sowny.net | The Southern Ontario/WNY Radio-TV Forum


You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?

January 28, 2020 2:46 pm  #1


CRTC Plans Major Review To Radio Policy In Canada - With Your Input

The CRTC has announced it plans to do a comprehensive review of the rules regulating radio in Canada. What could possibly go wrong?
 
It will start with a “conversation with Canadians” (a somewhat specious term that sounds good but means nothing.) It will centre on their current and future radio needs, with an emphasis on programming, followed by written observations submitted by broadcasters, artists, members of the public and other “interested persons.”
 
It’s that last category that has me worried! Who are these “persons” and what, exactly, are their interests?
 
Part 2 of the review will follow soon after:
 
“The Commission has mandated a third party to be responsible for leading discussion groups and implementing an online survey to collect Canadians’ experiences and their various points of view. The Commission will announce at a later date how Canadians will be able to participate in the online survey.”
 
I can’t wait to see what’s on that survey.
 
So what will the focus of the review consist of? Among other things (followed by a few of my own observations, for better and likely for worse):
 
-The number of stations that a licensee can own in a given market (Could this mean yet more control of AM & FM for Bell, Rogers & Corus or would they try to encourage more entrants into the arena?)
 
-Definitions relating to local programming, as well as levels, relevance and quality of such programming, including news bulletins and other spoken word programming. (But who decides on what constitutes “relevance and quality?”)
 
-Canadian content development contributions and quotas relating to Canadian content. (So even though Canada’s music industry is now well established, they don’t seem willing to even entertain the idea that maybe CanCon regs can be either loosened or eliminated entirely.)
 
-The definition of a “musical selection,” including Canadian selections (MAPL system) and
-musical montages;
-peak listening hours;
-the policy regarding hits for bilingual markets;
-the policy regarding emerging artists; and
content categories and sub-categories for radio.
 
-Measures to retain, modify or put in place so that commercial radio continues to support, to the greatest extent possible, through funding, programming or any other appropriate method, the creation, broadcast, promotion and discovery of Canadian content (musical and spoken word content); (Again, no end in sight for CanCon.)
 
-The role of commercial radio in maintaining and enhancing linguistic duality in Canada. (What, exactly, does that mean?)
 
I realize the CRTC’s mandate is to regulate radio and TV, but I get very, very worried when I see them constantly trying to interfere with programming. That’s not their business nor do they seem to know a lot about it. I wish they’d stick to ruling on licences, power boost requests and interference issues and keep their noses out of what radio must broadcast. That’s not their expertise and time and time again, they prove it, leaving creative types trying to figure out a way to make onerous rules into something people will want to listen to. 

Commercial radio policy framework review

 

January 28, 2020 4:15 pm  #2


Re: CRTC Plans Major Review To Radio Policy In Canada - With Your Input

Kind of hard to regulate licences, power boosts and interference issues without some degree of regulating format and content. How else pick between five separate proposals for 93.9 and then hold the winning candidate to what they promised? "Well, gee, we promised blues but really we find our listeners prefer rock with an hour of blues on Sunday night and the rest classic rock with some having a slight occasional blues edge" or "we promised interfaith and interdenominational but funny thing that our listeners predominantly want only one interpretation of the Bible..." The trick is to regulate content without unduly regulating what song is played at 5:05 pm. Kind of like licensing food trucks in Toronto in order to manage issues like hygiene and *unfair or illegal* competition without dictating the size and visual appearance (exterior decorating) of the trucks...
 

Last edited by Saul (January 28, 2020 4:16 pm)

 

January 28, 2020 4:26 pm  #3


Re: CRTC Plans Major Review To Radio Policy In Canada - With Your Input

My point - why should they have to "promise blues" in the first place? That doesn't happen in the U.S., where stations can switch formats for whatever they think will benefit them in their market.

As for rock, even if there was any open space on the GTA dial, you're very unlikely to see the CRTC ever approve one of those formats again. It seems only ethnic stations get the nod these days. I'm all for a variety of music available on the dial, but the market should decide - not the government. 

     Thread Starter
 

January 28, 2020 5:04 pm  #4


Re: CRTC Plans Major Review To Radio Policy In Canada - With Your Input

I don't see radio in the US serving the entire public interest. You're making the classic case for free market capitalism. Of course, companies usually want to do whatever they want with as few hurdles as possible - if any at all. So do children, from birth. Free market capitalism has gazillions of dollars and massive investments in political and social infrastructure to push its weight around, but it has not proven that it's the superior way to serve the entire public interest. I like certain aspects of capitalism, and limited degrees of capitalism, but I do think regulation tries in Canada more than it does in the US to strike a good balance. I do think the advent of high-tech has made regulation and also the conduct of business (such as radio) really complicated and challenging. Had media orgs been smarter (going back to at least in the 1990s) they might be faring better than they are. Media companies that want to program whatever they want can do that online. There's tons of space there. Pick yourselves up by your boot straps and start using that space creatively!

