The Southern Ontario/WNY Radio-TV Forum » Govt. Wants To Force Canadian Content On U.S. Streaming Services

RadioActive · December 16, 2019 11:02 pm

Hoo boy! What could possibly go wrong? According to a "mandate letter" given to the federal Heritage Minister, over the next year he's expected to come up with ways to make Canadian content more visible on American streaming platforms like Netflix, Disney+ and Amazon.

It's one thing to make it more prominent on their sites, but the real devil is in this detail: how much will they be expected (read: forced) to show if they want to do business in Canada?

From the National Post:

"University of Ottawa law professor Michael Geist, who holds the Canada Research chair in internet law ... said a requirement that three per cent of the shows be Canadian would not be hard for streaming giants to hit, but if the number is 30 per cent, companies would be forced to either shrink their catalogues or make a lot of bad television."

I don't currently subscribe to any streaming services and outside of local news, I can't recall the last time I watched anything that could be labelled as CanCon. But I would say to the feds, "keep your sticky fingers out of my Internet! You're not wanted here and you have no business telling U.S. companies what they can and can't show in Canada."

I know I'm not the only one who feels that way. But these guys, as we all know, love to regulate the hell out of everything. And I'm worried they'll be weaving a tangled web with this edict that could leave Canadians with even less choice than we have now if the Yanks decide to balk at the coming rules.

Liberals want to force Netflix, Disney Plus and Amazon Prime to show more Canadian content

paterson1 · December 17, 2019 12:28 am

For starters, the top line in the National Post story is misleading. Saying that Canadian Broadcasters need to program 50% cancon 6pm to 12 midnight seems to be implying that steaming services will be asked to do the same. The 50% in prime time applies only to OTA broadcasters.

Specialty channels program ZERO cancon in prime time, so the chances of steaming services programming 50 or even 30% is slim to nonexistent. Specialty channels program the bulk of their 35% cancon in off peak hours mostly in the morning. I can see steaming services more like 10-20% cancon.

Netflix already produces cancon and is investing heavily already. Now, this is a little convoluted since it was a trade off since they don't pay tax or charge HST. So this could change later. Maybe other services like Amazon, Disney etc. may strike up something similar. However these services also pay tax and charge tax in Europe so it likely will happen here as well. And there is also the chance that Disney, Amazon and others may be more than happy to invest in programming here.

Government has no business telling US companies what they can and can't show in Canada? That is debatable, but they do have the absolute right to have them pay tax and charge HST. Also many services from the US (HBO, Showtime, CBS Access) are opting to form an alliance with a Canadian broadcaster rather than steaming their service here outright. Less risk for them and cheaper, so some channels will always be somewhat different here, and that shouldn't be a big deal.

RA with all due respect, you actually can't remember the last time you watched anything other than news that could be considered cancon? That's like saying I watched the Beachcomers in 1981 and I thought it was crap, so all Canadian programming is crap, and I will never watch any again. That attitude hurts your arguments if you are trying to make your points based on facts and not just emotion.

Does the CRTC regulate the hell out of everything? Nope, they have regulations and as I have mentioned quite a few times, so does every other country. Since we already receive and have access to more US programming than any other country in the world, we are hardly regulated to hell. Our system of regulation is just different than the US and not much more than that. And again our market is one tenth the size, so it will never mirror exactly what is offered in the US, and that like it or not is the way it should be.

mace · December 17, 2019 5:41 am

The article says that currently between 6pm and Midnight, programming carried by the OTA boys MUST be 50% Canadian. Looking at the prime time schedules for CITY, CTV and GLOBAL, almost total simsub of U.S. product. The only Canadian programming is news from 6-7pm and 11pm- Midnight.

paterson1 · December 17, 2019 9:03 am

mace wrote:
The article says that currently between 6pm and Midnight, programming carried by the OTA boys MUST be 50% Canadian. Looking at the prime time schedules for CITY, CTV and GLOBAL, almost total simsub of U.S. product. The only Canadian programming is news from 6-7pm and 11pm- Midnight.

There is flexibility in the evening programming. Saturday and Sunday are usually loaded up with cancon in the evenings, sometimes 100%. A lot of the Christmas movies made for TV are cancon since they were shot in Canada and utilized local crews and actors, or were a co-production involving US or British/International and Canadian companies. So it's not that broadcasters need 50% every evening, more like an average.

Aaron would know more detail on this.

