Category Archives: TV

TVA helicopter crash-lands

LCN brings in the big guns - Pierre Bruneau - to anchor a crash special.

LCN brings in the big guns - Pierre Bruneau - to anchor a crash special.

This morning, the TVA helicopter crash-landed near the Bonaventure expressway downtown for reasons still unknown. The pilot, Antoine Léger, and journalist Réjean Léveillé are injured but their lives are not in danger. (Which is good news, because the last thing we need is another news helicopter-related fatality.)

UPDATE: More from La Presse.

Helicopter crashes are right up LCN’s alley, but since this was their helicopter (which ironically meant they couldn’t send a helicopter out to film it), this story took on a whole new importance. Pierre Bruneau hosted a one-hour special at 9am – pre-empting Claude Poirier – whose only news story was this crash-landing. It’s also leading every newscast with helicopter stories (as of 3pm, 10 minutes at the top of the hour and 5 minutes at the half-hour mark).

It’s a fact of life that the media love reporting on themselves. Whether it’s a meaningless award they’ve won, a news anchor’s retirement, or a labour disruption at a competing news outlet, these stories get more attention than they would if they related to non-media. A few hundred jobs are lost at a factory and it’s a business brief. A few dozen at a newspaper or TV station and it’s a big story.

I’m just as guilty there – this blog is all about local media.

So is LCN going overboard here just because it’s a TVA helicopter? Or is this just an understandable outpouring of support from a network that put family above the news?

The telethon goes on

The Telethon of Stars (left to right): Tania Krywiak, Lori Graham, Jed Kahane, Michel Lanteigne (foundation chair), Claudia Marques, Paul Karwatsky, Randy Tieman

The Telethon of Stars (left to right): Tania Krywiak, Lori Graham, Jed Kahane, Michel Lanteigne (foundation chair), Claudia Marques, Paul Karwatsky, Randy Tieman (photo: Telethon of Stars)

Aww, don’t they look adorable?

The Telethon of Stars, which aired last weekend on CFCF but didn’t air on V (formerly TQS), raised just under $4 million for research into children’s diseases. That’s a noticeable drop from last year’s $4.2 million, and well off the record of over $5 million, but considering how hurt the campaign could have been from the loss of a French audience (the CTV telethon was “bilingual”, though as you can see it was still a CTV event), it’s not bad.

Donations are still being accepted until Dec. 31. Be sure to kick in a few extra bucks as you raise your middle finger toward the Rémillard brothers.

Welcome, TSN2

tsn2

On Wednesday morning, TSN2 went live on Videotron’s Illico digital cable feed, on Channel 61 (681 in HD). GOL TV, which formerly occupied No. 61, has moved to 58. Channel 661 (the more logical place for the HD feed) is Rogers SportsNet HD, which will no doubt cause some confusion because SportsNet East SD is 81.

The channel is free for anyone who has access to TSN. Similarly for the HD feed.

TSN2 isn’t quite like any other channel. Its license actually requires it to mostly duplicate content from the main channel with a three-hour delay. And that’s because the license for the network wasn’t designed for the purpose TSN is branding it to become (essentially a Canadian equivalent of ESPN2).

Here’s the deal: TSN is a national network airing mostly live sporting events (hockey, football, curling, all the good stuff). But live game of the major sports leagues are also really finnicky about television rights. Some of them might enforce a blackout on local television coverage if the arena isn’t sold out for a home game. Others have exclusive deals with a local station or network, and so require regional blackouts. Others take their orders from Zorxon the Great and just declare blackouts randomly. So a sports network like TSN (and particularly the Rogers SportsNet regional networks) would be required to black out its programming for certain regions.

To help with this problem, the CRTC allowed TSN to split its network, both timewise – having a west coast feed on a three-hour delay – and to substitute other programming to replace blackouts, like another game. To make sure that TSN didn’t use this privilege to create a second network, they limited the amount of replacement programming to 10% of the schedule, which works out to 2.4 hours a day.

In 2008, TSN decided to rebrand this split network and “launch” what it called TSN2. Now there would be ads about what’s on this new network (that ran on all of CTV’s television properties), and the fact that it’s 90% the same as TSN was downplayed as much as possible. Besides, 2.4 hours means they can do what they want between 8pm and 10pm every day. Important events would air on TSN, but equally important events that happened at the same time would air instead on TSN2, and the network made sure everyone knew about that.

