Ah, convergence. It's been the buzzword in the big media companies for the past decade or so, with all the acquisitions that have taken place. Bell, a phone company, started up a satellite TV service, a DSL Internet service, and got into the broadcasting game in one giant swoop by acquiring CTV the first time, along with a growing number of TV specialty channels.

Rogers, which had a head start on the convergence business being a broadcaster, cable provider and wireless company, added a baseball team, other cable and wireless providers, and broadcasting assets including the sloppy seconds of the CTV/CHUM acquisition.

Quebecor, once a commercial printer and newspaper owner, bought a TV network, a cable and Internet service provider, and an entire newspaper chain.

Canwest, once a small television broadcaster, built up a national television network, bought a high-profile newspaper chain and a media company with a truckload of specialty channels. Now it in turn (minus the newspapers) has been bought up by Shaw, a cable provider that acquired a satellite TV provider.

With Shaw's acquisition of Canwest and Bell's acquisition of CTV, a pattern is emerging where each of the corporate empires has a TV provider, a wireless service, an Internet service, a national broadcast network, TV specialty channels, and maybe some radio and print assets on the side.

*For the purpose of this chart, we'll assume that the Bell purchase of CTVglobemedia goes through as advertised.

**Many people point to the Shaw family's control of Corus Entertainment to suggest that Corus is unofficially a subsidiary of Shaw Communications. But if you think that way, you can add a bunch of specialty channels and radio stations to the Shaw column.

Filling the holes

Rather than worry too much about a telecommunications company wanting to spend billions on media assets when just about all media assets are falling in value, the business world is wondering: What's next? Where is the next big acquisition or merger that puts a fifth column on that table?

Telus is the big name on everyone's lips, because they have the audacity to just be a telecom company at the moment and therefore have a "content gap". But Telus says they won't get in this game.

Besides, there are other options. Just connect the dots as you like:

Telecom

• Telus (wireless, home phone, TV, Internet)
• EastLink (cable, Internet)

Publishing

• Postmedia Network (former Canwest newspapers and online assets)
• Gesca (newspapers, including La Presse, plus Cyberpresse and related websites) - currently owned by Power Corporation
• Torstar (newspapers, books)
• Transcontinental (newspapers, magazines, printers)
• Metroland Media Group (newspapers, printers)
• Black Press (newspapers)
• Brunswick News (newspapers)
• Communications Voir (newspapers)

Broadcasting

• Jim Pattison Media Group (TV, radio, advertising) - currently a division of the giant Jim Pattison Group
• Newcap Broadcasting (TV, radio)
• Astral Media (radio, TV, specialty)
• Corus Entertainment (TV, radio, specialty) - would be kind of awkward if it was owned by anyone but Shaw
• RNC Media (TV, radio)
• Remstar (Remstar Productions, V)
• Channel Zero (CHCH, CJNT, specialty)

Telecom and broadcasting

• Cogeco (cable, radio)

There's also plenty of regional telecom companies, small newspaper publishers, book publishers and specialty TV channel owners that can be scooped up and disappear into the large conglomerates.

How this screws us over

"Today our three largest cable competitors are fully integrated and clearly we are not prepared to buy our content from our competitors"

That quote comes from a conference call that Bell had shortly after announcing the deal to buy CTV. The basic premise behind this deal isn't that CTV is going to make Bell a lot of money by being a profitable business unit, but rather that CTV's content will be a bargaining chip to get people to use Bell's services.

Recently, Rogers launched a new TV channel called Sportsnet One. Even though it's only available on Rogers cable (it hasn't negotiated carriage on the other providers yet), Rogers decided to move Toronto Blue Jays games to Sportsnet One in order to get people to subscribe to the new channel. Since Rogers owns the baseball team, the television channel and the cable provider that carries it, it's the ultimate convergence play.

And it's royally screwing over Blue Jays fans.

Analysts don't think Bell will be using blackmail to get people to switch over to its services. But they could. Want to watch NHL games on your mobile phone? You can't unless you're with Bell. Want TVA shows on demand? You can't unless you have Videotron illico. Anything these companies can buy exclusive rights for, they will do it. The only things keeping them from forcing you to subscribe to a particular telecom in order to get some content are the CRTC (which doesn't regulate mobile or online content) and business models that see more profits in maximum exposure than short-sighted consumer blackmail.

It's not out of the realm of possibilities for one of these companies to pull some move that, like Sportsnet One, requires using a particular service to get something that used to be widely available. And if one company does that (and it's successful), the others would probably follow. We could be a couple of years away from a country where you need to buy redundant services in order to get the content you want.

Save our local TV from ... us?

Remember that "Save Local TV" campaign by the broadcasters who wanted us to convince the CRTC to force the cable and satellite companies to give money to TV broadcasters? And the corresponding "Stop the TV Tax" campaign from the cable and satellite companies to pressure the CRTC the other way? Well, since that campaign, Shaw took control of Global TV and BCE is about to take control of CTV. Quebecor, which owns both TVA and Videotron, didn't participate in either campaign.