Retaw · December 17, 2019 10:00 am

paterson1 wrote:
Specialty channels program ZERO cancon in prime time, so the chances of steaming services programming 50 or even 30% is slim to nonexistent. Specialty channels program the bulk of their 35% cancon in off peak hours mostly in the morning.

You've got to be talking reruns, because I can't think of a channel that does this. The Bell and Corus specialties all premiere their first-run Cancon in primetime. I'm not sure Rogers produces programming for non-Sportsnet specialty TV anymore.

paterson1 · December 17, 2019 11:32 am

Retaw wrote:
paterson1 wrote:
Specialty channels program ZERO cancon in prime time, so the chances of steaming services programming 50 or even 30% is slim to nonexistent. Specialty channels program the bulk of their 35% cancon in off peak hours mostly in the morning.
You've got to be talking reruns, because I can't think of a channel that does this. The Bell and Corus specialties all premiere their first-run Cancon in primetime. I'm not sure Rogers produces programming for non-Sportsnet specialty TV anymore.

Specialty channels can and some do have cancon in prime time but they don't need to any more. They aren't required to program any locally produced programming in prime time, but they do schedule 35% overall throughout the day. Stations like E, Much, CMT, Showcase, Comedy, MTV, Disney, Bravo etc. rarely program any during prime time and tend to have the Canadian shows in the morning or afternoon, and you are right these are all repeats, but most of their programming now is repeats for everything.

Coming up over Christmas and New Years many of the above stations will go into big day long marathons of shows like Big Bang, Criminal Minds, Frasier etc. I remember two years ago Bravo had a 9 or 10 day Criminal Minds marathon over Christmas and New Years. They played all of the shows in order with no repeats 24 hours a day, right up until the current season of the show..

RadioActive · December 17, 2019 12:37 pm

There are many good points here, and I will confess that I may not be able to entirely discuss this rationally, because it’s an issue that I’ve been railing against since CanCon was first imposed on broadcasters in the early 70s.

The idea that a government – any government – gets to stick its big nose into programming and dictate what any station must show is anathema to me. I admit it’s not the same thing, but it’s always reminded me of the old Soviet Union, which scrambled signals to ensure no other point of view came into the country but the one the evil overlords wanted you to hear.

True, we can watch American shows on Canadian stations, who legally buy them, but the fact those on cable or satellite are being forced to see a certain feed is not in keeping with your freedom of choice. That’s why I will never be on any of those big three cablers. I want to watch the stations I choose – not what some big government entity decides is OK for me to see.

I know most people don’t get the difference. “You’re still seeing the show,” they say. And they’re right – but I feel I’ve lost some freedom of choice, and that's important to me. (And besides I want to see those previews from next week that we never get here!)

Speaking of forcing CanCon, there’s a reason the CBC is one of the lowest rated networks in Canada during primetime. People prefer Bob Hearts Abishola to Heartland. And it’s always been that way.

paterson1 wrote:
RA with all due respect, you actually can't remember the last time you watched anything other than news that could be considered cancon? That's like saying I watched the Beachcomers in 1981 and I thought it was crap, so all Canadian programming is crap, and I will never watch any again. That attitude hurts your arguments if you are trying to make your points based on facts and not just emotion.

It’s not quite fair to equate my not watching Canadian shows and concluding I’m condemning them all. I loved SCTV, it will always be a favourite. But I don’t think of it as a favourite Canadian show, just a great show period. I don’t need the “it was made here!” imprimatur to enjoy it. It’s possible to make great shows without referring to their origins.

paterson1 wrote:
Government has no business telling US companies what they can and can't show in Canada? That is debatable

Despite the fact it may one day replace it, the Internet is NOT broadcasting. It’s not over-the-air, it’s not the same as traditional media, there is no set schedule. The public doesn’t “own” it like they do the airwaves. In many ways, it’s more related to telephony. And while the feds have a say in that, too, they don’t restrict who you can call.

The government has no more place telling American streaming services what they must make or push to viewers than they do insisting that if you’re talking to someone on your cell phone you must make sure that 30% of your conversation centres on Canadian issues.

It’s ridiculous.

Can you see the Heritage Minister demanding that U.S. broadcasters like, say, WGRZ in Buffalo air more Canadian programming because after all, Canadians can see it across the border or we won’t let it in? It’s absurd on its face.

paterson1 wrote:
They do have the absolute right to have them pay tax and charge HST.

