Oops.  Whoops.  So it goes. 

They're just a telephone company.  They don't know radio, TV OR promotions. 

"Eyyyyyye'm sawrreeey...The numberrrr You have dy-ald is No lawnger in serrrrrrrrrrrvissss."  That doesn't work on television.

I guess their credibility must have dropped a further 40%

I have no love for the big telecommunications companies but this one perplexes me.  Why single out Bell and one particular event?  Either simsub everything or don't.  It's an arbitrary and authoritarian ruling from the CRTC and only undermines the legitimacy of the commission.

Last edited by Leslieville Bill (February 7, 2017 8:41 am)

I personally want to thank my overlord government rulers and their CRTC minions for making Bell Media feel some pain....I watched the game on FOX, caught some good commercials, did not miss a single second of action because a producer forgot to press a button after the break, missed all the horrible CTV promos, did not have to watch TSN sportscasters/teleprompter readers pretend to be comedians for the sake of a lame Bell contest designed to keep viewers they knew would not be there en masse....no tears shed...at all.

RadioActive wrote:

So where did everybody go? 

A very good question indeed. Does anyone know a bar in Toronto that deliberately set all TV's to only be on Fox?
Most, if not all bars had either CTV only, or both CTV and Fox on. 
Sure, sound might only be on the Fox feed, but CTV was still viewable. 

I don't have the bar facts handy though because I was at home with two TV's on, both with audio on.
 

The story that will not die is back - and you might not believe who's chiming in this time.

It's no less than J.P. Blais, the chair of the CRTC and the impetus behind the original end-the-simsub-decision. Earlier this month, he claimed there was absolutely no proof that a lack of commercial substitution played any part in the lower ratings for Bell's broadcast of the Super Bowl. 

He also pointed to the numbers for the French RDS actually increasing as evidence there was no effect. 

And he cited increased competition on other channels as another reason for declining numbers. 

I'm no fan of Bell as everyone here knows, but this just seems insane to me. There's little doubt that some Canadian eyeballs went to Fox, given all the publicity this issue attracted.

And French Canadians, especially if they're not completely fluent in English, would most certainly want to watch a station that speaks their language.

And while it's true NFL ratings have been sinking slowly, it's the competition claim I really find laughable. Anyone in broadcasting knows that you don't even try to compete with the biggest sporting event in North America. That's why every other station and network airs mostly reruns or a shlocky movie opposite the game. There's no point in wasting new material that costs a fortune to make when it's clear the biggest audience of the year - even if it's shrinking a bit - is looking elsewhere. 

Same logic goes for the Oscars, arguably the second biggest TV event of the year.

Not sure what Blais was thinking. But if that's his evidence, it surely won't help him in the upcoming court challenge.

No ‘direct’ link between decision on U.S. Super Bowl ads, ratings dive: CRTC