Bill Brioux remembers those campaigns, and is particularly pissed that a TV network with a "broken business model" just sold for billions.

They're still arguing against each other at the moment, but how long can we expect that to last?

And there's other concerns too. John Bowman points out that there's little incentive to invest in quality broadcast equipment. And Iain Marlow suggests this may make it easier for the government to relax foreign ownership restrictions.

This kind of stuff will come up at the CRTC hearings into the takeover, though I'm doubtful that the commission will put up a major roadblock to it, despite opposition from opponents to media concentration.

It won't work ... or maybe it will

The biggest negative opinion about this deal is the simple argument that CTV won't be a profitable venture for Bell any more than it was a decade ago. That's what David Olive says, it's what Howard Bernstein says, and Torstar (which sells its stake in CTV) is playing this up as a win for them, as is the Globe and Mail, which is breaking off (mostly) from the empire.

To be fair, some like the Globe's Derek DeCloet believe this might make sense, pointing out that the price isn't as ridiculously high as it was 10 years ago. Other analysts agree.

One of those sides will be proven right in a few years. Let's hope, for the sake of consumer choice and healthy corporate competition, that bigger isn't better.

Related Posts

• Bell Let’s Talk Day: “This is why we do it”
• A time to remember – unless The View is on
• CTV Two: The second-rate brand
• Is selling out okay for a good cause?
• Cogeco’s self-serving plan for Quebec radio

Among the highlights:

• Cogeco wants to hold on to all its stations in Montreal, which would include anglo station CFQR 92.5FM, AM sports talk station CKAC 730, and franco FM stations CHMP 98.5, CKOI 96.9 and CFGL 105.7. Having three francophone FM stations in the same market would normally not be permitted by the CRTC, but Cogeco (which previously owned only the Rythme FM network including CFGL and is getting the rest through Corus) seems to be banking on the fact that 98.5 is a talk radio station to argue that it should keep all three.
• In Sherbrooke, Cogeco wants to shut down CKOY 104.5 FM (a clone of CKOI that carries music) and replace it with a retransmitter of Montreal-based sports talk station CKAC. This would mean no local advertising for the station, cutting 6-10 jobs, according to La Tribune. This is Cogeco's proposed solution to the fact that it would own three francophone FM radio stations in the market, including a Rythme FM station (CFGE 93.7FM) and a Souvenirs Garantis station (CHLT 107.7FM)
• In Quebec City, where Cogeco would own four francophone FM stations, it wants to sell two of them: its Rythme FM station (CJEC 91.9FM) and CKOI-branded station (CFEL 102.1FM). That would leave it with talk radio station CJMF 93.3FM and Souvenirs Garantis station CFOM 102.9FM. It's a move that is actually lifting the spirits of those at the stations it's planning to sell.
• In Gatineau (CJRC 104.7FM), Trois-Rivières (CHLN 106.9FM) and Sherbrooke (CHLT 107.7FM), Cogeco would reverse the decision to replace morning shows on its Souvenirs Garantis stations with simulcasts of Paul Arcand's show on 98.5. This is designed to mitigate the loss of a local station in Trois-Rivières and Cogeco's demand for an exception to the rules in Montreal.

Cogeco News

In addition to the above, Cogeco is talking big about creating a "news agency" that would serve all its stations (I guess they mean something bigger than Corus Nouvelles). Here's what they say in their press release:

The news agency that COGECO proposes to set up will play a key role in enriching local information and will provide a complement to the other information sources available in Quebec. All of the stations of the COGECO group as well as independent stations in the regions and community stations will be asked to contribute to the content available through the agency. In return, they will be able to select the most relevant news for their respective listening audiences and produce their own news bulletins locally.

Pooling resources through the news agency, which will be coordinated by FM 98.5, will create a full information source available 24/7 - because news happens nights and weekends, too.

Furthermore, sharing information resources will allow regional stations CHLN-FM Trois-Rivieres, CHLT-FM Sherbrooke and CJRC-FM Gatineau, which will remain predominantly spoken-word radio services but will now primarily target men between the ages of 25 and 54, to devote their resources to producing local shows. Most significantly, this means the return of local public affairs programming in the morning and at noon, as well as locally produced news bulletins.

Finally, a night-time show and a weekend morning public affairs show will be produced and offered to all stations of the group. Community stations and independent stations in the regions will also have the benefit of these new resources and information content.

"We want to put information radio in Quebec back on top," commented Mr. Lachance. "Since COGECO is a business that is close to its people, it is a natural fit for us to make local information and local interest content the heart of our strategy. The decision to include independent stations in the regions and community stations in the agency aligns with that, and we think this is great news for radio in Quebec."

Unless I've misunderstood, this sounds a lot like what the TV networks have done to local television stations. They still produce local newscasts locally (well, except Global), but many of the stories they produce are prepackaged by the national network. Without the resources and staff to put together a full newscast, the local stations are forced to use these prepackaged reports, even if they're local stories from local newscast hundreds of kilometres away that have little interest to their communities.

