Monthly Archives: October 2009

The young’uns speak

Poster for Jeunes pour Montréal

Poster for Jeunes pour Montréal

You don't usually see third-party interest groups in municipal elections, but one has appearently formed called Jeunes pour Montréal. The idea is not to advocate for any particular political party but to raise issues of specific interest to youth, including public transportation. Its creators say they're supported by student associations and not any particular party, so I'll take them at their word.

They're also (of course) active on social media, including Facebook, where we learn that the most popular issue apparently is metro service overnight. They've asked the three parties for their views on that issue.

Aside from the little traffic that would take a metro at 4am, the overnight hours are when track maintenance and other work is carried out that can't be done while the trains are running.

But an increase in the frequency and reach of night bus service is an idea worth looking at.

UPDATE: Turns out the group isn't authorized by the Chief Electoral Officer and its signs are up illegally. Some of them have already been taken down.

Ile Sans Fil in the park

Both Union Montreal and Vision Montreal have an element on their platforms that some technologically-inclined Montrealers might find interesting: free (or cheap) wireless Internet access in public parks and other public areas.

The idea isn't new. The city first approached the volunteer group Ile Sans Fil more than two years ago to talk about setting up such a system. Ile Sans Fil provides free wireless Internet through more than 150 access points in the city, most through places like coffee shops who pay ISF a small fee.

The city has even conducted studies and hearings on the subject, and a presentation given in November 2007 resulted in only one comment, in support of the project. In a report, filed at the beginning of 2008 (PDF), the city's commission on economic development recommended setting up a network with Ile Sans Fil.

For various reasons internal to the city's operation, this issue has been sitting on a shelf since then. ISF even appealed to the public in August 2008, (perhaps prematurely), though specifying that the group wasn't in danger if the deal fell through. ISF were expecting a call for tenders earlier this year on a free wifi project, which it would then bid on and be a clear favourite for, but it never came.

Both Tremblay and Harel should be somewhat embarrassed to have this on their platforms. Tremblay because the city hasn't acted on this yet despite the preliminary work being done, and Harel because it was an idea of the Tremblay administration that her party has now stolen.

Journalism: It’s just for fun

The Globe and Mail has launched a new contest: Journalism Dream. The winners of this contest (one writer, one photographer) get a some-expenses-paid trip to Vancouver where they would become part of the Globe's Olympic team in February.

Except, they wouldn't be treated the same as the rest of the Globe's Olympic team. While real journalists will get all their expenses paid, plus a proper salary, these "guest" journalists get airfare and hotel, a laptop and $1,000 spending money, which works out to $200 per photo assignment or article that they're expected to write over the two weeks of the Games.

According to the rules: "Prize winner and his/her travelling companion are solely responsible for all costs not expressly described herein including, without limitation, applicable taxes, fuel/currency surcharges, ground transportation, meals, beverages, room service, gratuities, merchandise, telephone calls, insurance together with any required travel documentation, and all personal expenses of any kind or nature, together with any applicable overnight layover. ... No further compensation will be made to the guest journalists for their submission of articles/photographs."

Some of you might think that this is an equitable trade, even a beneficial one for participants in the contest, especially if you consider the $1,000 (which would be used for things like meals) as payment for the articles or photos.

What bugs me about this contest, though, is just that: it's a contest. Becoming a journalist is seen as some sort of prize to be won, rather than a job to work hard for. And this, by one of Canada's most prestigious newspapers.

One of the big problems facing journalists these days is this impression people have that it's somehow glamorous. So many people want to become TV reporters or newspaper columnists, and so few positions are available, that the cost of journalism is being brought down (the law of supply and demand). Freelancing rates have been stagnant (or even decreasing) for decades as inflation has reduced the value of those rates. New outlets (both traditional and new media) use "citizen journalism" as a code word for replacing expensive professionals with amateurs willing to do the work for free in exchange for what they hope will be fame or recognition (in the end, that never comes - even TV reporters and newspaper columnists can walk around town without being noticed).

