<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Fagstein &#187; TV specialty channels</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.fagstein.com/tag/tv-specialty-channels/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.fagstein.com</link>
	<description>Can you think of a better name?</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 22:54:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Some truth about Sun TV News</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/09/04/sun-tv-news-reality/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/09/04/sun-tv-news-reality/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2010 03:32:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fagstein</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRTC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Quebecor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sun News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV specialty channels]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=9627</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sun TV News, the new specialty channel being proposed by Quebecor, is in the news again because their second attempt at CRTC approval has been released to the public. After the previous application for a Category 1 specialty channel was outright rejected by the CRTC, Quebecor has decided to put forward an application for a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-9629" title="Sun TV News quotes" src="http://blog.fagstein.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/sun-tv-news-quotes.png" alt="" width="600" height="400" /></p>
<p>Sun TV News, <a href="http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/06/15/sun-news-channel/">the new specialty channel</a> being proposed by Quebecor, is in the news again because their second attempt at CRTC approval <a href="http://crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2010/2010-649.htm">has been released to the public</a>.</p>
<p>After the previous application for a Category 1 specialty channel was outright rejected by the CRTC, Quebecor has decided to put forward an application for a Category 2 channel, just like almost every new specialty channel in the past few years.</p>
<p>Both categories are digital channels, meaning they won't be on analog cable and aren't part of the basic package. The difference is that Category 1 channels must have a minimum of 50% Canadian content, and in return all digital cable and satellite providers must make the channel available on a discretionary basis. For Category 2 channels, the dealings with television providers are mostly unregulated. They negotiate carriage fees with each other, and the providers can choose whether or not to make the channel available.</p>
<p>But while the Sun TV News application is technically a Category 2 channel, Quebecor is asking for an exception that grants it the biggest advantage of Category 1: mandatory availability, at least for the first three years.</p>
<p>In both the previous and current applications, media coverage and left-wing reaction has confused the nature of what Quebecor is asking for. That's partially understandable. CRTC's regulations can be overly complicated sometimes, particularly when it comes to what channels providers have to carry.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/television/article/855619--atwood-engages-in-tweet-debate-over-sun-tv-news">This Canadian Press article</a>, for example, states three times that the new channel would be "funded with money from cable TV fees", even though that's not what the application is requesting. The statements are attributed to activists, but aren't challenged in the article, leaving readers to assume they are true. <a href="http://www.thewirereport.ca/reports/content/11212-quebecor_not_giving_up_on_application_for_must_carry_sun_tv_news">This report</a> uses the term "must-carry", which has a special meaning at the CRTC that doesn't apply in this case. Quebecor isn't asking for must-carry status. <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/quebecor-takes-new-stab-at-tv-licence/article1694601/">This Globe and Mail story</a> also uses the term "must carry", as does <a href="http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/09/03/chris-selley-margaret-atwood-digs-a-hole/">this National Post report</a>.</p>
<h4>"Must carry" vs. "must offer"</h4>
<p>In an effort to reduce the confusion, let me explain a bit how this works.</p>
<p>There is a list of channels that all cable and satellite providers must provide as part of their basic packages. In addition to the local television channels, this also includes things like CPAC and APTN. Other channels like CBC News Network and the Weather Network are also included in basic packages. Fees, set by the CRTC, are charged to all subscribers to pay for these channels.</p>
<p>Beyond that, there are levels of discretionary tiers that have different statuses at the CRTC. Some are allowed on analog cable on a discretionary basis or can be part of the basic package. Some, like Category 1 channels, are offered only on a digital basis unless an exception is warranted.</p>
<p>Category 2 channels are the least regulated type, and the one preferred by both the CRTC and new channel applicants because of how easy it is and how low the minimum requirements are.</p>
<p>Though it might seem like your cable or satellite company has every channel in existence, it doesn't. Bell TV, for example, doesn't carry MuchMoreRetro. Videotron doesn't carry Fox News Channel (somewhat ironically, if you think Quebecor is an evil right-wing empire). Shaw Direct doesn't carry Court TV (now Investigation Discovery) or TFO. There is no regulation requiring these companies to make these channels available. They decide what their users might be interested in, based on what the channels offer and what they want to charge the TV provider. The channels, meanwhile, ask people to "call your cable or satellite provider" to pressure them into adding the channel to their lineup.</p>
<p>What Quebecor wants with Sun TV News is to bypass this process, and require that all digital TV providers have the channel in their lineups. The wholesale price would still be negotiated between the provider and the network, and the provider could package the channel and charge for it however it feels.</p>
<p>Kory Teneycke, the former Harper aide who is behind this application, calls it "must offer" to distinguish it from "must carry". I'll use that expression for lack of a better one.</p>
<p>In short, Quebecor is asking that this channel be available on all digital cable and satellite providers, but the choice to take it would be entirely up to the consumer. Nobody would be forced to pay for the channel if they didn't want it.</p>
<h4>The package exception</h4>
<p>One scenario that might see people paying for Sun TV News without wanting to would be if they got it as part of a package. It would make sense for a news channel theme pack to include Sun TV News with CTV News Channel, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News Channel, BNN, CNBC, Al Jazeera English and BBC World News. Someone might select that wanting all the news channels but having moral objections to Sun TV (and, presumably, Fox News).</p>
<p>But this packaging is entirely up to the TV provider. It's not regulated by the CRTC and isn't negotiated with the channels.</p>
<p>The CRTC only regulates packaging to ensure that porn channels and single-view religious channels aren't forced on consumers as part of packages. Theoretically, the CRTC could require the same thing for Sun TV News that it requires for Playboy TV, but that seems a bit excessive.</p>
<p>Of course, if cable and satellite providers did away with such packages, or offered people à la carte options, this wouldn't be an issue. But so far, only one major TV provider offers that kind of à la carte service: Quebecor-owned Videotron.</p>
<h4>Ignorance breeds fear</h4>
<p>What gets me most about the reaction to this application is how much people are willing to oppose it without knowing what it is. There has been no proposed program grid, not even any confirmed hosts. All we know about Sun TV News is that it wants to be a mix of news and opinion, that its creators consider the other news channels "boring", and that those creators are Conservatives who want to create a channel based partially on Fox News.</p>
<p>A group of activists has <a href="http://www.avaaz.org/en/no_fox_news_canada">already started a petition that has 68,000 signatures on it</a> (we're not sure <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/politics/insidepolitics/2010/09/avaazorg-vs-sun-tv-vs-unwitting-hill-journalists-and-now-you-know-the-rest-of-the-story-maybe.html">how many of those are real people</a>). It repeats the non-truth about forcing people to pay for the channel, and throws in some drama that makes it seem as if Stephen Harper is trying to force his ideological agenda into our brains through the CRTC.</p>
<p>Sun Media had a field day with this, <a href="http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Politics/2010/09/01/15216771.html">saying that the petition is based out of New York</a> and that author Margaret Atwood and her cronies are <a href="http://www.torontosun.com/news/columnists/joe_warmington/2010/09/02/15229401.html">trying to suppress free speech</a>. Even <a href="http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/2010/09/02/15230201.html">Teneycke himself weighed in</a>.</p>
<h4>Fox News Cheap</h4>
<p>It's hard to judge something like this until you've seen it. Sun TV News could become a quality all-news network that bring much-needed competition to the industry. It could become a Fox News North, as critics have called it, providing news coverage to make people think it's objective, but loading primetime hours with fearmongering blowhards who care more about expressing their opinions than seeking the truth.</p>
<p>The arguments from Quebecor that this isn't Fox News North are contradicted by statements in the CRTC appliction, particularly this one:</p>
<blockquote><p>The most comparable channel to STN is located in the USA, Fox News. Both channels’ strategy is to focus hard news and commentary that raise public debates and reactions on different topics. Fox News has been USA’s most watched All News channel for years and still is. In 2008-2009, Fox News’s audience was as high as CNN’s and MSNBC’s combined. Fox News does not have extensive distribution in Canada. Therefore, this represents a true opportunity for STN.</p></blockquote>
<p>But while their goal is to replicate Fox News, I think the more likely scenario is that Sun TV News will be an experiment in cheap newsgathering that will quickly become a laughing stock because of its horribly small budget. According to the CRTC application, the channel plans to have a budget of about $25 million, of which $15 million would go to programming and technical costs. Though it's hard to directly compare this to CBC and CTV, since they take advantage of their local stations and national newscasts (I'm trying hard not to use the word "synergies" here), it's still very little money. We're looking at a staff of maybe 100 people, including journalists, anchors, producers and technicians, advertising salespeople, marketers, etc. Anyone who thinks he can run a national news network on that kind of budget is probably kidding himself.</p>
<p>The feared scenario, that they'll spend little money on news budget and focus all their efforts on opinion, makes more sense considering how little they have to spend. But even then, the big-name blowhards come at a high price, and a $25 million total budget isn't enough to get a Canadian Glenn Beck on the air if you want anything more than a webcam and laptop in front of him.</p>
<h4>How Sun TV News describes itself</h4>
<p>Though it's obviously self-serving, we really can't judge Sun TV News based on anything other than the statements of the people behind it.</p>
<p>Here, verbatim from the CRTC application, is how Sun TV News describes its "hard news" and "straight talk":</p>
<blockquote><p>“Hard News” will almost exclusively rely on live reporting and real-time conversations with journalists covering breaking news – as opposed to the more traditional news wheel format that features a revolving set of news stories. But these headlines will be analysed, commented upon and discussed at length. The host will question the reporter and will have an intelligent exchange that will often open to further debate.</p>
<p>News will not be read like in a news bulletin. Daytime “hard news” will be covering a broad range of political, economic and lifestyle stories that matter to Canadians both rural and urban. So even its “hard news” portion will not be “all news” like it has traditionally been done in Canada. Short traditional news bulletin may be programmed but not more than once an hour.</p>
<p>“Straight Talk” will be programs featuring hosts and guests that deliver strong opinions and analysis of stories that are important to Canadians that day. “Straight talk” opinion journalism at night will be clear, intelligent and engaging – featuring a broader array of television personalities and signature hosts who will challenge viewers to think – and decide – for themselves. The challenging of ideas in itself may feed the news but at least will attempt to have Canadians make their own mind on the events occurring every day in Canada.</p></blockquote>
<p>That could easily describe either Fox News Channel or MSNBC. Or a bunch of other networks. But it gives a bit of an idea what they're going for.</p>
<h4>What the CRTC should do</h4>
<p>The CRTC doesn't have the luxury of watching this network and judging whether it's good for Canadian TV watchers. It has to go on the application itself.</p>
<p>Based on that application, I would argue the CRTC should accept the network, maybe even with the exception they're requesting (particularly since it's only temporary).</p>
<p>The reason is simple: The channel proposes to create all its content. It says it will have zero foreign content. That alone should put it on a level higher than those Category 2 channels that air little but Family Guy reruns, 80s music videos, Star Trek movie marathons and ancient sitcoms.</p>
<p>The fact that Sun TV News wants to add to both news coverage and political debate in this country should certainly count for something as well, even though we may not agree with it.</p>
<p>The potential for abuse is there, but the CRTC already requires broadcasters to adhere to a code of ethics through the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council. Sun TV News has already accepted that it would be subject to those rules. The CRTC can't prohibit someone from starting up a channel because fearmongers disagree with the political leanings of its creator.</p>
<p>Sun TV News made sure to suggest in its application that without mandatory availability for at least the first three years on air, its business case would fall apart:</p>
<blockquote><p>If mandatory access for a maximum period of three years is not granted to Sun TV News, one or more major cable or satellite providers might decide to not offer this service.  This would be fatal to our business case as shown in Appendix 1, and would likely result in the cancellation of the Sun TV News project.</p></blockquote>
<p>The CRTC shouldn't let itself get bullied. But it should set policy encouraging new channels to include as much original, Canadian content as possible. Sun TV News, which seems to put this figure at 100%, should be rewarded for that, just like any other channel should.</p>
<p>Sun TV News's suggestion that it get a break from closed-captioning requirements, though, should be ignored. Broadcasters routinely request exemptions from obligations to CC programming, like a high school student who wants an extension on a term paper.</p>
<p>Though it doesn't specifically request relief from CC requirements, it gives this quote: "However commendable this obligation is, the sums that need to be invested in such an amount of closed captioning means a lower amount is left for Canadian programs."</p>
<p>I'm pretty sure everyone else could make a similar argument.</p>
<h4>By the numbers</h4>
<p>Looking through Sun TV News's CRTC application, I found some interesting financial projections I thought would be worth sharing.</p>
<ul>
<li>Though the wholesale fee would be negotiated between the broadcaster and TV provider, Sun TV News uses a base fee of $0.25 per subscriber per month in its analysis, and seems to suggest that they would aim for this. (That doesn't mean the channel would cost $0.25 to consumers though - providers charge consumers far above the wholesale rate.)</li>
<li>If the mandatory availability or "must offer" requirement is given, Sun TV News expects 17% penetration in the first year and up to 50% penetration by the end of the seven-year license at $0.25 per month. ("Penetration" defined as the number of cable/satellite subscribers who pay for the channel.)</li>
<li>Based on this analysis, the channel would get $15 million a year in subscriber revenue, which would be combined with $10 million a year in advertising to reach the $25 million budget.</li>
</ul>
<h4>Quebecor survey shows Sun TV News wouldn't be popular</h4>
<p>The CRTC application includes some survey data from polling they conducted. Though they do a good job of spinning it, the survey shows only 41% of Canadian TV watchers would be somewhat (36%) or very (5%) likely to subscribe to the channel. This makes its 50% penetration rate seem a bit far-fetched.</p>
<p>Similarly, a survey showed "Canadians do not find reporters to have an inherent bias in the news they report" (52% vs 7%), contradicting claims by Quebecor that Canadians are tired of the "lamestream" media's biases.</p>
<p>When asked about their satisfaction with current news choices, 67% in Quebecor's survey rate it six or higher on a scale of 1-10. Quebecor spins this as saying Canadians are "not extremely satisfied", but when almost half are rating seven or eight on a scale of 1-10, I would argue that's pretty satisfied. <a href="http://communities.canada.com/vancouversun/blogs/politics/archive/2010/09/03/not-quot-extremely-satisfied-quot-with-tv-news-sun-tv-news-has-the-fix.aspx">Postmedia's Andrew Mayeda agrees</a>.</p>
<p>Finally, even though Teneycke and company are pushing this as a competitor to CBC and CTV news channels, the application softens the stance and even argues that those networks won't be seriously affected by the appearance of Sun TV News. Instead, it argues that it will bring Canadians back from CNN (which it simultaneously argues is winning Canadian viewers from CBC and CTV because it has more opinionative programming in primetime, and is losing American viewers to Fox News because its primetime programming isn't opinionative enough).</p>
<p>"In the long run, we believe the impact on the existing Canadian all-news services will be negligible," it says.</p>
<p>I'm sure that comes as a relief to them.<br />
<h3 class='related_post_title'>Related Posts</h3>
<ul class='related_post'>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/06/15/sun-news-channel/' title='I don&#8217;t like Sun News, but I welcome it'>I don&#8217;t like Sun News, but I welcome it</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2011/09/14/specialty-channel-war/' title='Specialty channel war is screwing customers'>Specialty channel war is screwing customers</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/02/26/yoopa-zeste-coming/' title='Two French specialty channels coming'>Two French specialty channels coming</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/06/12/quebecor-fund/' title='Quebecor Fund: From the kindness of their CRTC policy'>Quebecor Fund: From the kindness of their CRTC policy</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/05/28/crtc-roundup-videotron-must-closed-caption-porn/' title='CRTC Roundup: Videotron must closed-caption porn'>CRTC Roundup: Videotron must closed-caption porn</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/09/04/sun-tv-news-reality/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>38</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>I don&#8217;t like Sun News, but I welcome it</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/06/15/sun-news-channel/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/06/15/sun-news-channel/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jun 2010 19:33:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fagstein</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Quebecor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sun News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV specialty channels]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=9278</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Updated with more talking out of my ass) Canadian media are buzzing today (and have been for about a week or so) about Sun News, the new all-news specialty TV network being setup by Quebecor Media. Before its name was made public, people were calling it "Fox News North", partly because the guy behind it, Kory [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>(Updated with more talking out of my ass)</em></p>
<p><object width="600" height="363"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/OrTooDqY9pY&#038;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/OrTooDqY9pY&#038;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="600" height="363" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object></p>
<p><a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/quebecor-to-reformat-sun-tv/article1604757/">Canadian media</a> are <a href="http://hlbtoo.wordpress.com/2010/06/15/fox-north/">buzzing</a> <a href="http://lapresseaffaires.cyberpresse.ca/economie/medias-et-telecoms/201006/15/01-4290168-quebecor-lance-sun-tv-news.php?utm_categorieinterne=trafficdrivers&amp;utm_contenuinterne=cyberpresse_B4_manchettes_231_accueil_POS2">today</a> (and have been for about a week or so) about Sun News, the new all-news specialty TV network being setup by Quebecor Media.</p>
<p>Before its name was made public, people were calling it "Fox News North", partly because the guy behind it, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kory_Teneycke">Kory Teneycke</a>, used to shill for Prime Minister Stephen Harper. The reputation that Quebecor and its head honcho Pierre-Karl Péladeau have built certainly helped fuel the rumours that a strong conservative bias would be more important to this network than a commitment to accuracy in reporting.</p>
<p>Though <a href="http://www.suntvnews.ca/why-sun-news/">the announcement</a> doesn't make reference to Fox (directly) or use the word "conservative", and <a href="http://www.winnipegsun.com/news/canada/2010/06/15/14395741.html">Teneycke dismisses the comparison</a>, the hints are all there. The video talks about being "strong and proud", and Canada being "the greatest place on Earth" (I assume that's part of their "factual" "straight talk" and they have lots of research to back that assertion up). And, of course, nobody involved with the project has denied outright that it would take a conservative, or at least strongly opinionative, stance.</p>