Last edited by Saul (January 28, 2020 5:04 pm)

 

January 28, 2020 5:22 pm  #5


Re: CRTC Plans Major Review To Radio Policy In Canada - With Your Input

That's an interesting take, but you can also turn it around to say that because of the Internet, the CRTC no longer has to "prefer" certain formats to others. Those who want music or shows that might not be as mass appeal can certainly find them online. 

My take is that we should have a level playing field. Trust me, if every station plays the exact same thing, many of them will fall by the wayside and try something else. 

I'm just not sure the CRTC is the body that gets to decide. I'm not a doctor (and I don't play one on TV!) I might have read every page of WebMD, but that doesn't mean I can tell you how to treat your illness with any credibility. I'm not an expert in that area. Neither, I would contend, is the CRTC when it comes to what actually works on the radio. 

It's always been my biggest complaint about the regulator. Stay in your lane and let broadcasters decide what should be on air. The audience will tell them soon enough if they're right and if they want to survive, they'll inevitably figure out what's missing in their market and appeal to it.

     Thread Starter
 

January 28, 2020 5:31 pm  #6


Re: CRTC Plans Major Review To Radio Policy In Canada - With Your Input

RadioActive wrote:

My point - why should they have to "promise blues" in the first place? That doesn't happen in the U.S., where stations can switch formats for whatever they think will benefit them in their market.

As for rock, even if there was any open space on the GTA dial, you're very unlikely to see the CRTC ever approve one of those formats again. It seems only ethnic stations get the nod these days. I'm all for a variety of music available on the dial, but the market should decide - not the government. 

Couple of things- Nobody has to 'promise blues' in their application, but if you do then there is a logical expectation you will follow through.  Because frequencies were tight a lot of smaller groups applying for radio licenses tried to second guess the CRTC and  promised more to win the application, it worked for some but not for all.  Be careful what you apply for. And to their credit the CRTC doesn't hang these stations out to dry, they are usually flexible in changes to promise of performance, especially smaller operators. Harder on one of the bigger operators if they over promised.

Situations like this don't happen in the US (as far as we know) but who cares? It appears that Canadian radio is financially in much better shape than US radio. Never hear of Bell, Rogers, Pattison, Stingray, Cogeco or smaller broadcast groups declaring bankruptcy.  Sure it could happen in Canada but you rarely even hear of smaller independents closing up shop.  Usually when a station closes down it is an AM operation and often the station is moving to FM. Canadian radio overall appears to be in better shape than other traditional media like newspapers, magazines and television. Maybe some of the CRTC regs had a little to do with this??

All for variety of music on the dial, but let the market decide? Really, so iHeart radio stations in the US  with no announcers, no local content other than commercials and some stations even  on auto pilot 24/7 is letting the market decide?  And how are stations like this serving their market or community?  Did the fine folks in town decide that they wanted a 24/7 radio station with no staff?  In terms of ethnic licenses, as you mentioned not many frequencies if any are left and many are not the best quality. If Toronto needs another rock station, it is not up to the government. Any of the many category 2 stations in the GTA could change to a rock format this evening if they wanted. Jewel FM as an example could go all heavy metal tonight if they deemed that is what is needed and would make them more successful. All they need to do is let the CRTC know of the change they are making, no application required.

And stations are free in the US to switch formats for whatever they think will benefit them in the market? What about benefiting the public and the listener? Musically it is easy to change format here as well as mentioned above, most stations fall under category 2 which is everything from country, dance, rock, metal, mor, CHR etc.  Harder to change to another category such as spoken word (talk) or classical. 

Last edited by paterson1 (January 28, 2020 5:40 pm)

 

January 28, 2020 6:03 pm  #7


Re: CRTC Plans Major Review To Radio Policy In Canada - With Your Input

Well, you're certainly right about the iHeart example. The loss of local is unconscionable. This is also the government's fault, for opening up the market to allow too few giants to own too many stations. If they had to actually compete instead of two or three companies owning everything in a city, this might not happen.

And you're partially right about format switches. I should have been more clear. I believe the CRTC has a built-in bias against certain formats and will never grant a licence to a company that proposes an on air sound they don't agree with. So they won't be switching formats because they'll never make it on air in the first place. 

As for radio being more healthy here, that could be true. But perhaps that's because there are more stations per market in the U.S. and thus more chance of them failing. 

To me the answer is to go back to the days when there were more owners who had to compete against their arch-rivals. It inevitably made all the stations better. Would the CHUM/CFTR rivalry been as good if Bell had owned them both? I remember the days when WGR, WBEN, WKBW and WYSL were kicking each other around in Buffalo. They were all fantastic, because they were all owned by different firms, each with a thirst to beat the other for #1.

Now Entercom, Town Square and iHeart have their grips on them and the result is cookie-cutter boredom. And that's something that definitely does not serve their listeners. 

What a fun topic this has turned into! I wonder if the CRTC will get a similar earful when it does its review - and if anyone there will actually listen. 

