1 of 1- RadioActive
- Moderator
Offline 
CRTC Chair Admits They've Put Up A "Broadcast Wall" In Canada
I used to semi-jokingly complain about an "Iron Curtain" used by the CRTC to contain American influence in this country's TV, by forcing certain U.S. networks and stations to be kept off cable and satellite. While I appreciate the need to keep Canadian production going, as a viewer it used to really irritate me that we couldn't get some of the better American cable stations here, just because we were on the wrong side of the border. That essentially allowed Rogers and Bell to control just about everything and we all know how well that's working for most consumers.
So I was somewhat surprised to hear no one less than CRTC Chair Ian Scott admit that's exactly what they're doing.
In a speech in Taiwan Thursday, the broadcasting boss makes no apologies for it.
"...we created a wall around our broadcasting industry. We allowed only approved services to penetrate into the garden beyond that wall, and created conditions for our domestic broadcasting and production industries within to grow and thrive."
It's not really comparable, of course and I admit that, but when the Berlin Wall went up after WWII separating Germany, every democratic government complained about how unjust it was.
When the CRTC does the same thing with broadcast signals, it's just good policy. Me, I always prefered open skies, to let the companies compete for eyeballs without any government interference and let viewers decide. But it will never happen in Canada.
All in all, it's just another brick in the wall.
Text of Scott's speech
- Forward Power
- Member
Offline
Re: CRTC Chair Admits They've Put Up A "Broadcast Wall" In Canada
The CRTC and other agencies/organizations/etc. need to stop Bell and force the entire company to shut down, instead of letting Bell control them.
- paterson1
- Member
Offline
Re: CRTC Chair Admits They've Put Up A "Broadcast Wall" In Canada
I guess I side with the CRTC too much. I don't see that Rogers or Bell control them at all. The reason we have the broadcast system we have is the result of what broadcaster said that they needed to compete and to be successful. It sounds like a contradiction, but it is not.
You can argue that the CRTC is a puppet of the large broadcast groups or you could also say that they listened and trusted private broadcasters and are trying give them what the industry said they had to have to survive. It never made sense to me how some broadcasters complain endlessly about the CRTC, over regulation and things like cancon, how the CRTC is anti free enterprise and yet broadcasters have been given more or less what they requested and lobbied for, and have grown to be more or less huge successful companies.
Since 1948 Canadians have had more US programming available than any other country in the world. Just because the CRTC has a "broadcast wall" surrounding some US cable channels does not mean we are a backwater or trying to control American influence. It is really to try and protect a somewhat fragile Canadian broadcast system. And what is wrong with that? Every other country protects their homegrown broadcast industries, including the US. Trying to control American influence is not the issue, that was lost many decades ago. Protecting or regulating Canada's broadcast industry is not the same thing as controlling or somehow suppressing US influence. To simply allow all US services to be offered here is not economically viable when your English Canadian market is only about 30 million people.
Open skies is not available in any other country, so why here? It is fine to say let the public/market decide who will or won't survive, but Bell, Rogers, Shaw etc. wouldn't have a prayer of surviving against the titans south of the border. The only option would be to fold their tent and let the US companies buy them out. Doing that is not competing, that is just giving up and taking the lazy, easy way out. It could be that this is the next thing that some broadcasters will be lobbying the CRTC for. If the CRTC agreed to this, then I am wrong and they are puppets of the broadcasters. Somehow though, I don't think that is the case.
Last edited by paterson1 (November 28, 2019 6:21 pm)
- RadioActive
- Moderator
Offline
Re: CRTC Chair Admits They've Put Up A "Broadcast Wall" In Canada
I understand your points, and you make some good ones. Yes, if there weren't protectionist measures in place, there's no doubt the Canadians would get steamrolled. Yet if you look at much of the CBC programming, it simply doesn't hold a candle to the better funded American product and the fact remains that most Canadians don't watch it. It can certainly be argued that this is a tremendous waste of money that could be better spent on something people would use.
The government's incessant obsession with Canadian content always fails to address the issue that viewers don't really seem to care. Yet broadcasters are forced to produce it anyway and they inevitably do it as cheaply as possible - and it shows. So the cycle continues season after TV season.
I will concede that some of it is a lot better than it used to be. But it's still mostly inferior to what's produced south of the border, just out of sheer financing, if nothing else. I can't think of any other industry forced to produce product people don't seem to really want.
If I make bread for a living and no one buys it, guess what? I'll either improve it, stop making it or go into another business. But imagine if the government told me I had to make that bread, even if no one would eat it. It's absurd but it could be argued that's Can Con rules.
On another front, I don't believe the CRTC is controlled by Bell or Rogers, although there does seem to be an inordinate number of Commission members who have some past affiliation with them. My real problem is that the CRTC or the federal government failed to see the inherent danger of letting both of those giants control station ownership, programming and distribution, including the Internet.
Nothing good can come of one or two companies controlling that much power and I believe we would be better off if the companies that provide you with, say, web access didn't also control your cell phone, your TV programming and how it reaches you. Despite the fact there are two or three alternatives, that still spells monopoly and it fully explains why we have some of the highest cell phone and cable bills in the world.