<h4>The application</h4>
<p>Quebecor says it has applied for a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_1_specialty_channel">Category 1 specialty channel</a> license from the CRTC. This means that satellite and digital cable providers <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2001/PB2001-90.htm">would be required to put the channel on a discretionary tier</a> so anyone who wanted to have it as part of their package could get it. Analog cable companies <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2000/PB2000-6.htm">are not even allowed to carry them</a>, except by special exception.</p>
<p>This is interesting because virtually all new specialty channels apply for a Category 2 license. This is entirely discretionary - cable and satellite companies would not be required to even make it available, and can freely negotiate with broadcasters to determine fees.</p>
<p>It makes sense for Quebecor to apply for a Category 1 license because the two biggest regulatory hurdles don't apply to the concept. First, Category 1 channels have genre protection (and must respect other channels' exclusivity), so people can't launch a new weather channel or business network or cartoon network - unless it has a very specific focus that doesn't compete directly with the Weather Network, BNN or Teletoon, respectively. But the CRTC decided recently that it would remove such protections from news and sports networks, because it judged that they had matured to the point where they were no longer needed.</p>
<p>Second, Category 1 channels must have at least 50% Canadian content. Since presumably all the content on Sun News would be provided by its journalists and those of Quebecor Media, that wouldn't be a problem.</p>
<p>The biggest problem will be convincing the CRTC that it should grant a license in what it originally planned to be a very limited category of digital specialty channels like Book TV, Bold, Discovery Health and G4.</p>
<h4>Think Sun Media, LCN ... and yes, Fox News</h4>
<p>I don't doubt that Sun News Channel will have a conservative slant to it, or at least a Fox News-style sensationalist slant. They've already said that they want to have opinion, and the kinds of talking heads you don't find on the other networks (CBC, CTV). But while I have no evidence to back this up, I'm thinking the model they'll want to use for the channel isn't so much Fox News as it is LCN.</p>
<p>For the Toronto-ites out there, LCN is kind of Quebec's equivalent to CP24, a regionally-focused news network that's the first to send a helicopter out when something happens in Montreal. Fires, car accidents, minor natural disasters, dead children, all the usual local news stuff. It's the channel that's usually on in the newsroom, for the simple reason that it's the TV network closes to an all-Montreal-news channel. (LCN pretends it's Quebec-wide, and it does have journalists elsewhere, but the vast majority of its news is based in the Montreal area, or occasionally Quebec City).</p>
<p>LCN also has opinion. Richard Martineau, Jean-Luc Mongrain, Claude Poirier, and anyone else who can talk loud even if they don't really say much of substance (Actually, now that I think about it, that does sound a lot like Fox News), and can be easily pre-empted if breaking news happens during the day. After LCN changed its format to have more of these kinds of hosts, ratings apparently shot up 300 per cent.</p>
<p>But while I think there will be a definite fiscal-conservative slant (expect investigative stories every day based on access to information requests for CBC expenses), I don't think we'll be seeing the same kind of socially conservative biases you see in the United States. I don't see Sun News praising Sarah Palin or talking about the evils of abortion or trotting out conspiracy theories that Michael Ignatieff is a secret terrorist.</p>
<p>Then again, I could be wrong. Sun News could turn into the press release arm of the Conservative Party. It could start simulcasting Fox News Channel. It could start running free ads for the Christian Heritage Party. Nobody knows yet. We'll just have to wait and see.</p>
<p>It's interesting to note here that although Fox News Channel is approved for carriage in Canada, Quebecor-owned Videotron doesn't make it available on its digital service. I suspect many Quebecers criticizing Quebecor may be basing their opinions of Fox News on what they see on the Daily Show.</p>
<h4>Conservative is better than nothing</h4>
<p>I welcome Sun News for the same reason I welcome the National Post: It's a different voice, and it employs journalists. If that means stories get out into the public that would have remained secret before, I'd say that's worth hearing more of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ezra_Levant">Ezra Levant</a>. I would hope they take their role seriously and concentrate more on being honest and open than countering perceived biases in their competitors. And I think Canadians should keep them on their toes and put immense pressure on them to keep their biases in check.</p>
<p>But either way, adding a new voice to the equation can only make the Canadian news industry more diverse.</p>
<h4>My biggest worry</h4>
<p>Although a news network that seeks to impose an opinion more than inform the population sounds pretty scary, my biggest worry about Sun News isn't that it will be conservative, it's that it will be cheap.</p>
<p>During <a href="http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/7678651">the press conference announcing the network</a>, after Teneycke blasted so-called "elites", he talked about, and I'm quoting directly here: "value-added content convergence with Sun Media properties across Canada". Besides being filled with meaningless industry buzzwords, it seemed apparent that Sun Media and Quebecor believe they can use existing journalists to supply the network. They think that Sun Media print reporters can do TV spots, as part of some convergent utopia.</p>
<p>(Speaking of which, it's interesting that Péladeau claims the media is in crisis - forcing him to lock out journalists at the Journal de Québec, Le Réveil and the Journal de Montréal - and then appears at a press conference to announce he's spending millions on a new TV news network. Péladeau said during the press conference when asked directly about this that the two are unrelated. But the irony was certainly not lost on locked-out Journal de Montréal workers.)</p>
<p>Even CTV and CBC, which have local television stations across the country to supply a national news network, need "national" reporters in various cities to supply the national network and national evening news. Anyone who's seen videos on Sun Media websites can't be optimistic about the prospects of a news network relying on them for content.</p>
<p>I'm sure Sun News will hire anchors (the prettiest they can find), technicians and all sorts of other people to run the channel. But without that network of videojournalists, I wouldn't expect their news operation to be able to match what the main networks can provide, outside of Toronto and (if they share resources with LCN and TVA) Quebec.</p>
<p>The opinion-news mix has two advantages over straight news. One is that it provides higher ratings, as the choir flock to their preachers. The other is that it's cheap. Spend good money on a well-known host, add maybe a researcher or two, and you're done. The big mouth blabbers about whatever, provided it's controversial and excites or angers the audience enough that they pay attention. And if Glenn Beck demonstrated anything, it's that those talking heads don't have to make sense, be consistent, have any connection to reality or have any journalistic integrity to succeed.</p>
<p>As much as sending out hundreds of access to information requests to the CBC, then trolling through management expense claims to <a href="http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/06/14/14389446.html">drum up even the most minor irregularity</a> may seem petty and biased, it's still journalism.</p>
<p>My fear with Sun News isn't that it's going to have those kinds of stories, it's that it'll have those kinds of stories and then have blowhards yelling about them for three hours, showing some clips from YouTube and then calling it a day.</p>
<p>Kind of like Fox News. Or CNN. Or MSNBC.</p>
<p>Let's hope I've vastly underestimated what Quebecor has planned.</p>
<p><em>Sun News Channel is slated for launch Jan. 1, 2011, pending CRTC approval.</em></p>
<p>UPDATE: <a href="http://tvfeedsmyfamily.blogspot.com/2010/06/sun-tv-news-conservative-opinion.html">Bill Brioux is also highly skeptical of this network</a>, particularly because of the failures at CKXT, the local Toronto station they're trying to "convert" into Sun News.</p>
<p>UPDATE (June 24): <a href="http://www.voir.ca/blogs/steve_proulx/archive/2010/06/23/c-est-rien-qu-un-d-233-but.aspx">Steve Proulx has some thoughts (mainly negative) about Quebecor's convergence</a> and conservativeness and how it's affecting media.<br />
<h3 class='related_post_title'>Related Posts</h3>
<ul class='related_post'>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/09/04/sun-tv-news-reality/' title='Some truth about Sun TV News'>Some truth about Sun TV News</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2011/11/30/quebecor-silent-on-job-cuts/' title='Quebecor doesn&#8217;t inform when it doesn&#8217;t feel like it'>Quebecor doesn&#8217;t inform when it doesn&#8217;t feel like it</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2011/11/24/quebecor-vous-informe/' title='Quebecor starts PR counterattack'>Quebecor starts PR counterattack</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2011/11/04/enquete-quebecor/' title='Enquête sur Quebecor: Good, but I expected more (UPDATED)'>Enquête sur Quebecor: Good, but I expected more (UPDATED)</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2011/10/20/cbc-quebecor-misinformation/' title='The CBC/Quebecor misinformation war'>The CBC/Quebecor misinformation war</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/06/15/sun-news-channel/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>15</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Two French specialty channels coming</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/02/26/yoopa-zeste-coming/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/02/26/yoopa-zeste-coming/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 19:00:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fagstein</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRTC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV specialty channels]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TVA Sports]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yoopa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Zeste]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=8571</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Announcements came this week about two new specialty channels that will be launched over the next month. One is Yoopa, a kids' channel (ages 2-6) that was approved by the CRTC as "TVA Junior". Quebecor plans to launch it April 1, and it will have some advertising, though not of the traditional kind, says Richard [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Announcements came this week about two new specialty channels that will be launched over the next month.</p>
<p>One is <a href="http://espaceparents.canoe.ca/style-vie/consommation/2010/02/24/13008261-ca.html">Yoopa</a>, a kids' channel (ages 2-6) that was <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2010/2010-103.htm">approved by the CRTC</a> as "TVA Junior". Quebecor plans to launch it April 1, and it will have some advertising, <a href="http://www.cyberpresse.ca/le-soleil/arts-et-spectacles/television-et-radio/201002/26/01-4255453-tva-lance-yoopa-une-chaine-pour-les-deux-a-six-ans.php">though not of the traditional kind, says Richard Therrien</a>.</p>
<p>The other is <a href="http://ruefrontenac.com/spectacles/tv/18439-nouvelle-chaine-tele-cuisine-zeste">Zeste</a>, a food channel set to launch March 22 by the company behind <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Évasion">Évasion</a>.</p>
<p>Both are digital channels and will launch in both standard and high definition.</p>
<p>UPDATE (Feb. 26): The CRTC has <a href="http://lejournaldequebec.canoe.ca/journaldequebec/artsetspectacles/television/archives/2010/02/20100226-115344.html">also approved TVA Sports</a>, though it refused to step in and force RDS to give up is exclusivity contract with the Canadiens.<br />
<h3 class='related_post_title'>Related Posts</h3>
<ul class='related_post'>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/09/04/sun-tv-news-reality/' title='Some truth about Sun TV News'>Some truth about Sun TV News</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/05/28/crtc-roundup-videotron-must-closed-caption-porn/' title='CRTC Roundup: Videotron must closed-caption porn'>CRTC Roundup: Videotron must closed-caption porn</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/04/28/crtc-roundup-deciding-the-future-of-tv/' title='CRTC roundup: Deciding the future of TV'>CRTC roundup: Deciding the future of TV</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/04/21/crtc-roundup-us-carriage-model/' title='CRTC Roundup: The American retransmission consent model'>CRTC Roundup: The American retransmission consent model</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/03/11/crtc-roundup-global-local-programming/' title='CRTC Roundup: Global, porn and death'>CRTC Roundup: Global, porn and death</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/02/26/yoopa-zeste-coming/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Canwest study shows people like Canwest networks</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/02/12/canwest-study-shows-people-like-canwest-networks/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/02/12/canwest-study-shows-people-like-canwest-networks/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:00:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fagstein</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CanWest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV specialty channels]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV-ratings]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=8413</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Canwest has released the results of a study that seeks to measure specialty television channels by quality rather than quantity of ratings. Instead of just pure viewer numbers, it seeks to rank networks by how attentive their viewers are, and how likely they are to pay attention to ads. A cynic might notice that Canwest-owned [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Canwest has released the results of a study that seeks to measure specialty television channels by quality rather than quantity of ratings. Instead of just pure viewer numbers, it seeks to rank networks by how attentive their viewers are, and how likely they are to pay attention to ads.</p>
<p>A cynic might notice that Canwest-owned networks, including Food Network, HGTV, History Television, Showcase (and its sister networks), National Geographic, Mystery TV and TVtropolis, improve their scores under this measurement. Under pure ratings, only one Canwest network (HGTV) comes in the top five, and only three (with History and Showcase) in the top 10. In the other metrics shown, Canwest networks have 2-3 of the top five and 4-6 of the top 10.</p>
<p>That cynic might wonder if Canwest would have released this study if Canwest-owned networks hadn't fared so well.<br />
<h3 class='related_post_title'>Related Posts</h3>
<ul class='related_post'>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/03/11/crtc-roundup-global-local-programming/' title='CRTC Roundup: Global, porn and death'>CRTC Roundup: Global, porn and death</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/03/04/crtc-roundup-license-renewals/' title='CRTC roundup: broken television'>CRTC roundup: broken television</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2011/01/20/cfcf-cbmt-ratings/' title='Ratings: CFCF dominates, but CBMT&#8217;s happy'>Ratings: CFCF dominates, but CBMT&#8217;s happy</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/09/04/sun-tv-news-reality/' title='Some truth about Sun TV News'>Some truth about Sun TV News</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/07/14/postmedia-network/' title='I, for one, welcome our new Postmedia Network Inc. overlords'>I, for one, welcome our new Postmedia Network Inc. overlords</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/02/12/canwest-study-shows-people-like-canwest-networks/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Spécialisées</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/11/07/canal-d-anniversary/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/11/07/canal-d-anniversary/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2009 20:15:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fagstein</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canal D]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canal Savoir]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Le Devoir]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV specialty channels]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=7445</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Le Devoir today has a series of articles about the 15th anniversary of Canal D, the documentary/educational network launched on Jan. 1, 1995. About half are subscriber-locked, but there's some open ones worth reading: A piece about Canal D's programming, which includes a brief mention of my favouritest show ever, Mayday. Mayday is produced in [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Le Devoir today has a series of articles about the 15th anniversary of Canal D, the documentary/educational network launched on Jan. 1, 1995. About half are subscriber-locked, but there's some open ones worth reading:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.ledevoir.com/2009/11/07/275987.html">A piece about Canal D's programming</a>, which includes a brief mention of my favouritest show ever, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayday_(TV_series)">Mayday</a>. Mayday is produced in Quebec for both Canal D and the Discovery Channel, and with the help of its massive tax credits, is exported to countries around the world.</li>
<li><a href="http://www.ledevoir.com/2009/11/07/275995.html">A <span style="text-decoration: line-through;">blowjob</span> discussion of owner Astral Media's branding strategy</a>. It says it likes to give each network its own brand and let it do its own thing. (Apparently that logic doesn't apply to <a href="http://montreal.virginradio.ca/">its radio stations</a>.)</li>
<li><a href="http://www.ledevoir.com/2009/11/07/275993.html">A look at how the documentary filmmaking industry has changed</a> with the digital media revolution.</li>
</ul>
<p><a href="http://www.ledevoir.com/2009/11/07/275904.html">Stéphane Baillargeon also discusses</a> the changes happening at <a href="http://www.canal.qc.ca/?tzinfo=2009|300">Canal Savoir</a>, which turned 25 this year.<br />
<h3 class='related_post_title'>Related Posts</h3>
<ul class='related_post'>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2011/04/01/le-devoir-to-charge-for-tweets/' title='Le Devoir to charge for tweets'>Le Devoir to charge for tweets</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/11/17/le-devoir-des-ecrivains/' title='A writer&#8217;s newspaper'>A writer&#8217;s newspaper</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/09/04/sun-tv-news-reality/' title='Some truth about Sun TV News'>Some truth about Sun TV News</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/06/15/sun-news-channel/' title='I don&#8217;t like Sun News, but I welcome it'>I don&#8217;t like Sun News, but I welcome it</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/02/26/yoopa-zeste-coming/' title='Two French specialty channels coming'>Two French specialty channels coming</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/11/07/canal-d-anniversary/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>There are other hockey teams too, you know</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/10/12/nhl-centre-ice/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/10/12/nhl-centre-ice/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 05:06:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fagstein</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Sports]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NHL Centre Ice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV specialty channels]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=7183</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In addition to free previews of Showcase Action and Showcase Diva (both owned by my corporate overlord Canwest) and Planète on Videotron digital cable, October is also free NHL Centre Ice month. For those unfamiliar with the concept NHL Centre Ice (NHL Center Ice in the U.S.) takes television feeds from out-of-market games (in our [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-7184" title="NHL Center Ice" src="http://blog.fagstein.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/NHL_Center_Ice.jpg" alt="NHL Center Ice" width="600" height="384" /></p>
<p>In addition to <a href="http://entertainment.videotron.com/free_previews/">free previews</a> of Showcase Action and Showcase Diva (both owned by my corporate overlord Canwest) and Planète on Videotron digital cable, October is also free <a href="http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26371">NHL Centre Ice</a> month.</p>
<p>For those unfamiliar with the concept NHL Centre Ice (NHL Center Ice in the U.S.) takes television feeds from out-of-market games (in our case, anything not involving the Canadiens) that otherwise wouldn't be available, including those games that are blacked out on the west-coast Sportsnet feeds. There's all sorts of asterisks involved (it doesn't show all games, or include playoff games beyond the first round, in addition to the local blackouts), but if you're a fan of, say, the Canucks, the Devils or the not-Hamilton Coyotes, it could be useful.</p>
<p>Check it out: Channels 451-461 on Videotron, 425-435 on Bell TV, and 471-487 on Shaw Direct (other channels for HD feeds, where available). After Oct. 24, NHL Centre Ice becomes $30 a month, which seems like a lot for me. But maybe I'm just spoiled because RDS has the rights to all 82 regular-season games of the Canadiens, plus all playoff games.<br />
<h3 class='related_post_title'>Related Posts</h3>