And Cogeco is trying to sell this as a good thing for local radio.

Of course, if the alternative is no news at all, or a straight rebroadcast of a Montreal signal, I guess it is good news.

Let us cheat, but only where we get rich

Cogeco doesn't try to hide the fact that its request to keep its stations in Montreal is all about money. Rythme FM is the No. 1 station in Montreal, 98.5 has the most popular morning show, and CKOI also does very well here.

Their excuse for wanting to keep all these money-generating stations? They're throwing out a bunch:

98.5 is special: "The proposed exception affects only FM 98.5 in Montreal's French-language radio market and would allow COGECO to operate three French-language FM radio stations, each in its own niche."

Are Rythme FM and CKOI so different that they qualify as their "own niches"? And the exception applies equally to them. Nothing stops Cogeco from keeping 98.5 and selling Rythme FM or CKOI. It's selling both stations from those networks in Quebec City and shutting down CKOI's sister station in Sherbrooke.

It saves the French language: "The distinctiveness of the bilingual Montreal market and the importance of keeping talk radio like FM 98.5 strong in order to ensure the sustainability of French-language spoken-word radio in Quebec justify our request for an exception"

I have no idea what bilingualism has to do with this, nor how "the distinctiveness of the bilingual Montreal market" somehow means it makes sense to concentrate ownership. I don't know whether 98.5 is profitable. If it is, they can sell it to someone who will keep the talk radio format. If it isn't, there's no guarantee Cogeco won't change the format and make it a music station or something else that's cheaper to produce.

It helps the regions financially: "Without that exception, it will be next to impossible for COGECO to indefinitely support regional spoken-word radio stations that have been running heavy deficits for many years."

That's an argument for converting CKOY in Sherbrooke from a station to a retransmitter, but what does it have to do with Montreal? Does Cogeco expect us to believe that if we give them an exception to media concentration rules that they'll subsidize money-losing regional stations indefinitely?

It helps the regions with programming: "The limited exception sought by COGECO would breathe new life into stations in the regions by providing them links to strong programming sources - to FM 98.5 primarily, for information and public affairs, and to CKAC-AM for sports and CKOI-FM for its expertise and music content."

Again with the distraction. CKAC has nothing to do with the exception, since it's an AM station. And as for CKOI, you just said you're selling its sister station in Quebec City and shutting down its sister station in Sherbrooke. If Montreal-based programming would save these stations, why do you insist on getting rid of them?

We should include anglo stations too: "... a very high number of francophone listeners tune in to English-language music stations."

Sure. CHOM and CJFM get a lot of francophones listening to them. But so does CFQR, which you'll recall is one of the stations you're buying. Add in the anglo stations, and Cogeco wants to own five of the 13 commercial radio stations in the city, and four of the eight commercial FM (mainstream) music stations. This doesn't support their argument very well.

Straight-up bullshit: "Our plan is without a doubt the best opportunity to increase diversity of voices across Quebec that the broadcasting system has seen in many years."

You're buying a former competitor. Don't pretend it's the opposite of what it is.

Ooh, money!

Oh, and that last part they mentioned about "an exceptional contribution of 9% of the total transaction value, an amount of $7.2 million, to various organizations and initiatives to support the radio system"? Sounds kind of generous, doesn't it?

It's CRTC policy that when a broadcaster is sold, the buyer proposes a "tangible benefits" package of 10% of the purchase price to contribute positively to the development of the broadcasting system. The money doesn't go to the CRTC, but to organizations that support independent productions and other good things.

You math majors might notice that their 9% proposal is less than the 10% CRTC policy. In other words, it's another exception they're asking for, one that they're selling to the public as a generous donation on their part.

What the CRTC should do

Cogeco hasn't made anywhere near a solid case for keeping three FM stations in the Montreal market. It's selling or shutting down Rythme FM and CKOI-branded stations elsewhere in Quebec, and freely admits its only motivation for wanting to keep these stations here is money. The CRTC should order Cogeco to sell one of the FM stations in Montreal, and let someone who isn't Cogeco or Astral Media take a shot at making money from commercial francophone radio in Montreal.

Cogeco's point about the unprofitability of regional stations is a good one, but giving the company what it wants in Montreal won't suddenly make those stations profitable (even with all the big talk about a news agency they promise). It will at best simply delay their eventual decision to either sell or shut down those regional stations.

In Quebec City, Cogeco's plan to sell two stations would put it in compliance with CRTC guidelines. No problem there.

In Sherbrooke, Cogeco is presenting its plan as a "win-win-win", proving it doesn't give a crap about local radio. The CRTC should order Cogeco to find a buyer for CKOY. Corus found a buyer for CKRS in Saguenay, and those Quebec City stations are going to someone. I'm willing to bet there's interest in CKOY if it's on the block for cheap. If Cogeco is interested in having a CKAC retransmitter in Sherbrooke, it can apply for a new license on a vacant frequency.