CBC Radio's The Current explored the issue of internships on Thursday (after an article in the New York Times about people paying to get unpaid internships), and it's no surprise that media interns were a big part of that. (For others, you can check out the Unfair Internships blog).

I realize I'm part of the problem here. I took two unpaid one-week internships (one at the West Island Chronicle, another at CBC which led to a handful of paid shifts in radio), though I should point out that neither of those were major factors in getting my current job (which began with a paid internship).

I also work for free for this blog (though in that case, at least I'm exploiting myself and marketing myself at the same time). Though a few people stop me to say they love it (one cute girl told me that last night, in fact), I don't pretend that I'll get famous or rich through it, or that it will ever replace the work done by professional investigative journalists.

Still, the thought of turning this into a contest prize giveaway like some cheap laptop...

CTV owes its viewers an apology

Dave Carroll, the guy who did the United Breaks Guitars video, produces a song about the evil cable companies paid for by CTV. It has aired in full (without explanation) at the end of local newscasts across the CTV network for two days in a row, as if reinforcing the idea that local stations have little say in local programming. You can download the video here.

At 11:30 a.m. Thursday, CTV held a 45-minute news conference in Toronto to make its case for "saving" local television by getting Canadians to support them and support their request (now with CBC and Global) before the CRTC. The complete video is on CTV's website. It started off by using CKX-TV Brandon as an example, making me wonder if proving a point in this campaign wasn't a big reason that CTV decided to pull the plug on the station so quickly. It also included the presentation of two new commercial spots (both of which are comically bad), and ended with the Dave Carroll video above.

Scanning through the TV channels, I found it covered live on only one. It wasn't CPAC, of course, it was CTV News Channel, which cut away from Dan Matheson's show for almost 25 minutes to air these talking heads live. Matheson cut it off just before noon only so he could finally throw to commercials. Before he did, there were three questions from the audience - all from television broadcasters with clear interests here (one was from CityTV, which isn't part of the coalition only because its owner Rogers is more interested in protecting cable revenue than television revenue - the videographer asked if this is a political campaign by broadcasters, and got them to admit that yes, it was).

When CTV News Channel returned, there was no discussion of the topic, no response from cable and satellite companies, and no attempt was made to provide the other side of the debate (even though it's being clearly stated). This despite the fact that the 25-minute presentation included facts that are clearly in dispute, included two commercials (which were not shot by a CTV cameraman pointing at a screen, but fed directly to air), and an admission from CTV itself that this was a political campaign.

It was only at 1 p.m., an hour and a half after the press conference began, that Dan Matheson brought in Phil Lind of Rogers and grilled him for five minutes on the cable company's response. A 25-minute news conference with embedded advertising presented without question versus a five-minute interview with a skeptical news anchor is apparently considered balanced to CTV.

Just after noon on CFCF's local newscast, a brief about the news conference was presented by anchor Todd van der Heyden. Again, CTV's statements were presented without question, no attempt was made to present the other side of the debate, and viewers were encouraged to visit CTV's Local TV Matters website as if it was some reliable source for more information instead of a propaganda campaign by the corporate office.

CTV started by airing one-sided ads on its networks, then holding "open houses" and leveraging local TV personalities to amass large crowds to pretend there's some huge support for their political cause. They aired one-sided reports from local journalists scaring people into supporting them. Now, it seems, they're presenting a news conference (at which nothing new was said) as if it's breaking news.

CTV is continuing to abuse the public trust, and using its power over journalists it employs to get them to ignore journalistic ethics and bias themselves in favour of their employer.

It doesn't matter whether you agree with CTV's campaign, or with fee for carriage, or that local TV is in trouble, or that cable and satellite companies are making too much money. CTV News has a duty to present a fair picture to its viewers, and it is intentionally failing to do so.

This is what you want us to save?

UPDATE: Bell and Rogers respond with a press release saying they give plenty of money to Canadian television.