<ul class='related_post'>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/09/04/sun-tv-news-reality/' title='Some truth about Sun TV News'>Some truth about Sun TV News</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/06/15/sun-news-channel/' title='I don&#8217;t like Sun News, but I welcome it'>I don&#8217;t like Sun News, but I welcome it</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/02/26/yoopa-zeste-coming/' title='Two French specialty channels coming'>Two French specialty channels coming</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/02/12/canwest-study-shows-people-like-canwest-networks/' title='Canwest study shows people like Canwest networks'>Canwest study shows people like Canwest networks</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/11/07/canal-d-anniversary/' title='Spécialisées'>Spécialisées</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/10/12/nhl-centre-ice/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>One demographic to rule them all</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/10/03/specialty-channels-and-women/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/10/03/specialty-channels-and-women/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2009 21:07:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fagstein</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Corus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SexTV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV specialty channels]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=7095</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There's a disturbing trend happening in cable specialty channels: they're being rebranded to appeal to adult women: TLC, the U.S. network formerly known as The Learning Channel, gave up all pretense of educating people and is now a female-centric lifestyle channel running Jon &#38; Kate Plus Eight Scream, the horror movie channel, was rebranded by [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There's a disturbing trend happening in cable specialty channels: they're being rebranded to appeal to adult women:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://tlc.discovery.com/">TLC</a>, the U.S. network formerly known as The Learning Channel, gave up all pretense of educating people and is now a female-centric lifestyle channel running Jon &amp; Kate Plus Eight</li>
<li>Scream, the horror movie channel, was <a href="http://www.mediaincanada.com/articles/mic/20090626/screamtv.html">rebranded</a> by Corus as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dusk_(TV_channel)">Dusk.</a> It includes more "paranormal" content to broaden its appeal and get more women watching.</li>
<li>CLT, Canadian Learning Television, was shelved by Corus in favour of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viva_(TV_channel)">VIVA</a>, the network for "boomer women".</li>
</ul>
<p>The latest blow came this week as Corus (notice a pattern here?) let it be known that it is <a href="http://www.mondoville.com/2009/09/sextv-r-i-p-goodbye-forever-to-the-baby-blue-movie/">rebranding almost-porn network SexTV </a>as "W movies", starting Nov. 1.</p>
<p>I realize video pornography is easy to acquire these days, but Corus seems to think it needs to change all its specialty channels into women's channels to appeal to the advertiser-rich demographic. Meanwhile, those of us (male or female) who don't fit into that stereotype get left behind.</p>
<p>We've lost education, horror and sex. What's next? Will they replace <a href="http://www.spike.com/show/22792">MANswers</a> with Womanswers? Start up the Discovery Emotions channel? Have OUTtv broadcast nothing but Queer Eye for the Straight Guy?</p>
<p>Something must be done to halt the assault on our television.<br />
<h3 class='related_post_title'>Related Posts</h3>
<ul class='related_post'>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/05/28/crtc-roundup-videotron-must-closed-caption-porn/' title='CRTC Roundup: Videotron must closed-caption porn'>CRTC Roundup: Videotron must closed-caption porn</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/09/24/hbo-canada-coming-but-it-wont-be-any-cheaper/' title='HBO Canada coming, but it won&#8217;t be any cheaper'>HBO Canada coming, but it won&#8217;t be any cheaper</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/12/20/crtc-caves-in-to-cogeco/' title='CRTC caves in to Cogeco'>CRTC caves in to Cogeco</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/09/04/sun-tv-news-reality/' title='Some truth about Sun TV News'>Some truth about Sun TV News</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/06/15/sun-news-channel/' title='I don&#8217;t like Sun News, but I welcome it'>I don&#8217;t like Sun News, but I welcome it</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/10/03/specialty-channels-and-women/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CRTC Roundup: Videotron must closed-caption porn</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/05/28/crtc-roundup-videotron-must-closed-caption-porn/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/05/28/crtc-roundup-videotron-must-closed-caption-porn/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2009 08:14:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fagstein</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Radio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Al-Jazeera]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bell ExpressVu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bold TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CBSC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CHAA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CJLM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CJWI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Corus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRTC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[porn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Radio-Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Slice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV specialty channels]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vancouver Olympics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Videotron]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=5620</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We made fun of this a bit when it came out, but there was a serious policy question being asked by Videotron: Should cable companies be required to spend money closed-captioning on-demand pornography and programming aimed at preschool children who can't read? The month, the CRTC ruled that, well, yes, they should. While you might [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We <a href="http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/07/28/crtc-roundup-videotron-doesnt-want-to-closed-caption-porn/">made fun of this a bit when it came out</a>, but there was a serious policy question being asked by Videotron: Should cable companies be required to spend money closed-captioning on-demand pornography and programming aimed at preschool children who can't read?</p>
<p>The month, <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-276.htm">the CRTC ruled that, well, yes, they should</a>.</p>
<p>While you might think it common sense that such programs should be excluded from closed-captioning requirements, the CRTC said that children should have access to captioning so they can learn to read, and parents should have access to what their children watch. There wasn't much discussion about the porn angle, namely that nobody cares what people are saying in pornographic movies.</p>
<p>In any case, the CRTC said Videotron hadn't made a case that it's so financially strapped that it can't afford captioning costs, so the application was denied.</p>
<h4>Konrad's oopsie</h4>
<p>The CRTC chairman <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/arts/media/story/2009/05/25/crtc-chairman-testimony-heritage-0525.html?ref=rss">said sorry</a> for saying that conventional broadcasters like CTV and Global wouldn't commit to taking carriage fees from cable and satellite providers and putting all that money into local programming. It turns out they were ready to make just such a commitment.</p>
<p>That certainly makes the TV people look better. But what guarantee would we have that they wouldn't take back their existing funding to local stations now that this new source of revenue is available to them?</p>
<h4>Bye Bye was wrong</h4>
<p>You hate to still be talking about this, but the judgment is in about Radio-Canada's Bye-Bye: <a href="http://www.montrealgazette.com/Life/Radio+Canada+rapped+Obama+assassination+joke/1629439/story.html">It really was racist</a>. The CRTC passed on complaints to the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council and asked them to judge the show. The CBSC normally rules only on private broadcasting, but the CRTC asked them for their advice (if anything, this shows that there's no reason the CBSC shouldn't also deal with complaints about public broadcasting).</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cbsc.ca/english/decisions/2009/090423.php">The CBSC's ruling</a> dismissed most of the complaints (though some only barely), including those about jokes on anglos, the poor, immigrants, dépanneur owners, Indian call centre operators, Julie Couillard, Céline Dion, politicians, and a single complaint saying they were unfair to GM. It also said that the show did not go over the line in its treatment of Nathalie Simard, and didn't even hint at the abuse she suffered at the hands of Guy Cloutier, father of Bye Bye hotst Véronique Cloutier.</p>
<p>The council did rule that three things crossed the line:</p>
<ul>
<li>Jokes against blacks, particularly the sketch involving Denis Lévesque and Barack Obama as well as comments from Jean-François Mercier about Obama being easier to shoot in front of the White House.</li>
<li>The portrayal of violence against women in a sketch involving the family of Patrick Roy.</li>
<li>The rebroadcast of the show the next evening without viewer advisories.</li>
</ul>
<p>The racist jokes, the council said, were gratuitous and abusive. Though Radio-Canada, the show's producers, its writers and its performers did not intend to foster racism and intended for the comments to be ironic, the council ruled that the context didn't make this sufficiently clear, and the comments could easily have been taken at face value. It brought up a number of previous cases to support its view that comedic irony isn't a blank cheque to make racist comments.</p>
<p>It's hard not to agree with the council's well-thought-out decision. Bye Bye didn't intend to be racist, but it did intend to shock. And when you're spouting racist comments just to shock people, how is that different from just being racist?</p>
<p>This decision is worth reading if only for the words "a rather cartoonish rabbit-like act of  intercourse."</p>
<p>Technically, this is just a recommendation to the CRTC. It is up to the commission to decide if it agrees, and if so what kind of sanction it will impose. Normally, private broadcasters are required to air a notice of the decision to viewers. We'll see if the CRTC orders Radio-Canada to do the same.</p>
<h4>More power for radio</h4>
<p>It's going to be a bit easier to listen to some out-of-town radio stations thanks to some CRTC approvals of power increases:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CKOY-FM">CKOY 104.5 FM</a> in Sherbrooke, the sister station to Montreal's CKOI, gets <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-259.htm">a huge power boost</a> to up to 50,000 Watts. Of course, that doesn't mean it'll be easy to hear, especially with <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2003/db2003-196.htm">CBC Radio One's second 100W transmitter at 104.7 FM in the west end</a>. But if you're in the Eastern townships and had trouble hearing the station, you should have much less of that now.</li>
<li>CJLM 103.5 FM in Joliette gets <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-260.htm">a modest boost</a> from 3,000 to 4,500 Watts, which will help people on the north side of the island and on the north shore.</li>
<li>For those on the south side, they'll be hearing <a href="http://www.fm1033.ca/fm1033ca/site/index.php">FM 103.3</a> in Longueuil, which in the same decision saw its allowed power output grow more than five-fold. It's still a low-power community radio station, but maybe now it won't disappear off the dial when I hit the Plateau.</li>
</ul>
<h4>Haitian station wants change of frequency</h4>
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CJWI">CJWI</a>, a <a href="http://www.cpam1610.com/">Haitian AM station</a> currently on 1610 AM, wants to <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-293.htm">change its frequency to 1410</a>, which is where CFMB used to be. The move would put CJWI in the regular, non-extended AM band, allowing people with older radios to hear it. It also wants to increase its output power from 1kW to 10kW, and relocate its transmitter.</p>
<h4>Rogers, small cable companies get nannied</h4>
<p>The <a href="http://www.ccsa.cable.ca/">Canadian Cable Systems Alliance</a> asked the CRTC to intervene in stalled negotiations it was having on behalf of small cable companies across the country with Rogers over its SportsNet service. The CRTC has the power to intervene in these cases, but it prefers not to. However, since regulations require some cable companies to carry SportsNet (and will until new regulations take effect in 2011 that deregulate the cable sports channels), <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-301.htm">it decided it must step in here</a>. Details are kept in confidence to protect both businesses, so that's about all we know.</p>
<h4>Slice wants less CanCon</h4>
<p>Canwest-owned Slice channel has noticed that its Canadian content requirements are much higher than what other specialty channels require, so it wants to get the same deal. <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-272.htm">It's asking</a> that its CanCon minimum programming requirement be dropped from 82.5% to 60%, and that it be forced to spend only 45% instead of 71% of revenues on Canadian programming.</p>
<h4>City wants less CanCon movies</h4>
<p>Citytv has asked the CRTC for a change in license that would eliminate a requirement to air 100 hours of Canadian movies each year - which works out to about a movie a week. Rogers (which owns City now) argues that it is the only conventional broadcaster that has this requirement and it shouldn't be singled out. <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/arts/filmmakers-up-in-arms-as-rogers-seeks-to-alter-licence/article1156011/">Canadian movie-makers say Rogers has pulled a bait and switch</a>, praising Canadian movies when it bought the network and now quietly wanting to get rid of them.</p>
<h4>Want Al-Jazeera?</h4>
<p>The CRTC is opening up the can of worms about <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-254.htm">allowing Al-Jazeera English into the country</a>. The commission had previously approved the Arabic-language version of the network, with unique requirements that distributors monitor and censor its content, something that requires far too much work for the cable and satellite companies.</p>
<p>The commission is considering adding the English channel to eligible foreign networks that cable and satellite can add to their lineups, but it wants comments from Canadians who might be opposed to it. They specifically want evidence of abusive comments, with tapes if possible.</p>
<h4>More specialty channels</h4>
<p>Conventional TV may be dying, but specialty channels are exploding like nobody's business. The CRTC is <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-296.htm">holding a hearing on July 21</a> where it will listen to proposals for new networks:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Black Entertainment Television Canada (English and French)</strong> - self-explanatory, I would imagine.</li>
<li><strong>Reality TV</strong> - A Canwest proposal for reality shows, DIY programs and scripted reality shows. This network was originally approved by the CRTC in 2005, but <a href="http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/04/28/crtc-roundup-deciding-the-future-of-tv/">expired before Canwest could launch it</a>, forcing them to start over from scratch.</li>
<li><strong>AMET-TV</strong>, an African and Afro-Caribbean-themed channel that carries programming in English (70%), French (20%) and African languages (10%)</li>
<li><strong>New Tang  								Dynasty Television Canada HD</strong>, a generalist network mainly in Mandarin but also other Chinese languages.</li>
</ul>
<h4>CPAC wants to be patriotic</h4>
<p>CPAC, the politics channel that carries House of Commons proceedings among other things, is <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-300.htm">asking for permission to expand its boundaries on July 1 of each year</a>. It wants to add three programming categories which would allow it to carry musical performance, variety, entertainment and related programming from Canada Day celebrations on Parliament Hill and elsewhere. A reasonable request if I've ever heard one, though I don't think there are similarly specific exceptions to such rules on other channels.</p>
<h4>A bold move</h4>
<p>The CBC was in the process of getting slapped by the CRTC because it was violating its license with respect to Bold, a specialty channel. Formerly Country Canada, its license says it should air programming directed toward rural Canadians. But since then it's basically been a dumping ground for whatever content the network wants to put there.</p>
<p>After the CRTC called a hearing, <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-132-1.htm">the CBC waved the white flag</a>. It has proposed a license amendment, though one that would keep the rural focus.</p>
<h4>Good news, bad news for Olympics</h4>
<p>Following a request from the CRTC chairman, CTV and the CBC have been in talks about using CBC stations to broadcast French-language Olympics coverage for the tiny, tiny portion of Canadians who:</p>
<ul>
<li>are unilingual francophones</li>
<li>don't live in Quebec or within range of a TQS station</li>
<li>don't have cable or satellite TV service</li>
<li>don't have broadband Internet access</li>
<li>AND want to watch the Olympics in French on TV</li>
</ul>
<p>You'd think this number would be so small as to be negligible (about 10,000 apparently fit the first three criteria), but in the spirit of political correctness, CTV (which owns the broadcast rights and is part of a giant consortium that's covering the games) is looking at using some CBC stations to retransmit its TQS/RDS Olympics coverage over the air.</p>
<p>The problem is that <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5iTTqi3IDR8TQcOHIXZbegE7gu8iQ">the CBC isn't crazy about donating the stations and getting nothing in return</a>. Specifically, the debate is over ad revenue: CTV wants to keep it all (minus some compensation for what they would have had with their regular programming), and CBC thinks that's crazy.</p>
<p>On the plus side, <a href="http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/May2009/14/c3922.html">Corus has joined the giant consortium</a>, which currently includes CTV (with TSN and RDS), TQS, Rogers and APTN. Corus will have Olympics coverage (though it doesn't sound like much) on CKAC Sports as well as updates on CKOI, Info 690 and 98.5FM in Montreal.</p>
<h4>In other news</h4>
<ul>
<li>Bell ExpressVu (now Bell TV) has been <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-278.htm">allowed to continue</a> the practice of having part-time channels. Currently, the satellite provider which is tight for space and already has 30 channels used up by conventional local television stations from the big three networks alone (almost 70 if you include CTV, CBC, Global, Radio-Canada, TVA, TQS, E!, A, City and OMNI), allows people to access newscasts from other stations through use of two shared channels, that carry the newscasts from CJOH (CTV Ottawa), CBC Fredericton, CBC Charlottetown, CFER (TVA) Rimouski and CBLFT (Radio-Canada) Toronto.</li>
<li>Approved for broadcast in high definition: <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-286.htm">Leafs TV</a> (it wasn't already?), <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-287.htm">Bite TV</a>, <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-288.htm">AUX TV</a>, <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-289.htm">TREK TV</a>. Equator HD gets the reverse, <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-262.htm">approved for a standard-definition version</a>.</li>
<li>Media concentration continues: <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-249.htm">Two Kingston radio stations have been bought up by Rogers</a>.</li>
<li>ARTV wants <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-268.htm">more flexibility in programming</a></li>
<li>Movie Central, western Canada's version of The Movie Network, <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-306.htm">has asked to be allowed to distribute in HD</a>.</li>
<li>Coaticook, Quebec (just southeast of Sherbrooke) <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-296.htm#7">wants a community radio station</a>.</li>
<li>The CRTC has <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-247.htm">approved a bid</a> by <a href="http://www.peteryoungren.org/">World Impact Ministries</a> to buy the <a href="http://www.christianchannel.ca/">Christian Channel</a>. As a matter of policy, the CRTC goes over sales carefully when they happen shortly after launch or change in ownership, but there were no signs of any financial impropriety here. The network is a perennial money-loser and its new owner will keep all its obligations.</li>
<li>Ownership reorganization at <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-242.htm">The Score</a> and <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-241.htm">Outdoor Life Network</a></li>
<li>bpm:tv can now <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-290.htm">add infomercials to its schedule</a></li>
</ul>
<p>And finally, not that anyone doubted it would happen, but <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-264.htm">the CRTC has allowed CBC Television and Télévision Radio-Canada to continue to operate for another year</a>.<br />
<h3 class='related_post_title'>Related Posts</h3>
