The Degeration of Television

By Nicole Larson

Have you turned on the tele-
vision lately? If you are like
the average North American,
yes. Have you flipped rapidly
through the channels and
found that there was
absolutely nothing worth
watching on that same televi-
sion. That even the ‘popular’
programs have the same
recycled plots, boring stereo-
types and annoying charac-
ters.

Television has gone down
hill. It caters to the lowest

Dear Editor,

common denominator and it
seems as if the television
executives have finished
scraping the bottom of the
barrel, scraped the bottom off
the barrel and have moved on
to creating a four foot hole
underneath said barrel. With
the recent “Who wants to
marry a Millionare?” and then
divorce him the next day fias-
co, but still exit with some
lovely parting gifts totalling
thousands of dollars and the
plans that some television
executives have for a show

that follows around real-life
adulterors and then shows
the tapes to their spouses.
Could television get any
lower? I’m sure that they can
but | can’t figure out how. |
mean there are shows that
highlight arrests, follow bad
drivers, featured a man’s
head stuck in the...anal cavity
of an elephant and have
paternity test results revieled
before a live studio audience.

| know that television was
not always like this. | will
grant you that a certain

Letters

amount of sex and violence
has always been shown on
television, but never before in
media history has a medium
become so invasive.
Television is breaking new
ground by broadcasting real
life drama, who didn’t see the
live coverage of Columbine
Highschool, during its crisis?
Television has even started to

create real life drama, “Who —

wants to marry a millionare?”,
or “Blind Date” or “Change of
Heart.” Television has moved
out of the studio and into the

street.

There has to be someone
watching these programs or
they wouldn’t still be pro-
duced. But why? Why watch
an interview with a woman in
love with zoo animals by
Jerry Springer? Does it make
you feel more normal? Or if
you too love zoo animals
does it make you feel less
alone?

Many apple growers, who grow traditional varieties, such as Macintosh and Delicious apples, complain the BC. governments’ 27 million is for maintaining
apple growers who replant, but nothing for growers like them. They now want the BC. Premier to appoint someone to assess how effectively the BC. govern-
ment has responded to the orchardists’ crisis.

In holding the BC. government fully accountable for alleged lack of help and for not resolving their financial problems, their position and complaints are unrea-

sonable and misleading.

Where is the common sense to only hold the BC. government accountable, but not he federal government? Especially, when the federal government can pro-
vide more help to farmers than any province can and without adding costs to tax payers.

Provinces can only help farmers by raising taxes or by borrowing, whereas, the federal government can help farmers immediately by;
1. Terminating Mulroney’s Free Trade and NAFTA agreements because they forbid subsidies
2. Using some of its 2.9 billion surplus due to our taxation from GST etc.

3. stop phasing out provincial transfer payments and increase them.

4. using its constitutional rights to print money and distribute it directly as subsidies or low interest loans. This would not raise taxes, provided this new and
old existing money combined does not exceed the Gross Nation Product of Canada. Also, this would not increase our national debt, because the basis of our
national debt is exclusive bank interest charges, which can be solved by using the Bank of Canada to bypass private banks in distributing this money.

Growers demanded a one time 11 million cash bailout. However, BC. agricultural minister Corky Evans told them he can’t offer them an ad hoc payment
because the subsidy contravenes international rules and agreements. Why harass Evans and BC. government? They didn’t sign Free Trade and NAFTA
which prevents subsidies. Brian Mulroney signed Free Trade and initiated NAFTA. And Jean Cretien promised to renegotiate or terminate NAFTA but instead

signed it.

So why aren’t traditional orchardists giving Chretien an ultimatum to either terminate Free Trade and NAFTA, so they can have the 11 million subsidy, or
resign? Governments in Europe provide farmers up to 56% subsidies and USA farmers receive 35%. To this some growers said, “We're left in the open.’
“Corky is well aware of the trade imbalance.” Since this is an international matter, why hold Corky or BC. government accountable, while the Chretien govern-

ment fails to act?

Many traditional apple growers say the world suffers from an over supply of apples and that we have and oversupply here due to ALR land-use restriction.
This is misleading. How can there be an oversupply of apples here and around the world when the works population is multiplying and many cannot afford

apples.

The problem is increasing poverty and lack of purchasing power due to inherent defects in the market system, which causes concentration and unequal dis-
tribution of wealth, sustained by current neo-classical economics and adopted by Chretien government.

Many tradition orchardists state arbitrary land-use restriction imposed by the ALR take orchardists business flexibility away. Wrong, the ALR has flexibility as
long as farmers raise agricultural products.

It is time the traditional apple farmers stopped barking up the wrong tree provincially. They must hold the negligent Chretien government fully accountable for
its injustice to them and all small Canadian farmers and for no reai federal policy spot the epidemic of dying Canadian family farms across Canada.

Sincerely R. Cichocki