CRTC Ruling No Threat to Big Media
Giants can keep owning papers, TV stations in same markets.
Harper: Convergence-friendly.
Canadians who rely on the CBC for news would have been labouring under a serious illusion about new cross-media ownership limits for several hours on Tuesday. The public broadcaster erroneously reported well into the afternoon that the CRTC had decreed that henceforth "any person or entity can own only two radio stations, television stations or newspapers in a single market." Such a development would have had particular significance for Vancouver, where CanWest Global Communications owns BCTV, both local daily newspapers, and most of the Lower Mainland's non-daily newspapers. CanWest also publishes one of the two national newspapers available locally, the National Post, and enjoys a similar newspaper-television cross-ownership in nearby Victoria.
Several overjoyed bloggers quickly spread news of the outcome of last fall's contentious CRTC "media diversity" hearings, at least as the CBC was reporting it. "It's about time," scolded the Canadian Journalism Project's Deborah Jones, quoting the mistaken CBC report, which has since vanished from the Mother Corp's website. Futurist Tod Maffin similarly trumpeted the tightening of Canada's lax media regulations, which have resulted in some of the highest levels of ownership concentration in the world. "The federal broadcasting regulator is imposing considerably tighter rules on media ownership," concluded Maffin.
Alas, 'twas not meant to be. Instead of restricting owners to two media outlets in radio, television or newspapers, the CRTC had decreed that from now on media owners may hold outlets in only two of the three media. Or, as the owning Asper family is probably singing at CanWest Global headquarters in Winnipeg, with apologies to Meat Loaf: "Two out of three ain't bad." After all, CanWest currently has no radio outlets in Canada since selling its FM jazz station in Winnipeg, although it does own radio in the UK and Turkey. The error was only corrected when the CBC website picked up a Canadian Press story at 1:17 p.m. EST that accurately reported the CRTC edict.
Diversity advocates dismayed
When the limited nature of the CRTC's cross-ownership ban became apparent, outrage emanated from Canadian media unions. "The CRTC is preserving the current unacceptable levels of concentration," said Lise Lareau, president of the Canadian Media Guild, which represents workers at the CBC. "There is a clear trend toward giving media companies and their shareholders what they want."
A spokesman for Canada's largest media union agreed that the CRTC decision "does very little if anything" to limit media concentration in Canada. "It still allows big broadcasters such as CanWest or CTV to own even more media outlets," said Peter Murdoch of the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union. "The commission has taken the smallest step possible to limit local media concentration."
Even the CRTC admitted in a background document accompanying its edict that it is merely cementing the status quo in media cross-ownership. "Given that it considers the Globe and Mail and the National Post to be national newspapers," it read, "the Commission is not aware of any market in Canada where a single person or entity controls all three types of media at this time."
Braver times
The CRTC did enforce a ban on newspaper-television cross-ownership in the early 1980s, which many media critics had been calling to be reinstated. Following the 1981 report of the Royal Commission on Newspapers, the Liberal government of Pierre Trudeau directed the CRTC to deny broadcast licences to newspaper owners. The prohibition was quietly lifted by the Conservative government of Brian Mulroney in the mid-1980s, however, paving the way for three cross-media "convergence" transactions to reshape the country's media landscape in 2000. That year the Globe and Mail partnered with CTV, CanWest Global bought the Southam newspaper chain from Conrad Black, and Quebecor took over the TVA network in Quebec.
After CanWest soon sparked protest by journalists for ordering the Southam dailies to carry "national" editorials written at company headquarters, two federal inquiries urged limits on media ownership. "The potential problems with cross-media ownership are sufficiently severe that the time has come for the federal government to issue a clear and unequivocal policy on this matter," concluded the 2003 Lincoln report on broadcasting policy. "The danger is that too much power can fall into too few hands and it is power without accountability."
The report of a Senate inquiry into Canada's news media issued a similar warning three years later. "The media's right to be free from government interference does not extend," it argued, "to a conclusion that proprietors should be allowed to own an excessive proportion of media holdings in a particular market."
The new Conservative government of Stephen Harper, however, rejected curbing media concentration by limiting cross-ownership. "The government recognizes that convergence has become an essential business strategy for media organizations to stay competitive in a highly competitive and diverse marketplace," read its official response to the Senate report.