<ul class='related_post'>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/04/21/crtc-roundup-us-carriage-model/' title='CRTC Roundup: The American retransmission consent model'>CRTC Roundup: The American retransmission consent model</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/03/11/crtc-roundup-global-local-programming/' title='CRTC Roundup: Global, porn and death'>CRTC Roundup: Global, porn and death</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/11/03/broadcasting-regulation-nerdgasm/' title='Broadcasting regulation nerdgasm'>Broadcasting regulation nerdgasm</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/07/28/crtc-roundup-videotron-doesnt-want-to-closed-caption-porn/' title='CRTC roundup: Videotron doesn&#8217;t want to closed-caption porn'>CRTC roundup: Videotron doesn&#8217;t want to closed-caption porn</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2011/09/14/specialty-channel-war/' title='Specialty channel war is screwing customers'>Specialty channel war is screwing customers</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/05/28/crtc-roundup-videotron-must-closed-caption-porn/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CRTC roundup: Deciding the future of TV</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/04/28/crtc-roundup-deciding-the-future-of-tv/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/04/28/crtc-roundup-deciding-the-future-of-tv/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 02:20:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fagstein</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRTC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fee-for-carriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Société nationale de l'Acadie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[StarChoice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV specialty channels]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=5239</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The CRTC continues to dominate be a footnote in the headlines as conventional television operators appear in two hearings - one for the CRTC itself in Gatineau to discuss license renewals, and another for a House committee in Ottawa to discuss the future of local television. And those discussions are heating up. Last week, CTV [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The CRTC continues to <span style="text-decoration: line-through;">dominate</span> be a footnote in the headlines as conventional television operators appear in two hearings - one for the CRTC itself in Gatineau to discuss license renewals, and another for a House committee in Ottawa to discuss the future of local television. And <a href="http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/04/27/269393.aspx">those discussions are heating up</a>.</p>
<p>Last week, <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090423.wrtv0423/BNStory/Business/?page=rss&amp;id=RTGAM.20090423.wrtv0423">CTV and Global pressed their fee-for-carriage idea</a>, where cable and satellite providers would be required to pay broadcasters to carry stations that already transmit their signals over the air for free. <a href="http://business.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090427.wcrtc0427/BNStory/Business/home">This would give broadcasters a $350-million lifeline</a>, which is why they're continuing to press for it even after having gotten rejected twice. They say local news simply can't pay for itself, and <a href="http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=1542423">it needs to be subsidized</a>.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/April2009/29/c6588.html">Even TQS jumped on board</a>, despite the fact that it doesn't produce local news.</p>
<p>Rogers, which owns CityTV and OMNI but gets much more of its revenue from its cable distributor, argued in front of MPs that CTV and Global were exaggerating their financial troubles to get a handout.</p>
<p>This week, <a href="http://www.canada.com/business/fp/Rogers+rejects+call+boost+contribution+local+fund/1541989/story.html">Rogers repeated the accusation to the CRTC</a>, saying the networks want money for local stations but also want to shut down small stations that don't rake in money. It tempered that by saying that if the CRTC approves such an idea, it should be temporary until the recession goes away and a revenue goes back up. It also said fee-for-carriage means <a href="http://business.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090428.wcrtcrogers0428/BNStory/Business/home">they shouldn't be required to distribute conventional TV channels</a> if broadcasters demand fees that are too high.</p>
<p>(This brings up an issue: Isn't Rogers in a conflict of interest here? On one hand, OMNI and Citytv would benefit from additional fees, but Rogers is silencing those voices because the corporate parent has decided it would have more to lose from these fees through its cable provider than it would gain through its television stations. The same applies to Quebecor, which owns the TVA network and Videotron. In all, <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/news/releases/2009/r090423.htm">distributors showed revenues of $10 billion in 2008, with over $2 billion in profit</a>.)</p>
<p>Pierre-Karl Péladeau, who speaks on behalf of TVA and Videotron, <a href="http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=1515436">gave a more nuanced, have-your-cake-and-subsidize-it-too answer</a> to MPs, saying fee-for-carriage should be allowed, but that the rates should be subject to negotiation between broadcaster and provider (no doubt the negotiations between TVA and Videotron would go amicably).</p>
<p>Leonard Asper of Canwest <a href="http://business.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090428.wcrtccanwest0428/BNStory/Business/home">argued the problem is a regulatory system</a> that allows distributors to flourish while broadcasters falter. He said debt and the recession are problems too, but they're not the whole answer.</p>
<p>Ivan Fecan of CTVglobemedia said the Local Programming Improvement Fund, a special fund setup by the CRTC to subsidize local television stations in small markets, <a href="http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=1540049">would need to be tripled</a>, and that even then this would only protect the status quo and would not result in any increase in local programming. That angered Rogers and CRTC members.</p>
<p>CTV and Canwest also pointed out that cable and satellite providers are <a href="http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=1524013">constantly increasing their rates </a>without the "revolt" that the providers say would happen with a fee-for-carriage.</p>
<p>The Globe and Mail's Grant Robertson, who has been covering this issue better than anyone, <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090427.wrtv27art1939/BNStory/Business/?pageRequested=all">has a list of some of the issues</a> that may come up in discussions about the future of television in Canada.</p>
<h4>Why not just shut them down?</h4>
<p>An interesting point was made in discussions of license renewals: If CTV and Global are so jealous of specialty television channels, <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090428.RTV28ART1938/TPStory/National">why don't they just become specialty channels</a>?</p>
<p>It's not quite so simple, but with 90% of Canadian television viewers having cable or satellite service, the added expense of setting up transmitters and local news stations isn't worth the added viewership and ad revenue that comes with it. (Not to mention the cost of transitioning to digital television, which has caused broadcasters to decide to <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/2009/04/28/tech-090428-digital-tv-crtc-hearing.html">shut down dozens of retransmitters across the country</a>.)</p>
<p>CRTC chairman Konrad von Finkenstein asked if CTV would prefer the specialty channel model to the conventional TV model. Conventional stations require a certain amount of local programming, while specialty channels are required to spend a certain percentage of their revenues on creating original programming. CTV suggested it would prefer the latter, though it wanted some recognition that having local stations is much more expensive than rerunning old Seinfeld episodes.</p>
<h4>CRTC wants more transparency from big guns</h4>
<p>The CRTC is <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-235.htm">seeking comment on new rules</a> that would require large broadcasters and distributors to disclose more information about their finances than they currently do.</p>
<p>Currently, the CRTC collects lots of information but only releases "aggregate information" to the public. So we know how much all broadcasters spend on U.S. programming, but we don't know how that breaks down per broadcaster or broadcasting unit.</p>
<p>Since broadcasters are arguing that they need more money because their business model is broken (and the distributors are arguing that the can't spare fee-for-carriage payments without raising prices), it makes sense that they should let us see their books.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/April2009/29/c6504.html">The CEP labour union certainly agrees with that reasoning</a>.</p>
<h4>Broadcasters want changes on the air too</h4>
<p>In addition to fee-for-carriage, television broadcasters are asking for a relaxing of regulations about how much Canadian content they have to air and what kind of programming they must create. One of the proposed changes is to <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/arts/tv/story/2009/04/27/crtc-licence-broadcasters.html">include reality programming in the list of "priority programming"</a> (scripted comedies and drama shows) that the CRTC gives special attention to because it costs more to produce. This would go against the entire point of distinguishing expensive from cheap programming, and encourage private broadcasters to cancel expensive dramas in favour of cheaper reality shows.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, <a href="http://tvfeedsmyfamily.blogspot.com/2009/04/will-ctv-global-limit-their-cross.html">Bill Brioux wonders</a> if CTV and Global will be reducing their big-budget U.S. programming purchases in light of their apparent financial woes.</p>
<h4>StarChoice really dislikes CBC Regina</h4>
<p>Last year, the CBC got all up in StarChoice's face because of a decision by the satellite distributor to remove CBC Regina (CBKT) from its channel lineup. The CBC complained to the CRTC, saying that the removal meant StarChoice had more CTV channels than CBC channels, and this represented a violation of one of its conditions of license.</p>
<p>In November, <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2008/db2008-330.htm">the CRTC ruled</a> that CTV's main network and its A Channel network should be considered separately for the purposes of this rule, and that StarChoice was still in compliance. It dismissed the complaint.</p>
<p>But the CBC pressed on with its case, arguing that the CRTC got the numbers wrong and that even excluding the A Channel network, StarChoice has more CTV-owned stations than CBC-owned stations. These include CTV-branded stations as well as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CJCH-TV">CJCH</a> in Halifax (formerly ATV, rebranded as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CTV_Atlantic">CTV Atlantic</a>) and MCTV's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CICI-TV">CICI</a> (rebranded as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CTV_Northern_Ontario">CTV Northern Ontario</a>).</p>
<p>What followed was a war of words betwen CBC and StarChoice, with the latter accusing the former of using incendiary language.</p>
<p>Now, StarChoice is <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-231.htm">asking for an exception to be made to its license</a> to allow it to continue not distributing CBC Regina but still distribute all its CTV stations (including CTV Regina). I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the CBC will oppose this request.</p>
<h4>In other news</h4>
<ul>
<li>The <a href="http://www.snacadie.org/">Société nationale de l'Acadie</a> has <a href="http://snacadie.org/content/view/426/30/">released a survey</a> showing that <a href="http://www.radio-canada.ca/regions/atlantique/2009/04/28/003-ATL-radio-canada_n.shtml">the amount of coverage of Atlantic Canada is three times higher on CBC's The National than on Radio-Canada's Le Téléjournal</a>. It uses that statistic to argue that Radio-Canada is too focused on news from Montreal and Quebec.</li>
<li>The CRTC <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-230.htm">issued some streamlined decisions this week</a>. Most were for extensions or minor changes that didn't require a full hearing. The only denial issued was for a request from Canwest for a second extension on <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2005/db2005-35.htm">a license it had been issued in 2005</a> for a specialty channel focusing on reality television unimaginatively called <strong>Reality TV</strong>. They had been given three years to launch the channel, and got a one-year extension in 2008, but the CRTC refused to issue another extension as per its policy, and the license expired on Feb. 3. Canwest will need to reapply for the license (which it said it would do as it intends to launch the channel).</li>
<li>The Family Channel has been <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-215.htm">granted a license</a> to setup a new specialty channel called <strong>Family Extreme</strong>, which will have programming marketed to children age 6-17.</li>
<li>Fairchild Television has been <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-217.htm">given a license</a> for a specialty channel called <strong>Fairchild Television II</strong>, which will have predominantly Cantonese programming that couldn't fit on the main Fairchild network. Ditto <strong><a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-218.htm">Talentvision II</a></strong> in Mandarin.</li>
<li>Another new channel is <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-219.htm"><strong>Music India 2</strong></a>, which will feature Hindi-language music videos. Awesome.</li>
<li><a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-219.htm"><strong>Canal Évasion</strong></a> has gotten authorization for a companion HD channel, and <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-208.htm"><strong>Oasis HD</strong></a> and <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-209.htm"><strong>Treasure HD</strong></a> have gotten authorization for standard-definition versionf of their channels, to take advantage of people like me who haven't switched to HD.</li>
<li><a href="http://www.walrusmagazine.com/blogs/2009/04/16/the-only-future-of-canadian-identity/">The Walrus's <span style="text-decoration: line-through;">Chantalle</span> Chantelle Oliver</a> suggests the CRTC should be shut down and that the government should impose its cultural will on the populace through identi.ca.</li>
</ul>
<h3 class='related_post_title'>Related Posts</h3>
<ul class='related_post'>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/04/21/crtc-roundup-us-carriage-model/' title='CRTC Roundup: The American retransmission consent model'>CRTC Roundup: The American retransmission consent model</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/09/04/sun-tv-news-reality/' title='Some truth about Sun TV News'>Some truth about Sun TV News</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/03/24/crtc-fee-for-carriage-decision/' title='CRTC has decided: It&#8217;s time to pay for free TV'>CRTC has decided: It&#8217;s time to pay for free TV</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/02/26/yoopa-zeste-coming/' title='Two French specialty channels coming'>Two French specialty channels coming</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/11/14/fee-for-carriage-hearings/' title='Grab the popcorn, the real local TV debate is about to begin'>Grab the popcorn, the real local TV debate is about to begin</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/04/28/crtc-roundup-deciding-the-future-of-tv/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CRTC Roundup: The American retransmission consent model</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/04/21/crtc-roundup-us-carriage-model/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/04/21/crtc-roundup-us-carriage-model/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 02:05:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fagstein</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Montreal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Radio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CHAA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CKOD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRTC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Do Not Call list]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fee-for-carriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fox Business Network]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[language]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Radio Ville-Marie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Super Écran]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Télé-Québec]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Télévision régionale de Laval]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[traffic shaping]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV specialty channels]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=5142</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Another term to add to the zeitgeist of CRTC talks about conventional television funding is the "American retransmission consent model," thanks to a comment from Rogers during hearings this week on whether conventional television broadcasters should be allowed to collect fees from cable and satellite companies for retransmission of their channels. Asked by the commission [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another term to add to the zeitgeist of CRTC talks about conventional television funding is the "American retransmission consent model," thanks to a comment from Rogers during hearings this week on whether conventional television broadcasters should be allowed to collect fees from cable and satellite companies for retransmission of their channels.</p>
<p>Asked by <span style="text-decoration: line-through;">the commission</span> a House committee whether Rogers would approve of a U.S.-style system in which cable companies have to seek permission (and therefore pay fees) to carry conventional television stations, <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090421.RROGERS21ART1932/TPStory/Business">Rogers said it would</a>, provided carriage was optional.</p>
<p>CTVglobemedia pounced on this, <a href="http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/April2009/20/c3424.html">issuing a press release in which it praised Rogers</a> for agreeing to fee-for-carriage in an "industry-to-industry solution" that follows the "American retransmission consent model."</p>
<p>I personally think this is a better idea and could live with this kind of compromise. If broadcasters choose to demand fees that are too high for carrying their signals, the cable and satellite companies (or better, the consumers themselves) could decide it's not worth it and use their rabbit ears instead to get the channels for free.</p>
<p>Not that I think the CRTC and all the players involved would support such a system.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/3873/135/">Michael Geist also weighs in on this issue</a>.</p>
<h4>Conventional television pros and cons</h4>
<p>For those who want to keep track, here are the various pros and cons to running a conventional television station instead of a cable specialty channel:</p>
<p>Pros</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Over-the-air reception</strong>: This used to be a no-brainer, but with only 10% of Canadian TV viewers still using antennas (and most of them probably not watching TV all that much), this incentive becomes a lot less powerful than it once was.</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simultaneous_substitution"><strong>Simultaneous substitution</strong></a>: Hated by most Canadian TV viewers, it's the practice of replacing U.S. feeds with Canadian ones when both are running the same programming, in order to ensure that only Canadian commercials are watched (and Canadian networks get all the ad money). The problem is that it's not done properly a lot of the time (<a href="http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/02/05/the-horrors-of-simultaneous-substitution/">especially during live events</a>) and can end up cutting off programming. Still, it's a huge cash cow to have a monopoly on the Canadian ad money when you air a new episode of House.</li>
<li><strong>Spot on the dial</strong>: It's mentioned often, though I think its effects are trivial. The CRTC requires that conventional television stations have low spots on the cable dial (channels 3, 4, 5 etc.). Perhaps there's a minor psychological effect, but my TV viewing patterns are the same whether it's channel 3 or channel 125.</li>
<li><strong>Mandated carriage</strong>: Simply put, the cable companies <em>must</em> include these channels as part of their basic packages. This means there are no homes in a local area that don't have access to these channels. (Well, almost. Satellite carriers don't have to carry all channels, and Bell still doesn't carry Global Quebec.)</li>
</ul>
<p>Cons</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Cost of transmitters</strong>: This is serious because of the mandated switch to digital television. It's not an issue so much in major centres like Toronto and Montreal, but small markets don't have enough size to justify such huge capital expenditures. <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/dtv0903.htm">A recently-released report</a> puts the cost of converting all stations in the country to digital at between $200 million and $400 million.</li>
<li><strong>Cost of local production</strong>: The CRTC mandates a minimum amount of local production, usually in the form of local newscasts. Even with huge cuts to newsrooms and increased use of technology to reduce the need for technical jobs, broadcasters say being forced to produce local programming is hurting their bottom line. With some exceptions, local newscasts are money-losing operations.</li>
<li><strong>Lack of subscriber income</strong>: Ironically, even while being forced to spend more on programming, conventional television doesn't get access to subscriber fees from cable and satellite companies, having to rely on advertising alone for income. Before the explosion of cable and the Internet, that wasn't a problem. Now it is.</li>
</ul>
<h4>A plea for local TV</h4>
<p><a href="http://www.cyberpresse.ca/le-soleil/arts-et-spectacles/television-et-radio/200904/20/01-848582-a-quoi-sert-le-crtc.php">Richard Therrien in Le Soleil asks what purpose the CRTC serves</a>, which is kind of a misleading title because his article advocates stronger regulation of private broadcasters. He argues that TVA is abandoning Quebec City, asking the CRTC to reduce its local programming requirements and producing generic non-regional shows out of its Quebec City studios.</p>
<h4>Journalistic Independence is here (kinda)</h4>
<p><a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-163.htm">Global TV</a>, <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-162.htm">TVA</a> and <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-161.htm">Sun TV</a> have received final approval from the CRTC to suspend parts of their licenses relating to cross-media ownership (Canwest and Quebecor also own newspaper properties) and replace it with a standard policy called the <a href="http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/11/21/crtc-roundup-new-rules-for-converging-newsrooms/">Journalistic Independence Code</a>. The code provides for an independent body (half controlled by the industry it's regulating) to adjudicate complaints related to independence of co-owned media outlets. The outlets are to have completely independent news management, but there are no restrictions on news gathering, which means corporate management is free to force as much convergence as it likes, provided editorial boards are separate.</p>