The CRTC will hold a hearing on Sept. 28 at 9am at Le Nouvel Hotel (1740 René-Lévesque W., corner Saint-Mathieu) to consider the application.

UPDATE (Aug. 6): Cogeco VP Richard Lachance does interviews with Infopresse and Paul Arcand explaining the plan, saying the new news service will create about a dozen jobs (including reporters in the federal and provincial legislatures), and there's no Plan B if the CRTC decides it doesn't like Cogeco's plan.

Trente, meanwhile, takes another look at the plan, referencing this blog post.

Related Posts

• CRTC caves in to Cogeco
• Cogeco to buy Corus Quebec radio stations
• Government pays for Cogeco to shut down CKAC Sports
• Tales from Cogeco
• Radio ratings: A good fall for Cogeco and CKGM

In case it isn't obvious, Canoe is highlighting (literally) Quebecor-owned channels in its TV listings, including, hilariously, its only anglo cable channel, Men TV (owned jointly with Canwest).

Related Posts

• Who needs press releases when you own the newspaper?
• TVA hates Lagacé
• The CRTC does something
• Québec à la une: An advertorial in three parts
• Quebecor’s newsrooms 99.9% separate

The media concentration outrage of the week (Hitler comparisons and all) concerns Matt McCann, an intern at the New Brunswick Telegraph-Journal who wrote an article about teachers' reaction to the University of New Brunswick giving an honorary degree to premier Shawn Graham.

You'd think such a thing would be a conflict of interest, an academic institution presenting an honour to the man responsible for the government that funds them, but apparently UNB does this as a matter of routine.

The story made the front page. It included quotes from professors and students (none of which were anonymous) who were upset at the move. It quoted a university spokesperson who explained the policy and made counter-arguments, as well as a note saying that Graham's office did not wish to comment. In all, a fairly standard newspaper political conflict story, and a pretty good one for an intern.

After the story was published, the newspaper fired him.

According to McCann, he was told his story was "seriously unbalanced and severely underplayed the university's side of the story" and that "the newspaper has worked hard to establish a good relationship with UNB and that I had damaged that relationship". The newspaper refused to give its side to the CBC, so we have only McCann's word on this.

On Saturday, the Telegraph-Journal, which had refused to comment because it was a "personnel issue" (a policy many companies have to avoid lawsuits and such), decided that policy has a scandal-annoyance exception clause to it, and published an unsigned Page 3 story with an inflammatory headline that falsely accuses the CBC. (Thanks Josh) In it, the paper said McCann was fired because he misspelled a name, got a title wrong (his "university secretary" was actually a "university secretary" ... wait, what?), and didn't correctly list the premier's degrees. It also repeats that that McCann didn't "adequately portray" both sides of the story and "did not seem to fully grasp the seriousness" of his errors.

Bullshit.

Are we to believe that the Telegraph-Journal has such absolute integrity that minor factual errors lead to immediate dismissal? If it was, why haven't the errors been corrected on the original story online? Is balance in stories so important that a 149-word rebuttal to a 368-word argument is so outrageously biased it constitutes an error in judgment? (And just what part of the university's argument did McCann leave out of his story?) Shall we go through Telegraph-Journal stories with minor factual errors and where the word counts of both sides of an argument don't exactly match and demand those journalists be fired too?

This isn't just wrong, it's cartoonishly-evil wrong. The kind of stuff you see on TV and scream "that wouldn't actually happen in real life." It's so bad, in fact, that Premier Graham took pity on the kid and asked for his CV. Even Graham, who the newspaper considered the victim of McCann's "reckless" reporting, thought the punishment was too severe.

This is an abhorrent act and needs to be condemned in the strongest terms. Other than the minor factual errors, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that story.

A little context is necessary here: The Telegraph-Journal is owned by the Irving family, a very powerful family that owns almost all news media in New Brunswick (the exceptions are a Transcon-owned community paper, L'Acadie Nouvelle and sister francophone media, bureaus of Global Halifax and CTV Halifax, CBC/RadCan stations, private radio music stations and small community publications). Of note is the fact that outside of CBC New Brunswick, there hasn't been any original reporting of this story. Not only is this kind of monopoly unique in Canada, but unlike Canwest or CTVglobemedia, the Irvings also have non-media corporate interests, including big-money forestry and oil businesses. Their media holdings have been repeatedly accused of being soft on the Irving empire.

And now a young reporter has been dismissed because he made the premier look bad.

New Brunswick needs a media revolution. The Irvings' control over the province needs to be pried off with a crowbar.

Related Posts

• Irving really doesn’t like competition
• Bell Let’s Talk Day: “This is why we do it”
• Ethics don’t matter on TV
• Is selling out okay for a good cause?
• The convergence utopia

CBC media ownership network map

The CBC has played with cool new technology from IBM to create a network map of media ownership in Canada as part of a special section dealing with the future of television.

While it does look cool, it's not particularly useful for understanding media ownership. For one, large corporations are represented by tiny dots, and the network looks a lot more incestuous than it should because of things like CPAC (which is financed by all Canadian cable and satellite providers) and other joint ownership situations.