Oh yeah, that Canwest thing

Over the past week, I've had people ask me about Canwest's financial situation. Are they selling their assets? Will there be an auction? Is Paul Godfrey buying the newspapers? Are executives getting huge bonuses? Was Leonard Asper to blame? Did the company not do enough to reduce its debt? Does ScotiaBank own the newspapers now? Are people being fired and losing severance? Will pensions be worthless? Is this somehow Conrad Black's fault? Will Global TV be owned by Americans? Can the newspapers survive? Will this affect programming? Will Leonard Asper get thrown out?

I wish I could tell you I knew the answers to these questions, as I am an employee of a Canwest newspaper, but the reality is that I don't know any more than you do. Canwest is a publicly-traded company (okay, it was a publicly-traded company), and as such anything at those upper levels has to be divulged to shareholders (via press releases) before it's told to the company's thousands of front-line employees. So I don't know any more than what's been reported through those releases and in the media. Neither does my boss. Neither does my boss's boss.

So everything is out there. CBC does a pretty good job of explaining the issues (and getting the facts right). Or you can get it from the horse's mouth on Canwest's public restructuring info page, complete with video of Leonard Asper.

For those too lazy to read everything, these are the facts as I've been told them from the company (and has been publicly released):

  • The company that filed for creditor protection is called Canwest Media Inc. It owns the National Post, the Global Television Network, three cable channels (DejaView, Fox Sports World, and MovieTime) and the corporate office. You can see a diagram here (PDF). Canwest Limited Partnership is the company that owns the other newspapers (including my employer The Gazette), and the former Alliance Atlantis channels are owned by CW Media, which as its own structure. Neither those companies nor the parent company Canwest Global Communications Corp. has filed for creditor protection.
  • Nothing has changed at the operational level, either on the affected side or the non-affected side. There's obviously a lot of concern among those inside and outside the company (and that might affect things like advertising contracts), but nothing has been shut down. Employees are still getting paid, and invoices are still being processed.
  • Other than the National Post Company being transferred from the Canwest Media side to the Canwest LP side (to join the other newspapers), there has been no official word on the sale or reconfiguration of any assets.
  • The creditor protection filing comes with a pre-packaged deal with 70% of some class of creditors (I'm not a business expert here, read the stories if you care), so it is expected to go through this credit-for-equity swap relatively painlessly. Negotiating this deal (and the sale of Australia's Network Ten) is why the company has gotten extension after extension on debt-related deadlines over the past few months.
  • Canwest LP (the newspaper side) still has a lot of debt (about $1 billion) of its own, which means there will be some restructuring on that side as well. There has been no word on whether a creditor protection filing would be part of that.
  • The television networks and newspapers are still profitable, and no matter what happens to Canwest they are expected to survive.

Admittedly, I'm drinking the company Kool-Aid here. Some of these things may change, or they might not. Everything we know for sure has already been released.

It would be easy for me to speculate on possible avenues here, but the Globe and Mail, Toronto Star and others are perfectly content to do that with their anonymous sources, and they're probably in a better position than me to do so. Maybe what they say is true, maybe it's not. I don't know any more than you do, and it would be irresponsible and counter-productive to make wild guesses about the future of this media giant.

Go ahead and make up your own theories. But just remember there are thousands of families who depend on Canwest properties to put food on the table.

Google Street View coverage maps

I won't bother reporting that Google Street View launched in Montreal and other Canadian cities today, since everyone else is already doing that.

But I'll add this map so you can see what areas are covered (sorry Châteauguay, Vaudreuil-Dorion and St. Bruno, it seems you've been left out):

Google Street View coverage map for Montreal

Google Street View coverage map for Montreal

To check it out, we'll start you off in true Gazette style, at the corner of Peel and Ste. Catherine. Now go and find all those embarrassing or quirky photos hidden in the city.

Read More »

Battle of the fee-for-carriage misinformation campaigns

The battle for "fee for carriage" - forcing cable and satellite TV providers to hand over money to over-the-air broadcasters - is getting ugly.

