Technology not necessarily a threat to broadcasting: OIC comments

Fostering high-definition Canadian television production and regulating the Canadian broadcasting system in a more flexible manner – including requests for less regulation and more subsidies for broadcasters – were common refrains in comments filed with the CRTC as part of Public Notice 2006-72. On June 8, 2006 the Governor-in-Council issued an Order-in-Council (OIC) requesting the report from the commission. The OIC was delivered in conformity with section 15 of the Broadcasting Act, which allows the Governor-in-Council to request the CRTC to hold hearings or make reports on any matter within its influence under the act. The Governor in-Council noted in the OIC that new audio-visual technologies are changing the way Canadians communicate and interact with media, leading to a new communications and media environment. Accordingly, more than 30 parties – primarily broadcasters, BDUs, and broadcasting and new media industry associations – filed comments with the CRTC suggesting how Canada should react to this environment. "While the threat from digital technology to the Canadian broadcasting system is real, the same technology holds unprecedented opportunity for growth and innovation within the traditional broadcast system," submitted Rogers Communications Inc. "Working together, distribution and content partners can create a compelling television product that can compete with any alternative source of content. In our view, this will be the only way to attract and retain viewers." Rogers also submitted that the CRTC should immediately place more emphasis on the policy objectives in the act that call for the broadcasting system to be regulated in a more flexible and future-friendly manner. Although broadcasting in Canada has withstood the initial phase of new media technologies, noted the BDU and broadcaster, "the policy and regulatory framework will need to adapt to the changes of a consumer-centric, on-demand environment." Rogers suggested three ways that policy and regulation should help achieve the objectives of the Broadcasting Act: foster consumer choice and program diversity; reward innovation and encourage investment in new technologies and services; and maximize the ability of all stakeholders to compete on a fair and flexible basis. Depending on how you look at it, the Canadian broadcasting system has already been fundamentally changed by technology, according to the Canadian Association of Broadcasters. "In one sense, there are now two parallel broadcasting systems – one a traditional regulated system with controlled entry and detailed regulatory obligations and contributions to achieve cultural policy goals, the other an essentially unregulated, uncontrolled system made possible by new digital platforms for the creation and distribution of content, bypassing traditional channels," wrote the CAB. The wide-sweeping and purportedly negative impact of digital technology on traditional broadcasting was the focus of many of the submissions to the CRTC. Comments filed jointly by CanWest Media Works Inc. and CHUM Ltd. noted the following impacts of new media: fragmentation; erosion of borders (geographic borders, borders between media, between advertisers and media); consumer empowerment; changes in audience measurement and media buying; and pressure on traditional concepts of scheduling. These impacts, and not the technologies that cause them, are what should be focused on, as total replacement is not required for a new technology to have an impact on existing media, stated the CanWest/CHUM submission. And while the submission from the two broadcasters principally provided an overview and history of Canadian media, it hinted that a handout may be in order down the road. "One of the important consequences of new technology and its impacts may well be a shift in the balance between regulation and subsidy," read the submission, "with less emphasis on regulation, and more emphasis on subsidy." The two companies were not the only parties who noted that the economics in Canada could restrict broadcasters from maintaining relevance. Continuing its constant fight for more Canadian content, advocacy group Friends of Canadian Broadcasting noted that increased programming choices have not lead to an increase in high-production-value Canadian fiction. It added that the economic model needs to change if HD production is going to be fostered. "Friends believes it is imperative that Canadian programming make the transition to high-definition production, but recognizes that this cannot occur when the increased cost of production is not accompanied by an offsetting increase in revenue." Friends added that new technologies are eroding Canadian TV funding by spreading audiences out over multiple content platforms and reducing advertising revenues. The Canadian Cable Systems Alliance (CCSA) also noted a pressing need for Canadian broadcasters to invest in producing more HDTV content, and went so far as to suggest strategies for keeping pace with the United States on that front. "Relieve over-the-air broadcasters of the obligation to build HDTV transmitters and to direct the funds that would have been spent on such a distribution network to the creation of high-quality Canadian HDTV content," the alliance’s submission reads. But why stop at over-the-air commitments? The CCSA, which represents 94 independent cable operators serving approximately 850,000 analog television subscribers, feels the commission should also revisit the rules that apply to analog cable providers, particularly mandatory distribution of certain pay and specialty services and restrictions on migration of analog services to digital distribution. These rules, says the CCSA, penalize the BDUs for "their history of having invested in and built the analog broadcasting distribution system." CCSA members face an additional burden in knowing they can lose fewer eyeballs to outside sources before it irreparably harms their business. The same goes for broadcasters. "The smaller the broadcaster, the more vulnerable they are to these developments," stated the CAB. However, Canada’s public broadcaster says the situation is far from dire, for both BDUs and broadcasters alike. In its comments, CBC/Radio-Canada noted that over the last 10 years television viewing by Canadians has actually increased, from about 22 hours per week in the mid 1990s to between 24 and 25 hours per week now. With this in mind, the OIC issued by the Governor-in-Council represents foresight by the regulators to set the stage for the future of broadcasting before it’s too late. And the comments from the broadcasters, BDUs and industry associations took into account the inevitability of new technologies playing a crucial role in Canada’s broadcasting system. Nevertheless, the CBC seems ready to embrace the digital revolution. It submitted: "If Canada is to continue to have a broadcasting system that meets the needs of Canadians, a system that provides them with video and audio programming that reflects their country, their communities, their music, their way of being in the world, then Canadian broadcasters and the Canadian government must collectively develop new ways to ensure that high quality Canadian programming has a prominent place on Canadian televisions, radios, computers, iPods, cell phones and every new device that comes on the scene." Reforming policy and regulation to ensure Canada’s broadcasting system stays relevant in the face of new technology is not just about allowing broadcasters, BDUs and DTH providers to maintain their piece of the pie. According to the CAB, it’s about continuing a legacy: "The relationship between private broadcasting and the government has arguably been the most successful public-private partnership in the history of Canada, creating an east-west infrastructure across which Canadians have communicated for decades." Estimated number of households in Canada with select devices/capabilities, 2006Estimated number of radio receivers in Canadian homes and vehicles, 200660 millionEstimated number of television receivers in Canadian homes, 200630 millionEstimated number of Canadian households with high-speed Internet access, 20066.8 millionEstimated number of Canadian households that can manufacture CDs, 20065.8 millionEstimated number of Canadian households that can manufacture DVDs, 20063.8 millionSOURCE: Technology and broadcasting: Implications for public policy, Communications Management Inc.

Technology not necessarily a threat to broadcasting: OIC comments

Broadcast | September 13, 2006

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