on its case about corruption, etc (they also get a good skewering on "This Hour has 22 Minutes"). I DO have to say that they are far from neutral, and arguably very out-of-touch with Canadian's overall viewpoint editorially. Canada is markedly to the left of the US, but not outright socialist as often the CBC's editorial stance seems to be. Compared to th BBC programming I've seen I'd say the BBC is not nearly as ideologicallly bent as the CBC. And while they are not a puppet of the government, during election time they cover the Liberal and NDP (socialist) party much more favourably than others (Conservative, Greens, separatists, fringe parties).
As far as government puppets go, in Canada they are private media companies--Bell GlobeMedia is owned by a staunchly Liberal family with close ties to high-powered politicians. The "old and stale" Globe and Mail editorials are a good example of mutual backscratching.
Then finally someone will pour scorn on the actual quality of the programming
Much of what the CBC does is crap, and I'm sure the same is true of the BBC too, but it seems (at least here across the pond) we get to see the best of what the BBC has to offer, and even when production values are sometimes low, it is very good entertainment, which is often emulated here (hits like "All in the Family" are Americanised British imports). The CBC has carried such shows before too (Degrassi Junior High had a following around he world, Beachcombers was a bit hokey but still a perennial favourite, The Nature of Things is world-renowned and very long-running). However, finding the treasure amongst the crap that sometimes gets put front-and-centre is sometimes frustrating.
The CBC *is* too overlooked, and there is quality stuff on there, but it has incompetent management. Their biggest hits never seem to air on the same day and time from week to week. They are too often pre-empted for special presentations or sports events or whatever reason they can come up with to move things around. Furthermore they have no real direction. On one hand they try to meet some kind of official mandate and be like the BBC or PBS, and on the other hand they are driven to fill air time with American movie features and revenue-generating commercials and Canadian-produced content that emulate American formulae.
There has to be a corporate-wide shake-up at CBC to allow for more innovation. They can't be both the BBC and ABC. Furhtermore, private networks are starting to make some really good, truly Canadian programming that beats what the CBC has come up with for awhile (Check out Corner Gas...also CTV has picked up the latest sequel to the original Degrassi shows at CBC's expense).
I'm not totally against the CBC--as I said they have some good programming and it's nice to see initiatives like the open source one by ZED. However, if taxpayer money is going to fund it, the CBC should offer something different than "just another network" (which they too often try to be). Private enterprise can give me the same old stuff. The CBC will know they are successful when they air something a bit off the wall that becomes enough of a hit t
Leftist bias?
Okay, explain to me where?
Sure, if you compare it to the American Broadcasters the CBC is extremly to the left, but I haven't seen the CBC trott out the NDP on every occasion, blasting the Conservatives and only tolerating the Liberals.
It seems to me that they tend to bash on everybody rather equally.
If you mean tha the CBC is activly critizising(sp?) the big corporations and the government, then you're right. If you think that's wrong by the CBC than you are wrong.
The media (even in the US) is supposed to be the third power, the voice of the people, not the blowhorn for commerical or political interests.
If anything the CBC could use more funding (guranteed like the BBC) to get some more teeth.
I don't want a broadcaster who tells me how great the world and the government is (unless it's about terrorism) instead of telling me what's really going on.
Watch Global News if you want that, they still hope that their "news" helicopter in Toronto will find some car chases along the 401.
If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
Just a small clarification though, the CBC is not 'state-run'....it's 'state-funded'. Subtle but important. A state-run media organization would act as the mouth-piece of the current regime where being state-funded only means you have to lick a few boots at budget time ;-)
-- If it isn't broken, you haven't let my users have a crack at it yet --
Why is it particularly heartening to see these things come from state run corporations?
This is my personal bias, but I figure that as tax payers, if we're paying for the development anyway why not get access to the what we're paying for ?
Another great site is Just Concerts, which features professionally recorded bands from all over the world (though principally Canada) performing live in Canadian venues and studios.
Admittedly, it's not open source, and so a little off topic, but think of it as the equivalent in the music world.
The problem is that it doesn't because it has leftist corporate culture that supresses anything else.
Poppycock. CBCs viewpoint is representative of the community. If you compare *ANY* western media against the pro-private-corporate-consumer viewpoint of the Corporate Media -- AND you agree with this CM -- you will feel CBC is 'leftist'.
Whats special about commercial insterest is commercial interest. In short, dont expect probing investigation into American consumer culture, its crass shallowness, ecological destruction and unsustainable economics from teh CM. Its self-interested, commercial self-censorship.
