Mediacheck

What the Broadcasters Really Want

It's not just about adding new cable fees to help their profits. They also want to block US signals.

By Michael Geist, 24 Nov 2009, TheTyee.ca

tv-silhouette.jpg

If plan gets nod, you could find a blank screen.

Text size:

Rate this:

Login/Register

Related

In the weeks leading to the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission hearing on broadcasting licences, Canadians were inundated with splashy advertising campaigns claiming that new fees for local signals were either a TV tax or would save local television. With all of the major broadcasters and cable companies appearing before the commission, the fee-for-carriage (or value-for-signal) issue unsurprisingly took centre stage at last week's hearing.

Yet those convinced that the broadcaster plan was limited to a new fee were in for a rude awakening. Fee-for-carriage is only part of the story, as broadcasters are also seeking to block U.S. signals, leave some Canadian communities without over-the-air television, and delay the transition to digital television transmission until 2013.

The prospect of blocking U.S. television signals will come as a shock to many, but both CTV and Canwest, Canada's two largest private broadcasters, have asked the CRTC to establish a new program deletion policy.

For many years, Canadian broadcasters have benefited from simultaneous substitution, which allows them to air U.S. programs at the same time as U.S. broadcasters but to substitute their broadcast (complete with advertisements) on both channels. That policy is the reason programs such as House or Desperate Housewives air simultaneously in the U.S. and Canada, creating an important commercial advantage for Canadian broadcasters.

The broadcasters now wish to expand the simultaneous substitution policy with program deletion. It would provide that when a Canadian broadcaster purchases the rights to a U.S. program, they would have the right to air it whenever they choose within a seven-day window. The hook is cable and satellite companies would be required to block the U.S. broadcast of the same program if it did not air simultaneously.

Mom, why is the screen blank?

The proposal, which would lead to millions of Canadians regularly encountering blank screens instead of expected programs, would perversely increase the attractiveness of U.S. programming. Moreover, given the increasing expectation of on-demand program viewing, it seemingly would send more Canadians away from broadcast television to the Internet where there are no blackout messages and most programs are readily available in both legal and illegal forms.

The broadcasters also confirmed some Canadian communities will lose their over-the-air signal as part of the transition from analog to digital. For decades, Canadian broadcasters have used spectrum to transmit over-the-air analog broadcast signals; estimates indicate ten per cent of Canadians still rely on over-the-air TV signals.

The shift to digital transmission brings several advantages including better image and sound quality and more efficient use of spectrum that will open the door to new telecom services. Yet the broadcasters are not willing to invest in digital transmitters for all communities, leaving residents of Kingston, Sudbury, Thunder Bay, and Kelowna (among others) without over-the-air signals.

Moreover, the broadcasters admit they will not be able to complete the transition by the Aug. 31, 2001 deadline. Instead, they now target 2013, four years later than their U.S. counterparts.

A spectrum yearning to be free

A delay necessarily will hold up the availability of new spectrum to be freed-up as part of the transition. This spectrum -- known as the 700 MHz spectrum -- opens up a host of possibilities for new innovation, competitors, and open Internet access. For Canadians anxious for new entrants into the wireless sector, delayed availability of the spectrum will mean more delays in spectrum auctions, keeping the market at a stand-still and costing taxpayers billions of dollars in lost spectrum revenue.

If the plan is fully adopted, Canadians would be left with blacked out broadcasts, lost spectrum revenue, and delayed telecom competition. After a week of hearing from broadcasters and cable companies, it is clear that the hearing is about far more than TV taxes and saving local television. [Tyee]

Michael Geist, whose column runs Tuesdays on The Tyee, holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law. He can reached at mgeist@uottawa.ca or online at www.michaelgeist.ca.

13 Comments:

Login or register to post comments

  • make_up_another...

    2 years ago

    TV Is Dead

    First off, I don't watch TV. I get my news online. I read alot. When I want mindless entertainment, I play COD4 online. I have no use for Cable and Satelite Television Providers.