That data behind it, however, are publicly available and can be used to create other visualizations. Making the size of the dots proportional to gross yearly revenue might make it more interesting.

Related Posts

• The convergence utopia
• Cogeco’s self-serving plan for Quebec radio
• Quebecorvergence
• Irvings’ media monopoly in NB takes a sad step (UPDATED)
• Who needs press releases when you own the newspaper?

24 Heures, Feb. 20, 2009, Page 20

From Friday's 24 Heures. Neither of these sound like news stories (even entertainment news stories), but when you remember that Quebecor owns 24 Heures and also owns TVA and Videotron, the advertorials make sense.

This, I can only assume, is what Quebecor wants to see in the Journal de Montréal.

Related Posts

• Quebecor doesn’t inform when it doesn’t feel like it
• So Metro goes to the STM, 24 Heures goes to the AMT
• Quebecorvergence
• TVA hates Lagacé
• The CRTC does something

You know what these three megacorporations have in common? They all thought they could get rich by acquiring other media companies.

Canwest was still paying off the debt it took on when it bought the Southam newspaper chain (which includes my employer, The Gazette) when it decided it needed more cable channels and acquired Alliance Atlantis. This gave them channels including Showcase.

Bell Canada responded to Canwest's consolidation by planning a megacorporation of its own. Bell acquired CTV and the Globe and Mail and eventually most of CHUM's assets. In exchange for the latter, BCE sold shares in the company to the Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan, Torstar and the Thomson family, and BellGlobeMedia became CTVglobemedia.

A lot of Rogers's acquisitions have been in the form of CTV's sloppy seconds (oh wait, can I not use those words?). This includes Sportsnet, which CTV had to dump when it acquired TSN, and City TV ($375 million), which CTV had to dump when it acquired CHUM. It also acquired the Blue Jays, Fido, as well as specialty TV networks and radio stations within the past decade.

I'm no financial expert, and I don't have a very clear idea of the balance sheets of these three companies, but this is a really bad time to have debt, especially risky debt (say, holding a bunch of assets in an industry that might disappear entirely in 10 years). The economic downturn that the mortgage debt crisis precipitated is certainly affecting these companies and worrying their management, but I think the debt problem is more significant here than the advertising or subscription revenue problems.

Perhaps this might serve as a warning that consolidation isn't always the best way to go.

Or perhaps not.

UPDATE (Dec. 9): The New York Times, which I can only assume got the idea from this blog post, has a similar analysis of U.S. newspapers (though in that case, it was taking on debt to acquire other newspapers that got them into trouble).

Related Posts

• Massive cuts at CityTV, but Rogers doesn’t care
• Mixed news at small Global, CTV stations
• Low on cash? Just ask the gummit
• CRTC roundup: broken television
• Canwest cuts 560 jobs nationwide

The code is designed to replace CRTC rules about the independence of TV and newspaper newsrooms, which affect Canada's three largest private TV broadcasters:

• Global TV (owned by Canwest which also owns a newspaper chain including the National Post and The Gazette - which includes me)
• CTV (owned by CTVglobemedia which also owns the Globe and Mail)
• TVA (owned by Quebecor Media which also owns the Sun chain, 24 Hours/Heures and the Journal de Montréal)

Currently, the CRTC has rules that the television newsrooms and the newsrooms of affiliated newspapers cannot be mixed or merged. They must be completely independent of one another.

As if to underscore how bureaucratic everything is at the CRTC and CBSC, only three of the ten points in the code actually deal with rules for broadcasters. The rest deal with how the code itself should be administered.

The new rules are:

• There must be completely independent "news management and presentation structures"
• Decisions about journalistic content must be made "solely by that broadcaster"
• TV news managers may not sit on newspaper editorial boards and vice versa (but news managers may "sit on committees or bodies intended to co-ordinate the use of newsgathering resources")

The CRTC's rules on cross-media ownership date back to 2001, when Quebecor Media bought Videotron, which then owned TVA. The transaction meant that Quebecor would own the largest private television network in Quebec, the largest newspaper (the Journal de Montréal) and the largest cable TV company. The CRTC decided that some journalistic rules would need to be in place to protect the diversity of voices in the newsroom.

Those rules were just as vague as the new ones proposed. Newsrooms and news management decisions must be separate.

Though they sound simple, the application of those rules is all about interpretation. For example, while newspapers and TV stations can't decide on the other's coverage, nothing prevents the parent company of both from dictating news. In fact, under the new rules, nothing discourages TV stations and newspapers from "co-ordinating newsgathering resources." This could mean, for example, having TV journalists file both TV packages and newspaper articles on stories that have video, and having newspaper journalists file texts to both newspaper and TV on stories that don't.

Journalist unions, who also protested the original Quebecor takeover, also spoke out during hearings about this code, saying it didn't do enough to really separate newsrooms. But it seems the CRTC thinks it's enough for them, and with the new code approved it is allowing networks to modify their licenses to remove the original rules (TVA was first off the bat)

We'll see over the coming years how many loopholes can be found to cut down costs and introduce "efficiencies" by reducing "duplication" in the two media.