<p>The CRTC mentioned it got complaints from concerned citizens who were <a href="http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/Media/2009/01/16/PrintTelevision/">up in arms over these firewalls being taken down</a>, but the commission essentially argued (as I have) that these complaints should have been brought up when the Journalistic Independence Code was discussed in the first place.</p>
<h4>Minority-language communities are well-served</h4>
<p>The Governor-in-Council has <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/BACKGRND/language/ol0903-lo0903.htm">issued a report</a> about minority-language broadcasting in Canada (English programming in Quebec and French programming outside Quebec). The report, which is in no way binding, concludes that in general, language minorities have sufficient access to programming, mainly due to the CBC, national specialty channels and the Internet.</p>
<p>It does, however, also bring up a few suggestions for strengthening access to French-language programming in English areas. Among them:</p>
<ul>
<li>Requiring Ontario cable companies to distribute both CBC French-language stations in the province (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CBOFT">CBOFT</a> in Ottawa and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CBLFT">CBLFT</a> in Toronto)</li>
<li>Encouraging cable and satellite companies in English-language areas to provide the option of a single package of all francophone services to subscribers</li>
<li>Encouraging negotiations between the CBC and CTV/Rogers/TQS consortium regarding distribution of French-language Olympics programming to minority French communities outside Quebec using CBC transmitters. (The consortium has already said it would air all programming on RDS and allow cable and satellite providers to distribute the station for free during the Games)</li>
<li>Requiring that <a href="http://www.tfo.org/">TFO</a> be distributed as part of the basic service on all cable and satellite services.</li>
<li>Consider expansion of CBC Radio Two to serve minority linguistic areas</li>
<li>Find a way to support funding of minority-language community radio stations</li>
<li>Find ways of increasing spectrum available for radio stations, either by reassigning TV channels 5 and 6 (which sit just below the FM broadcast band) or by encouraging the adoption of digital radio</li>
</ul>
<p>None of these are binding, and most aren't even formal suggestions. But they might come up in more formal contexts at the CRTC in the coming months and years.</p>
<p>As for the flip side - English programming in Quebec - the report concludes that anglo Quebecers have ample access to English-language programming.</p>
<h4>Fox Business coming to Canada</h4>
<p>The CRTC has <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-202.htm">approved a request from Rogers</a> to add <a href="http://www.foxbusiness.com/">Fox Business Network</a> to the list of foreign channels eligible for rebroadcast on Canadian cable and satellite services. This means that Rogers Cable and others can add FBN as an option on digital cable or satellite (assuming they can negotiate a reasonable price for carriage).</p>
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_Business_Network">Fox Business Network</a> is a competitor to CNBC (and <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/04/business/media/04fox.html?_r=1">a really bad one at that if you look at the ratings</a>). CTV argued to the CRTC that it would also be a competitor to its <a href="http://www.bnn.ca/">Business News Network</a> (formerly Report on Business Television). The CRTC determined that this was not the case because BNN focuses on Canadian business and there is no programming common to both networks.</p>
<p>Besides, they'd already approved CNBC, which is a far more formidable competitor than Fox Business will be.</p>
<h4>Specialty channels raking in the dough</h4>
<p>The CRTC has released <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/news/releases/2009/r090326.htm">financial figures for specialty, pay and video-on-demand services</a>. It shows increases in both revenues and profits, but no increase in the number of people employed (in fact, it went down by six people). The headliner was that for the first time ever, spending on Canadian programming by these services topped $1 billion.</p>
<h4>Community TV station in Laval?</h4>
<p><a href="http://tvrl.ca/">Télévision régionale de Laval</a> has <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-157.htm#17">asked for a license</a> for a low-power (50W) television station serving the Laval area, on which it would air programming it is currently producing for Videotron's Vox TV.</p>
<p>The station, which currently has a budget of about $400,000 a year and is affiliated with local media and the city of Laval, would broadcast on Channel 4, which would cause interference problems with CBOT (CBC) Ottawa and CFCM (TVA) Quebec City, both on the same channel (not to mention analog cable reception of Radio-Canada's CBFT for homes very close to the transmitter).</p>
<p>The main motivation for this move, according to TRL, is that Vox isn't giving its programming enough play, especially during prime time viewing hours.</p>
<p>It's an ambitious move, and one wonders if the small group behind it would be up to the task of keeping such a station running (they've already asked for an exemption from a 100% closed-captioning requirement). But it's nice to see some people still think locally-produced over-the-air television is worth something.</p>
<h4>Al-Jazeera trying again</h4>
<p>Though the CRTC hasn't issued a call for public comment yet, news about Al-Jazeera English's bid for CRTC approval is making its way around. It started <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090217.waljazeera0218/BNStory/Entertainment/?page=rss&amp;id=RTGAM.20090217.waljazeera0218">in the Globe and Mail back in February</a>, and has since hit the <a href="http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/612936">Toronto Star</a>, <a href="http://www.thesudburystar.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1528404">Sun Media</a>, <a href="http://lcn.canoe.ca/lcn/infos/national/archives/2009/04/20090421-084232.html">LCN</a> and <a href="http://www.cyberpresse.ca/arts/television-et-radio/200904/21/01-848690-al-jazira-refait-une-demande-au-crtc.php">Cyberpresse</a>.</p>
<p>Al-Jazeera's Arabic-language network is authorized for distribution in Canada, but with unique special requirements that put the onus on distributors to monitor its content. That made it too difficult (read: expensive) for cable and satelllite operators to abide by, so none have picked up the channel.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">Al-Jazeera is trying to clean up its image as a radical jihadist network, <a href="http://iwantaje.ca/">launching an online campaign</a> and even <a href="http://jta.org/news/article/2009/04/03/1004231/al-jazeera-lobbies-canadian-jews">lobbying the Canadian Jewish Congress</a>, which says it's on the fence about supporting the network's bid. Despite its reputation (many of its critics have never even watched the network), it is based in a relatively pro-U.S. country (Qatar), employs Western journalists for its English network, and reports on a lot outside the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Even PBS affiliates have used some of its reports (though <a href="http://www.pbs.org/ombudsman/2009/04/the_al_jazeera_effect.html">that caused a kerfuffle</a>).</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">Canadians will have their say when the CRTC opens the application for comments. The issue probably won't be whether the network is approved, but whether the same onerous restrictions will be placed on its carriage.</p>
<h4>General changes to broadcasting laws</h4>
<p>The CRTC is <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-176.htm">asking for comments</a> about a list of minor but general changes to its broadcasting laws, which provide for:</p>
<ul>
<li>Cable and satellite companies inserting targetted ads into programming (with the agreement of the broadcaster)</li>
<li>Establishing the Local Programming Improvement Fund, which will be funded by a 1% tax from broadcasters to help small-market stations</li>
<li>Prohibiting networks from withholding programming from cable and satellite companies during a dispute</li>
<li>Removing the distinction between small cable companie (fewer than 20,000 subscribers) and large ones when it comes to minimum financing rules for community television initiatives (such as Videotron's Vox network).</li>
</ul>
<h4>In other news</h4>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-196.htm">Télé-Québec will officially abandon regional programming in its license renewal</a>. It runs over a dozen transmitters all over Quebec, but all programming is identical to that of its Montreal station. Télé-Québec has Quebec-produced programming but no local newscasts. Canal Savoir is also asking for a license renewal for CFTU.</li>
<li>The French-language pay TV movie network <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-170.htm">Super Écran got into trouble</a> for airing the movie <a href="http://www.toi-you.com/">Toi</a> without sufficient viewer advisory and before the 9 p.m. cutoff for adult material. Judging by <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KmOGZvWW3I">the trailer</a>, the CRTC wasn't kidding about it being sexually explicit despite its innocuous-looking 13+ rating. (Quebec, for some reason, has always been generous with its ratings, giving all-ages ratings to things that should be 13+ and 13+ ratings to things that should be adult-only.)</li>
<li>The CRTC has <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-178.htm">revoked the broadcasting license of CKAV-FM in Montreal</a>, based on a request from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aboriginal_Voices">Aboriginal Voices Radio</a> to do so. The station, which was <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2003/db2003-195.htm">first approved in 2003</a>, had a license to operate at 106.7FM, but never went on air. The license was set to expire in August. <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-177.htm">The license for its Kitchener station has also been surrendered</a>.</li>
<li>The race is on for a station to fill the 105.3/105.7 FM slot in the Quebec City region.<a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-157.htm"> The CRTC has received four applications</a>.</li>
<li>A number of radio stations are <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-157.htm">up for renewal</a>, including Corus stations CHMP 98.5, CKAC 730 and CINF 690. A station in Valleyfield, <a href="http://www.ckod.qc.ca/">CKOD-FM 103.1</a>, is up for renewal but appears to have failed to live up to its log reporting requirements as a condition of its license, and will have to justify those lapses to the CRTC if their license is renewed.</li>
<li>Radio Ville-Marie wants to <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-157.htm#21">add a restransmitter</a> at 1350AM in Gatineau, which would carry content from its CIRA-FM station in Montreal.</li>
<li>Radio communautaire de la Rive-Sud has <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-148.htm#2">applied for an increase of the transmission power</a> of <a href="http://www.fm1033.ca/fm1033ca/site/index.php">CHAA 103.3FM in Longueuil</a> from 64 to 375 Watts (ERP), an almost six-fold increase in power.</li>
<li>The Green Channel and Men TV want to <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-140.htm">amend their licenses to add more programming categories</a>, to give them more flexibility in programming. <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-151.htm">BPM:TV wants to add infomercials</a>.</li>
</ul>
<h4>And on the telecom side</h4>
<p>The CRTC has <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/news/releases/2009/r090420.htm">approved changes to the National Do-Not-Call List</a> so that numbers added to the list stay for five years instead of three. It also clarified that independent politicians (who are not connected to political parties) are also exempt from the do-not-call rules. <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-200.htm">Arguments for these decisions are here</a>.</p>
<p>The commission has also <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2008/pt2008-19-3.htm">launched a public consultation</a> on ISP traffic management, namely asking <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2009/03/31/crtc-consultation.html">whether Internet providers should have the right to use traffic shaping</a> during high-usage times to slow down peer-to-peer file sharing so that regular users have a chance to use more bandwidth. This comes at the same time <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2009/04/14/bell-unlimited-download.html">Bell says it will charge independent providers metered rates</a> instead of flat ones, effectively ending the idea of unlimited Internet access.<br />
<h3 class='related_post_title'>Related Posts</h3>
<ul class='related_post'>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/08/17/crtc-roundup-cancon-porn-tsn2-and-rural-channel/' title='CRTC roundup: Cancon porn, TSN2 and the Rural Channel'>CRTC roundup: Cancon porn, TSN2 and the Rural Channel</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/05/28/crtc-roundup-videotron-must-closed-caption-porn/' title='CRTC Roundup: Videotron must closed-caption porn'>CRTC Roundup: Videotron must closed-caption porn</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/04/28/crtc-roundup-deciding-the-future-of-tv/' title='CRTC roundup: Deciding the future of TV'>CRTC roundup: Deciding the future of TV</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/03/11/crtc-roundup-global-local-programming/' title='CRTC Roundup: Global, porn and death'>CRTC Roundup: Global, porn and death</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2011/11/24/crtc-limits-musical-montages-on-french-radio-stations/' title='CRTC limits musical montages on French radio stations'>CRTC limits musical montages on French radio stations</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/04/21/crtc-roundup-us-carriage-model/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CRTC Roundup: Global, porn and death</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/03/11/crtc-roundup-global-local-programming/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/03/11/crtc-roundup-global-local-programming/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2009 05:24:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fagstein</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CanWest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CKVR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CNN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRTC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Do Not Call list]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Îles de la Madeleine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[porn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV specialty channels]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vanessa]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=4614</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In response to a complaint issued by the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada that Canwest's* decision to centralize master control of local news at four broadcast centres violates aspects of local stations' conditions of license requiring a certain amount of local programming, the CRTC has ruled that while it can't make a final [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In response to a complaint issued by the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada that Canwest's* decision to centralize master control of local news at four broadcast centres violates aspects of local stations' conditions of license requiring a certain amount of local programming, <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-115.htm">the CRTC has ruled</a> that while it can't make a final decision because the broadcast centres aren't fully operational yet, it sees no evidence that Global TV is violating those conditions of licenses, and that the impact of this reorganization should be brought up during license renewal hearings.</p>
<p>For those of you who couldn't get through that massive sentence, here's some background: In 2007, <a href="http://blog.fagstein.com/2007/10/05/global-tv-outsourcing-local-news-production/">Canwest announced that it was laying off 200 people across the country</a>, mostly technical positions at small stations (including CKMI in Quebec City/Sherbrooke/Montreal).</p>
<p>To save money, it decided it would centralize master control operations for all its stations at four broadcasting centres in Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton and Toronto. These stations would be responsible for cueing up reporters' packages and even controlling the movement of cameras remotely. Though editorial decisions would rest with local stations, local reporters would continue to do reporting and the newscasts would be anchored locally (well, <a href="http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/08/07/global-quebec-fake-local-news/">kinda</a>), the CEP argued that this still didn't qualify as locally-produced programming and complained to the CRTC.</p>
<p>The new reorganized system and green-screen sets <a href="http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/03/04/the-new-dirt-cheap-global-quebec/">launched last March</a>.</p>
<p>Canwest stated that the allegations set out above were incorrect because control of and responsibility for the broadcasts will remain with the local television station:</p>
<blockquote><p>Canwest submitted that the decision to move some production elements (for example, camera work, lighting, microphone levels, generation of virtual sets, physical assemblage of news run-downs) to the Broadcast Centres would not, in any way, abrogate its individual licences or take decision-making capabilities away from the local stations.</p>
<p>Canwest further submitted that, while the Broadcast Centres will control technical production support, all material decisions regarding the content and presentation of the newscasts, with the exception of set design, will continue to occur at the local level, as will local news gathering.</p></blockquote>
<p>While not making a final decision on the matter, the CRTC essentially agreed with Canwest's assertion that this still qualifies as local programming. It also said that for most stations, while there are "commitments" to local programming, these haven't been part of their conditions of license since 1999.</p>
<p>But the CRTC does leave the door open for the CEP to bring this up during Global's license renewal hearings this year, where their commitment to local programming will be a factor in the CRTC's decision of whether or not to renew stations' licenses.</p>
<p>Considering the current financial crisis facing media and conventional television in particular, I don't expect the CEP will get too far.</p>
<h4>More porn!</h4>
<p>And now for something completely different. The CRTC last week <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-123.htm">approved the creation of a new digital specialty channel </a>called Vanessa which is devoted to sexuality:</p>
<blockquote><p>Its adult  								programming would be devoted to the themes of  								charm, sensuality, eroticism and sexuality and  								might also include documentaries, news and  								magazines covering the industries that exploit  								those themes and the personalities that revolve  								around them.</p></blockquote>
<p>The channel got through the approval process without a big fight. No one filed any interventions opposing the channel, and the only hiccup is that it asked to be free of closed-captioning requirements and the CRTC said no (<a href="http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/07/28/crtc-roundup-videotron-doesnt-want-to-closed-caption-porn/">closed-captioning and porn has been an issue before</a>).</p>
<p>Sex-Shop Television, the company behind Vanessa, is a creation of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_Diffusion_International">Image Diffusion International</a> aka <a href="http://www.idi2.tv/">Productions IDI</a>, the company of Marc Trudeau and <a href="http://www.amlosique.com/">Anne-Marie Losique</a> that produces content mainly for MusiquePlus. <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2007/db2007-417.htm">It got approval in 2007</a> (after <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2007/db2007-98.htm">originally being denied</a>) for a French-language pay TV channel of the same name. But discussions with Videotron were ... ahem... anti-climactic. The cable provider said there was not enough capacity or enough interest to distribute a service like this that they don't own. (The CRTC theoretically has rules that prohibit cable companies form offering preferential treatment to other services owned by the same company, but I guess they don't apply here.) The goal is to launch an English service which would get picked up elsewhere and force Videotron to get on board or lose customers.</p>
<p>The content of the channel isn't entirely clear. It's limited to only 10% of its programming being feature films, and can only broadcast explicit adult material between 11pm and 6am. So expect this to be like Sex TV: exploring sexuality in a tasteful (or even fun) way during the day and in a raunchy way after dark.</p>
<p>UPDATE (April 17): <a href="http://www.cyberpresse.ca/arts/television-et-radio/200904/17/01-847554-anne-marie-losique-pourra-lancer-deux-chaines-pour-adultes.php">Presse Canadienne reports on the approval only a month and a half late</a>.</p>
<h4>Je me souviens is coming</h4>
<p><a href="http://www.montrealgazette.com/story.html?id=1374651">Canwest's Marianne White has an interview</a> with the guy behind that Quebec obituary channel that was <a href="http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/03/04/crtc-roundup-license-renewals/">approved last week</a>. He says he wants to have it up by the summer and, if all goes well, start a similar English-language service at some point in the future. It also talks to funeral home owners who say they like the idea, so long as it's done in a tasteful way.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.thestar.com/article/599865">CP also has an article on the channel</a> in which the guy says basically the same things. That in turn is expanded in <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090311.OBITUARIES11/TPStory/TPNational/?page=rss&amp;id=GAM.20090311.OBITUARIES11">a Globe piece</a> which points out how unlikely it is that people are going to sit in their living rooms for hours on end watching obituaries scroll by (though I could see a Weather Network-like model, repeating them every 10-20 minutes and people checking in once a day when they want to see who's died recently)</p>