A few weeks after CTV got Global and the CBC to join its "Save Local TV" campaign (now rebranded "Local TV Matters"), Bell (which owns the largest satellite TV provider) and Rogers (which owns Rogers Cable) have launched the counter-campaign Stop the TV Tax. Both websites feature "facts" pages with incredibly misleading arguments and statistics about the business model of television, and both are racing against the clock to get people to support their side in upcoming CRTC hearings on the fee for carriage issue.

Notably absent from either side is Quebecor, which owns the TVA television network (and Sun TV station in Toronto) but also the Videotron cable service. CityTV, the other notable absence on the broadcaster side, is owned by Rogers, which has clearly picked the other side in this debate.

The "TV tax" website has prompted CTVGlobeMedia to respond by calling it "misinformation", while in the same release saying that cable companies are charging Canadians for conventional television, which is demonstrably false.

While CTV et al's claims are suspect, the Rogers and Bell throw up some doozies of their own, including fantom quotes saying incorrectly that this is a "one time" fee. Except nobody said fee for carriage would be a one-time fee, and the website provides no source for this supposed quote. They also claim that conventional broadcasters had profits of $400 million last year, but the CRTC put that number at only $8 million (down from over $100 million) when it released statistical data in February. (UPDATE Oct. 6: I asked the Stop the TV Tax people about this, and they pointed to a Canwest quarterly report and an opinion piece about CTV, neither of which break down profit by conventional vs. specialty channels, and on Global's side the operating profit for its non-Alliance-Atlantis TV network - which still includes a half-dozen cable channels like MovieTime and TVtropolis - was about $40 million)

When it comes to choosing between greedy broadcasters and greedy cable and satellite companies, most informed Canadians would prefer to choose neither. These slick (and expensive) lobbying campaigns - just think of how much they're spending to lobby the CRTC directly if they're spending this much on us - only reinforces the fact that both sides have plenty of money to spare.

Vos vrais patrons, c’est moi?

Got this flyer in the mail today. It's from Montreal's blue-collar union (SCFP 301), who are trying to negotiate a new contract with the city (and are staging a one-day strike on Wednesday). They try to gain public sympathy by arguing that union labour is cheaper than outsourcing, and that their salary demands of 2/2.5% per year are not extravagant.

More details from this "exclusive" La Presse piece, and some thoughts from Propos Montréal.

scfp1

Read More »

Montreal Geography Trivia No. 56

Another suggestion from a reader: Where in Montreal do a street ("rue") and avenue of the same name intersect?

Bonus half-points if you want to throw in streets and crescents, streets and boulevards, streets and terrasses, etc., which are much more common.

Alexandra Avenue and Alexandra Street

Alexandra Avenue and Alexandra Street

UPDATE: I should have excluded numbered streets and avenues (too easy). The answer I (and contributor Jean Naimard) had in mind was Alexandra St. and Alexandra Ave. in Little Italy. But I'm sure you can come up with others.

Melnick Underground

Mitch Melnick, the afternoon host on the Team 990, has begun his own web video show online called Melnick Underground. The first episode was filmed and posted on Saturday. Discussions include music and, of course, the Habs.

The show, which is shot at Hurley's pub and Melnick stresses has absolutely nothing to do with the radio station, has a very "underground" feel to it (read: the sound, lighting and graphics are all awful), but it's the content that matters, and it remains to be seen if it can gain a following.

I'm noticing a trend developing where journalists and other media personalities try going out on their own online. In some cases, like Peter Anthony Holder or Jean-Michel Vanasse, it happens after they get fired. But some who are still comfortable in their current jobs are also considering similar moves because they feel they're not getting something from their current employer (either editorial freedom, exposure or money).

I welcome these kinds of efforts, and hope Melnick finds an audience for his show. In that light, some constructive suggestions:

  1. Your intro is 68 seconds long. Way too long. Like 63 seconds too long.
  2. We can live with the imperfect lighting, but the sound needs to be better. You got microphones on the table, just make sure you talk into them, especially when you're at a bar with loud music playing.

Any other remarks from the peanut gallery?