UPDATE (Nov. 25): TVA's union has objected to the request to use the new rules, saying it threatens journalistic independence.

In other news

• Star Choice got slapped for not including RDI in its basic package for satellite TV customers. Star Choice's defence seemed to be that it had multiple "basic" packages, one anglo, one franco and one bilingual. The CRTC saw through that silliness and ordered it to put RDI on everyone's lineup (and pay appropriate mandatory fees, though retroactive fees will be left up to the courts). Despite this, the CRTC is asking what kind of services should be mandatory for linguistic minorities (anglos in Quebec and francophones elsewhere).
• The Asian Television Network is asking the CRTC for permission to add Indian lifestyle channel NDTV Good Times to the list of networks that cable and satellite providers can offer to Canadians
• Rogers has asked to add the Fox Business Network to the list of importable non-Canadian networks. I guess Rogers is bullish on the channel which has been cursed with low ratings even during the current economic crisis.
• Astral wants to amend the licence for the MPix movie channel to reduce the time between when movies are made and when they can air on that channel from five years to three.
• TVA has applied to create an HD version of LCN.
• MuchMusic will now be allowed to add game shows to its lineup, provided they are less than 10% of the total and are "music-related" (you know, just like Discovery's game shows are science-related).

Oh, and Pauline Marois is flapping her gums again about creating a Quebec CRTC, further needlessly duplicating government institutions and burning through our tax dollars.

Related Posts

• Quebecor’s newsrooms 99.9% separate
• Cogeco’s self-serving plan for Quebec radio
• CRTC Roundup: Hands off our InterTubes
• CRTC Roundup: No Super Bowl loopholes this year
• TVA hates Lagacé

I've always admired Patrick Lagacé. The way he works hard, the way he does his homework before putting together insightful commentary (instead of knee-jerk reactions), his hair, and the fact he puts me on his blogroll.

But more importantly, I admire the impact he has. Like being able to piss off the entire management team at TVA.

Yesterday, La Presse published a really long letter signed by four executives at TVA which accuses Lagacé of not checking his facts in a recent column about the network burying embarrassing news about itself and friends of owner Quebecor.

As Lagacé mentions at the end of the column, TVA is suing Gesca and Lagacé personally for his previous remarks on this issue.

For the benefit of those who don't want to read the long letter, or whose French is rusty, here's TVA's main points:

1. TVA's news coverage is dictated by TVA, not Quebecor. Quebecor has no control. No control my ass. You don't get to own the media unless you can tell it what to do occasionally. Obviously TVA decides what the day-to-day news is going to be, but don't tell me there isn't some middle manager who knows he's more likely to get a promotion and less likely to be fired if he suppresses bad news and promotes good news. Just look at its collusion cooperation with Quebecor-owned Journal de Montréal or Quebecor-owned Videotron.
2. TVA did, in fact, allow clips critical of TVA to be aired, contrary to Lagacé's insinuations. OK, sure. I'll concede that point, though Lagacé got his information from Le Soleil, which got a quote from TVA saying they can decide what to air and what not to air. But stories can be buried without being totally eliminated. Newspapers do it all the time: putting good news on A1 or A2, while leaving bad news to a brief at the back of the business section.
3. TVA didn't talk about 15 job cuts at TVA Québec because it was a non-story, and it was really four job cuts, and only one in news. As Lagacé mentions, it was still 15 job cuts at a regional station, whether or not some people stayed on part-time in another role.
4. Lagacé made no attempt to contact TVA before his article was published to check these facts. Lagacé says he tried to contact Quebecor but got no response.

Left unmentioned by both parties is that Lagacé used to be part of the Quebecor family when he worked for the Journal and blogged for Canoe. To say there's bad blood between the two might be considered an understatement.

But, of course, Quebecor doesn't control TVA. So this silly conspiracy theory has no basis, right?

Related Posts

• TVA mad at La Presse for suggesting they have managers
• Québec à la une: An advertorial in three parts
• Quebecor’s newsrooms 99.9% separate
• Série Montréal-Québec: Flawless, says Journal
• Quebecorvergence

There's this thing with the media that's always annoyed me:

1. Journalists love to talk about their industry with other journalists
2. People love reading about the media (within reason, of course)
3. Journalists are hesitant to write about matters that are "in the family" (owned by the same company) or within the media outlet itself, whether because of paranoid self-censorship or orders from upper management not to pursue a story
4. Journalists and their media outlets will never talk about their competition, unless it's to report something bad about them, in which case they go all out.

La Presse isn't immune to this. Neither is The Gazette (the paper I work for), nor any other media outlet I can think of. And the larger the corporate empire, the worse the problem gets.

Why can't they be more honest about themselves? Giving a union boss criticizing a platform to criticize you makes you look bad, but denying that union boss a voice makes you look worse.

Remember: It's not the crime, it's the cover-up.