     Thread Starter
 

January 28, 2020 6:10 pm  #8


Re: CRTC Plans Major Review To Radio Policy In Canada - With Your Input

As much as I support regulation, and a strong CRTC, my gut hurts when I hear phrases like "Conversation with Canadians" or whatever of that sort was possibly used. Friggin 'conversation' my arse ... I wish people would never use that kind of touchy-feely language.

 

January 28, 2020 6:26 pm  #9


Re: CRTC Plans Major Review To Radio Policy In Canada - With Your Input

Hopefully, someone will "reach out" to you for further comment.   Please start any such comment with the now-obligatory, "So..."

 

January 28, 2020 6:37 pm  #10


Re: CRTC Plans Major Review To Radio Policy In Canada - With Your Input

I had the (pleasure?) over the years to go to a few CRTC hearings and they did have  lighter moments, even some of the commissioners had a  sense of humour.  The CRTC staff  are human after all, one of them told me and a friend where the best bars and nightclubs in Ottawa/Gatineau were.  I think he felt sorry for us since we were from Owen Sound and Wingham! 

 

January 28, 2020 7:24 pm  #11


Re: CRTC Plans Major Review To Radio Policy In Canada - With Your Input

RadioActive wrote:

Well, you're certainly right about the iHeart example. The loss of losing local is unconscionable. This is also the government's fault, for opening up the market to allow too few giants to own too many stations. If they had to actually compete instead of two or three companies owning everything in a city, this might not happen.

And you're partially right about format switches. I should have been more clear. I believe the CRTC has a built-in bias against certain formats and will never grant a licence to a company that proposes an on air sound they don't agree with. So they won't be switching formats because they'll never make it on air in the first place. 

As for radio being more healthy here, that could be true. But perhaps that's because there are more stations per market in the U.S. and thus more chance of them failing. 

To me the answer is to go back to the days when there were more owners who had to compete against their arch-rivals. It inevitably made all the stations better. Would the CHUM/CFTR rivalry been as good if Bell had owned them both? I remember the days when WGR, WBEN, WKBW and WYSL were kicking each other around in Buffalo. They were all fantastic, because they were all owned by different firms, each with a thirst to beat the other for #1.

Now Entercom, Town Square and iHeart have their grips on them and the result is cookie-cutter boredom. And that's something that definitely does not serve their listeners. 

What a fun topic this has turned into! I wonder if the CRTC will get a similar earful when it does its review - and if anyone there will actually listen. 

Oh no doubt they will get an earful. 

Personally I think this is a good and over due exercise and I think it actually signals that the CRTC will be looking to make modifications, and loosening up some of the cancon regs. They likely won't get rid of them, which would be a mistake in my opinion but they will be updated.

Don't really agree that the Canadian music industry is that strong and radio doesn't need cancon regs. The music industry in general is not really in the best shape.  Steaming and music sharing does not generate the money like the selling of albums and CD's. That's why so many bands tour and perform live, that is the best way for them to make money. 

True there is an abundance of Canadian artists on air world wide but many of their songs actually don't qualify as cancon under the current regulations. This may be part of the changes coming. And I do appreciate and understand that the purpose of a music oriented radio station is not to sell music for record companies but they do overlap. Not nearly as much as 20 or 30 years ago since many people can literally become their own radio station.

It would be hard to prove that the CRTC has a bias against certain formats. Would you be referring to conservative talk radio? Any station that has a talk format now could change to a  Rush Limbaugh style of programming.  There are a few conservative harder right talk shows in Quebec or maybe more shock talk. So if you already have a talk station going to a more conservative right wing format isn't really a thing. Roy Green is about the only network commercial talk show on various stations in Canada and Roy is right of centre. 

When a station is applying for a talk format if they were moving from a music format I haven't seen any evidence that the CRTC really cares what the political stripe of  the talk is. And really how many applications do they get for talk anyway? Even large and a few medium markets can only really support 1 or 2 talk stations, not including sports. 
                                                                                                                                                             
Seems also that talk stations here are more comfortable having one or two conservative leaning hosts rather than the whole station having a right of centre point of view. And my gut feeling is still that Canadians tend to shy away from extreme points of view either left or right so that could be why this type of talk has never happened here.

Last edited by paterson1 (January 28, 2020 7:26 pm)

 

January 28, 2020 7:36 pm  #12


Re: CRTC Plans Major Review To Radio Policy In Canada - With Your Input

RadioActive wrote:

My point - why should they have to "promise blues" in the first place? That doesn't happen in the U.S., where stations can switch formats for whatever they think will benefit them in their market.
 

I agree, and it also points out a flaw in the process. Most viable formats fall under the same music category, so I don't know why the proposed format is always prominent in the preamble. If you say you're going to launch a Country station, you haven't committed to anything but Category 2. It could launch as Soft AC and you haven't broken your license. It's only the specialty formats (like Blues) the come with any kind of promise. Regulate formats or don't.