Can’t argue with you there. I don’t really have a problem with taxing the newcomers – that’s the government’s prerogative, and we all know every party – no matter what its stripe - has never seen a tax dollar they don’t want to spend. And of course, it’s never enough. So if this starts, get ready for bigger bills.

paterson wrote:
Many services from the US (HBO, Showtime, CBS Access) are opting to form an alliance with a Canadian broadcaster rather than steaming their service here outright. Less risk for them and cheaper, so some channels will always be somewhat different here, and that shouldn't be a big deal.

I had high hopes for things like HBO Canada, but alas it turned into HBO Lite, because of the rights restrictions and pre-sales. Better just to get the real thing than some watered down version IMHO. And while I know not everyone feels that way or cares, I shouldn’t be denied it if I’m willing to pay for it.

I also had high hopes for streaming primarily because it seemed to be government tamper-proof. I’m sorry to say this new (old?) administration seems to be proving that I was sadly wrong. And we’re all poorer for it. And, as far as I can see, about to get a lot poorer.

Saul · December 17, 2019 1:41 pm

I think the solution begins with looking at what the problem might be, or what the end goal is that should be achieved. Surely it isn't as much about controlling what people watch or hear but about ensuring there's a viable, enduring Canadian arts sector. And then you plot out what measures can be implemented. Looking at pros and cons. Canada is the proverbial flea parked next to an elephant, in an increasingly globalized world and corporate-concentrated world. If we don't want the entire system to be disneyfied - metaphorically speaking - then we would seek somehow to nurture Cdn content production. As technology evolves, so must the game plan. I do think a good place to start is strengthening the underlying infrastructure and also building sinew - sinew, for example, can be CBC TV being legally bound to carry all NFB productions. They work together. That's integrating different pieces of the infrastructure. Like building roads and bridges that connect cities to remote regions. Measures can also address financial support - and I'm thinking beyond mere taxpayer dollars to - instead - building at least some degree of financial mechanism that is self-sustaining without necessarily costing per view or user subscription. It's the same with agriculture, or the domestic steel industry. Government's role goes beyond regulation to also include a key role in building and managing infrastructure.

RadioActive · December 17, 2019 2:07 pm

To me, Canadian Content is one of those "feel good" policies that sounds better than it really turns out to be.

I'm not advocating against boosting the industry here. I want as many working as possible and I suppose there is some value in telling "our" stories against the tide of a U.S. juggernaut. I admit it's a bit of a Catch 22: If you don't make it, how do you know they will watch it? But if they don't watch it, why keep making it?

It has to be asked - you can make all the CanCon the government can force you to, to allow you to do business in this country. But if no one (or relatively few) tune it in, what's the point?

There is no business I know of that turns out a product nobody buys. So what's the point of spending millions if not billions on something people aren't likely to see? Only government would think that is a wise investment.

Saul · December 17, 2019 4:09 pm

Why does everything have to be business bottom line? If business bottom lines always applied, you wouldn't have half the art you have, and it'd be all pop art. There has to be room for something other than what succeeds profit-wise. Government's legitimate role isn't just geared to what's profitable. Its role includes helping to shape the bigger picture.

RadioActive · December 17, 2019 4:19 pm

I don't completely disagree with you but I'm not sure how Rogers & Bell would feel about that statement. Or Netflix, Apple, Amazon or especially Disney+, likely the most avaricious media company on earth.

But I still say there's no point in spending money on shows people won't watch just so the government can claim that it's doing something.

But hey, I'm not really reasonable about this. This particular topic has been one of my pet peeves for decades. It's a losing battle but I can't seem to stop fighting against it. Talk about doing something pointless...

Peter the K · December 17, 2019 4:46 pm

RadioActive wrote:
Despite the fact it may one day replace it, the Internet is NOT broadcasting. It’s not over-the-air, it’s not the same as traditional media, there is no set schedule. The public doesn’t “own” it like they do the airwaves. In many ways, it’s more related to telephony. And while the feds have a say in that, too, they don’t restrict who you can call.

Exactly!

I always thought the original idea behind regulation in general, including the international treaties we participate in, is to protect the finite resource that are the airwaves.

The thing is, the Internet is, essentially, infinite. You can have as much as you want. Even new advances we've seen in OTA in the last few years (with ATSC 3 pushing it even further) are making the "finite" resource less so.

Cancon regulations have done their job and we don't need them anymore. There is enough good Canadian product out there to stand on its own. Applying broadcast rules from the last century just doesn't make sense anymore.