Do you think CBS is going to investigate General Electric?
Noam Chomsky is an intellectual, a scientist and a academic. If you have issue with his assessments, voice them. If you cant pallet the world he presents, because it conflicts with your dearest dogma, please, spare us the off-hand character assault.
State funded media gives an unfair advantage to one point of view, (in Canada's case the leftist bias of the CBC), at the expense of diversity of views.
All endevour will be tainted with the bias of the players. Bar none. Im not suggesting their is zero bias at the CBC, there probably is. Odds are the bias is derivative of the employees -- university educated intellectuals. Like most of their peers NOT in the CBC, they are *probably* leftists.
However, this doesnt mean that they dont take journalistic responsibility seriously. They certainly take their role more seriously in a traditional sense vs. the players in the "other model" (Corporate Media).
The Corporate Media has the means (no oversight), the motivation (profit) and the mechanics (profit-driven self-centered egos) to be biased to a greater degree (as in greater volume) and towards the goals of Corporate Interest.
State funded media has the means (ombudsman oversight), the motivation (fulfill its neutral mandate), and the mechanics (players with less to personally gain through corruption) to be biased to a smaller degree.
In short, CM is FAR AND AWAY biased and corrupt to support a particular viewpoint. State funded media is designed to tolerate less bias.
Im sorry if the News doesnt reflect your personal viewpoint. Everone is entitled to their opinion, but there is only one set of facts.
...is about as Canadian as Chrysler is American. That is, it is part of a greater corporation formed by a "merger of equals" where one of the equals was just a bit more equal than the other (in this case the Wendy's burger chain). So a significant portion of Wendys-Tim Hortons is Canadian held but the majority is American owned and managed (similar to how Chrysler is mostly German now).
Tim Hortons is still a part of Canadian culture, and relatively unknown in the US (it only has a limited presence in certain regions of the US). In Canada, there are more Tim Hortons stores than McDonalds stores. When I was in Hamilton (where the chain got its start) I can pretty much say without exaggeration that you are in easy walking distance to a Tim Hortons from any imaginable location in that city. If you've watched "Supersize Me" where they plot the McDonalds stores on a map of Manhattan, and add a couple more stores, that is kind of what a map of Hamilton would look like.
The CBC should make a documentary about Tim Hortons (oh wait--they already did, sort of--one on the hockey star and founder of the chain that bears his name). The CBC makes documentaries on nearly everything remotely to do with Canada it seems. Overall they are very good but sometimes it's like "WTF eh?"
Sure, there are specialized companies that do this of course. Most are hosting providers and the like.
Actually, most of us advertise ourselves as IT consultants. Hosting providers tend only to sell packaged software, which isn't quite the right market.
But CNN doesn't make money by selling the code that runs CNN.com. The NY Times doesn't sell the code that runs their site. MSNBC.com doesn't sell their code either.
Actually, I'd say that CNN, NY Tmies and MSNBC are in the minority for owning the copyright of all the code that runs their sites. Probably something like 99% of corporate web sites are run using packaged software with perhaps a few customisations performed by the consultant that installed and configured them for the individual site.
The code behind these types of sites could be immensely useful to someone wanting to start their own fringe-hobby news site.
It would also be immensely useful to any of the above-mentioned company's competitors who happen to currently have a substandard web site and are looking to expand into the online sector, which is probably why they don't give it away for free.
I think you could say that the CBC is centre-left, but not in the same part of the curve as the NDP. The NDP barely factor into discussions and typically the At Issue panel is dismissive of the relevance of that party. Layton is an idiot posturing as most politicians do and that's clear from the CBC reporting.
Have you listened to how much bashing there is of Paul Martin and his group? Didn't Mark Kelly or someone do an investigative piece on Martin's shipping company before the election? -- I didn't hear about the Alberta Liberal candidate but did hear much negative criticism Jean LaPierre.
Though I can't be certain of the source I was fully aware of the Indian couple from BC before election day. I primarily watch CTV and the National for my news - no cable. I must admit that personally I also found the coverage of Layton and his wife annoying, but that might be because they are annoying (and I'm from Toronto).
At least in the past three or so years I've heard Neil MacDonald be blunt with respect to both the Palestinians and Isralis. Her name slips my mind but there is a female correspondent who has often reported from Israel (currently reporting from Sri Lanka).