The reaction from the public was predictable. Having been told that their favourite sports programming would air on a network that they didn’t have access to, they followed TSN’s instructions (“For more information about TSN2, viewers are encouraged to contact their television provider“) and began badgering their cable and satellite providers. One by one they folded, and began carrying the second network.

Videotron was one of the holdouts, but it was just a matter of time before they too were forced to add the channel. There was a petition, a Facebook group, and all sorts of rumours about when Videotron would add the channel to its Illico digital cable lineup (Pierre Trudel had it “concrete” that it would launch Sept. 30).

This week the rumours were confirmed by various sources inside Videotron, and the service went live as scheduled. TSN sent out a press release about it, boasting that it’s now in 4.5 million Canadian homes and is the most-watched digital cable sports network.

I’m certainly not opposed to more sports networks. Even the CRTC has admitted it’s time to deregulate them and allow them to compete. Still, I think TSN should just ask for a license for another sports network to air separate programming. Instead, it will eventually go back to the CRTC and say that this arrangement is unworkable, and that it needs more leeway for more alternative programming (no doubt playing it as being better for the consumer) and the CRTC will cave, basically handing TSN the keys to a new specialty sports network.

In the meantime, I won’t say no to the channel. I’m just glad I don’t have to pay extra for it.

CFCF losing Daniele Hamamdjian

Daniele Hamamdjian

Daniele Hamamdjian

Friday will be Daniele Hamamdjian’s last day at CFCF.

It’s for a good cause, though: the young reporter is taking a new job at CTV national news, only three years after getting a job at CFCF. (You can read her bio on the website.)

“For someone who considers herself to be both a francophone and an anglophone, it doesn’t get much better than Montreal,” Hamamdjian tells Fagstein. “However, when an opportunity like this comes along… you can’t not jump on it.”

Indeed. At least we’ll still be seeing her, only more on the 11 o’clock news (and CTV News Network) and less at 6 and 11:30.

Asked what message she has for Montreal viewers (those who just like to look at her and otherwise), she offered this:

Our viewers… have made me laugh, and they’ve made me cry.  If anything, I’d like to thank them for their honesty. I’ve had a whole lot of fun telling their stories, and I can only hope they’ve enjoyed being along for the ride.

So now who’s going to talk to teenagers about them always thinking about sex?

Alouettes parade to get live coverage on TV

Championships in Montreal are more rare than we’d like them to be, yet this year we’ve had two – the Impact and the Alouettes. (And with the Habs being shut out at home to the Leafs, a trifecta seems unlikely.)

Wednesday sees the players and fans meet to celebrate for the victory parade down Ste. Catherine St., from Crescent to Jeanne-Mance starting at 11:40am.

Surprisingly, despite it being a local event (and one coming with little advance notice), there’s going to be actual live coverage of it by local television.

Here’s what’s been announced:

  • Global (CKMI) will have live coverage from 11:30am to 1:30pm (Mike LeCouteur with The Gazette’s Herb Zurkowsky and the Q’s Ken Connors). It will also be streaming the parade live at globalmontreal.com
  • CTV (CFCF) will have live coverage from noon to 1:30pm, preempting its entire noon newscast. Sports reporters will be in the crowd, Mutsumi Takahashi and Randy Tieman at the end of the route. Lori Graham and Todd van der Heyden will be in the parade itself. It will livestream the entire parade at montreal.ctv.ca
  • CBC (CBMT) has no announced live coverage
  • Radio-Canada will not have live TV coverage on the main network, but will be livestreaming the parade at radio-canada.ca/sports
  • TVA and V have nothing announced as far as live coverage
  • RDI will have a live special from 11:30am to 1:30pm. Simon Durivage hosts with Marc André Masson, Jean St-Onge, Jacinthe Taillon, Antoine Deshaies and former Als player Bruno Heppell
  • LCN has not announced anything, but expect it to give good coverage to the parade
  • RDS will have live parade coverage from 11:30am to 2pm (it’s the only network to actually change its electronic and online schedule to reflect the coverage) with David Arsenault, Marc Labrecque, Pierre Vercheval and Denis Casavant.
  • TSN has not announced anything, but considering their current plan for noon is World Championship Darts…

So that’s four channels carrying live TV specials (CFCF, CKMI, RDI and RDS), and three sources for live online streaming, at least.

Maybe what’s surprising is that, in this local TV death spiral, I find this surprising.