Related Posts

• Quebecor’s newsrooms 99.9% separate
• Conseil de presse outs TVA for journalistic plagiarism
• CRTC roundup: new rules for converging newsrooms
• TVA hates Lagacé
• Québec à la une: An advertorial in three parts

Related Posts

• CRTC caves, bends rules for TQS
• Rogers TQS?
• The convergence utopia
• Cogeco’s self-serving plan for Quebec radio
• Fosse aux liones

An aberration, or a growing trend?

Related Posts

• The convergence utopia
• Cogeco’s self-serving plan for Quebec radio
• Quebecorvergence
• Irvings’ media monopoly in NB takes a sad step (UPDATED)
• Ownership mothership

The new rules basically come down to three limits:

1. The same company can't own a newspaper (daily, paid local paper), radio station and TV station in the same market
2. The same company can't acquire TV stations that would give it a 45% or more audience share in a market
3. The same company cannot control all broadcast distribution systems (cable and satellite TV) in the same market

Enough exceptions have been made already that nobody is affected right now. These include:

1. The CBC/Radio-Canada and other public broadcasters
2. Companies who grow their audience market share to over 45% with existing properties
3. The National Post and Globe and Mail, which are considered "national newspapers"

You can see the CRTC's press release and a public notice outlining the well-thought-out rationale for the decisions they made and those they decided against.

Go nuts, Quebecor

A second, related decision which isn't getting so much attention is a loosening of restrictions on news gathering. Previously, Quebecor was forced to separate news gathering divisions in its print and television properties. Reporters for TVA and the Journal de Montréal couldn't so much as talk to each other.

The problem with that restriction is two-fold. First of all, other media like CanWest and CTVglobemedia had lesser restrictions which only required them to manage the news outlets separately. Second, the Internet has forced the CRTC to realize that the medium is irrelevant. Newspaper reporters are shooting video, and TV reporters are writing text. The lines between media are blurring.

So the CRTC has decided to harmonize its rules to the looser CTV/Canwest system, which restricts news management but not news gathering directly. Management of one outlet cannot be involved with managing the other. The reporters themselves, however, are unaffected.

This will come as welcome news to Quebecor, who can now take frame grabs from TVA to fill Journal de Québec pages have more flexibility in its media management.

Related Posts

• Quebecor’s newsrooms 99.9% separate
• Specialty channel war is screwing customers
• Be careful who you make fun of
• Some truth about Sun TV News
• Cogeco’s self-serving plan for Quebec radio

La Presse has a rumour (and CBC/CP rewrites that rumour) that Rogers is going to be buying the Montreal and Quebec City TQS stations, while Radio Nord (which already owns TQS stations in Outaouais and Abitibi) would buy stations in outlying regions.

Rogers won't comment and Radio Nord denies they're buying the stations.

I suppose it makes sense. Rogers owns what's left of Citytv, a network without a station in Canada's second-largest city. (I can just imagine the kind of outcry we'd have if they tried to convert TQS into an anglophone City station.) And if they are buying TQS out, chances are it would be for a significant discount.

TQS's creditor protection lasts until Thursday.

UPDATE: Meanwhile, at Le Devoir, Paul Cochon looks at the blame game, and wonders why Quebecor (which owns TVA) isn't being blamed in the same way Radio-Canada and the CRTC are.

UPDATE (Jan. 16): TQS gets its extension, and now has until Feb. 29 to decide what to do with itself. Meanwhile, Steve Proulx doesn't think La Presse's "scoop" is any more than idle speculation, and he thinks the CRTC is more to blame for TQS's troubles than Radio-Canada.

Related Posts

• Debt crisis hurts HugeMediaCorps
• Remstar buys TQS
• The convergence utopia
• Branchez-Vous unplugged
• Cogeco’s self-serving plan for Quebec radio

Transcontinental, which owns 61 community weeklies in Quebec (22 of them on the island of Montreal), has decided to reverse its position banning brown people from its papers.

At least, that's the best I could figure out from this editorial, which is running in all of Transcontinental's newspapers this week. In it, the general manager of Transcontinental Newspaper Group, Serge Lemieux, has finally clued in to the idea that covering community issues involves covering cultural communities as well. Apparently it took the Bouchard-Taylor Commission into reasonable accommodation for him to figure this out.

The article doesn't mention exactly what they're going to do, only that they'll be "celebrating cultural diversity." In fact, it goes into more detail about what they're not going to do, specifically that they won't be publishing articles in "all the world's languages" because they find it "undesirable" to do so. Instead, they'll publish articles "exclusively in French or English (as the case may be)" (French versions of this editorial don't mention articles in English).

We'll see what they have in mind.

Speaking of nonsensical Serge Lemieux columns, this one, which in the same breath blames the media for oversensationalizing the issue of reasonable accommodation and says the commission looking into the issue has been a good idea, is also appearing in Transcontinental papers this week.

