Broadcasters tell CRTC that proposed test would inhibit interactive TV growth

A test being evaluated by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) for determining whether interactive television content is "program-related" is too strict and would slow down the growth of ITV, says the Canadian Association of Broadcasters (CAB). The argument is occasionally semantic, but strikes at the heart of who will control distribution of ITV material and whether broadcasters and distributors will have their relationship defined by the regulator or be forced to the bargaining table. At the heart of the controversy, currently being played out as part of a process announced in Broadcasting Public Notice 2002-63, is the so-called WGN test for determining when interactive material is program-related. By regulation, program-related material must be passed through to the consumer by cable operators and satellite TV companies. In the past, the CRTC has defined services such as closed captioning and descriptive video services to be program-related, but interactive material such as voting on shows, ecommerce and other cutting-edge applications create a new regulatory morass. To help guide the industry, the CRTC has asked whether a U.S.-originated WGN test, used in the past by Canadian regulators in other decisions, would be appropriate to ITV. The WGN test consists of three criteria for determining if content is program-related. First, the broadcaster must intend the information to be seen by the same viewers as those who are watching the main video signal. Second, it must be available during the same time interval or contemporaneous with the main video program. Finally, the information must be integral to the program being aired. Cable companies say that the test is a ready-made solution to sorting out the regulatory environment around must-carry ITV signals. Wayne Charman, senior VP of television, specialty & pay services and new technologies at the CAB, says the test would rule out a raft of applications now in common use in Europe and likely to be adopted by the television industry in this country. He notes that the second and third WGN test criteria would leave 18 examples cited in the CAB’s submission out in the cold. The examples include simple applications such as voting, ecommerce and the ability to view enhanced content. For example, Charman says, viewers might be able to vote on a show after the program has ended, and thus run afoul of criteria mandating simultaneous viewing. Further, the WGN test’s insistence on material being integral to the program would, by definition, rule out the must-carry of almost all enhanced content. "With the WGN test, especially the second and third criteria taken together, we felt it would rule out almost every realistic application that you could expect to see. Indeed, if you apply the test to the 18 examples from around the world that we illustrate in our submission, I think that’s exactly what happens." Instead, Charman says, the commission should adopt a broader two-pronged definition of program-related ITV content. First, interactive content would be intended for use, not necessarily just viewing, by users. Second, the material would have to be passed through if it enhances the programming on the main service and is consistent with the nature of the programming. The CRTC will have to decide whether the CAB is correct in its argument that the evolution of ITV could be slowed by a strict test such as WGN, but Charman paints a discouraging picture of the marketplace should distributors be in control of whether content is passed through or not. "Let’s hypothetically go down that road a little bit. You would have a situation where the WGN test or criteria that are similarly restrictive would mean that very few applications would be required to be passed through by distributors. Then the program would have to negotiate for whatever access to the box for the use of the system to use that interactive element. We felt that does place the BDU, in fact, in the role of gatekeeper once again for that whole portion of the programming. It really means that there is no certainty at all. There is no assurance that you can negotiate reasonable terms. We just felt that this is assured to slow down the rollout of interactivity. In theory, you can negotiate things but we feel that there needs to be a balance in terms of what reasonably should be passed through and what reasonably should not be passed through." He adds, "Some of this is nuance, but when you get down to stuff like this, people look at words and so on…We’re not at all suggesting that distributors should pass through any and all content provided by programmers no matter what it is. We’re saying, no, do what’s reasonable." The Canadian Cable Television Association argues in its submission, however, that capacity and infrastructure are limited for distribution of ITV, and that only material that is "more than something supplementary or tangential" should be passed through on a mandatory basis. As for the oft-cited argument that cable and satellite TV companies might become gatekeepers without regulatory checks, the CCTA notes that there have been no formal disputes filed with the CRTC with respect to the carriage of interactive material by distributors. "This is instructive," the CCTA writes in its submission, "in that it demonstrates that the business and technical arrangements associated with ITV are still being developed and tested by all industry players."

Broadcasters tell CRTC that proposed test would inhibit interactive TV growth

News | 02/20/2003 5:00 am EST

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