(Of course, you won’t be watching the parade on TV because you’ll be on Ste. Catherine St. celebrating, right?)

UPDATE: CTV Montreal and RDS have archived footage of the parade and party afterward. The Gazette and Rue Frontenac have put together artisty videos.

Rogers On Demand Online: Meh.

Homepage of Rogers On Demand Online

Homepage of Rogers On Demand Online

A few days ago, I got an email from a social media marketing guy at Rogers, inviting me to participate in a sneak preview of the Rogers On Demand Online service being launched on Monday (see coverage of that at Digital Home, Paid Content, Mediacaster).

It’s being called a “Canadian Hulu”, which is like saying CTV’s video portal is a Canadian Hulu, except that CTV doesn’t charge to watch its content.

I can’t imagine why Rogers would want me participating in this. I guess they cast a wide net and don’t read this blog, because otherwise they’d know I don’t think very highly of Canada’s telecom companies, and most of my reviews are negative ones.

This one is no exception.

Continue reading

RadCan pulls plug on online RDI streaming

It happened on Oct. 29, but it seems few people either noticed or cared. The first news story came out two weeks later that Radio-Canada has stopped livestreaming of its RDI all-news network online.

The reason? “Faciliter les discussions avec les câblodistributeurs”.

Some reaction online (including the video above) was negative, suggesting that Radio-Canada doesn’t get it, that we own the corporation and that the cable companies have nothing to fear from online streaming.

Here’s what gets me though: RDI is a must-carry network for cable and satellite. There’s no choice in the matter. The CBC even forced StarChoice to include it as part of its “English essentials” basic package last year. Because of this, the wholesale rate is set by the CRTC: $1 for RDI in francophone markets and $0.10 in anglophone markets.

So, what kind of discussions are we talking about here? There’s nothing to negotiate.

Besides, RDI isn’t the only one doing this. CPAC, the political affairs channel funded by the cable and satellite companies, also streams for free online. In fact, it annoyingly starts playing automatically when you go to the CPAC website.

I understand the worry from cable and satellite companies: if broadcasters stream all their stuff for free, then consumers might realize they’re being gouged and start cancelling their television services.

But for the public broadcaster to pull its feed, to intentionally deny access to its services from Canadians, solely to please the cable and satellite industry, that’s outrageous.

I sent an email to Alain Saulnier, who was quoted in the Cyberpresse piece, asking for clarification, but there was no response.

What if we stopped subsidizing local TV?

One of the arguments used against conventional television broadcasters in Canada – CTVglobemedia and my corporate overlord Canwest especially – in this whole fee-for-carriage debate is that they’re both giant megacorporations and own a slew of cash-cow specialty television channels.

The broadcasters counter that they can’t take profits from one part of the business and subsidize another.

As much as the knee-jerk consumer reaction might be that this is exactly what they should do, they’re right. It makes no business sense for a profit-generating enterprise to not be generating profit. If conventional television doesn’t make money, then subsidy or no subsidy, it will eventually be shut down.

CTV and Canwest purchased their specialty arsenals knowing the conventional model was going down the toilet. If it came down to it, neither would have any trouble shutting down their entire conventional network and moving completely to specialty channels. But conventional TV is still making money (only just) and they’re betting on a fee-for-carriage solution to get them more.

But as much as the broadcasters are arguing against subsidizing their own operations, they have no trouble demanding exactly that from cable and satellite broadcast distribution companies. Not only do they benefit directly from the new Local Programming Improvement Fund in small markets, but their expensive Canadian dramas and comedies get large subsidies from the Canadian Media Fund, formerly the Canadian Television Fund. Both of these funds get their income from cable and satellite companies.

And cross-subsidization is what the conventional broadcasters do for local programming. In fact, even though they constantly whine that the “model is broken”, the basic premise of using profits from reselling U.S. programming to fund Canadian and local programming remains. This isn’t done because CTV and Global have hearts of gold and see the value in homegrown television, it’s because the CRTC forces them to air this kind of programming as conditions of license.

Continue reading

Grab the popcorn, the real local TV debate is about to begin

On Monday, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission will finally get down to meeting about the future of conventional broadcast television, and through a series of hearings lasting at least a week, will hear arguments from broadcasters, cable and satellite companies, unions, producers, and maybe even a few television watchers, about whether those who freely transmit television signals over the airwaves should be paid a fee by cable and satellite companies currently mandated to distribute that signal. If it does, it will then have to decide who pays for it, how much it will be (or how it’s negotiated) and where the money will go.

