The ACTA Internet Chapter: Putting Pieces Together
ACTA Guide, Part 1: The Talks To-Date
ACTA Guide, Part 2: The Documents (Official and Leaked)
ACTA Guide, Part 3: Transparency and ACTA Secrecy
CRTC Re-Opens Door to Fee-For-Carriage |
| Print | |
|
Monday July 06, 2009
|
|||||||
|
The CRTC has again opened the door to fee-for-carriage, saying that "is now of the view that a negotiated solution for compensation for the free market value of local conventional television signals is also appropriate. The Commission expects that these negotiations will be completed before the long-term renewal of licences and that they will take place in a way that ensures that Canadians will not lose access to programming services. In the absence of negotiated agreements, the Commission will provide resolution through binding arbitration." The move was swiftly condemned by Rogers and Bell. Update: The Globe covers the story with Rogers' Phil Lind saying he is "fighting mad." Comments (5)
Jeff J
said:
|
|||||||
|
... If they want to be "fighting mad", Rogers, Bell, Shaw, etc. should just go back and tell the networks they'll pay the fee for carriage in exchange for the termination of simultaneous signal substitution and anybody who doesn't like it can get the proverbial boot off the channel grid. Then watch the networks BEG the CRTC to maintain the status quo.... |
|
An interesting concept Fee for carriage. The networks would be allowed to charge the cable and satellite providers to carry their basic, free to air, signal. An interesting concept. The networks claim that the cable and satellite companies are making money by carrying the signals. This is true. What they neglect to mention is that the networks themselves benefit from this carriage as it allows them to charge more for advertising; the ads reach a larger audience. Some channels provided by these same networks are mandatory carriage; I am not sure if these ones are, or if the providers must pay for the mandatory carriage channels. Jeff J. I'd add that the providers should be given the option to not carry the channels that are also provided off-air. Imagine if, in Ottawa, Rogers no longer had to carry CJOH or the Global transmitter (it is a transmitter for the Toronto station). Given how few people in Ottawa have an antenna, the advertising revenues would fall through the floor. |
|
This is ridiculous The only canadian broadcast channel I watch is CBC, which I would glad pay for, however all of the other channels either show their pitiful "cancon" or are just airing american shows that I can just as easily watch, and do, on the american channels. To that end, I say please do allow them to charge a fee for carriage in exchange for allowing customers to opt-in for receiving these channels. This will save me from having these useless channels clogging up my channel listings. One wonders how many people on cable would miss them enough to pay the $1 or $2 per channel... Or maybe they'll just go out and buy antennas and hook up to the secondary hookup on their tv... |
Subscribe to this comment's feed