Runaway convergence
Since then media consolidation has accelerated in Canada. In 2006, CTVglobemedia paid $1.4 billion for several dozen radio and television stations owned by Toronto-based CHUM Ltd. Last year, CanWest flouted foreign ownership limits by partnering with New York investment bank Goldman Sachs in scooping up a baker's dozen cable television channels from Alliance Atlantis.
The Americans contributed 64 per cent of the $2.3 billion purchase price, far in excess of the 43 per cent allowed by law. The CRTC, however, approved the purchase without restriction last month.
Related Tyee stories:
- Big Media's Big Showdown
Merger mania and the harm to media diversity. Hearings start today. - Canadians Want Media Choice
At this critical moment, we must tell our politicians. - The Media Diversity Movement and The Tyee
Watch the video. Study up. Act.
![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
rjm
16-01-2008
like rumsfeld said...
"we've got over 200 papers in iraq now"
tks,
rjm
Fiat lux
16-01-2008
Could anybody expect the
Could anybody expect the former head of the most vicious corporate lobby outfit with the phoney name of "Canadian Citizens Coalition", advocating the sale of the country, act otherwise?
I wonder how much the directors of Can West are raking in every year? I'm sure Stevie knows.
Ed Deak.
Jeffrey J.
16-01-2008
Democracy Morphs Into Autocracy
Like many progressive Canadian institutions, the CRTC is a mere shadow of its former self. Legislation that promotes the public good is now obsolete and considered "bad form". Legislation that promotes corporate profits is of course welcomed by the elites.
What many don't seem to realize is well documented in Dark Age Ahead by Jane Jacobs. To wit: If concepts like the public good aren't acted on, they can be forgotten. Cultural amnesia sets in, and they never return. Which is exactly how dark ages devolve. We are witnessing just such amnesia. Soon, the CRTC will cease to have any power at all.
Great reporting Tyee.
gaulois
16-01-2008
But the CRTC rulings remain irrelevant
I don't get my news from CanWest newspapers, TV, radio or the Net. So I don't care much if they centralize their news rooms. Junk is junk, whether centralized or not. In any events the CRTC rulings have been irrelevant for quite some times now.
I however still depend on my public broadcaster (French&English) and it irritates me greatly that they are going down the tube. The alternative media (&citizen media) don't have the resources of a public broadcaster and I wish we had a better handle on how the public broadcaster must interwork with small press media, including citizen-medias. Unfortunately, I get the impression that the CRTC mainly caters to conglomerate medias, ensuring that the public broadcaster will not interoperate with tier party, hence better "compete" with the large media conglomerates.
melissak
16-01-2008
But the CRTC has given a boost in other areas . . .
As someone who works in the community media sector (I work for the National Campus and Community Radio Association), we were actually happy to see some of the things they talked about with respect to us. The momentum has been building for a while now, but with this decision, it is encouraging to see the direction that the Commission is going in. I have posted a news story on our website if you want to check out our perspective: www.ncra.ca. (Relevant links included there as well).
G West
16-01-2008
melissa
But the CRTC seems to be coming at this from the following position:
Further to its review, the Commission is satisfied that the broadcasting system currently provides Canadians with a range of news and information programming. For this reason, it reaffirmed its existing common ownership policies governing the number of conventional television and radio stations a person may control in the same market.
I just don't see any evidence on the ground that this is actually the case. Especially in rural areas and places like British Columbia there just isn't what any fair observer could call a 'wide range’ of news and information programming; especially on radio and certainly on the basic TV dial.
As for the specialty channels, with the exception of BBC, which is excellent (but not on free first tier for cable) what we have is not news but a combination of food, real estate and real crime ‘porn’...not exactly news and information programming.
Konrad von Finckelstein's statement is probably true of the situation in the Golden Horseshoe...but anywhere else?
I don't think so.
As for campus radio, puhleeze, what are your latest Nielsen figures?
The phrase needs another adjective - "accessible" and when that's added in, the result is not sanguine at all.
Maurice Cardinal
16-01-2008
well put gaulois ...
I'd like to add ...
citizen journalism's most powerful role is not reporting first run news.
Instead, the power comes from "reporting on mainstream reporting."
Let mainstream media do the expensive legwork, and when they deceive, undermine them - one lie at a time.
