Another potential CRTC (CCC?) change? They recommend that whatever the Commission comes to be called, that there are fewer people in it. 

"...Reduce the maximum number of Commissioners to a Chair, a Vice-Chair, and up to seven additional Commissioners, each appointed for a single term of up to seven years." 

There are currently 13 of them now, and many reside in other parts of the country. Under the proposed new rules, all of them would have to live in the Ottawa Region for the entire length of their term. That would almost certainly cut down on the number of people willing to fill the role. Why do it? The panel thinks it will speed up future decisions if everyone is in the same place. 

I think before everyone gets their shorts in a knot and jump to conclusion is the fact that Netflix and Amazon are already showing and producing lots of cancon, and they are doing so willingly. And even more interesting is  that they are showing a decent amount of cancon on their services in the US as well. And I am not talking about shows just shot in Canada, shows like Being Erica, Murdoch Mysteries, Corner Gas, Schitt's Creek, Durham County and many more currently offered on various US platforms.  See link below.

So why the hand wringing that they may be "forced" to make cancon available here and pay tax?  Sure streaming services will squawk but everyone knows there is no permanent free lunch.   France has already imposed a  tax on all sales (not profit) of streaming services in that country,  the UK, Belgium and Ireland are looking to do the same.

Speculating about NBC, CBS, ABC and Fox and the Buffalo stations immediately needing to feature cancon on their schedules is laughable and isn't going to happen.  Sorry for being so blunt, but let's keep it real please.

Here is a list of cancon programming already streaming in the US and on what services it is being offered. And I am sure many more new Canadian shows are planned to be available in the months ahead. 
https://thebritishtvplace.com/canadian-tv-shows-available-for-streaming-in-the-us/

How then can anyone argue that homegrown programming shouldn't be as available on streaming services in Canada is beyond my understanding.  Nobody is being forced to watch anything. Making Canadian productions  available for Canadians to even consider watching is not forced viewership. And the cancon should offered the same way as all programming and not corralled in a special "Canadian Section."  Oh, and should these services be taxed, absolutely. And finally, in my opinion, there is also nothing wrong with legislation in place to ensure this continues to happen.

Last edited by paterson1 (January 29, 2020 7:45 pm)

paterson1 wrote:

Speculating about NBC, CBS, ABC and Fox and the Buffalo stations immediately needing to feature cancon on their schedules is laughable and isn't going to happen.  Sorry for being so blunt, but let's keep it real please.

Agreed. And that was the point - it's such a ridiculous idea that it isn't even worth considering. They send shows into Canada, as much as does Netflix, CBS All Access, Disney+, Amazon and the rest. Why is it OK to tax one but not the other? And I want to reiterate that these are NOT Canadian owned services. What right does the government have forcing our misguided content laws onto other countries?
 

paterson1 wrote:

Here is a list of cancon programming already streaming in the US and on what services it is being offered. And I am sure many more new Canadian shows are planned to be available in the months ahead. 
https://thebritishtvplace.com/canadian-tv-shows-available-for-streaming-in-the-us/

In my mind, there's a big difference between buying Canadian shows to be used on their platforms (just as CTV, City and Global all buy U.S. shows) and forcing citizens to pay for it. Can you imagine the reaction if the Americans started charging Canadians a tax to watch their shows?

paterson1 wrote:

 How then can anyone argue that homegrown programming shouldn't be as available on streaming services in Canada is beyond my understanding.  Nobody is being forced to watch anything. Making Canadian productions  available for Canadians to even consider watching is not forced viewership.

Ah, but under this proposal, we ARE being forced to pay for it, if we choose to subscribe. I can't speak for you, but I refuse to pay for something I don't want - and it's a no-brainer that in any other circumstance, I'm fairly sure you'd feel the same way. Want to buy those California-grown tomatoes? Then you have to pay an extra levy, to ensure we can grow our own tomatoes here. You'd laugh at the idea. Just because it's TV doesn't change the principle. 

paterson1 wrote:

And finally, in my opinion, there is also nothing wrong with legislation in place to ensure this continues to happen.

OK. If you don't mind forking over money for programming you may never watch, perhaps you'd consider paying my portion while you're at it. I'm no fan of CanCon rules as they are. To think you can force them on other countries is just insane.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this. But I'd rather live in my reality than yours. If nothing else, it will be a lot cheaper!

paterson1 wrote:

Not Canadian owned businesses and what right does the government have to impose our misguided content laws on them? Not Canadian owned but doing business here. When you are doing business in another country and in some cases setting up facilities and production you follow  the law of that country.