<h4>Magdalen TV</h4>
<p>Diffusion  								communautaire des Îles, the company behind <a href="http://www.cfim.ca/">CFIM radio</a> on the Îles de la Madeleine, has <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-118.htm">gotten approval</a> to setup a community cable channel, which would be distributed through the only cable operator on the islands which have <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdalen_Islands">a population of about 13,000</a>. Their goals are modest: two hours a week of local programming, rising gradually to five hours a week in 2012-2013.</p>
<h4>New approved channels</h4>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-129.htm">CNN International</a>, the sister network to CNN that broadcasts stuff other than U.S. politics to the world outside Canada and the United States (usually with anchors who have British accents). We sometimes see this network late at night when breaking news happens. Now we'll have access 24/7, at least for those with Shaw Cable or StarChoice, as Shaw was the one who requested it.</li>
<li><a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-121.htm">AUX TV</a>, a channel devoted to emerging music artists. The CRTC rejected a request that they be partially exempted from having to close-caption user-generated content.</li>
<li><a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-122.htm">TREK TV</a>, a channel devoted to "world  								cultures, travel, geography, exploration and  								anthropology" (sadly, not space travel). Again, the CRTC rejected partial exemption from CC for user-generated content.</li>
</ul>
<p>All these networks will need to negotiate with cable and satellite providers before they're carried on those systems.</p>
<h4>Global getting on the digital bandwagon</h4>
<p>Canwest has gotten approval to setup digital transmitters for <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-119.htm">CICT in Calgar</a>y and <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-120.htm">CITV in Edmonton</a>, two of its biggest stations. Both stations would broadcast in high definition.</p>
<p>CTV and Global have been slow to setup digital stations, even though there's a deadline looming in 2011, because of the cost, the current recession and the instability in conventional television broadcasting.</p>
<h4>More HD, please<a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-114.htm"><br />
</a></h4>
<p>The following networks have <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-114.htm">applied for permission</a> to begin distribution of HD versions:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.wfn.tv/">World Fishing Network</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.goltv.ca/">Gol TV</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.igametv.com/">Game TV</a></li>
</ul>
<h4>Barrie examined</h4>
<p><a href="http://www.thebarrieexaminer.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1469969">The Barrie Examiner looks at conventional television and CKVR-TV in Barrie</a>, the CTV A-Channel station that survived being shutdown but has laid off a third of its staff and cancelled its morning show.</p>
<h4>We didn't get called!</h4>
<p>I don't usually look at the telecom side of the CRTC's affairs, but a recent survey shows that <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/03/09/no-call-canada.html">80% of Canadians have noticed a drop in telemarketing calls</a> since Canada's Do-Not-Call list was launched.</p>
<p>Speaking of telecom, the company behind the Weather Network told the CRTC that <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2009/03/09/new-media-wireless.html">mobile providers are putting up walls</a> to control what kind of content (i.e. theirs) can be accessed through wireless networks.</p>
<p>*For the three of you unaware, Canwest is my employer through my contract at The Gazette (though they weren't my employer in 2007 when I commented about changes at Global Quebec).<br />
<h3 class='related_post_title'>Related Posts</h3>
<ul class='related_post'>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/05/28/crtc-roundup-videotron-must-closed-caption-porn/' title='CRTC Roundup: Videotron must closed-caption porn'>CRTC Roundup: Videotron must closed-caption porn</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/04/21/crtc-roundup-us-carriage-model/' title='CRTC Roundup: The American retransmission consent model'>CRTC Roundup: The American retransmission consent model</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/03/04/crtc-roundup-license-renewals/' title='CRTC roundup: broken television'>CRTC roundup: broken television</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/09/05/crtc-roundup-shaw-seeks-cnn-international-license/' title='CRTC Roundup: Shaw seeks CNN International license'>CRTC Roundup: Shaw seeks CNN International license</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/09/04/sun-tv-news-reality/' title='Some truth about Sun TV News'>Some truth about Sun TV News</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/03/11/crtc-roundup-global-local-programming/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CRTC roundup: broken television</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/03/04/crtc-roundup-license-renewals/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/03/04/crtc-roundup-license-renewals/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 10:13:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fagstein</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canal Argent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CanWest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CFAV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CJOH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CKMI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRTC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CTVglobemedia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OLN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The-Weather-Network]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV specialty channels]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=4440</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The big news this week is the release by the CRTC of submissions from major Canadian private television broadcasters whose licenses are up for renewal in August. This includes CTV/A, Global/E!, TVA, Sun TV, Citytv and OMNI. (TQS is the notable exception since it had its own dealings with the CRTC after it went bankrupt). [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-4441" title="Canadian television network breakdown" src="http://blog.fagstein.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/lotsofchannels.jpg" alt="Canadian television network breakdown" width="599" height="449" /></p>
<p>The big news this week is <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-113.htm">the release by the CRTC of submissions from major Canadian private television broadcasters</a> whose licenses are up for renewal in August. This includes CTV/A, Global/E!, TVA, Sun TV, Citytv and OMNI. (TQS is the notable exception since it had its own dealings with the CRTC after it went bankrupt).</p>
<p>The CRTC has suggested having one-year license renewals (instead of standard seven-year ones) and dealing with the TV financial crisis in the meantime. The networks have gone along with that and are recommending status quo until August 2010.</p>
<p>The private networks (especially CTV Globemedia and Canwest) are re-repeating all of the please-give-us-money talking points they've been sending toward the CRTC for years now, including bringing up their pet project of forcing cable and satellite companies to give them money for putting their free over-the-air channels on their systems, mainly because they can't find a way to make a profit off advertising and say <a href="http://www.canwest.com/media/viewNews.asp?NewsroomID=942">the system is broken</a>.</p>
<p>Among their other money-grabbing and money-saving ideas:</p>
<ul>
<li>More access to the new Local Programming Improvement Fund (deigned to help with local programming at small-market stations) by expanding them to larger markets (Canwest even argues that CJNT Montreal should have access to the fund even though it doesn't provide any local news.)</li>
<li>Having the ability to own their own production companies instead of being forced to use independent production houses</li>
<li>That the proposed 1:1 ratio of spending on Canadian vs. non-Canadian programming is "not viable" because it would mean cutting back on the very thing that is generating the revenue to keep the networks afloat (and besides, CTV argues, they've already signed contracts for the 2009-2010 broadcast year)</li>
</ul>
<p>Canwest proposes a "5 and 10" rule that would require 5 hours a week of local programming for stations serving markets of under a million viewers, and 10 hours a week for stations serving markets of over a million. Since most Canwest stations already have local programming requirements far in excess of 10 hours a week, this would save it a lot of money. (It counts only four stations as being in large markets - even Global Quebec is considered small because it only counts English-speaking viewers, which means it would drop from 18 hours a week of local programming to only five)</p>
<p>Even Quebec's TVA, which does plenty of local (or at least regional) programming, wants to cut back. It's <a href="http://www.cyberpresse.ca/le-soleil/arts-et-spectacles/television-et-radio/200903/04/01-833374-tva-veut-couper-a-quebec.php">asking to reduce the amount of local programming at its Quebec City station</a> from 21 hours a week to <span style="text-decoration: line-through;">12</span> UPDATE: They now say they <a href="http://www.ledevoir.com/2009/03/06/237536.html">only want to cut it to 18 hours a week</a>.</p>
<p>Canwest even proposes going further than its continued demand for money from cable companies, and throw out some new ideas that nobody has suggested before, including:</p>
<ul>
<li><em>Non</em>-simultaneous substitution, which would replace U.S. signals with Canadiens ones showing the same programming, even if they're not being broadcast on both channels simultaneously.</li>
<li>Banning commercial advertising from CBC</li>
<li>Government assistance for digital conversion</li>
<li>Tax cuts</li>
</ul>
<p>UPDATE: <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090304.wrbroadcasters04/BNStory/Business/?page=rss&amp;id=RTGAM.20090304.wrbroadcasters04">More coverage from the Globe and Mail</a>, which also looks at <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090305.RYAKABUSKI05/TPStory/TPBusiness/?page=rss&amp;id=GAM.20090305.RYAKABUSKI05">how much the networks are spending on Canadian versus foreign content</a>.</p>
<h4>Canwest wants Global Quebec to become Global Montreal</h4>
<p>As part of its submission to the CRTC on license renewal, Canwest said it wants to convert only primary transmitters of its 15 major stations to digital by 2011, and as part of that it wants to convert regional networks Global Ontario and Global Quebec into local stations in Toronto and Montreal, respectively. CKMI-TV is actually based out of Quebec City (and also serves the Eastern Townships through a transmitter in Sherbrooke), but all its programming, including its newscasts, originate in Montreal.</p>
<p>The change wouldn't affect programming but would allow CKMI to attract local advertisers, even though Canwest says they would not be taking advantage of this much.</p>
<h4>CTV wants to pull the plug on CJOH-8</h4>
<p>In its submission to the CRTC, CTVglobemedia put forward a long list of television transmitters it said it would not apply for licenses to renew past August. Included in that list is a retransmitter for CJOH Ottawa in Lancaster, Ont., on Channel 8. Montrealers and off-islanders with good TV antennas will note that this transmitter serves southwestern Quebec since it is just across the border. Shutting the transmitter down means those near the Ontario/Quebec border will have to tune into CJOH's Ottawa transmitter or CFCF-12 in Montreal.</p>
<h4>The Obituary Channel?</h4>
<p>The CRTC has granted approval for a regional Quebec cable channel called <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-95.htm">Je me souviens</a>, which will be devoted essentially to obituaries and related public notices. The CRTC did not agree to a request to carry local advertising in addition to the obits, however.</p>
<p>The channel (which is a private venture unconnected to the major broadcasting companies) is interesting because it's an original idea and because it's a regional network (most cable networks are national in order to reach as broad an audience as possible).</p>
<p>But if <a href="http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/08/20/tatv-shuts-down/">Astral Media couldn't keep its TATV shopping channel on the air</a>, does a regional channel of nothing but obituaries stand a chance?</p>
<p>UPDATE: <a href="http://www.cjad.com/node/886706">I see CJAD reads this blog</a>.</p>
<h4>Pay up, CFAV</h4>
<p>The CRTC has <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-93.htm">denied a request</a> from Laval radio station <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFAV">CFAV 1570 AM</a>, which wanted to be excused from the $8,000 a year it has to pay to promote Canadian artists. Its excuse is that it's not making a profit. The CRTC says rules are rules.</p>
<h4>Rogers wants carte blanche on OLN</h4>
<p>Rogers has <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-104.htm">asked for some very radical amendments to its license</a> for the Outdoor Life Network (OLN). Among them, it wants to be able to use sitcoms, comedy shows and animated shows, reduce its restriction on televising live sports, and reduce requirements for Canadian content. The proposal was so radical<a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090303.wroln03/BNStory/Business/?page=rss&amp;id=RTGAM.20090303.wroln03"> it caught the eye of the Globe and Mail</a>.</p>
<h4>TVA wants carte blanche on specialty channels</h4>
<p>Speaking of radical amendments, <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-68.htm">TVA has filed requests</a> to add more <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/canrec/eng/tvcat.htm">programming categories</a> for three of its specialty channels: Mystère (mystery), Argent (financial news) and Idées de ma maison (home/living). While some might make sense in a world where various forms of programming blend together (say, a game show about science), it's hard to see some of these categories as being requested solely so that TVA can stretch the envelope and provide programming that has only a tenuous connection to the mandate of the channel.</p>
<p>Among the categories they'd like to add:</p>
<ul>
<li>Religion programming</li>
<li>Professional and amateur sports, including live sporting events</li>
<li>Drama, sitcoms, comedy programming, animated programs</li>
<li>Music videos</li>
</ul>
<p>I'm all for flexibility, but can you imagine a program that has music videos about mysteries? Or a sitcom about financial news?</p>
<h4>The Weather/Emergency Network</h4>
<p>Pelmorex, the strangely-named owner of the Weather Network/MétéoMédia, is <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-2-2.htm">asking</a> for the CRTC to require that all cable and satellite companies operating in Canada have the networks as part of their basic digital services (it's already required on analog cable). In exchange, the networks will act as "a national public alerting aggregator", distributing emergency information.</p>
<p>To sweeten the deal, Pelmorex gives idle threats about how their existence will be in "jeopardy" if they can't force that $0.23 per subscriber out of us, even though most Canadians already (happily) get the Weather Network by default.</p>
<p>Still, having the Weather Network distribute emergency information makes sense, if only because many such emergencies are weather-related and TWN already deals with emergency weather alerts.</p>
<p>The only problem is: Shouldn't it be the broadcast networks (like, say, CBC/Radio-Canada) who distribute emergency information, so it's over the air where everyone can receive it?</p>
<h4>HD vs. SD</h4>
<p>While <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-90.htm">Canal Évasion wants to start an HD version of the channel</a>, the owners of three HD-only networks - Oasis HD, Treasure HD and Equador HD - <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-81.htm">want to distribute those channels in standard definition</a>. This isn't the first request of this kind I've seen, and is probably a reflection of the fact that while most Canadians have cable or satellite service, the number with HD service and sets is not as high as they had expected by now, and offering a downgraded SD signal will allow them to reach a larger audience.</p>
<h4>And finally</h4>
<p>The CRTC has<a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-97.htm"> approved a request to add five networks</a>, all of third-language programming originating from east and southeast Asia, to the list of eligible channels for satellite providers.<br />
<h3 class='related_post_title'>Related Posts</h3>
<ul class='related_post'>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/03/11/crtc-roundup-global-local-programming/' title='CRTC Roundup: Global, porn and death'>CRTC Roundup: Global, porn and death</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/03/18/canwest-crtc/' title='Corporate executives dishonest, oh my!'>Corporate executives dishonest, oh my!</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2007/10/25/ctv-is-drunk-with-cable-power/' title='CTV is drunk with cable power'>CTV is drunk with cable power</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/09/04/sun-tv-news-reality/' title='Some truth about Sun TV News'>Some truth about Sun TV News</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/02/26/yoopa-zeste-coming/' title='Two French specialty channels coming'>Two French specialty channels coming</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/03/04/crtc-roundup-license-renewals/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CRTC Roundup: Rogers gets its own CP24</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/12/13/crtc-roundup-city-news-toronto/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/12/13/crtc-roundup-city-news-toronto/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Dec 2008 19:21:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fagstein</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CityTV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CP24]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRTC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CTV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rogers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TSN2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV specialty channels]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=3424</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The big news this month is that Rogers has been given permission to launch its own 24-hour all-news channel in the Toronto area called CityNews. Now, you might think, doesn't City already have a 24-hour all-news channel for the Toronto area? No, silly. CP24, the existing all-Toronto, all-news station, was owned by CHUM, which also [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The big news this month is that Rogers has been <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2008/db2008-347.htm">given permission</a> to launch its own 24-hour all-news channel in the Toronto area called CityNews.</p>
<p>Now, you might think, doesn't City already have a 24-hour all-news channel for the Toronto area?</p>
<p>No, silly. CP24, the existing all-Toronto, all-news station, was owned by CHUM, which also owned City. But CHUM was acquired by CTV, which was forced to dump City as a result to satisfy the CRTC. For some reason known only to the CRTC, that didn't include CP24, even though it was heavily linked to CityTV. Rogers ended up buying City, and is now the one behind this new network.</p>
<p>Even under CTV, CP24 is very much a City network. It even airs City News three times daily. Now, not only does CTV have to figure out how CP24 and CTV Newsnet are going to coexist, it has to deal with this new channel from Rogers which is no doubt going to take all the City content for itself.</p>
<p>Oh, and how does the CRTC justify having two Toronto all-news stations like this? Well, they split hairs like I've never seen before (emphasis mine):</p>
<blockquote><p>CITY News                (Toronto) would provide a niche news service targeted to <strong>Greater                Toronto</strong>. In contrast, CP24’s mandate is and has always been                to serve the region of <strong>Southern Ontario</strong>.</p></blockquote>
<p>Yes, that's right. CITY is for Toronto, while CP24 is for Southern Ontario. Therefore they don't compete directly with each other. Yeah.</p>
<p>I might have understood if the CRTC pointed to its <a href="http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/11/03/broadcasting-regulation-nerdgasm/#more-2991">recent decision to allow more competition for news and spoirts programming</a>. Instead, it came up with the flimsiest excuse in the book to pretend like the obvious isn't true.</p>
<p>The application was opposed by CTV (for obvious reasons) and by The Weather Network, because of City's unhealthy obsession with providing information on the weather.</p>
<p>Elsewhere in the news/blogosphere:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.blogto.com/city/2008/12/rogers_gets_its_24_hours_news_channel/">BlogTO</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20081211.RTVNEWS11/TPStory/TPBusiness/?page=rss&amp;id=GAM.20081211.RTVNEWS11">Globe and Mail</a></li>
</ul>
<h4>CTV wants HD loophole</h4>
<p>CTV is <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Notices/2008/pb2008-112.htm">applying</a> for special permission from the CRTC to distribute HD versions of its local stations (including CFCF Montreal) to cable and satellite networks, even though those stations do not have digital broadcast licenses (and the CRTC normally requires that before distributing HD feeds). CTV offers excuses for not getting those licenses, and says that they should be granted this loophole to keep Canadians from seeking the same programming on U.S. networks. Deadline for comments is Jan. 9.</p>
<h4>TSN2 is OK</h4>
