CAB takes tough stand on cableco ownership of specialty channels

The Canadian Association of Broadcasters is rallying against the cable industry in its bid to own more analog specialty channels, prompting one of its largest members to threaten to withdraw from the association. Rogers Communications Inc revealed earlier this week that it plans to resign from the association at the end of this month in response to a Feb. 2 intervention the CAB filed with the CRTC as part of a review of the rules governing cable ownership of discretionary channels (PN 2000-165). At the request of the CAB, Rogers was to meet Wednesday with the association. The cable industry wants the rules changed to allow it more freedom to buy specialty and pay channels. The CAB doesn’t share that view. In fact, it calls for a broader review of the entire broadcasting industry before contemplating such a "complete overhaul of the existing regulatory framework for cable undertakings". A brief excerpt from the association’s February submission appears below: The CAB considers it premature to change the commission’s policy with respect to cable ownership of discretionary programming services. Although there have been some changes in the distribution landscape, these changes do not in and of themselves support the commission changing its policy on cable ownership of discretionary services. More importantly, there is no evidence that there has been a significant change in the conduct of cable distributors that would warrant a change in the policy. The CAB is particularly concerned with the notion that safeguards in and of themselves can be the basis upon which to effect a change to the commission’s policy on cable ownership of discretionary services. In the past, safeguards have been disregarded and the commission has been reluctant to effectively and unequivocally enforce such safeguards. A number of issues that relate to the industry in general, including the past treatment by cable distributors of affiliated discretionary programming services, the need for clear safeguards that are effectively and unequivocally enforced in order to prevent any further circumstances of undue preference/undue disadvantage and, other issues such as the structure of the broadcasting industry need to be closely examined before a determination on whether to change the commission’s policy on cable ownership of discretionary programming services is made. Another "Structural Hearing" In the CAB’s view, the commission needs to conduct a broader and comprehensive review of the Canadian broadcasting system before determining whether a change in its current policy...is warranted. A thorough examination of the impact that a relaxation of the commission’s existing policy on cable/discretionary service cross-ownership would have on issues such as the diversity of voices and ownership structures in the system, issues related to the migration of services from analog to digital distribution with increased cable ownership, and the future of interactivity for Canadian programming services are but a few of the matters that need to be considered.... The need for safeguards In order to address outstanding concerns with respect to undue preference/undue disadvantage, the Canadian Cable Television Association has proposed the following safeguard: The CCTA is prepared to undertake, on behalf of its members, that none of its member companies that has an ownership interest (existing or future), either directly or through an affiliate, in a discretionary programming service that is distributed on an analog channel on any cable system owned and controlled by that company or any affiliate of it, will alter the terms of carriage of that service... The undue preference provision and the safeguard provision proposed by the CCTA are insufficient … to provide the necessary protection for unaffiliated discretionary programming services when dealing with an overwhelmingly dominant distributor who is seeking to increase its dominance in the marketplace through the acquisition of an ownership interest in a discretionary programming service. More importantly, any exception allowed on the basis of either a code of conduct, safeguards, condition of licence or other regulatory means must be swiftly and strictly enforced without the requirement that a third-party complaint first be instituted before the commission addresses the matter of the breach.

CAB takes tough stand on cableco ownership of specialty channels

Broadcast | February 28, 2001

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us