Lee Marshall · December 17, 2019 4:54 pm

so...to be clear...if I want to run an internet 'station'...I can play whatever I want? No regs? Payment to composers though? Yes?

Saul · December 17, 2019 5:25 pm

RA, I don't entirely disagree with you ... I also don't want a system where voices or music or art are excluded for political or other arbitrary reasons. The Soviet system succeeded in some regards but in many regards failures were abject. I'm no fan of authoritarianism, left, centrist or right, or centralizing what should be local or regional. I just don't want profit to run the show. Also, to various points expressed above, I did clearly state that methods of nurturing CanCon must evolve with technology. The internet isn't the same, in a physical sense, as the airwaves, though I do think there are public good and public access dimensions. If private companies are the exclusive access providers, they can't be allowed to throttle or restrict content like they do. Access to the commons itself has to be affordable and available for society's least wealthy, in the same way people need to be free to gather in public squares and walk the streets. And while I think Fake News and unfettered hate cause serious social harm, I think it's very difficult to expect a social media provider like Facebook to police content on its own - this needs to somehow be a collaborative effort. (I think by the time I come up with an even half-witted idea of how to do it, the systems will have changed markedly, we'll all be hearing Elvis and Janis - and, yes, Leonard Cohen - perform live, and our great grandchildren will be running the show). I'm simply saying there is a role for government in nurturing CanCon. It could be along the lines of easing barriers for artists in the far north (like throat singers, for instance, and it could dovetail with other economic and infrastructure work in remote communities) or enabling public and quasi-civic organizations like the National Film Board and CBC. The CBC's mandate is likely less useful on providing OTA coverage as it is content creation. Put another way, The Simpsons has no place whatsoever on CBLT!

Last edited by Saul (December 17, 2019 5:27 pm)

December 17, 2019 5:57 pm

Saul wrote:
there is a role for government in nurturing CanCon. It could be along the lines of easing barriers for artists in the far north (like throat singers, for instance

Saul, you should consider running your deep throat singers idea past someone with influence and get them on board. John Derringer comes to mind. Deep throat singers may be just what could bump Corus shares back up over $6 bucks

RadioActive · December 17, 2019 6:05 pm

Saul wrote:
there is a role for government in nurturing CanCon.

Maybe, and as much as it goes against the grain to let the government interfere in programming, I can live with it in Canada. But to think they can dictate to other countries what they have to spend millions of dollars on to make and/or show to get access to an audience here is the height of chutzpah.

If I were one of the big players, I might just tell the Canadian government to take a hike and cut off viewers here rather than spend big bucks for little return. And you could only imagine what the reaction to that would be.

Saul · December 17, 2019 6:24 pm

geo wrote:
Saul wrote:
there is a role for government in nurturing CanCon. It could be along the lines of easing barriers for artists in the far north (like throat singers, for instance
Saul, you should consider running your deep throat singers idea past someone with influence and get them on board. John Derringer comes to mind. Deep throat singers may be just what could bump Corus shares back up over $6 bucks

paterson1 · December 17, 2019 7:33 pm

Great discussion.
I haven't seen any evidence that the government (CRTC) is trying to squash other points of view. The CRTC doesn't really care what the programs are actually about, they do care that a reasonable amount of Canadian programming actually gets on Canadian television, which to me is sensible. Oh yes, Fox News isn't as readily available as CNN or the Canadian news channels, but that is not keeping out another point of view, it is available in Canada if you want to pay for it. CNN won the luck of the draw by being on the air first. And I haven't heard the masses pining for Fox News Channel to be included with all the other news outlets.

Cancon regs have done their job and aren't needed any longer since there is enough good cancon to stand on it's own? Not really, with the fragmentation and ever changing landscape, cancon regs are still needed. Also when is enough "good cancon?" Why not keep on producing it?

Why produce cancon that nobody is watching? Point is we are watching it. Don't understand this feeling that we are pouring all this money into local productions that nobody likes or watches. I don't understand where this is coming from. Does every show need to be in the Numeris Top 30 to be considered a success? See some recent broadcast ratings in the US and Canada below.

CBC forced cancon? They are supposed to be primarily Canadian in content, and they are supposed to have some programming that normally private broadcasters wouldn't or couldn't do. Unfortunately these more specialized shows have limited audience appeal and they do bring down the ratings for CBC. It is part of their mandate and part of how they are supposed to conduct their business. They don't have much choice in this.