But I would contend they're not actually based here at all. The Internet has no "place" which is what makes it unique. It's not like a TV network, which has a physical presence. And that's why it annoys me to no end that the CRTC and its ilk want to regulate it. This is NOT being broadcast over the public airwaves. Therefore, it can be reasonably argued that the feds have no jurisdiction over it whatsoever. 

The new review wants to make the case that they do. And who knows where that will eventually lead?  I hate the term slippery slope but it applies. 

paterson1 wrote:

Netflix, Disney and Amazon..are already producing a lot of cancon.

If they're already producing a lot of Cancon, then what's the need for endless regulation to force them to make more? Seems it's only Cancon if it takes places in Nunavut, but not Alaska. Does it really matter that much as long as the production money stays put here?

paterson1 wrote:

Traditional broadcasting and streaming ain't the same thing.

You defeat your own argument here. If they're not the same thing, which I agree with, then they shouldn't be treated or regulated the same way. 

paterson1 wrote:

So all of that US stuff on Crave I am not looking at, I am being forced to pay for.

You at least have a choice of what you watch on a service you subscribe to and you know it's based in Canada going in. You also have the same choice about viewing Netflix or Disney+, but you shouldn't have to pay Canadian taxes for a service that isn't based here. What, exactly, has the government done to earn that? 

paterson1 wrote:

As I mentioned in the previous post, countries in Europe have started or will be charging tax on these streaming services, so it shouldn't be a surprise that Canada is looking at it as well.

This is a bit of a straw argument, but the former Soviet Union used to censor its broadcast services. China and North Korea do it now. Maybe Canada should do that here, because, hey, other countries do it, as well. The claim that just because someone else is doing something unethical (which I consider paying a tax I shouldn't owe for a product I will never use) and we should follow suit is not a world I want to live in. Unfortunately, we do.  

paterson1 wrote:

Just like anything else, you can't watch or use everything on a service and you are paying for it whether you realize it or not. Lots of people pay school taxes all the years they owned a house and didn't have any kids, we pay taxes to help build a highway in Northern Ontario that we will never travel on. Maybe not the greatest examples but same idea.

Yes, but roads and schools are for the "greater good" of everyone. Surely you can't be intimating that subscribing to Netflix serves that purpose. 

And I'm sorry for calling you Shirley.   

paterson1 wrote:

I would be surprised if Netflix or Amazon and other large operators weren't offering local product in almost every country they are available. Basically it is good business.

On that we can at least agree. There’s nothing wrong with showing another country some national love. But it shouldn’t be forced on anyone.

Don't worry about calling me Shirley, at least you didn't ask me what a hospital was! Wish I was as quick on the keyboard as you.

Not based here, and don't have a physical presence like a network- Well not really, Access CBS, Netflix, Amazon and Disney all have a physical presence here with studios, employees and offices and other services have partnerships with Canadian broadcasters. True Canada is not their head office, but we are  a base for those choosing to set up a physical presence here.  GM, Toyota and Ford are not based here either, but they abide by our laws and regulations. Why are the steaming companies different?

Annoyed that the CRTC and the like want to regulate it, NOT being broadcast over the public airwaves, feds have no jurisdiction-   Point taken, but the wild west days of anything goes on the internet are over whether it be twitter, facebook or google. To allow these multi billion dollar services to be more or less unregulated and able to do anything they want when they want and to be unaccountable are gone. All of this is coming to a head, and it won't be in Canada. Streaming services rightly or wrongly are going to be regulated here and everywhere else. The impact on other competing traditional businesses is huge and as you become larger with more influence and yes success, comes more responsibilities and more expectations, similar to any other business. 

Ain't the same thing, you defeated your argument- I was making the point about the speculation about the four US networks being required to have cancon which isn't going to happen. Amazon Video and NBC are not the same.  The proposed regulations for streaming services will not be the same as traditional broadcasters.

So  you agree that when you subscribe to a streaming service you are also paying for the programming you aren't watching or have no interest in whether it be US, Canada, UK, children's programming etc.? My point was not so much the greater good but the fact we pay for many things that we don't want or even need. Yes it may not be right but it is part of life. 

Why should we pay tax for a service not based here and what has the government done to earn that tax-  The service being based here or not is irrelevant, if they are selling to Canadians and doing business here they should pay tax and or charge tax.  You can argue that some of them are based here since they have a specific Canadian service or have chosen to partner with a Canadian provider or broadcaster. Can't argue with you about what the government has done about earning the right about the tax. Government rarely earns the right!