    If there's one thing that has always irked me, it's the CRTC or Canadian Broadcasters, I don't know which, dictating whether I can watch American TV or not. I have just simply accepted that the Americans do TV better. I can't put my finger on why, but when a show is set in Canada, like a crime drama, It just doesn't seem believable to me. I certainly don't want it rammed down my throat.

    I guess this is why I'm a creature of the internet now, because I am free to shape my own experience, free of the meddlings of the CRTC and Canadian Broadcasters. Perhaps broadcast Television is going to die out as a major commercial enterprise, it just seems like a dinosaur compared to the freedom of the internet.

    Online, I can do email, banking, buy things, read news, post comments, watch YouTube, play COD4, download, get a recipe, learn about economics, all in the same experience. What are the broadcasters offering me? More money for less choice? Piss off. I can get the same thing for a buck on iTunes, without the annoying commercials.

    Perhaps the spectrum occupied by these dying behemoths can be reclaimed for some better purpose by the public.

    Don't get me wrong though. I happen to listen to CBC Radio in the car all the time and at home. I think there is a lot of great programming on. I really quite enjoy radio drama, like Afghanada, and wish there were more of it. I think because drama presented on the radio is a whole other experience, requiring you to use your imagination to set the scene, like reading.

  • teebird150

    2 years ago

    talk about killing off your clientele

    like the record industry, broadcasters just don't get it. as stated above, we dont need CTV et al anymore. Simulcasting is bad enough with their f'ed up late starts but what ever. i'll D/PVR the hell out of your commercials anyway. You wanna shut down the Detroit feed so i can watch shows 3 hours earlier? fine. cable cancelled. thanks for saving me some money guys - i'll get it online.

  • mikev

    2 years ago

    yawn

    "In the weeks leading to the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission hearing on broadcasting licences, Canadians were inundated with splashy advertising campaigns claiming that new fees for local signals were either a TV tax or would save local television."

    Still happening. These huge corporations really believe that the common people will actually pick a side? What a waste of time and money trying to make me even aware of the issue, let alone making me vomit with the "stick with me I'm on your side" message. Like we're all going to march in protest or go around collecting signatures to stop big mean Corporation A from picking on poor little Corporation B, or vice versa. Give me a break. Disgusting display of ineptitude.

    Who even cares about TV anyway? What could be better for society than having every idiot box everywhere suddenly and permanently go dark? I mean I watch it from time to time, some of the programming on some of the channels doesn't actually harm your brain, but it's just a got-some-time-to-kill, nothing-better-to-do option. If I was forced to find something better to do, it would be better for me.

    I pay too much for it as it is, if it goes up at all (and I seriously couldn't possibly care less which corporation's fault it is), I will either cut back on channels or if that's not possible then eliminate it entirely. There is no more blood in this stone for those bloodsuckers, they'd be better off not pushing the issue.

  • RickW

    2 years ago

    The Straw......

    If the above happens, it will be all the excuse I need to unplug.

  • Van Isle

    2 years ago

    If they blocked PBS that

    If they blocked PBS that would really piss me off. Then I would call up a buddy of mine and a few minutes on a computer he could set me up with completely FREE satellite TV from both sides of the border. He did it himself about 3 years ago; all he did is buy 2 different dishes, 2 compatable recievers, and a couple of minutes on the computer and presto, free TV. Movie channels, HBO, you name it, it's there.

  • mmphosis

    2 years ago

    the Internet where there are no blackout messages

    "the Internet where there are no blackout messages and most programs are readily available in both legal and illegal forms."

    http://www.colbertnation.com/

    curl www.comedycentral.com

    Error Page

    An error (302 Moved Temporarily) has occured in response to this request.

    http://www.thecomedynetwork.ca/search/advancedSearchResult.aspx?q=%2bcolbert+%2breport

  • Skywalker

    2 years ago

    Why is it that people don't seem concerned?

    Is it because the sight of Leonard Asper asking for more money because Canwest is broke doesn't strike a chord? It is really hard to think that we should pay more just to get more coverage of the Olympic preparations? The pleading leaves me cold. Now maybe if the news content was more balanced I might be sympathetic to the cause.