CBC shouldn't ever have a show like the Simpson's on the air? They did for many years, but in my opinion there is nothing really wrong with CBC having some mainstream or mass appeal programming. Best if they produce it themselves, but if they are really going to appeal to all Canadians they should, similar to the BBC which has a few mass appeal and possibly even slightly politically incorrect shows. BBC manages to get great ratings, and some of their most popular shows are very middle of the road, and a little downmarket, but always with a sense of humour.

Here are some ratings I was able to dig up.
First on Numeris Nov 25 to December 1- Not counting news and sports three cancon shows in the top 30.
W5- CTV 921,000 #24
Murdoch Mysteries- CBC 937,000 #23
Curse of Oak Island- History Channel 1.184 million #15
If we include news and sports 7 of the top 30 shows from Numeris are cancon.

US Top TenBroadcast Shows all viewers on Nielson Week of November 18th, and these numbers include any PVR viewing the same day as broadcast. Sorry this was the most recent I could find, and only the top ten.

Notice how 5 of the top 10 Broadcast Shows are Football.
The highest rated scripted show was on CBS NCIS with 11.13 million viewers
#10 show was Chicago Fire with 8.3 million viewers
[url]http://assets.numeris.ca/Downloads/November%2025,%202019%20-%20December%2001,%202019%20(National).pdf[/url]

https://www.nielsen.com/us/en/top-ten/

It is interesting at the differences obviously but it is also evident that football seems to be giving the US big four networks their only decent ratings. The broadcast scripted shows are underwhelming and shows #20-#25 again most popular are only pulling in 5 or 6 million viewers! And still are in the top 25.

Considering that the US has ten times the population of our English Canadian market, shows like W5, Murdoch Mysteries and Oak Island would all be in the top 10 shows in the US for the week of November 18th! And if Chicago Fire the #10 show in the US was broadcasting in Canada the ratings in theory would have been 837,000 viewers, and would have been the #27 show on Numeris. Again, this is just taking into account the differences in population and nothing more.

So this is why I say it is dangerous to look only to the ratings as to whether a show is worth producing, or including in a broadcast schedule.

If any of you are still reading this very long mess of a post, I salute you for your interest and thoughts and dedication. My apology, looks like I can't link the Numeris November 25 ratings for some reason. Still available on their site though.. Sorry about that..

Last edited by paterson1 (December 17, 2019 8:06 pm)

Media Observer · December 17, 2019 7:59 pm

RadioActive wrote:
[
But to think they can dictate to other countries what they have to spend millions of dollars on to make and/or show to get access to an audience here is the height of chutzpah.

If I were one of the big players, I might just tell the Canadian government to take a hike and cut off viewers here rather than spend big bucks for little return. And you could only imagine what the reaction to that would be.

RadioAaron · December 17, 2019 8:20 pm

paterson1 wrote:
Here are some ratings I was able to dig up.

Do you know what 'viewers' means in the US numbers? The Canadian numbers clarify that it's AMA (Average minute audience) but the American numbers don't specify. This may be comparing two very different statistics.

RadioActive · December 17, 2019 8:29 pm

Lee Marshall wrote:
so...to be clear...if I want to run an internet 'station'...I can play whatever I want? No regs? Payment to composers though? Yes?

I don't think anyone here would argue that payments aren't necessary for material used in any shows made for the web. Copyright still exists, even on the Internet and you can't steal whatever you want.

I think what some of us are saying is that to force any shows - and the expense of making them - on an audience that may not want them makes no sense. When I go to the grocery store, there's no one there trying to force me to buy Canadian lettuce when all I came in for was bananas. But then they charge you for the vegetable anyway even if you don't leave the store with it.

No one would ever propose a business plan like that. Yet somehow it's different online and streamers can be forced to make shows only a handful of viewers may ever see and those who aren't viewers will be made to pay for it. All in the name of some amorphous "Canadian identity" policy whose only real purpose seems to be to make the government look good.

paterson1 · December 17, 2019 8:49 pm

RadioAaron wrote:
paterson1 wrote:
Here are some ratings I was able to dig up.
Do you know what 'viewers' means in the US numbers? The Canadian numbers clarify that it's AMA (Average minute audience) but the American numbers don't specify. This may be comparing two very different statistics.

The Nielson ratings are total viewers 7+ and include same day viewing on PVR, they don't say anything about Average minute audience. . So if I could pick your brain, would the Numeris numbers be much different using similar criteria as Neilson, or is there anyway to calculate this? I was just looking at the total numbers 2+ Numeris and 7+Nielson. Looks like Numeris numbers include PVR as well?

