Advocates envisage role for municipalities and communities in community channels

Supporters of community television are urging the CRTC to adopt a regulatory model that empowers municipalities to play a strong role in independent volunteer-run community channels. Some envision a model that would see community channels managed by a board appointed by elected municipal officials. Cathy Edwards, co-founder of the Canadian Association of Community Television Users and Stations (CACTUS), calls it the “library model,” and says it will create television programming that truly belongs to the community. Edwards’ comments are in response to the CRTC’s Oct. 22 notice (2009-661) that it would be reviewing its seven-year-old framework policy for community television. A hearing is scheduled for April 26, 2010 and the deadline for written interventions is Feb. 1. The majority of community television channels in Canada are owned by cablecos. According to the CRTC’s Communications Monitoring Report 2009, broadcast distribution undertakings (BDUs) spent $116 million on local programming for 139 community channels last year. BDUs are required to contribute 5% of their revenues towards Canadian content. For cablecos, about 2% of this money is earmarked for community channels. But advocates for community television allege cablecos have eroded community programming by cutting back on hours, reducing the role of volunteers, and eroding independence by handing over production to professionals. “Cable-run community channels may be broadcasting to the community, doing a public service, but they are not part of the community sector,” says Edwards. Under the proposed library model, 2% of the community television funds would be funneled to an independent production fund. Community boards of directors appointed by elected municipal officials would then apply to this fund to set up their own channels. Edwards envisions a balanced community board representing all sectors of the community, but one that is not necessarily appointed by elected municipal officials. The issue can be traced back to 1997, when cablecos, facing competition from satellite television, began packaging community channels as an added incentive to attract cable subscriptions. As a result, Edwards says community channels gained prominence, and the cablecos replaced amateur volunteers with professionals. But the cablecos also started to regionalize programming, closing offices in smaller towns and allowing programming to originate from large urban centres. “Vancouver used to have 12 neighbourhood offices. You wouldn’t have to travel too far to make programming and now there’s only one in a corporate tower in downtown and you have to pay dollars for parking,” says Edwards. Under the cablecos, community television is detached from its true roots as it is used to shore up other programming on cable, says Richard Ward, director of the Vancouver-based Community Media Education Society (CMES). He contends that most community channels in Canada have “become pretty much a promotional vehicle for the cable companies.” Ward believes a board appointed by elected municipal officials would create accountability in communnity channels. Ward stresses, however, that he’s not opposed to cable-owned community channels, as long as they agree to fund them from their own pockets. “What I object to is the community television money being used to fund this. I think they should be two separate things." The CRTC’s 2002 policy framework does allow for not-for-profit community channels. In cases where a cableco isn’t able to provide its own community channel, it is required to direct its financial contribution to an independent licensed channel. But critics say the 2002 framework had major loopholes in implementation and funding. Edwards says only 14 applicants have applied for licences and only five or six are involved in community programming with minimal resources. Even the CRTC acknowledges a less rosy picture of the 2002 framework, noting that “one community programming undertaking has been licensed since the 2002 community TV framework came into effect.”

Advocates envisage role for municipalities and communities in community channels

News | 10/29/2009 2:56 pm 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