This is one of the biggest reasons the CRTC is irrelevant. Who cares what they dictate or do when it is now possible to easily reach a sector of society that is interested in reality and truth?
The reality sector, for want of a better term and something I just this moment made up, does not have to be big. People of like mind simply have to be connected to each other.
When a mainstream media outlet is identified as a liar, and they can't defend themselves because the facts support the accusation, it undermines their advertising revenue.
Follow the money and alert their advertisers.
Mainstream media does not primarily care what the public thinks. They mostly care what their advertisers think, so don't waste your time and energy in a venue that won't give you a big return.
For example, the next time someone tells you they are going buy a gas guzzling SUV, or that they are going to volunteer for the 2010 Olympics, don't simply roll your eyes, or worse get into a heated argument. Maybe they can justify their decision. Instead, ask them politely if they are aware of all the ramifications to our community.
Most importantly though, complain directly to GM, Ford, RBC, HBC, and Rona, and any other companies to which mainstream news media sell advertising, and do it do it in an open (public) letter using a blog.
It's free, very easy and incredibly effective. They key is to make sure the companies buying the advertising know you are blogging about them. When you email everyone in the chain to alert them of your open letter they will have great incentive to carefully reconsider their actions.
All you have to do is email customer service. Don't worry about reaching the president. He or she will get your message if you present your argument properly, and especially when a hundred other reality seekers do likewise.
The reality sector can't expect average people to know what you know, which means, you have to share your knowledge. A silo style, debunking one lie at a time vertical public forum is very effective.
Basically, identify everyone in the chain of deception, but make sure you do it where it consumes the least amount of your resources and where it will have the most impact on their money stream.
News media play a public game. Don't let them lure you onto their field where they hold an advantage.
Force them into your one-on-one court in a public forum.
Large companies hire teams of professionals to manage damage control. Give them something to do - like this
billy pilgrim
16-01-2008
harper
if harper was to dismantle the crtc, i would consider voting conservative for a nanosecond.
melissak
16-01-2008
for G West
All great points. I also disagree with that particular statement from the CRTC. Personally, I think it would be more accurate to say there "could" be, and there is a potential for something more.
However, there is a -direction- that the CRTC is headed, which is beginning to do something about ensuring the existence of our sector, and to strengthen it. My optimism comes from working on this issue for a number of years. From our perspective, this is a first.
It's also a little misleading to talk of ratings. Without going into a huge discussion about that, hopefully it is enough to say that people listen to community radio differently than they do other media. But when you consider the fact that that community radio is pretty well listener supported at this time, and that the sector is growing, I think it becomes clearer about how much support there actually is out there. As well, our sector has a real demonstrated and proven impact in local communities, and that is not something you can measure with numbers.
G West
16-01-2008
Melissa
I hope you're right - and I suppose for a small section of the public you may be. Maybe you’re writing from Toronto…where I do believe there is some effective grassroots community organization going on.
However, being from a long-standing activist background, I'd be a little circumspect about the prospects of campus and community radio having much sticking power except in very small niche 'markets'.
There has been a real effort, for example, in BC, to use community and Co-op radio as a means to reach out to the public about issues like the 'run-of-the- river' hydro sell offs in this province. It's something I think every British Columbian ought to be concerned about and yet, the several excellent programs I've heard on local community radio about the subject appear to have had absolutely NO effect upon public awareness. If I didn’t listen to community radio and I weren’t part of an extensive and active network (and very few people are) I’d know very little about the situation.
That's why I asked the question about ratings - if you can't get a critical mass of people to listen to your broadcasts then I think all the 'encouragement' in the world from the CRTC isn't going to make a difference.
Much as I hate to say it, I think the character and spirit of the institution (the CRTC) has been changed during this (and the previous) administration. I just don't believe that they are acting 'independently' any longer and this current decision NOT to address ownership concentration is simply another brick in the wall. I mean, even some of the comments on this board indicate to me that it is becoming little more than a source of bad jokes about the influence of Quebec politicians on the national scene.
If you can point me to some actual evidence of community-driven change that's occurred because of independent radio I'll be a happy guy.
I hope you can!
Unfortunately, I think we’re all being sold a bill of goods by Finckelstein’s spin....I just don't see the evidence for any other conclusion.