Thanks if you can clarify for me Aaron!

RadioAaron · December 17, 2019 8:58 pm

The Numeris numbers include 7 day playback, as opposed to the Nielson same day. I also have no idea how Nielson defines a "viewer." So the numbers are apples and oranges. Don't know if that makes your premise wrong or more right. Too many variables.

Retaw · December 17, 2019 9:03 pm

The free Numeris numbers are total viewers and live+7 days of DVR viewership. Putting that up against live+same day Neilsen data is comparing apples to oranges.

Advertisers don't really care about the +7 data, which is why Numeris gives it away for free. Most DVR viewers skip commercials.

RadioAaron · December 17, 2019 9:05 pm

Retaw wrote:
The free Numeris numbers are total viewers.

No, they're AMA,

RadioAaron · December 17, 2019 9:12 pm

My opinion in all of this - Cancon quotients on linear broadcast channels at least follows logically. Cancon quotients for on-demand streaming services means less selection overall and 100 versions of The Fireplace Channel: Canada.

The linear broadcasters at least have to put some effort in to get some kind of ratings. The streamers don't.

Last edited by RadioAaron (December 17, 2019 9:29 pm)

paterson1 · December 17, 2019 9:14 pm

Is there a possibility that some viewers are counted more than once with Nielson? Are any US TV ratings based on AMA like Numeris?

RadioAaron · December 17, 2019 9:18 pm

paterson1 wrote:
Is there a possibility that some viewers are counted more than once with Nielson? Are any US TV ratings based on AMA like Numeris?

No idea. They could be counting every single instance of tuning, or they may have a minimum threshold of tuning time to count as a "viewer." I doubt it's based on AMA, as that's not used on the radio side, where they use AQH (Average quarter-hour.)

Retaw · December 17, 2019 9:50 pm

RadioAaron wrote:
Retaw wrote:
The free Numeris numbers are total viewers.
No, they're AMA,

Sorry, I meant that in regards to age demos, not per viewer stats.

paterson1 · December 17, 2019 10:09 pm

RadioActive wrote:
Lee Marshall wrote:
so...to be clear...if I want to run an internet 'station'...I can play whatever I want? No regs? Payment to composers though? Yes?
I don't think anyone here would argue that payments aren't necessary for material used in any shows made for the web. Copyright still exists, even on the Internet and you can't steal whatever you want.

I think what some of us are saying is that to force any shows - and the expense of making them - on an audience that may not want them makes no sense. When I go to the grocery store, there's no one there trying to force me to buy Canadian lettuce when all I came in for was bananas. But then they charge you for the vegetable anyway even if you don't leave the store with it.

No one would ever propose a business plan like that. Yet somehow it's different online and streamers can be forced to make shows only a handful of viewers may ever see and those who aren't viewers will be made to pay for it. All in the name of some amorphous "Canadian identity" policy whose only real purpose seems to be to make the government look good.

On line shows and even network shows with a relative "handful" of viewers is not unique to cancon or the Canadian broadcast system. As we know US shows on the big four networks are getting renewed with very, very low ratings.

And looking at the ratings in the US, if it wasn't for sports the networks would be even in rougher shape.

Our top 30 shows seem to be a healthier mix and variety, not as reliant on "live event" sports programming for some good numbers. And low and behold, 3 cancon shows made the top 30! And with no simsub! And they cracked the top 30 against the biggest, most powerful, most popular and most successful entertainment machine just across the border! No other country in the world contends with this 24/7, 365 days a year, and for 67 years like we do. The rest of the world is just starting to taste what we have handled for many decades.

Quite an assumption to say that Canadian shows are "forced" on people who may not want them! Many people do want Canadian shows, and do watch them in good numbers. Forced is the wrong term, programming is "offered" to people, and it is up to you if you want to watch...sort of like any other show.
Some people always label Canadian shows as being so different and put them "over there" in a separate category. I think many others confuse their dislike for the government and regulation with the actual program, or organization which is short sighted and a mistake. They are not one and the same. As we know governments and parties in power come and go.

In terms of the business plan, sorry cancon is part of the plan. Broadcasters should be mature, not whine do the hard work, and step up and give it their best shot, just like they do in the US, UK, France, Australia, New Zealand.... If the show doesn't work out, you do what every other broadcaster in the world does...you sit down and start to work on the next great show! A really simple and effective business plan that has proven success.

Last edited by paterson1 (December 17, 2019 10:15 pm)