Vivienne Poy's Letter

...on defunding Macleans Magazine can be found here. There are many reasons that handing 1.5 million a year to a product of the deep pocketed Rogers media empire is a bad idea, beyond the magazine's occasional foray into race-baiting. Norman Spector outlines them succinctly here.

And Ms. Poy is right: a magazine can indeed have its funding yanked for publishing offensive material. The protocol for filing a "questionable content complaint" is right there in the applicants guide to the Canada Periodical Fund (although I wrote that post ages ago and some of the links may have changed). Moreover, the provision has been used before, in the case of Catholic Insight Magazine, which was put on a "watch list" for a time to stop the editors from gay-bashing. So, once again, the cries of "censorship" are misplaced. Or at least, if there is censorship involved, it is mandated by the regulations of the fund. Got a problem with that? Lobby to have the regulations changed so that Kenneth Whyte and Co. and publish any filth they want on the taxpayer's dime.

The New Publication Assistance Regime

The Canada Magazine Fund and Publishing Assistance Program have finally been merged to create the Canada Periodical Fund. On the up-side, Macleans and a few other large large circulation magazines will have their subsidies cut by $1,000,000 plus, though they will still get a cheque of some sort. On the downside, and as expected, small circ literary mags will no longer get funding. An analysis of the winners and losers here. A particularly interesting fact:

Agricultural publications are exempt from the $1.5 million cap on grants based on the special contribution they make to Canadian society, according to the government. As far as Masthead can determine, this only affects one publication to date, The Western Producer, which received $1.8 million in PAP subsidy in 2008-2009. The weekly has a paid circulation of 61,000 with offices across western Canada, but is headquartered in Saskatoon, which is represented by Tory MP Maurice Vellakott.

Pigs are in, poetry's out.

Macleans To Lose $1,000,000 In Government Subsidies?

Paul Wells was making callous free market noises over the plight of The Walrus, and I laid into him with my standard "How dare you talk like that when Macleans is riding the government gravy train to the tune of $3,000,000 per year?" What I was referring to was Macleans PAP (Pubications Assistance Program) subsidy, which paid out $2,538,282 to Macleans in 2008. He responded:

"I'm not sure this is a particularly bad time to point any of that out. Incidentally, the current Heritage Minister has announced plans to cut our subsidy by nearly a million, in a naked grab for the bcl vote."

Well, what appears to be happening is that the Canada Periodical Fund, which is due to replace PAP and the Canada Magazine Fund, will

...cap at $1.5 million annually the amount that an individual title can receive. The money saved will be reallocated to small and mid-sized titles, recognizing the economies of scale available for larger titles and the need to support a wide diversity of choice for Canadians.

...which is good. What is not so good is that the Heritage Minister has decided to defund Canadian small-circulation (under 5,000 ) and literary magazines, including On Spec Magazine, which published my first short story ("In The Train Of The King") so many years ago, and which survives on a grand total of $618 government dollars per year.

Macleans is still getting a pretty sweet deal, as far as I'm concerned.