Increasing in-house drama production won’t benefit industry: Independent Producers

Add independent producers to the list of factions giving the CRTC the sage advice of "Don't mess with what doesn't need fixing." The commission heard this refrain ad nauseam from the major broadcasters and BDUs during last week's Diversity of Voices proceeding, and now it's the producers response to some of the recommendations in the Review of the Regulatory Framework for Broadcasting Services in Canada. The report, commissioned by the CRTC and delivered by Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP lawyers Laurie Dunbar and Christian Leblanc, recommends the CRTC "study the pros and cons of reducing the requirements on broadcasting undertakings to use high percentages of independently produced programming." Current regulations require 75% of the priority programming aired by conventional over-the-air broadcasters to be produced by independent producers, a policy the Dunbar/Leblanc report says "may not be working." The producers disagree. "I don't think there's any economic incentive for broadcasters to make the kind of high-cost original content that can compete with Hollywood, because at this point, anyway, the producers are delivering it at a fraction of the whole cost," says Stephen Ellis, president and CEO of Ellis Entertainment, one of Canada's oldest independent producers. "Canada's not radically different from other major industrialized countries, and essentially they all lean on the independent sector and government regulation and support just because of the nature of the creation of intellectual property." While Ellis doesn't agree with reducing the broadcaster requirements for independently-produced programming, he understands the value of questioning the validity of regulations occasionally. In fact, he says he would gladly take part in a public process and appear before the commission to help reaffirm the current system is necessary and effective. Stephen Stohn, president of Epitome Pictures Inc., is slightly less concerned about a removal or reduction of the mandated independent production levels because he believes market forces would dictate a similar ratio of in-house to independently produced programming is maintained. "The best situation, whether there's regulation to it or not, in my mind is having independent producers, certainly for the high-cost programs," he says. "Their core strength is being a broadcaster, I think our core strength is being a producer, why would it change?"It would change, of course, if it suited the broadcasters financially. Although Ellis says the broadcasters have no incentive to produce high-cost original content, there would be a temptation to replace it with a lower-quality product. "Networks don't want to do any Canadian production to begin with, and this wouldn't encourage them to do any more," says David Smith, VP of S&S Productions Inc. "Every show would look the same; the same music, the same crew. So I don't think this would improve the quality of Canadian programming." Smith adds that if the independent production regulations were replaced with a spending requirement, the broadcasters could simply reallocate their overhead costs and charge them to Canadian production. Even though Stohn believes that if the regulations were removed the level of independently produced priority programming would eventually return to the 75% range, he acknowledges that it would decline initially. So the question then is if the long-term conclusion is that things are fine the way they are, what sense does it make to subject the smaller producers, and the industry itself, to irreparable damage?It's certainly not a scenario the Canadian Film and Television Production Association (CFTPA) wants to see. In fact, at last week's hearing the CFTPA countered the Dunbar/Leblanc recommendation by suggesting the commission increase the level of priority programming that major broadcast groups must source from independent producers from 75% to 85%. "We fundamentally believe that allowing broadcasters to do more in-house or affiliate production would be disastrous for the Canadian broadcasting system and Canadian television viewers," said Julia Keatley, president of Keatley Entertainment and co-chair of the CFTPA's broadcast relations committee, during the association's opening address. She echoed Smith by saying that, similar to the replacement of drama and comedy programming with entertainment magazine shows that occured after the CRTC relaxed regulations in its 1999 TV policy, a trend toward cheaper content would likely develop if broadcasters were allowed to fill more of their schedules with in-house programming. "I don't see where there's a huge problem that needs fixing," says Smith. Actually, he does advocate putting the pre-1999 drama requirements back in place. And perhaps debate of the Dunbar/Leblanc report will lead to just that. After all, it does suggest examining both the pros and the cons of reducing the broadcaster requirements, so any resulting new regulation could possibly go either way. It would certainly validate the independent producers and, to some extent, the report itself. Says Ellis: "You could probably take apart your clothes thread by thread and question the need for each individual thread, but at the end of the day you'd be naked. I'm not sure doing anything more than questioning each individual thread in isolation from everything else. So my worry is that we shouldn't overlook the fact that at the end of the day, taken together, it creates an important fabric."

Increasing in-house drama production won’t benefit industry: Independent Producers

Broadcast | September 25, 2007

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