<p>Following <a href="http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/09/19/when-is-a-channel-not-a-channel/">complaints about the launch of TSN2 by the CBC and The Score</a>, the CRTC has concluded that, though TSN is essentially exploiting a loophole to create a new channel, <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2008/db2008-352.htm">it has every right to do so</a>. TSN2 takes advantage of time shifting and a special allowance to replace up to 10% of its programming on split feeds (presumably to get around regional blackouts for live sporting events) in order to create a second channel which shows 90% identical programming (though time-shifted three hours from TSN) and 10% different live sporting events from TSN.</p>
<h4>Two new French-language networks</h4>
<p>The CRTC approved Category 2 digital licenses for two new French-language networks:</p>
<ul>
<li> <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2008/db2008-341.htm">Chaîne de Divertissement Clovys Entertainment Channel</a>, which I assume will shorten its name at some point, will be a music channel devoted to "urban, world and  								Latin music and black culture."</li>
<li><a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2008/db2008-332.htm">Le Réseau des combats</a> is the French-language version of the Fight Network, which carries boxing, wrestling, martial arts and similar programming</li>
</ul>
<p>Category 2 networks, which most new specialty channels are approved as, has no protection from direct competition (though it can't directly compete with existing analog channels). They also have no guaranteed carriage rights, which means they have to negotiate with cable and satellite providers for a spot on their grids (and then get subscribers to add them).</p>
<h4>More HD!</h4>
<p>The following networks have received approval to setup high-definition versions of themselves:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2008/db2008-339.htm">LCN</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2008/db2008-328.htm">TV5</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2008/db2008-354.htm">TFO</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2008/db2008-351.htm">Canal Indigo (Pay-Per-View)</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2008/db2008-350.htm">Videotron Illico on demand</a></li>
</ul>
<h3 class='related_post_title'>Related Posts</h3>
<ul class='related_post'>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/08/17/crtc-roundup-cancon-porn-tsn2-and-rural-channel/' title='CRTC roundup: Cancon porn, TSN2 and the Rural Channel'>CRTC roundup: Cancon porn, TSN2 and the Rural Channel</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/10/05/battle-of-the-fee-for-carriage-misinformation-campaigns/' title='Battle of the fee-for-carriage misinformation campaigns'>Battle of the fee-for-carriage misinformation campaigns</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/07/07/crtc-roundup-lpif/' title='CRTC Roundup: They saved local TV!'>CRTC Roundup: They saved local TV!</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/09/19/when-is-a-channel-not-a-channel/' title='When is a channel not a channel?'>When is a channel not a channel?</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/07/08/crtc-roundup-ctv-wants-everything-in-hd/' title='CRTC roundup: CTV wants everything in HD'>CRTC roundup: CTV wants everything in HD</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/12/13/crtc-roundup-city-news-toronto/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>West Wing is back on CLT, only it&#8217;s not CLT anymore</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/11/05/west-wing-is-back-on-clt-only-its-not-clt-anymore/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/11/05/west-wing-is-back-on-clt-only-its-not-clt-anymore/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 09:04:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fagstein</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CLT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The West Wing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV specialty channels]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Viva]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=2998</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Before I could get a chance to delete CLT from my cable subscription list since it was no longer running The West Wing and there wasn't anything else worthy of my attention on it, the newly Corus-owned network has rebranded itself "Viva" and has gone from "Canadian Learning Television" to "television for boomer women". Apparently [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-2999" title="Viva" src="http://blog.fagstein.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/viva.png" alt="" width="450" height="202" /></p>
<p>Before I could get a chance to delete CLT from my cable subscription list since <a href="http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/09/03/clt-kills-west-wing/">it was no longer running The West Wing</a> and there wasn't anything else worthy of my attention on it, the newly Corus-owned network has rebranded itself "<a href="http://myviva.ca/">Viva</a>" and has gone from "Canadian Learning Television" to "television for boomer women".</p>
<p>Apparently boomer women are all about political/legal dramas, which also include Judging Amy and Commander in Chief.</p>
<p>But since I am neither boomer, nor a woman, should I not be allowed to subscribe to this channel?</p>
<p>The West Wing has come back, Mondays to Thursdays at 9pm and 2am. They're starting it at the beginning of Season 6, which means you'll be able to see as it re-enacts <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/30/arts/television/30wing.html"><span style="text-decoration: line-through;">Barack Obama's</span></a> <a href="http://www.buzzle.com/articles/232797.html">Matthew</a> <a href="http://communities.canada.com/shareit/blogs/tvguy/archive/2008/10/30/how-the-west-wing-predicted-the-outcome-of-the-u-s-presidential-race.aspx">Santos's</a> campaign through the Democratic primaries and his narrow victory (sorry if I spoiled it for you) over an old fiscal conservative Republican senator with a wacko Christian running-mate to become the first coloured president of the United States.</p>
<p>(Of course, Santos is latino, not black; he was running to replace a very popular Democratic president; and he beat two opponents through multiple ballots at the convention who were men who had served as vice-president; not to mention the fact that Santos won Texas and his opponent won California)<br />
<h3 class='related_post_title'>Related Posts</h3>
<ul class='related_post'>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/09/03/clt-kills-west-wing/' title='Where&#8217;s Leo?'>Where&#8217;s Leo?</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/09/04/sun-tv-news-reality/' title='Some truth about Sun TV News'>Some truth about Sun TV News</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/06/15/sun-news-channel/' title='I don&#8217;t like Sun News, but I welcome it'>I don&#8217;t like Sun News, but I welcome it</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/02/26/yoopa-zeste-coming/' title='Two French specialty channels coming'>Two French specialty channels coming</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/02/12/canwest-study-shows-people-like-canwest-networks/' title='Canwest study shows people like Canwest networks'>Canwest study shows people like Canwest networks</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/11/05/west-wing-is-back-on-clt-only-its-not-clt-anymore/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Broadcasting regulation nerdgasm</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/11/03/broadcasting-regulation-nerdgasm/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/11/03/broadcasting-regulation-nerdgasm/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 08:20:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fagstein</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRTC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RDS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TSN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV specialty channels]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Videotron]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=2991</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The CRTC got real busy last week making some big announcements/decisions/suggestions about television broadcasting regulations. Many of them are boring, minor or technical, but here are a few that aren't: Over-the-air carriage fees The big one for broadcasting companies like Canwest/Global, CTV, TQS and Quebecor is the decision to reject the suggestion that "broadcast distribution [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The CRTC got real busy last week making some <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/NEWS/RELEASES/2008/r081030.htm">big announcements/decisions/suggestions</a> about television broadcasting regulations. Many of them are boring, minor or technical, but here are a few that aren't:</p>
<h4>Over-the-air carriage fees</h4>
<p>The big one for broadcasting companies like Canwest/Global, CTV, TQS and Quebecor is the decision to <a href="http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/business/story.html?id=d5e4fcab-5892-433c-9503-c9ec95c4ec90">reject the suggestion</a> that "broadcast distribution units" (i.e. cable and satellite companies) should be required to <a href="http://www.reportonbusiness.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081030.wcrtc1030/BNStory/Business/home">pay fees to TV broadcasters who broadcast over the air freely</a>.</p>
<p>This idea came out of the whole TQS saga, when the network's owners decided that it needed the ability to somehow blackmail cable companies into giving them money. Since cable specialty channels get per-subscriber fees in exchange for their content, shouldn't broadcast networks - whose budgets are supposedly higher because they need to produce local news - get money too?</p>
<p>The flip side of the coin is that these network broadcasters are broadcasting freely, using public airwaves. Cable and satellite companies are required by law to carry local broadcast channels on their basic packages. Subscribers don't get any added value from getting over-the-air stations on cable (except, perhaps, not having to deal with rabbit ears), so why should they have to pay for them?</p>
<p>The CRTC's decision was tough (emphasis mine):</p>
<blockquote><p>CTVgm and Canwest          proposed that any FFC only be made available if broadcasters meet          monthly local programming requirements. However, <strong>they did not commit          that the FFC, or any portion of it, would result in incremental spending          on Canadian programming</strong>.</p>
<p>While OTA          broadcasters have shown a recent decline in profitability, <strong>they, as          other enterprises, might first look to their own business plans before          making a request for increased revenue from the Commission</strong>. In the          Proceeding, no business plans suggesting new sources of revenue were          provided to the Commission. Neither the rationale for strategic          initiatives by OTA broadcasters, such as recent major acquisitions, nor          the basis for financing those initiatives or the impact of those          initiatives on profitability were explained to the Commission at the          public hearing.</p></blockquote>
<p>The CRTC did cave on one point though: It said that so-called "distant signals" (e.g. CTV Vancouver for us Montrealers) should be able to "negotiate" carriage, in order to offset the trouble that this time-shifting business has caused. What that effectively means is that broadcasters can set rates for out-of-market broadcast stations and simply not allow their channels to be carried on other regions' cable networks unless they pay their fees.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cab-acr.ca/english/media/news/08/nr_oct3008_2.shtm">Broadcasters are happy</a> with the parts of the decision that give them money, and unhappy with the ones that don't. They're for less regulation in the broadcasting industry, but they want corporate socialism for the "ailing" over-the-air broadcasting sector.</p>
<p><span id="more-2991"></span></p>
<h4>TV packaging</h4>
<p>The CRTC wants to streamline rules for TV packaging to make it easier for subscribers to choose what they want to see. The basic rules would still apply: A basic package, which includes things like CBC Newsworld, RDI, CPAC, etc. would still be required, porn channels can't be packaged with non-porn channels, and more than half of all channels in a subscriber's lineup must be Canadian.</p>
<p>Another point of contention is over so-called "U.S. 4+1 signals", which permit cable operators to carry four nearby stations of major U.S. networks (usually ABC, NBC, CBS and FOX) and a PBS station in their lineup. Recently, this was expanded to allow a second set of such signals for time-shifting purposes. Providers use this to offer east-coast and west-coast feeds of these networks.</p>
<p>Tellingly, the Canadian networks aren't happy about U.S. stations being allowed to broadcast their U.S. programming when they're trying to broadcast the same U.S. programming:</p>
<blockquote><p>CTVgm and Canwest, in their final written submission, requested that the Commission simply prohibit the distribution of the second set of U.S. 4+1 signals.</p></blockquote>
<p>A slight compromise would require subscribers to have corresponding Canadian stations to their out-of-market U.S. ones. For example, if I wanted to add the Seattle stations, I would have to also add the Vancouver stations to my lineup.</p>
<h4>Local programming</h4>
<p>The CRTC took broadcasters to task for the fact that they're not investing in local news:</p>
<blockquote><p>The Commission’s          own data demonstrate that private broadcaster spending on local          programming has been flat since 1998. Between 1998 and 2007, the          spending on local programming by English- and French-language commercial          broadcasters increased by 22.8%. However, as the growth in the consumer          price index (CPI) during this period was 22.1%, there was no real          increase in local spending. <strong>This contrasts with spending on non-Canadian          programming, which, after adjusting for CPI growth, increased by 61%</strong>, as          well as spending on other Canadian programming, which increased by 8.3%          over the same period. The data indicate <strong>an inability or unwillingness on          the part of OTA broadcasters to invest in their local stations</strong>.</p>
<p>The Commission has          also examined broadcasters’ spending on local programming by market          size. In the six metropolitan markets with a population of over one          million, spending on local programming, after adjusting for the CPI, has          increased by 11.8% since 1998. However, in markets with a population of          less than one million, local program spending has declined by 15.6%          since 1998.</p></blockquote>
<p>In other words, CTV and Global have more money than God with which to buy simulcasting rights to House and American Idol, but are constantly tightening their belts to the point where <a href="http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/08/07/global-quebec-fake-local-news/">weathermen have to be shared</a>.</p>
<p>Their solution, naturally, is a new government-controlled fund that people are forced to pay into that will be used to subsidize local news in smaller markets.</p>
<p>In addition to the 5% of gross revenue they have to put toward community channels (like Videotron's VOX network), cable and satellite providers would have to add an extra 1% which would go to a Local Programming Improvement Fund. This fund would be distributed to TV stations in small markets to get them to produce more local news.</p>
<p>This extra tax would be levied on the <span style="text-decoration: line-through;">oil companies</span> cable and satellite providers, whose profit margin the CRTC estimates at 40% and 17% respectively. Because they're making so much money <span style="text-decoration: line-through;">gouging customers with their monopolies</span> with their efficient service, the CRTC expects that the <span style="text-decoration: line-through;">oil companies</span> cable and satellite providers will simply absorb the cost instead of passing it on to the consumer. Yeah.</p>
<p>The other problem is whether or not this fund could be used by the CBC. They have plenty of stations in small markets. But then, if the CBC could make use of the fund, the Canadian Association of Broadcasters (of which the CBC is not a member), which would administer said fund, would be in a conflict of interest. And then it gets complicated.</p>
<p>The idea for this fund sounds good-natured, but I wonder how much of it will actually go to local programming and how much will be used to line the pockets of the broadcasters' parent corporations.</p>
<h4>Despecialization of specialty channels</h4>
<p><a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Notices/2008/pb2008-103.htm">One decision</a> that seems to be welcomed by all parties is a very common-sense one to <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20081031.TRUTH31/TPStory/TPSports/?page=rss&amp;id=..TRUTH31">lessen the regulations</a> on two genres of specialty channels that have become competitive: news and sports networks.</p>
<p>Currently, all specialty channels have genre protection, which means we have one comedy network, one weather network, one history network and one science-fiction network (in each language). As the number of channels increased, these genres became more specialized. One science channel became different channels for health and nature. One sports channel became a national sports channel, regional sports channels and sports headline channels, as well as channels for individual sports. One news channel became a news channel, a headline news channel and a business news channel.</p>
<p>News and sports, even if they are not supposed to directly compete, have been effectively doing so for years now (TSN vs. SportsNet, CBC Newsworld vs. CTV NewsNet, RDI vs. LCN). The CRTC's decision reflects reality, and opens up the field to more competition. New channels in these genres are more than welcome, as long as they play by the same rules (i.e. CanCon).</p>
<p>In addition, specialty channels will no longer have to apply to the CRTC every time they want to add a new programming category (like <a href="http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/01/07/discovery-channel-wants-game-shows/">Discovery did in January</a> to add game shows). <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/canrec/eng/tvcat.htm">These categories</a> specify what kind of programming (news, sports, documentaries, dramas, comedy, etc.) each channel can select from (the subject of such programming should still fit the channel's genre), and are usually specified with maximums and minimums as a condition of license. Generally, channels are severely limited in terms of things like feature films, sports and music unless they are meant to focus on those things, to prevent a channel from going to the cash cow too often.</p>
<p>Instead, the CRTC suggests a standard provision that channels be able to take up to 10% of their programming from these categories:</p>
<ul>
<li>Long-form documentary;</li>
<li>Professional sports;</li>
<li>Drama and comedy;</li>
<li>Theatrical feature films aired on television;</li>
<li>Animated television programs or films; and</li>
<li>Music video clips and Music video programs</li>
</ul>
<h4>Taming the VOD squad</h4>
<p>Video on demand is such a new technology that even the CRTC realizes the existing rules are way out of date. And because even the industry has no idea how it wants to do things, the CRTC is sending out an <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Notices/2008/pb2008-101.htm">"anyone got any ideas?" public notice for comments</a>. Among the issues are whether VOD providers should be able to include advertising, whether packaged "subscription VOD" should have CanCon requirements, and what kind of competition regulations VOD should have.</p>
<p>Honestly, there's already a VOD service that has no regulation and a wealth of Canadian content. It's called the Internet.</p>
<p>But still, the fact that my Videotron VOD library contains only TVA and VOX programming (Quebecor owns TVA, VOX and Videotron) kind of bugs me, and it would be nice if the effects of media convergence weren't so obvious there.</p>
<p>You can read all about these crazy decisions in <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Notices/2008/pb2008-100.htm">the CRTC's massive public notice</a>.</p>
<p><strong>Elsewhere in the blogosphere</strong>:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://blogues.cyberpresse.ca/lagace/?p=70721998&amp;utm_source=Fils&amp;utm_medium=RSS&amp;utm_campaign=Blogue_PATRICK_LAGAC%C3%A9">Patrick Lagacé</a> likes cable competition</li>
<li><a href="http://tvfeedsmyfamily.blogspot.com/2008/10/go-konrad.html">Bill Brioux thanks the CRTC</a> for not fleecing customers to pad TV networks' pockets</li>
</ul>
<h3 class='related_post_title'>Related Posts</h3>
<ul class='related_post'>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/05/28/crtc-roundup-videotron-must-closed-caption-porn/' title='CRTC Roundup: Videotron must closed-caption porn'>CRTC Roundup: Videotron must closed-caption porn</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/09/19/when-is-a-channel-not-a-channel/' title='When is a channel not a channel?'>When is a channel not a channel?</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/08/17/crtc-roundup-cancon-porn-tsn2-and-rural-channel/' title='CRTC roundup: Cancon porn, TSN2 and the Rural Channel'>CRTC roundup: Cancon porn, TSN2 and the Rural Channel</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/07/28/crtc-roundup-videotron-doesnt-want-to-closed-caption-porn/' title='CRTC roundup: Videotron doesn&#8217;t want to closed-caption porn'>CRTC roundup: Videotron doesn&#8217;t want to closed-caption porn</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2011/09/14/specialty-channel-war/' title='Specialty channel war is screwing customers'>Specialty channel war is screwing customers</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/11/03/broadcasting-regulation-nerdgasm/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cash Cab and other Discovery Channel cash grabs</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/10/30/cash-cab-and-other-discovery-channel-cash-grabs/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/10/30/cash-cab-and-other-discovery-channel-cash-grabs/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2008 05:00:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fagstein</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cash Cab]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRTC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Destroyed in Seconds]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discovery Channel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV specialty channels]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=2983</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Back in January, I worried with my infinite wisdom about an application to the CRTC by Discovery Channel Canada to allow game shows as part of its programming categories. I worried that this might be an excuse to import a U.S. British trivia show called Cash Cab into Canada, stretch the limits of the channel's [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Back in January, I worried with my infinite wisdom about <a href="http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/01/07/discovery-channel-wants-game-shows/">an application to the CRTC by Discovery Channel Canada to allow game shows as part of its programming categories</a>. I worried that this might be an excuse to import a <del>U.S.</del> British trivia show called <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cash_Cab">Cash Cab</a> into Canada, stretch the limits of the channel's mandate and suck up some easy cash.</p>
