Us Canadian Magazine Dispute Case Study

To what extent do you think the U.S.-Canadian magazine dispute was motivated by genuine desires to protect Canadian culture?

If we should stay to official documentation, we have to conclude that the U.S.-Canadian magazine dispute was motivated by genuine desires to protect Canadian culture. In fact, Canadian Government declared that the magazine industry is “an important touchstone of Canadian National Identity" and indicated it as the only Canadian national press (The LEVIN Institute, n.d., p. 17). Considerations about the diffusion and the popularity of Canadian magazines, or the preferences of Canadian people are inappropriate when the purpose is to preserve tradition and culture. Of course, people have the right to choose what to read,

Culture and identity defence is just a good excuse not to break internatioal deals, and not to be accountable for a protectionist politic. Of course, I think that there are many situations where the defence of culture and identity could motivate some form of protectionism and resistence to globalization, but I'm pretty sure that when these situations are not linked with strong political or economic interests, they count nothing for any government. By the way, press is always a sensitive thing and a matter of political interest.

To what extent do you think the government of Canada was pressured to seek to protect its market because of the financial interests of the Canadian magazine industry?

I think that the government of Canada was surely interested of the problem by the Canadian magazine industry, but I don't think that the financial interests of this industry could have been determinant in a question which dragged on for years since 1920. Also, because 89 percent of magazines sold in Canada are produced by foreign industries (The LEVIN Institute, n.d.), I think that foreign (mostly Americans) magazine industries, with their economic weight, could have greater impact than the local

In democracy there's nothing like the concept of an "implicit vote". An explicit question should be posed to Canadian people, if we want to understand their opinion about protecting Canadian culture in the form of magazines. Then, in a democratic country, Canadians' opinions should be translated into laws.

As for me, I think that Canadians should be free to choose what to buy, but not free to cast a vote for abolishing minorities, instead. Also, I think that the government should identify and protect identity, culture, and traditions when these are valuable.

Is it fair to levy extra taxes against foreign magazines—which have the effect of forcing Canadian purchasers of foreign magazines to subsidize local publications?

I don't think that there's anything fair in commerce or trade: it's always a matter of convenience. I know that the WTO ruled in favor of the United States in 1997 against a tax imposed by Canadian government in order to protect local magazines, and I know that it stated that the tax was "discriminatory and unfair to foreign producers" (The LEVIN Institute, n.d., p. 19). But I also know that, since the WTO ruling, Canadian government took many other "fair" additional measures to protect the local magazine industry. So, the debate "fair" or "unfair" is really of little or no interest to