To prepare for it, TVO’s The Agenda with Steve Paikin has a long panel discussion with four experts: the uncomfortably smiley Ian Morrison of Friends of Canadian Broadcasting (who supports fee for carriage), the knowledgeable but detached Grant Robertson of the Globe and Mail, the nerdy Michael Geist (who, like Andrew Coyne, supports deregulation and increased consumer choice), and Norm Bolen, who represents producers (and supports fee for carriage) as president of the Canadian Film and Television Production Association.

In the Globe and Mail, the story is told through the eyes of two former Canwest E! network stations: CHCH Hamilton, which was bought by Channel Zero and is trying to build a business model around being an all-news station during the day (70 hours a week of local news), and CHCA Red Deer, which it seems hasn’t been missed much since it was shut down on Aug. 31.

Meanwhile, even though the deadline for public comments has passed, both the Local TV Matters people and the Stop the TV Tax people are still running ads. The former has created a new one, which as usual vastly oversimplifies the issue.

There’s no “V” in “Foundation for Research into Children’s Diseases”

It’s one of the few special programs produced locally, and a key part of that whole “local TV matters” thing: every year in December, CFCF runs a 24-hour telethon to raise money for the Foundation for Research into Children’s Diseases called the Telethon of Stars. It’s been an annual tradition since 1977.

While originally in both languages on CFCF, the telethon was eventually split up with the French version airing on what was at the time CFCF’s sister station TQS. The two telethons would pool their money together, last year raising $4.5 million.

But with its rebirth as V, CFJP has apparently decided the telethon isn’t worth the expense anymore, according to Richard Therrien. Instead, some francophone flavour, including Chantal Lacroix, will be included in CFCF’s broadcast on Dec. 5.

As a commenter on Therrien’s blog alludes to, it seems an odd decision since the network had no problem a few months ago trying to get viewers to call them and give them money just to get them to stop their endless encouragement.

UPDATE: Some context: The network (which you’ll recall doesn’t have the burden of a news department) is seeking to cut more staff.

CFCF brings out the big guns for sweeps

Ad for CFCF (CTV Montreal) special report from Caroline van Vlaardigen in The Gazette

Ad for CFCF (CTV Montreal) special report from Caroline van Vlaardigen in The Gazette

I suppose I should be grateful that CFCF is flexing its marketing budget again. These large full-colour ads are appearing every week in The Gazette, and that money is trickling down into my salary.

For those of you who haven’t been been paying attention, Montreal’s most-watched evening newscast has been running special reports, usually on Thursday evenings, over the past month, and is heavily promoting them. Newspaper ads and TV promos, but even having the reporter come in the day before to do an interview on the noon newscast.

The videos are online, posted on the Special Report page of CTV Montreal’s website. Among them:

Each report is between four and seven minutes long – an eternity in television news these days. Some include original reporting (the kind you could put an “exclusive” label on if it was important), others condense a lot of background information to put the issue in context and in depth. All of them include original interviews with Montrealers, and they all take quite a bit of time to put together.

I asked Jed Kahane, the director of news and public affairs at CTV Montreal, about these “special reports”, and he says they’ve been “a consistent feature” here and elsewhere for years, but they get particularly important during sweeps:

While we always put our best journalistic foot forward, in our newscasts and promotions of our newscasts, we make sure that during ratings periods in the fall and spring, we produce and promote stories of “added value” that will hopefully draw new viewers to CTV Montreal.

This doesn’t mean light and fluffy; for example last fall during sweeps Anne Lewis did a mini-doc (or special report) on PTSD among Canadian soldiers returning from Afghanistan, for which CTV won a Murrow Award from the RTNDA in the U.S., one of the top TV journalism prizes on the continent.

He also points out that, while some of these might sound like pure ratings-grabbers (Daniele Hamamdjian talking about teens and sex, anyone?), others are much more serious. This week, it’s Caroline van Vlaardigen on the drop-out rate. Next week, a report on suicide (“hardly a classic low-brow ratings grab”).

As for the decision to air these reports on Thursdays, which I had guessed might be due to Thursday having the highest ratings of the week, Kahane says that decision was “somewhat arbitrary” and other days have “virtually identical audiences as Thursdays.”