<p>Sure enough, that's exactly what happened. The CRTC approved the change in its license, and Discovery announced that it was <span style="text-decoration: line-through;">carbon-copying</span> <a href="http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/08/18/discovery-adds-cash-cab/">importing the format for use here</a>. I still held out hope that the format would be predominantly educational in nature, and/or that the subjects of the questions would deal with science, technology and nature.</p>
<p>After watching a couple of episodes (<a href="http://watch.discoverychannel.ca/cash-cab/cash-cab-episode-1/#clip93416">you can see complete episodes online here</a>), it seems my original fears were more than justified.</p>
<p>For those who haven't seen it (or don't want to see it), Cash Cab's format has a guy driving a van through the streets of Toronto, and then surprising people who come aboard by telling them they're on a TV game show they've never heard of (a part that's either hilarious or awkward depending on your tastes). He then asks them questions, gives money for each right answer, and when they get three wrong they're booted out of the cab.</p>
<p>It's nothing more than a cookie-cutter trivia show with a lame hook. Some of the questions are certainly scientific in nature, but others relate to sports, business, history and even popular culture. It's hard to distinguish these questions from the ones on every other trivia-based game show out there.</p>
<h4>Discovery's reputation: Destroyed in Seconds</h4>
<p>For how bad Cash Cab is, <a href="http://dsc.discovery.com/tv/destroyed-in-seconds/destroyed-in-seconds.html">Destroyed in Seconds</a> is worse. This embarrassment of programming is essentially a carbon copy of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World%27s_Most_Amazing_Videos">World's Most Amazing Videos</a> (which currently airs on Spike TV), in all the bad ways imaginable. Here's how both shows work:</p>
<ol>
<li>Find a video that shows some catastrophic event: a plane crash, a bridge collapse, an explosion. Usually this will be amateur video of poor quality, but that's ok. In fact, it adds to the realness of the show.</li>
<li>Ensure that nobody dies in the event that took place. You wouldn't want to be accused of profiting off someone's death, after all. You want miraculous escapes and/or recoveries here. Exceptions can be made if the video is <em>really</em> good and you don't actually see any bodies.</li>
<li>Show the video as a man with an exaggerated voice explains the situation (usually something along the lines of "it looks like an ordinary day, but in a few seconds their lives will be in mortal danger"), until the surprising, terrifying event happens.</li>
<li>Have the narrator explain, as briefly as possible, what caused the catastrophy, as well as the aftermath.</li>
<li>Show the moment of catastrophe over and over and over again. Slow-motion, zoomed-in, any different way you can think of. Have the narrator point out how the people on the video were "inches from certain death" or "moments from disaster" or "lucky to escape with only minor injuries"</li>
<li>Move on to the next clip.</li>
</ol>
<p>There is no educational value to this show whatsoever. You learn nothing other than what an explosion looks like.</p>
<p>Compare that with a show like <a href="http://www.discoverychannel.ca/shows/showdetails.aspx?sid=452">Mayday</a> (my personal favourite) which re-enacts airplane accidents (with cool computer graphics) and then explains very seriously and clearly what caused them and what has been done to ensure they don't happen again. Or Mythbusters, which tests sometimes silly hypotheses, but does them in (mostly) scientific ways. Both have the idea of teaching viewers as the main focus, and entertainment is a convenient medium to do so.</p>
<p>For Cash Cab and Destroyed in Seconds, the main focus is to entertain. That's not a bad thing, and these shows have their homes (Cash Cab on the Game Show Network, Destroyed in Seconds on Spike TV), but neither belong on the Discovery Channel.</p>
<p>If we're going to continue with the idea that specialty channels should have protected formats (and you're well within your rights to question whether that's necessary anymore), we should honour those formats, not try to find ways around them to pad the bottom line.<br />
<h3 class='related_post_title'>Related Posts</h3>
<ul class='related_post'>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/08/18/discovery-adds-cash-cab/' title='Trivia is learning too!'>Trivia is learning too!</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/07/08/crtc-roundup-ctv-wants-everything-in-hd/' title='CRTC roundup: CTV wants everything in HD'>CRTC roundup: CTV wants everything in HD</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/09/04/sun-tv-news-reality/' title='Some truth about Sun TV News'>Some truth about Sun TV News</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/02/26/yoopa-zeste-coming/' title='Two French specialty channels coming'>Two French specialty channels coming</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/07/07/taxi-payant/' title='Taxi 0-22 $'>Taxi 0-22 $</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/10/30/cash-cab-and-other-discovery-channel-cash-grabs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>HBO Canada coming, but it won&#8217;t be any cheaper</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/09/24/hbo-canada-coming-but-it-wont-be-any-cheaper/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/09/24/hbo-canada-coming-but-it-wont-be-any-cheaper/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Sep 2008 07:55:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fagstein</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Astral-Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Corus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HBO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV specialty channels]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=2716</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Corus and Astral have put the word out that they're creating HBO Canada, a channel that will be part of the Movie Network/Movie Central premium packages that will offer all-HBO programming (when it's not fulfilling its CanCon requirements). This will mean simulcasting of HBO shows and, for the first time, the legal airing of Real [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Corus and Astral have put the word out that they're creating HBO Canada, a channel that will be part of the Movie Network/Movie Central premium packages that will offer all-HBO programming (when it's not fulfilling its CanCon requirements). This will mean simulcasting of HBO shows and, for the first time, the legal airing of Real Time with Bill Maher in Canada.</p>
<p>Reports from the <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080923.RHBO23/TPStory/Business">Globe</a> and <a href="http://jam.canoe.ca/Television/2008/09/23/6846346-sun.html">Sun Media</a>.</p>
<p>UPDATE: Digital Home has <a href="http://www.digitalhome.ca/content/view/2873/279/">a good history of satellite TV in Canada</a> and why HBO is illegal.<br />
<h3 class='related_post_title'>Related Posts</h3>
<ul class='related_post'>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/10/03/specialty-channels-and-women/' title='One demographic to rule them all'>One demographic to rule them all</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/05/28/crtc-roundup-videotron-must-closed-caption-porn/' title='CRTC Roundup: Videotron must closed-caption porn'>CRTC Roundup: Videotron must closed-caption porn</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/08/20/tatv-shuts-down/' title='For sale: TATV channel'>For sale: TATV channel</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/12/20/crtc-caves-in-to-cogeco/' title='CRTC caves in to Cogeco'>CRTC caves in to Cogeco</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/09/04/sun-tv-news-reality/' title='Some truth about Sun TV News'>Some truth about Sun TV News</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/09/24/hbo-canada-coming-but-it-wont-be-any-cheaper/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>When is a channel not a channel?</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/09/19/when-is-a-channel-not-a-channel/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/09/19/when-is-a-channel-not-a-channel/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2008 05:51:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fagstein</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRTC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TSN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TSN2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV specialty channels]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=2650</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hey, remember back when I said you should expect CTV's competitors to get mad when it decided to brand a regional split of TSN into a separate channel called TSN2? Yeah, they got mad. TSN says it's respecting the letter of the law, and that only 10% of programming will differ between the channels. But [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey, remember <a href="http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/08/17/crtc-roundup-cancon-porn-tsn2-and-rural-channel/">back when I said</a> you should expect CTV's competitors to get mad when it decided to brand a regional split of TSN into a separate channel called TSN2?</p>
<p>Yeah, <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080915.RTSN15/TPStory/TPBusiness/?page=rss&amp;id=GAM.20080915.RTSN15">they got mad</a>.</p>
<p>TSN says it's respecting the letter of the law, and that only 10% of programming will differ between the channels. But Score Media wants the CRTC to clarify that this should apply to <em>advertising</em> as well.</p>
<p>Either way, TSN is selling this as an entirely separate cable channel, not as a split feed. And that, at least, seems to be going against the spirit of its license.<br />
<h3 class='related_post_title'>Related Posts</h3>
<ul class='related_post'>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/08/17/crtc-roundup-cancon-porn-tsn2-and-rural-channel/' title='CRTC roundup: Cancon porn, TSN2 and the Rural Channel'>CRTC roundup: Cancon porn, TSN2 and the Rural Channel</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/12/13/crtc-roundup-city-news-toronto/' title='CRTC Roundup: Rogers gets its own CP24'>CRTC Roundup: Rogers gets its own CP24</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/11/03/broadcasting-regulation-nerdgasm/' title='Broadcasting regulation nerdgasm'>Broadcasting regulation nerdgasm</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/09/04/sun-tv-news-reality/' title='Some truth about Sun TV News'>Some truth about Sun TV News</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/02/26/yoopa-zeste-coming/' title='Two French specialty channels coming'>Two French specialty channels coming</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/09/19/when-is-a-channel-not-a-channel/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CRTC Roundup: Shaw seeks CNN International license</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/09/05/crtc-roundup-shaw-seeks-cnn-international-license/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/09/05/crtc-roundup-shaw-seeks-cnn-international-license/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2008 17:51:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fagstein</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CanCon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CMT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CNN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Comedy-Network]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRTC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CTV Newsnet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HDTV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV specialty channels]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=2554</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Shaw Communications has asked the CRTC to add CNN International to the list of eligible channel imports for Canadian cable and satellite companies. Canadian viewers' exposure to CNNI is currently limited to the British-sounding people they sometimes hear behind an anchor desk during a noon-hour show or when breaking news happens late at night. The [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Shaw Communications has <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Notices/2008/pb2008-76.htm">asked the CRTC</a> to add <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNN_International">CNN International</a> to the list of eligible channel imports for Canadian cable and satellite companies. Canadian viewers' exposure to CNNI is currently limited to the British-sounding people they sometimes hear behind an anchor desk during a noon-hour show or when breaking news happens late at night. The programming is distinctly different from CNN's U.S. channel, and obviously focuses much less on U.S.-specific stuff.</p>
<p>The CRTC's notice suggests it is ready to approve the channel, since it doesn't compete with Canadian networks and is unlikely to have any program licensing issues.</p>
<h4>No HD for you</h4>
<p>Also from the CRTC this week is <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2008/db2008-251.htm">a denial for a new channel</a> called Canada HD Network, which <a href="http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/07/08/crtc-roundup-ctv-wants-everything-in-hd/">I mocked back in July</a>. Back then I suggested the CRTC would likely deny the request unless it got much more specific about programming. Otherwise it would compete with conventional general-interest broadcasters.</p>
<p>Sure enough, there were objections from CTV, Canwest, Rogers, Astral Media, The Score and the Canadian Association of Broadcasters, and Canada HD Network was shown the door. Similar decisions were made against its Diversion channel in <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2008/db2008-249.htm">high-definition</a> and <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2008/db2008-250.htm">standard-definition</a> (which were for some reason filed separately)</p>
<h4>New HD channels coming</h4>
<p>The CRTC has approved high-definition versions of the following CTV-owned specialty channels:</p>
<ul>
<li>CTV Newsnet</li>
<li>Business News Network</li>
<li>MTV Canada</li>
<li>Comedy Network</li>
<li>travel+escape</li>
<li>Outdoor Life Network</li>
</ul>
<p>This is only the first step in the process. The HD channels must now be created and CTV must negotiate with carriers to have the HD versions added to their lineups.</p>
<h4>Good news, bad news for CMT</h4>
<p>CMT Canada (Country Music Television) had a few requests for amendments to its license:</p>
<ol>
<li>It wanted to make changes to the categories of programs it can air, by adding animated programming and improv/stand-up comedy, by increasing (slightly) its cap on drama/comedy programming and by removing restrictions on the number of feature films it can air (though those films must still feature country music artists). All programming would still have to fit in with the country music theme and fit existing limits on non-music-video programming. Since no opposition was voiced and the proposed changes are not huge, the requests were approved.</li>
<li>CMT wanted to change the criteria by which videos are deemed "Canadian" to judge only the music and not the video itself. For music video television stations to consider a music video as Cancon-compliant, not only must the music be produced/written/performed by a Canadian (similar to the criteria radio stations use), but <em>the video itself</em> must have been produced by Canadians. This means that a Shania Twain music video wouldn't be Cancon if it was entirely produced in the States, even though the song itself counts as Cancon for radio stations. This request was denied because it would change policy across the board.</li>
<li>CMT wanted to change its required financial contribution minimums. Currently it must spend 22% of gross revenues, half on creating new Canadian country music videos and half on creating new (original) programming. It wanted to shift the balance toward programming and away from videos. Partly this is because CMT is less of a music video station (its requirement dropped from 90% to 50%), and partly this is because it would have to spend less of that remaining 78% on original/Canadian programming to meet CRTC requirements if it could shift that budget over. This request was also denied, as the CRTC pointed out that CMT's revenues have gone up and the network is hardly in a financial crisis.</li>
</ol>
<h3 class='related_post_title'>Related Posts</h3>
<ul class='related_post'>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/07/08/crtc-roundup-ctv-wants-everything-in-hd/' title='CRTC roundup: CTV wants everything in HD'>CRTC roundup: CTV wants everything in HD</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/03/11/crtc-roundup-global-local-programming/' title='CRTC Roundup: Global, porn and death'>CRTC Roundup: Global, porn and death</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/08/17/crtc-roundup-cancon-porn-tsn2-and-rural-channel/' title='CRTC roundup: Cancon porn, TSN2 and the Rural Channel'>CRTC roundup: Cancon porn, TSN2 and the Rural Channel</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2007/12/10/crtc-specialty-channels/' title='CRTC specialty channel digest: Everyone wants a break from CanCon'>CRTC specialty channel digest: Everyone wants a break from CanCon</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/09/04/sun-tv-news-reality/' title='Some truth about Sun TV News'>Some truth about Sun TV News</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/09/05/crtc-roundup-shaw-seeks-cnn-international-license/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Télétoon Rétro launches</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/09/04/teletoon-retro/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/09/04/teletoon-retro/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Sep 2008 21:20:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fagstein</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Teletoon Retro]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV specialty channels]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Videotron]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=2551</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Videotron Illico subscribers get their first taste of Teletoon Retro on Channel 97 (French) and on Channel 159 (English). (Data for the channels apparently haven't been input yet into the on-screen guide, but the channels are live.) Teletoon Retro was initially approved by the CRTC back in 2000, when all the networks were scrambling to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-2552" title="Teletoon Retro" src="http://blog.fagstein.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/teletoon-retro.png" alt="" width="400" height="309" /></p>
<p>Videotron Illico subscribers get their first taste of <a href="http://www.teletoon.com/teletoon3/teletoon.php?language=En&amp;brand=retro">Teletoon Retro</a> on Channel 97 (French) and on Channel 159 (English). (Data for the channels apparently haven't been input yet into the on-screen guide, but the channels are live.)</p>
<p>Teletoon Retro was <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/NEWS/RELEASES/2000/R001124-1.htm">initially approved by the CRTC back in 2000</a>, when all the networks were scrambling to come up with new specialty channels. It was then <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2005/db2005-511.htm">re-approved in 2005</a>, when Teletoon actually wanted to launch it. The English version launched last year, and the French version launched today, hence the inclusion of both on Videotron's Illico service.</p>
<p>In case it's non-obvious, Teletoon Retro is a classic cartoon network, with repeats of Spider-Man, Scooby Doo and The Jetsons, Rocky &amp; Bullwinkle and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_programs_broadcast_by_Teletoon_Retro">others</a>.</p>
<p>Sadly (and curiously), the channels are not being offered as free previews to subscribers. Instead, Videotron has added the channels to the popular Anglo and Franco packages, and both to the digital Telemax package at no extra charge. (This means your humble correspondent gets access to the anglo version but not the franco one.)</p>
<p>UPDATE (Sept. 9): Richard Therrien points out that <a href="http://blogues.cyberpresse.ca/therrien/?p=100&amp;utm_source=">the franco channel doesn't have much home-grown cartoons</a>, and prefers to have dubbed Bugs Bunny instead.</p>
<p>UPDATE (Sept. 11): Therrien adds that Bell TV (formerly ExpressVu) has <a href="http://blogues.cyberpresse.ca/therrien/?p=110">no plans to add the channel in the near future</a> due to lack of interest.<br />
<h3 class='related_post_title'>Related Posts</h3>
<ul class='related_post'>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/05/28/crtc-roundup-videotron-must-closed-caption-porn/' title='CRTC Roundup: Videotron must closed-caption porn'>CRTC Roundup: Videotron must closed-caption porn</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/11/03/broadcasting-regulation-nerdgasm/' title='Broadcasting regulation nerdgasm'>Broadcasting regulation nerdgasm</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/07/28/crtc-roundup-videotron-doesnt-want-to-closed-caption-porn/' title='CRTC roundup: Videotron doesn&#8217;t want to closed-caption porn'>CRTC roundup: Videotron doesn&#8217;t want to closed-caption porn</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2011/09/14/specialty-channel-war/' title='Specialty channel war is screwing customers'>Specialty channel war is screwing customers</a></li>
<li><a href='http://blog.fagstein.com/2010/09/04/sun-tv-news-reality/' title='Some truth about Sun TV News'>Some truth about Sun TV News</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.fagstein.com/2008/09/04/teletoon-retro/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