Finally still can't agree cancon programming is being forced on anyone. If the customer doesn't consider other programming that they will never watch or have no interest in watching, as not being forced why would cancon be?   If they are paying for US programming that they don't watch, why is any cancon they don't watch considered differently? If the customer doesn't consider it a waste then why would cancon be? And if you don't want to watch it, just like any other program, don't watch it then.

If they are already making cancon then why endless regulations-  Unfortunately we live in a legal world and the regs will be there to ensure it continues and that there is a commitment.   Endless regs? The regs will likely be pretty simple and clear.

Interesting, I saw a story on the news tonight about all of this and Netflix released a comment on the report, they said that they were looking forward working with the government to update and modernize Canada's broadcast and telecommunications businesses.  The CBC also released a comment stating that asking the government for $300 million more to remove advertising on TV and various platforms was not a priority for them.

And to all a good night...zzzz

 

Last edited by paterson1 (January 30, 2020 1:38 am)

Maybe they should rename it the Canadian Communications Commission Panel and do away with all pretexts.

Governing the airwaves, a finite resource, is one thing.  This shouldn't apply to data services carrying programming.
 

Wow. Is this long. An apology for that to start. But I’ll make it my final word on this. (I hope.)
 
I, too, enjoyed the discourse, if for no other reason than it shows people can differ on a platform like this without resorting to name calling. That’s the tone I try to engender on SOWNY and I appreciate that so many posters are (mostly) willing to adhere to it.
 
And no, I’m not always right. (In fact, I wish I were correct more often!) But without refuting each point made in paterson1’s last post, there’s a reason I’m so passionate about this specific topic and why it’s hit such a nerve. It is, in effect, my #1 pet peeve in the world.
 
I was a media-obsessed teenager when the CanCon rules were first applied in Canada. (I’m still media obsessed, but those teen years are long since gone!) And I saw even then what it might mean to the broadcast industries I loved for a government to dictate content.
 
While I hated the idea (and still do) I will admit that the CanCon rules worked on radio, to help stimulate our recording industry. (Of course it cost the world CKLW, but the CRTC didn’t care about that.) But they were far less successful on TV. And it took away one of the great benefits of living on this side of the border.
 
A long time ago, before DVRs and VCRs, you actually had to be in front of your TV to watch a show. The Canadian stations would buy U.S. programs, as they do now, but because there was no simsub, they would show them at different times, allowing you to catch a program on American TV later on you might have missed because that show was on opposite something else you wanted to see – and there was no way to catch them both.
 
It was kind of like a built-in DVR, time shifting so you wouldn’t miss anything. That ended with the coming of cable and simultaneous substitution. But it was fun while it lasted!
 
Yes, there has to be some kind of ruling body that governs the airwaves, if for no other reason than what happened in the early days of radio when stations and hobbyists were overriding each other’s signals, leading to chaos. But I was disturbed then and continue to be (some would say I’ve been very disturbed for a long time, but that’s another matter entirely!) when a government tries to force content rules on the media.
 
It’s been my experience (and I’m betting a lot of people here) that bureaucratic intervention with almost anything rarely, if ever, results in any major improvements. Governments may decide to build a bridge. But they hire professional contractors to build it. Governments may make rules about health care. But I don’t expect to see the minister of health in my doctor’s office telling me what pill to take to cure my illness. I’m leaving that for someone with an M.D. by their name.
 
The same goes for broadcasting. Leave programming and on air decisions to the pros. That’s their business and for the most part, they know what they’re doing. If they’re wrong, the audience will let them know very quickly. Stop dictating content and forcing us to pay for it. It’s wrong to tell people what they can write, show or make, beyond say, slander and hate speech.
 
Simply and finally put, I want the government out of programming, although that ship has long since sailed. So let’s keep them out of the Internet while we can. It’s not their place to dictate what anyone wants to see – let alone to add insult to injury by charging us to do it.
 
Rant done. Thanks for a spirited back-and-forth. And enjoy your CanCon Mr. P! I will continue to watch my favourite shows based on whether they’re good – not because of where they were made.

mace wrote:

Regarding the demise of CKLW, I think the move of Top 40 from AM to FM in Detroit was the main cause. The Can-Con regulations certainly didn't help. I believe they had planned to move the format to 93.9 around 1984 but the CRTC  denied their request because Top 40 belongs on AM and "Beautiful" music belongs on FM.

You may be right, but as noted, CanCon certainly didn't help, especially in the early 70s, when the FM pressure wasn't really a factor. The stations out of Detroit were not forced to play Anne Murray and Gordon Lightfoot ad nauseam and so people - including those in Windsor - voted with their dials. 

