Offline
After all these years, I find I still have trouble reading through bureaucratese. Which is why I’m doing a bit of a double take when it comes to an announcement calling for comments that was made by the CRTC on Friday.
It’s an overall review and update of certain policies related to Canadian broadcasters. But the one that caught my eye reads “eliminate the daily Canadian content requirement for over-the-air television stations.”
Later in the document, it elaborates.
“In Broadcasting Regulatory Policy 2015-86, the Commission determined that it would maintain the Canadian exhibition requirements for over-the-air television stations only in the evening period. Accordingly, consistent with this policy determination, the Commission proposes to eliminate section 4(6) of the Television Broadcasting Regulations, 1987,which requires licensees to devote at least 55% of the broadcast year to Canadian programs.”
So does this mean that the CRTC is saying Canadian TV stations will no longer have to air any Can Con if they don't want to? Or does it only apply to the daytime broadcast day? If the former, how could the regulatory body responsible for promoting Canadian content – indeed, mandating it on both radio and TV – eliminate the very thing it was supposedly created to help promote?
Not that I watch a lot of content specifically created for Canadian TV. But if my initial interpretation is right, then the Rogers and Bells must be salivating at the idea they’ll no longer need to spend money on making or showing programs made for Canadians.
I can't be reading this right. Or am I? How do you interpret this? And what, if anything, might it mean for the industry?
Offline
For what it's worth, the way I read it is, BDUs will not be forced to air Canadian programming at any percentage. What they will be required to do is contribute to the production of Canadian content.
So it goes to reason that if they must provide funding that they would want to see a return on their investment.
To reasonably expect a return on their investment, the product must be 'good' and be desirable to be aired and sell commercial time. This as opposed to being forced to be aired, good, bad, or just even tolerable in quality of content.
Offline
ROI is an interesting term though. If I can throw some $$$ at a crap Canadian production I may never run, and that allows me to run Jeopardy it's a good investment. Sort of a licensing fee if you will.
This is a bit like the Canadian porn tax credit in the 70's. It didn't have to be good, it just had to exist to get the grant (sic) money.
DeepTracks wrote:
So it goes to reason that if they must provide funding that they would want to see a return on their investment.
Last edited by ig (February 24, 2017 2:54 pm)
Offline
So according to the interpretations above, you have to invest in Canadian programming, but you don't have to show it. Interesting position for the CRTC to take.
It might mean funneling the still mostly cheaply made Canuck productions onto your owned cable outlets, while the major networks, like CTV, Global and City TV, end up being even more like a U.S. network affiliate. I wonder if a show like Bell's current "Cardinal" or its former "Flashpoint" would have ever gotten made if the rules had been in effect then.
Keep in mind this is only soliciting comments about the proposed change, but clearly they're considering it.
If what we think it means turns out to be true, it's certainly an odd move by the supposed protector and promoter of Canadian content. But who knows - maybe they'll eventually remove the Can Con edict from radio, as well. Now that would be fun to contemplate.