It’s not the same depth of information as you’d find in a newspaper feature, but it’s definitely more than you normally find on TV these days. As much as I criticize the local news media for diminishing quality of reports, I have to applaud them when they kick up their game.

Unfortunately, the November sweeps are almost done, so get used to this expensive journalism while you can.

Caroline van Vlaardigen’s report on the fight against the school drop-out rate airs Thursday, Nov. 12, on CFCF-12 at 6pm. A preview is online.

Spécialisées

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:

Stéphane Baillargeon also discusses the changes happening at Canal Savoir, which turned 25 this year.

CBC fee-for-carriage solution isn’t really one

The fee-for-carriage/local TV debate is over. The CBC has solved it. In was a stroke of absolute brilliance, the Mother Corp. has come up with a system that makes local broadcasters happy, reduces cable costs for consumers, and provides a fair system that doesn’t threaten cable companies’ profits.

Oh, and they solved the digital TV transition problem too.

Haha, just kidding. Their proposal does nothing of the sort.

On Tuesday, the CBC heralded a submission it made to the CRTC that “offers a solution to the issue of the affordability should a compensation regime for the value of local television signals be implemented.”

I asked the CBC for a copy of this submission, and they kindly forwarded it to me. I’ve uploaded it here for you to read (PDF).

Here is the key part of the CBC’s proposal (emphasis mine):

The CRTC should require cable and satellite companies to offer consumers a small, all Canadian basic package which would include all local television stations plus a few other licensed services.  The rate for this small basic package would not exceed a maximum rate established by the CRTC.  This would ensure the affordability of television service for all Canadians.

Consumers would be free to purchase – but would not be required to purchase – any additional services they may want that are not included in the small basic package.  The cable and satellite companies would negotiate with broadcasters to determine the compensation payable for the services they distribute – including the local television services in the basic package.  The CRTC would act as arbitrator in any situations where the parties could not agree.

The CBC explains how this would work in its “straightforward” three-step process:

First, the Commission would need to determine the services to be included in the streamlined basic package.

Second, the cable and satellite BDUs would have to negotiate wholesale rates with the programming services included in the new basic package – including the local television stations.  Commission arbitration would be available if the parties could not reach an agreement.

Third, the Commission would approve the proposed rate to be charged for this basic package.

Wait, hold on a second. Wasn’t the entire point of “negotiation for value” that consumers would have the choice of what local television stations they would carry on cable? The CBC’s proposal does away with that (what a surprise) and goes back to forcing the cable companies to carry their stations. It mentions that they would “negotiate wholesale rates”, but what kind of negotiation can you have when the only response the cable and satellite companies can give is “yes”?

So this would go to “arbitration” in front of the CRTC. Which means the CRTC would simply set the rate for carrying local stations.

In other words, this is fee for carriage.

In fact, it goes beyond fee for carriage. Now the CRTC would set the price for basic cable as well, and say what channels can and can’t be carried on it:

Cable and satellite BDUs would not be permitted to include any additional services in the basic package beyond those required by the Commission.

Surely they could throw in some freebies (like advertising channels) and nobody would get hurt.

The CBC’s argument includes a lot of charts and data showing that cable and satellite companies are rolling in cash while broadcasters face certain doom. These things, of course, we knew already. It also brings up all the “save local TV” talking points, like how taxes aren’t taxes:

It has become all too common in the Canadian communications environment for cable and satellite companies to disguise items on their consumers’ bills as government imposed retail taxes when they are not (e.g., “system access fee”, “government regulatory recovery fee”, “LPIF tax”, “CRTC LPIF Fee”).

While fee-for-carriage is still up in the air, the LPIF fee is a tax as much as the GST is. It’s a mandatory percentage fee added to the total price of a service that’s taken by the government. The fact that the CRTC says the cable companies should pay it instead of consumers is semantics at best.

It’s not that I oppose the LPIF, or even fee-for-carriage, but don’t get all bent out of shape because we call a tax a tax.

Cheap cable solves digital TV?

The submission also pretends to offer a solution to the digital TV transition. In addition to requiring many people across the country to modify or replace television sets that are up to half a century old, the transition will mean many Canadians in remote regions won’t have access to free, over-the-air TV, because the broadcasters are too poor/cheap to replace the analog transmitters with digital ones.

