Thou shalt not misinterpret the chairman

After a quick, but stern, rebuke by Konrad von Finckenstein for its past misinterpretation of the CRTC chairman's own words, the Canadian Film and Television Production Association (CFTPA) took its turn answer the commissioners' questions as the final intervener on day three of the Diversity of Voices proceeding. Von Finckenstein's indignation stemmed from part of the CFTPA's July Diversity of Voices submission - page 38, paragraph 214 as he specifically pointed out - that first quoted the chairman saying, "Since market forces recognize only economic goals, it is clear that there must always be regulation of broadcasting in order to ensure the creation of Canadian content in programming, and to ensure access to the system for all Canadians." The CFTPA then noted that, "In essence, what the chairman is saying is that when market forces fail to achieve the objectives of the Act, the commission must regulate to ensure that the objectives are met."This is not what the chairman was saying, though. Von Finckenstein stated he has never advocated for a strictly market-based approach to the broadcasting sector, making his point to the CFTPA in a tone that won't be reflected in the transcripts. CFTPA president and CEO Guy Mason thanked the chairman for the clarification.With that aside, issues of maintaining a diversity of voices in the face of media concentration moved to the fore. In his opening remarks to the commissioners, Mason outlined the CFTPA's members' role in ensuring diversity. "We believe that one of the surest ways to have a diversity of voices in the broadcasting system in an ever-consolidating media world is to mandate a significant place for priority programming produced by independent producers in broadcasters' program schedules," he said. "Canadian independent producers provide a rich diversity of programming sources and creativity to the broadcasting system." Specifically, in the interest of maintaining the contribution of independent producers to the diversity of voices, the CFTPA recommended the commission both increase the level of priority programming the major broadcasters must acquire from independent producers from 75% to 85% and require the broadcasters to enter into a terms of trade agreement with the CFTPA. Presented with the two recommendations, von Finckenstein asked the production association which one was more important. "For the purpose of this hearing, for ensuring diversity, I think moving to the 85% in priority programming is more important," responded Mason. However, the CFTPA was reluctant to value one of its recommendations over the other. Following Mason's response, Julia Keatley, president of Keatley Entertainment and co-creator of the drama series Cold Squad, added that "without terms of trade, consolidation is a greater threat to us." Indeed, independent producers struggle enough as it is. "One broadcaster even suggests that despite years of trying, we have been unable to foster a truly viable independent production industry," said Ira Levy, co-founder of Breakthrough Films & Television, during the opening remarks. "While we agree, regrettably, that the independent production sector can not be considered healthy....the main reason for this is because broadcasters have been able to get away with paying minimal licence fees for independent productions." But when it came to the terms of trade request, von Finckenstein was unsure exactly what role the commission was to play. Certainly, the CRTC couldn't be expected to simply order broadcasters into terms of trade agreements, which are traditionally ratified after a negotiating process. Mason clarified by saying the CRTC would act more as an arbitrator who complaints could be returned to if negotiations stalled. "We need accountability back to the commission for terms of trade," he said. Before the CFTPA testified, the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC) was under the spotlight, defending its position. While the broadcasters that presented on Monday - CTV and CanWest - said matters of self-censorship and editorial independence were monitored by the CBSC, other interveners questioned the council's ability to regulate the very broadcasters who fund it. "I'd like to address that point straightaway," said Ronald Cohen, the CBSC's national chair. "It's simply untrue. It's cynical. It's inaccurate. It flies in the face of reality. The numbers, the history, the precedents do not bear that allegation out." Of course, the most telling number is 72, which the percentage of the 228 formal public decisions rendered by the CBSC since 1999 that have gone against broadcasters. Although the CBSC's record in administering the various broadcast codes is no doubt exemplary, diversity of voices is not served by admonishing a broadcaster for broadcasting adult content before 9:00 p.m. The commission is more interested if the CBSC can ensure that the multiple newsrooms of these broadcasting behemoths aren't all towing the same line. "You don't need something in writing from the owners to know how to cover a story," said commissioner Stuart Langford. "To borrow an old Irish saying, a wink is as good as a nod to a blind horse. Can track this down?"Cohen responded by saying even a superior or federal court would have difficulty proving that type of interference, but the CBSC can look at evidence, speak with people and call for documents. "We'd probably do as well or badly as a court would do," he said, but also noted a fact that illustrates a key issue with enforcing diversity of voices in the face of consolidation, "You can't subpoena a wink or a nod."

Thou shalt not misinterpret the chairman

News | 09/20/2007 11:33 am EDT

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

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us