Multimedia producers perplexed by seemingly conflicting criteria of CTV fund

Delegates at a new media festival held last week in Prince Edward Island were perplexed about BCE Inc.’s $23-million Groundbreaker Fund and the seemingly conflicting criteria they must meet to use it. While newly hired CTV Inc. consultant Andrew Cochran attempted to clarify the guidelines during a session at the International New Media Festival on October 18, delegates still questioned whether the fund aimed at generating quality interactive television (iTV) content meets industry needs. The Groundbreaker Fund was part of an extensive $230-million benefits package that BCE offered in exchange for regulatory permission to acquire the broadcast properties of CTV for $2.3 billion. About $140 million of the benefits package, which the CRTC approved without any changes, is earmarked for television program production over seven years. When the overall package was unveiled, the network touted its approach as risk taking and innovative (CCR, Dec. 21/00, July 19/00). But new media producers at whom the Groundbreaker Fund is aimed disagree. In backroom corridors at the festival, producers questioned how a program could be cutting edge but also meant for mainstream prime time, and how the interactive elements could be integral to the production yet the show also be able to stand alone. As well, producers criticized the regional requirement when most of the limited number of Canadian multimedia companies of repute are located in Toronto. In an hour-long presentation, Cochran attempted to clarify what CTV was looking for with the fund. "The path toward iTV often focuses on new technology and better gizmos. But CTV has taken a different path. It is focusing on how to involve viewers and enhance storytelling," he said. He pointed out that CTV was looking for iTV proposals that would enable "all viewers" to feel included. In other words, the programming should not be aimed at a fringe time, but at mainstream prime-time viewing and have export potential. Yet, Cochran said the programming had to offer something that currently doesn’t exist on television. He said the proposals should centre on programming in which the viewer experience is the driver and technology the follower, and that the interactive elements must enhance the story and have original narrative but be different from and not integral to the television programming. As an example, he cited the two sound tracks, one with more advanced information for experts, used on the show Walking With Beasts. "Most television programs have web sites with the storylines, biographies of the characters, games and contests," he noted. "These are promotional sites and not what we’re talking about."Cochran said that CTV was looking to fund ideas that are organic (multiple inputs into a story), deeper (show complementary information to a television show on the same screen), and wider (original narrative on another platform). He noted as well that all genres of programming would be considered and that the funding did not have to be split per year over the six years. "I think what it gets you is terrific cable stakes…The fund will finance up to 70 per cent of a budget, and certainly the expectation is that this fund is going to lever even more money," he said. "I think it represents a significant amount of money that is ready to be put at risk." But the questions posed following his presentation revealed real problems with the fund. "I would say that the expectations are too high if you are looking for innovative, yet they want a product that will be embraced by the mainstream," one participant commented during the session. Snap Media VP Roma Khanna questioned the regional requirement of the fund, which she noted was meant to push the edges of a truly nascent industry. "To force partnerships when there are very few people playing in this space is difficult," she said. "My understanding of the way it works is that the copyright of the show has to be owned in the region at least 51 per cent. So if that idea is created in the city, then the problem with partnering with someone in Regina – let’s say – I have to give them 51 per cent." Cochran replied that the requirement for Toronto companies to give up copyright is a red herring in any discussion on a restructuring of the fund. "I frankly don’t think it’s that big a deal," he said. "Copyright is really valuable where there is a market. There is no market; you can’t exploit the copyright." For more details, see the July 25/02 and the upcoming issue of CCR affiliate publication Canadian NEW MEDIA.

Multimedia producers perplexed by seemingly conflicting criteria of CTV fund

News | 10/24/2002 4:00 am EDT

To keep reading, get a free trial.

Already a Subscriber?

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us