I’ve already argued that this digital transition is completely unnecessary, and that goes double for remote areas with few television stations. But the CRTC is going ahead with it anyway, and in August 2011 will create a problem where none existed.

So what is the CBC proposing? Well, their argument is that cheap cable can replace free television:

While not everyone would choose to subscribe to such a service, those who did not would not be deciding on the basis of affordability.

If this sounds a bit familiar, it’s because Bell thought up the same thing with cheap satellite. Both seem to ignore the fact that cheap is not free. Though it’s unclear how much basic cable would cost under CBC’s plan (I’m willing to guess it won’t be much cheaper than it is now), it will still be infinitely larger than zero.

There’s also another problem with this idea: The CRTC setting the rate for basic cable tips the economic scales, and reduces the incentive for entrepreneurs to enter the cable market, especially in remote areas where the economies of scale don’t work out as well in their favour.

Perhaps the CRTC would set a different rate for big-market and small-market cable, but then it starts to get more complicated.

What is basic?

The CBC’s submission is based on the premise that basic packages contain a bunch of channels that Canadians don’t want and are being forced to pay for. It doesn’t list them, nor does it list the channels it would want to keep.

To get some context, I looked at the channels that are included in my basic (digital) service through Videotron:

  • 10 broadcast stations:
    • CBFT (2, Radio-Canada)
    • CBMT (6, CBC)
    • CJOH (8, CTV Ottawa’s retransmitter in Cornwall)
    • CFTM (10, TVA)
    • CFCF (12, CTV Montreal)
    • CIVM (17, Télé-Québec)
    • CFTU (29, Canal Savoir)
    • CFJP (35, V, ex-TQS)
    • CKMI (46 Global)
    • CJNT (62)
  • Three parliamentary channels:
    • Assemblée Nationale
    • CPAC (French)
    • CPAC (English)
  • Eight must-carry specialty networks
    • CBC News Network
    • RDI
    • The Accessible Channel
    • Aboriginal Peoples’ Television Network
    • The Weather Network
    • MétéoMédia
    • Avis de recherche
    • TV5
  • Télé Achats (an advertising network that would be silly to demand subscriber fees)
  • VOX, Videotron’s public access channel
  • Cable barkers, including the Canal Info Videotron (Channel 1), the video on demand barker channel and the Viewer’s Choice / Canal Indigo barkers
  • GameTV
  • Local radio stations, Galaxie and other audio-only services

With the exception of GameTV and the advertising channels (which we’re not charged for), these are all part of the basic service because the CRTC requires it to carry them.

So which of these channels would the CBC make discretionary? Surely not the parliamentary channels, nor the cable access channel, nor its own all-news channel.

Maybe I’m on the wrong track. For one thing, Videotron forces its customers to choose a package (either a theme package or an a-la-carte channel package) in addition to the basic service. This would stop under the CBC proposal.

On the satellite side, there’s Bell TV, whose digital basic package includes, besides broadcast television stations and must-carry networks, the following:

  • Treehouse
  • W Network
  • CTV News Channel
  • Vision TV
  • Teletoon Retro
  • MTV Canada
  • The Shopping Channel

These would also be pulled from the basic package under the CRTC proposal.

There is also, of course, analog cable, in which everyone gets the same service. That includes more channels, including:

  • Vision TV
  • YTV
  • MuchMusic
  • TSN
  • CMT
  • VRAK.TV
  • MusiquePlus
  • RDS
  • Showcase
  • Bravo
  • Discovery Channel
  • W Network
  • Canal Vie
  • MusiMax
  • Canal D

But analog cable doesn’t provide for discretionary channels, at least not on the level of digital.

Despite my criticisms, there’s some merit to some of the CBC’s proposal, specifically the creation of a basic package, whether on satellite, digital cable or analog cable. The practice of forcing people using digital services to add packages to basic lineups needs to stop.

But what the CBC is proposing is fee for carriage, and that’s a tax. And it would do nothing to stop the cable and satellite oligopolies from further solidifying their hold on the market.

The Hugh Haugland Award

CTV cameraman Hugh Haugland, remembered by his colleagues

CTV cameraman Hugh Haugland, remembered by his colleagues

CTV cameraman Hugh Haugland, who died in a helicopter crash in August while trying to get video for a story, is being remembered by RTNDA Canada (Radio-Television News Directors’ Association) with an award in his name.

The award, for “creative use of video”, will be presented on an annual basis at the RTNDA’s conference in June.