Commercial broadcasters warn against turning community stations into rivals

Canada’s broadcasting establishment is worried that policy changes could transform community television and radio operators into new competitors for advertising and programming funds. While the cable industry would rather that more community channels not be licensed, groups like the Canadian Association of Broadcasters (CAB) suggest it’s time such channels returned to their local programming roots. "In the CAB’s view, it is absolutely essential that community programming not mimic the programming style and formats of the programming provided by the other elements of the broadcasting system," the organization writes in intervention to PN 2001-19. "…The CAB urges the commission to take this opportunity to guide the community channel back to its original purpose: that of a non-commercial vehicle for local expression that clearly reflects the bilingual and multicultural composition of the community, and provides programming that is both unique and complementary to existing services." Broadcasters are primarily concerned that cable-owned community channels are becoming increasingly competitive with specialty or conventional stations. The same concern applies to low-powered radio stations. For their part, cablecos don’t want new local channels that would go head-to-head with their community channels. As for producers, they don’t want a funding mechanism supporting community channels that would eat into the Canadian Television Fund. In its May 7 brief, the CAB recommends that community television be subjected to more stringent monitoring to ensure that the role and objectives of the commission’s policy are met. It also wants the CRTC to clearly define what constitutes local programming. An analysis of four cable community channels submitted by the CAB reveals an increased reliance on ‘generic’ programming that competes with specialty and conventional TV channels, and less focus on community issues. The CAB study examined three 18-hour days of programming on a Shaw Communications Inc cable channel in Calgary, Rogers Communications Inc channels in Toronto and Ottawa, and Vidéotron ltée’s Canal Vox in Montreal and concluded that much of the programming on the channels "had very little local orientation." On the radio side, the CAB says low power stations are popping up in non-major markets where they’re competing with existing radio licensees. According to the CAB, low-power radio stations should stick to delivering niche programming that complements existing radio services, whether profit or not-for-profit. "Stated another way, low power radio should be guided by a policy mechanism that will prevent a low power radio undertaking from replicating, overlapping or competing with existing services in their markets, whether those existing services are broadly appealing, targeted to specific segments of a given community, or fall somewhere in between," the association writes. Rather than forcing community cable to return to its roots, others say the CRTC should licence new local channels that use low-power frequencies (PN 2000-127). It’s not an idea that’s shared by the Canadian Cable Television Association. "If the CRTC wishes to ensure there is more local programming, then the most direct and appropriate solution would appear to be to look at the existing sources of local programming to see if there are ways of encouraging more local program development," the cable association states. Alternatively, the CCTA points out that low-power television stations could be licensed but only if "its off-air operation would not unduly interfere with the distribution networks of cable operators or other BDUs" and provided that cable carriage of these channels was not mandatory. The Canadian Film and Television Production Association (CFTPA) is concerned that changes to the community channel policy could result in less program funding for its members. As such, it’s urging the CRTC "not to make any change to the existing regulatory structure with regard to the support of community programming." Currently, BDUs are required to devote 5 per cent of their gross revenues derived from broadcasting to support the creation of Canadian programming, with 80 per cent of the monies being directed to the Canadian Television Fund. However, cablecos can reduce the required contribution to the designated production funds by 2 percent to 3.5 per cent if they maintain a community channel. Noting that advertising contributes to the strength of specialty channels and conventional broadcasters, the CFTPA urges the commission not to allow advertising on community channels. Any decrease in the revenues of specialty and conventional broadcasters "could have a negative impact on their capacity to contribute to the distribution of Canadian programming in the priority programming categories," the CFTPA states. Like the CAB, it says that community channels should not be competitive with licensed Canadian broadcasters.

Commercial broadcasters warn against turning community stations into rivals

Broadcast | May 10, 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