Those things tend to occur when there's no real competition. And THAT'S where the government fell down on the job, by allowing that to happen in the first place. There's simply very few places to go and thus the prices stay high and go ever higher. And you have little choice but to do business with one of them, even as you know they're ripping you off.
I would refer you to a previous link in another thread that outlines how Bell & Rogers had a record number of complaints about their billing and other services to the regulator responsible for it. That doesn't happen when companies treat their customers fairly. Both of them should be broken up into smaller, separate and private entities that don't have such monopolistic control of every aspect of the industry.
Bell, Rogers Top Telecom and TV Customer Complaints
The CRTC may not be controlled by Bell and Rogers, per se, but the problem is they've let them run out of control. And anyone who is unlucky enough to be one of their customers is quite literally paying a high price for that.
- •
Thread Starter- RadioAaron
- Member
Offline
Re: CRTC Chair Admits They've Put Up A "Broadcast Wall" In Canada
paterson1 wrote:
Every other country protects their homegrown broadcast industries, including the US.
And what gets forgotten is that the US regulations on this are far stricter than in Canada, even with theoretically less need. Only the local network affiliate can be carried on cable or satellite. No time-shifting, no 15 versions of the same network. Also, local stations get fee-for-carriage.
From a non-regulatory and national point of view, every new show in the US gets 10x the potential audience than a new Canadian show, without costing 10x as much to produce.
Whether or not one thinks this should be regulated, the playing field is far from even, and the US is not always the free-market haven it's made out to be.
Last edited by RadioAaron (November 28, 2019 8:25 pm)
- RadioActive
- Moderator
Offline
Re: CRTC Chair Admits They've Put Up A "Broadcast Wall" In Canada
Well, you're right there. The NAB spearheaded that idiotic rule, and cable/satellite and consumers have literally been paying for it ever since, often leading to blackouts on U.S. cable/sat systems when station ownership groups can't reach a deal with distributors for payment of their signals. Inevitably, it leads to higher prices for subscribers.
I used to own one of those 10' satellite C-band dishes, and that was an amazing time. You used to be able to subscribe to east coast feeds (WXIA Atlanta for NBC, WSEE Erie for CBS and WPLG Miami for ABC), mountain time (the so-called Denver 5, all from that Colorado City) and west coast feeds (which included a Seattle station, one from San Francisco and a third one, that escapes me at the moment) of the networks all at once. Back in the days before the smaller dishes became available, the choice was only limited to your wallet.
It was a virtual viewer feast and there hasn't quite been anything like it since.
- •
Thread Starter- paterson1
- Member
Offline
Re: CRTC Chair Admits They've Put Up A "Broadcast Wall" In Canada
Thanks for your comments RA and Aaron.
While I agree that most Canadians don't watch as much homegrown programming especially drama, comedy etc. doesn't mean that the domestic fare is poorly produced or inferior. With all of the imported product available, it is pretty hard to crack the top 30 shows on Numeris with what little cancon dramas or comedy programs available.
Most of our dramas are a little different than the US product,not as lavish and slick but I have also found that many people aren't even aware of the show. So that is likely more a question of promotion, hype and exposure. Bell and CTV are by far the best at promoting their own product and it usually shows in their ratings. CBC is not that good at promotion and do not have the infrastructure of CTV, Global or even Rogers in promotion of their programs. To say that Canadians don't care based only on ratings is a bit of an assumption.
I look at the ratings for the 4 major US networks on Nielsen and I am amazed how some shows are still on the air with only 4 or 5 million viewers. And some of these are still creeping into the top 25 shows. All of the current top scripted 10 shows would have been cancelled 20 years ago with the numbers they pull in.
Top original scripted broadcast show in the US week of Oct 28-Nov 3 was Chicago Med on NBC, total viewers 7.9 million, 18-49, 1.5 million viewers. Chicago Med came in at #11, the rest of the top 10 was sports and 60 Minutes. Chicago Med is neither inferior or cheaply produced and I don't think it would be fair to say that the viewers don't care.
The CRTC I don't feel has an incessant obsession with cancon. A lot of industries are forced to do things that they otherwise would not do, look at the auto industry, or natural resources, architectural designs that must conform to city or provincial guidelines and building standards. Cancon is part of doing business, and broadcasters if they are mature and serious shouldn't be trying to get around the rules or producing programming that is buried in poor time slots with little promotion.
In terms of the giants controlling so much of broadcast, distribution, internet, phone etc. I agree not the best situation and yes we do pay more than we should for some services. However the formation of mega media giants certainly is not unique to Canada. We see the same thing in the US and I am sure in other countries as well.
I guess there is potential of conflict with supposedly a lot of members of the CRTC coming from Bell, Rogers and others. But I am also old enough to remember 25-30 years ago when many broadcasters were complaining about members of the CRTC that had no broadcasting or real life experience in the business. The CRTC members were elitist, too sympathetic to the CBC, were career bureaucrats, didn't understand how these regs. impact on us etc.
So again it sort of looks like the CRTC took the complaints to heart and made some changes and actually hired more industry people. If there are conflicts or if the public is not being served properly, it is up to smaller broadcasters and those outside the business to prove this and bring to light any conflicts or corruption if it exists.