Don Cherry repeatedly offended the near 30% of Canadians who live in Quebec. That was probably a financial decision and as such should not be linked to the potential bias in a reporter. MacDonald does in fact provide a great deal of detail in his reports.
The Greatest Canadian was a flawed process from the beginning. It cannot be used to make an arbitrary point. Consider that individuals such as Wayne Gretzky (sp) and Don Cherry had to be defended as the greatest Canadian. It was a game on debating skills and the political leanings of the viewership - same with all media. The voting process is flawed, but it's clear that *anyone* could have won.
I ask you to tally the popular vote for all the centre and centre-left candidates (these include conservatives). You'll find that perhaps greater than 70% of Canadians will vote for the Liberals, Block, NDP, and the centrist Conservatives. If a national referendum was held on the greatest Canadian what do you suspect the outcome will be...
22 Minutes is not the National.
Now, I'm not going to open up the can of worms over carpet and firebombing of cities, I'm not even sure where I stand on the issues but I don't see it as being something that shouldn't be looked at. The fact is that carpet and firebombing did kill many people in these cities. People who didn't support the war or Nazies. And as i said, the CBC did stop airing the show http://www.waramps.ca/news/valour/96-04-03.html press release
For Hakim Faqiryar, the other media didn't cover that issue much. Searching the Canadian Newsstand, a newspaper database of most of the newspapers in Canada. only turned up passing references to him. There is one article about it, but that's after the liberals pushed him out of running. Searching for Hakim Faqiryar and Al-Quaida didn't turn up any results. Now Hakim Faqiryar did make anti-jewish comments and that was reported on by media (The Calgary Herald) but not by the CBC. However, CBC did cover (3 paragraph piece) the lawsuit that Hakim Faqiryar launch against Stockwell Day after Mr. Day made comments on this. I couldn't find out way come of the suit.
Neil Macdonald has been removed from the middle east file in 2003. However, he has made the odd comment on Israel /Palestinian. Neil Macdonald is biased. However, the CBC did try to move him to a place where he wouldn't comment much on Israel /Palestinian. Should the CBC fire him? Perhaps.
I'm not a huge fan of Ms. McDonough, but does being rich mean you can't call for greater taxes for rich people? Seems to me they are the best people to call for higher taxes for rich people.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/features/mcdonough.html from cbc, saying father was a millionaire. There are other pieces of McDonough. The rreason, I believe, the CBC doesn't attack the NDP that much is because, it's not a powerful party. It only holds 18 seats out of 302. Why spend time on a party with only 18 seats? Plus, the CBC doesn't attack leaders. At least on their website. I couldn't find a story attacking a leader as a person.
It's "The Greatest Canadian" not the best Canadian. And where all the portrayals "entirely complete and balanced" of course not. It was just a show to raise the profile of some of the Canadians in our past. And wasn't wrong with the voting? The "vote as much as you want'? Anyone, could vote as much as they want.
"However, the CBC completely missed the fact that there was a husband and wife running in adjacent Vancouver-area ridings for the Conservatives, and didn't mention it until they had actually won" Really? http://www.cbc.ca/story/election/national/2004/06/ 29/married_mp040629.html
I'll give you that the CBC can be a bit too "Ontario is the center of Canada" It's also possible they didn't know about the Grewals. After all, Layton is the leader of a federal party. The Grewals are just backbencher MPs, and before the election weren't even MPs.
The CBC is Ontario biased. And maybe more left then right, but it's far from "Very left"
Profit is self-interest. Self interest is bias.
Riigghht... Your argument is clear. It's still total crap. Despite your confusion over meaning of the term "bias" does not mean "self-interest". If you'd bother to check a dictionary, you'd find the most relevant definition is "A preference or an inclination". Check the link for a more complete definition. So think about it? Do human beings all have preferences & inclinations? Yep. Anything magical about working for a state sponsored corp that removes said preferences and inclinations? Nope. Conclusion? I think I've made my point.
People are biased. The news is biased. The CBC is biased. You're biased. I'm biased, and your Aunt Mabel is biased. It's called having a worldview. Get over it. Stop looking for that magical unbiased source because it does not exist!
The way to get the best news is to check a variety of sources. End of story. The problem isn't that the CBC is biased so much as it's biased and government funded. Funding one view is a bad idea because that gives unfair precendence to that one view. Or if you want to indulge the fantasy that there is not editorial direction at the CBC, then it's a bad idea to give funding to a limited subset of views).
. --- If you're looking for free e-mail you won't find it here! http://www.noemailhere.com