  • Fii

    2 years ago

    People still own tvs???

    I haven't watched tv (well, on an actual tv) in over a decade. With sites like "freeonlineepisodes.net" there is no reason to. You have to wait sometimes to watch a show months after it has aired, but who cares. I don't think I could even do it now- wait a week to watch the next episode when I can watch three in a row :) Mind you, this is just my winter thing. Watching tv or being online for long periods of time in the spring/summer months is just silly. Get outside!!

  • Chris Keam

    2 years ago

    not so free internet

    Perhaps broadcast Television is going to die out as a major commercial enterprise, it just seems like a dinosaur compared to the freedom of the internet.

    Buy a set of rabbit ears and TV is free. I don't know of any way one can get a free internet connection to their home.

    Also, the freedom of the Internet is illusory. Think the broadcasters can't start charging for programming. Just wait until TV really does die (unlikely btw) and guess how fast every single program now available for free OTA (over the air) becomes a pay-per-view program.

    Be very, very careful what you wish for.

  • Chris Keam

    2 years ago

    And another thing

    haha

    I know everyone here is no doubt heading over to Youtube to watch uploaded versions of PBS programming such as I, Claudius and Masterpiece Theatre, but the 'most popular' items on Youtube right now are Adam Lambert kisses a boy and Sarah Palin book-signing. Frankly, TV has done more to democratize good, thought-provoking entertainment than the Internet may ever be capable of. Let's give credit where credit is due.

  • make_up_another...

    2 years ago

    YouTube, Pay per View and Net Freedom

    I know it's easy to dismiss YouTube as a collection of cute baby videos and clips of the scandal du jour. This is what I thought too, until I dug a little deeper. I use YouTube to view lectures, documentaries, find reviews of things I'm considering buying, discover rare music, find classic footage of old rock bands, it goes on. I really discovered YouTubes was useful when I realized the vast number of free guitar lessons available, being a guitar player. What a way for independent bands to get their music out there. Or independent film.

    Sure, the 'most popular' videos are going to be the ones that appeal to the lowest common denominator, but there's people getting tens or hundreds of thousands of views for video that has something constructive to offer.

    As far as pay per view goes, I don't think that will emerge as the only option. The American networks seem to have clued in by launching Hulu.com, allowing people to shape their own viewing experience while still supporting the old commercial advertising model. If this is possible then how can the static model of conventional TV programming remain relevant? It seems logical to offer free-with-advertising streams, and the choice of premium, ad free content. It looks like the networks are finally willing to cede control of programming as long as they can protect their revenue from ads.

    It's too bad it isn't supported in Canada.

    I know the Internet isn't the wild west it used to be. We know regulation and control are coming and unlike the TV spectrum, where there is at least a pretense of it belonging to the public, the internet exists on private infrastructure. This makes the coming fight for neutrality more difficult. The future role of the CRTC should be to provide a framework for democratic access to the internet and lay off policing content.

  • Chris Keam

    2 years ago

    Youtube

    Not my intent to suggest all Youtube is junk. Heck, I use it to distribute my own content. But, as mentioned, what's popular isn't necessarily a reflection of the medium, but rather the audience. TV shouldn't necessarily be dismissed as an 'idiot' box IMO and it's interesting to note just how much of the online content is actually re-purposed TV programs.

  • crankypants

    2 years ago

    Time to send a message

    CTV spent big bucks to wrest the Olympics from CBC. Wouldn't it be a shame if as many of us as possible refused to watch the games on either CTV, TSN and Sportsnet. For those that need a fix, you can tune into NBC. The downside is that you will be forced to follow the American athletes, but if a Canadian wins a medal, I'm sure that they will at least show the event.

    You know that they will be tracking the market share they are getting for their investment each day. The advertisers that they lure in will also be tracking the numbers, and I'm sure they won't be too happy if CTV and the others fail to produce the viewership.

    This may be one of the few opportunities that the paying customer actually has some clout and get the attention of money-grubbing SOBs. And you can be certain the message will reverberate throughout the industry, not just CTV.

    • The discussion for this story is closed. No more comments can be added.