I've always found the CKLW story very ironic. The CRTC has always maintained it wants the Canadian David to be on as equal a footing as possible with the U.S. Goliaths and to get Canadians to listen to their own media. CKLW not only did that, it beat the Americans at their own game, repeatedly and solidly, book after book. So what did they do? Bring in onerous regulations that helped take the Big 8 down.

Here's a Canuck entity shining like a beacon against a flood of foreign competition and coming out #1. Instead of encouraging that, they did everything to kill it. I've never understood it and I never will. But rest in peace LW (or as Bill Gable used to call it off air "CK.") We will never see its like again.

I well recall hearing how CKLW tried to hide Canadian content in off hours until the CRTC put a stop to it. But the Commission didn't do them any favours when they instituted this rule. And while FM was certainly a factor in their final decline, being forced to play what was then often lesser hits (and let's face it, while some CanCon was pretty good, at the beginning you were forced to play whatever there was) could not have helped them across the border. 

I know we will always differ on this and that's OK, but I will forever hate the idea of any government dictating what must be played on public airwaves. While some will contend I'm taking it too far, it smacks of a dictatorship to me and it drives me crazy.

And as many here are aware, that's not a very long drive!

You may be misinterpreting my implications of a "dictatorship." The Soviets, for example, used to jam signals coming into their country. I believe Cuba still does this. And yes, we still get to see the shows, so it's definitely different there, but simsub takes away my freedom of choice as to which station I want to watch. Kinda like an authoritarian regime might do, albeit admittedly for very different reasons.

I'm not saying the Commission tells stations what to run on CanCon. The fact they mandate it at all is the sin, in my mind. Stay out of my TV!!!!! But at least those are public airwaves. They MUST keep their grubby interfering mitts off the Internet.

As Peter Shurman pointed out on 640 Thursday, one of the original ideas behind the CRTC was to dole out the precious public resource that AM and FM provides. The Internet does not have those restrictions - there's infinite space - so those solons in Hull should have no say in it whatsoever. And once they start getting their hands in it, where does it end? I think we all know and fear that answer.  

My reference to a CRTC format bias usually has to do with rock or some form of it. Remember that old idiotic idea that you couldn't play hits on FM? The Commission cooked that one up. Stunningly stupid.

There is too much political correctness in how things are awarded these days, which explains the endless parade of ethnic stations on FM, without a single oldies station (and I don't count AM740's rebroadcaster as a full time oldies outlet) in Toronto. Maybe owners have decided it's a loser. But there are few other markets without one. Even if there was spectrum space, I can't see that we'll ever get one. The CRTC obviously isn't fond of the idea for Toronto, so instead it will go to, who knows, an all climate-fighting weather and traffic format instead. As long as all the right boxes are checked. 

As for the woman behind the big report, she had the temerity to go on more than one radio station today and insist that adding a tax to streaming services would not raise the price for consumers. What planet is she living on? It's obvious to anyone that any company will pass the cost along. It's the way business works. And if you believe her, I have a bridge to sell you. Several in fact. All made here, so they're CanCon. 

Finally, while greedhogs like iHeart and Cumulus certainly share the blame for the economic disaster that is U.S. radio, the real fault lies with the FCC for removing rules that allowed these guys to own 500 stations (an exaggeration, but only a bit!) in every market. That was a disastrous decision and it's how they got where they are now. It was a stupid thing to do and the outcome was pretty predictable.

I will give the CRTC credit for checking to see if a proposed station is economically viable. But I sometimes worry that they're too heavily influenced by Interventions from the big guys like Bell, Rogers or Corus who are ALWAYS against having any competition. Just like with cell phones, they too often get away with it.

As the situation in the U.S.has proven, a little competition is a good thing.

A lot is even better. 

Another format missing from the Toronto market is Country. Yes I know 94.7 and 95.9 are available for those who enjoy that format. I think 92.5 was the last station to program Country. Any thoughts on why it doesn't work?

Paterson1- Since you like oldies, may I suggest 1440 WJJL in Niagara Falls, N.Y. Not really available in Toronto because of splatter from 1430 but their 1000 watt signal improves greatly travelling further west. They have an extremely deep playlist concentrating on 50's, 60's and 70's. Unfortunately, their 55 watt night signal barely crosses the border and the station currently has no streaming capability.

WJJL radio does stream.  They can be found at wjjlradio.com .

Give them a try after 3:00 Saturday when their hispanic programming ends.
 

No problem.  To be honest, I had no idea until I checked out their website on a whim this morning. 

I even checked WXRL's web page just in case they're streaming, but alas, no.  (Sorry, but I can't stand "modern" country music)