Ironically, both these articles serve to remind us, in case we didn't know already, how little local journalism actually comes out of Transcontinental weeklies. A large amount of content is syndicated across many papers, their websites are identical and even most of their logos have the same design elements. All that's left are some fluff stories about aging grandmothers, rewritten press releases about local events, and a couple of local issue stories written by overworked, underpaid journalists.

But I guess "celebrating cultural communities" will fix that.

Related Posts

• We can’t accomodate freedom
• Reasonable information on reasonable accommodation
• Can’t we just agree that the Charter amendment is a stupid idea?
• More xenophobia at the Bouchard-Taylor commission
• Bouchard-Taylor Commission legitimizes xenophobia

The documentary is an interesting look at the history of the newspaper known for its attention-whoring headlines, spending its first episode concentrating on the October Crisis that brought it into the mainstream and launched its Sunday edition.

But I can't get over the fact that this is airing on TVA, which is owned by the same company that owns the Journal. In fact, Quebecor is run by Pierre-Karl Péladeau, and his father Pierre Péladeau is the guy getting a posthumous public blowjob in this rather one-sided documentary. (No mention of the Philadelphia Journal here.)

The appearance of the younger Péladeau on screen after the end of the documentary talking about how great Quebecor and the Journal de Montréal are sealed the deal. I'm still not sure if that was a paid advertisement or part of the documentary. Of course it doesn't matter, because Péladeau would have just been paying himself.

It's unfortunate, because a look at the big Montreal newspaper upheavals of the 1960s and 70s makes for interesting storytelling.

Québec à la une airs Tuesday, Dec. 4 and 11 at 9pm on TVA. The show is also available for free for Videotron Illico digital TV subscribers on its video-on-demand service (Channel 900, under "TV on demand" -> "TVA on demand").

Related Posts

• Série Montréal-Québec: Flawless, says Journal
• TVA hates Lagacé
• Quebecor’s newsrooms 99.9% separate
• Bureaucracy killed the Journal’s website
• Enquête sur Quebecor: Good, but I expected more (UPDATED)

The problem, of course, is that eventually the disconnect between this remotely-produced journalism and the local environment becomes apparent. We start seeing "regional" newscasts instead of local ones, to save money. A story about a province-wide issue is covered by a single journalist out of a big city and then copied to regional news outlets with no local spin added.

Newspapers are being split into two categories:

1. Major dailies, which rely mostly on wire service stories, syndicated features like comics and crosswords, and a few columnists and police report rewriters.
2. Community papers, which produce mostly fluff from its grossly underpaid journalists

The problems of local journalism are having a backlash effect though: Former Minneapolis Star-Tribune and St. Paul Pioneer-Press employees are producing a local news website called MinnPost, which is filling the gap created when the big papers failed in their commitment to local news (via).

The site has just launched, so it's hard to say if it's financial model is going to work (it probably won't), but it's still good to see things like this. One thing I've learned writing this blog and covering local issues is that people are very interested in what's going on around them.

The problem is that local journalism will never make you rich. And big media is obsessed with making itself rich. But fortunately some journalists have a higher calling.

Related Posts

• CBC gets to keep some analog TV running
• The convergence utopia
• Cogeco’s self-serving plan for Quebec radio
• Google Street View coverage maps
• The Rest of Quebec

CanWest, the largest newspaper publisher in Canada, called the acquisition "yet another example of CanWest's commitment to developing strong community voices across this country."

Also today, CRTC hearings into CanWest's bid to take over Alliance Atlantis are being held.

Related Posts

• Cogeco’s self-serving plan for Quebec radio
• Shaw to buy Canwest
• CRTC okays CJNT, CHCH purchase
• CRTC Roundup: Global, porn and death
• CRTC roundup: broken television

The ad, which implies that Mix 96, CHOM FM and CJAD won't ... uhh ... change the logos they put on their baseball caps, I guess... includes this bit of hilarity:

... Please be assured of our commitment to continue providing the same great listening pleasure you have come to enjoy. Respect for our broadcast audience and the public in general is a core value of Astral Media...

I can only guess from this that Astral Media haven't actually listened to CHOM or Mix 96 for more than a few minutes.

(The fact that CHOM and Mix 96, two radio stations that should be competing directly, are controlled by the same owner, is an entirely different issue.)

Related Posts

• Behind-the-scenes changes at Astral Media radio
• Radio ratings: A good fall for Cogeco and CKGM
• Astral’s Martin Spalding on Terry DiMonte, CHOM, CJAD and Virgin Radio
• “Sir” Patrick Charles dumped from Virgin Radio Breakfast Show
• Astral strikes again

Aside from the outrageousness of punishing viewers as a negotiating tactic (as well as the legal ramifications of not giving us something we've paid for), most of these channels are licensed in a way that prohibits direct competition from other specialty channels.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. If CTV wants to treat these channels like they're private property to do with as it pleases, then the CRTC should allow free competition from other services.

Related Posts

• CRTC roundup: broken television
• Some truth about Sun TV News
• Cogeco’s self-serving plan for Quebec radio
• Two French specialty channels coming
• CRTC Roundup: Videotron must closed-caption porn