My weekly Law Bytes column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) focuses on the growing push from the Canadian broadcasting community to revisit the CRTC's 1999 New Media decision, in which Canada's broadcasting regulator took a hands-off approach to the Internet. The support for greater regulation is often couched in Canadian content terms, but I argue that the current changes have the potential to dramatically alter Canadian content production from one mandated by government regulation to one mandated by market survival.
The issue began to percolate last June, when Canadian Heritage Minister Bev Oda asked the CRTC to conduct a six-month consultation on the effects of changing technology on the radio and television industries. The CRTC report, which was quietly released in mid-December, went almost unnoticed, yet submissions from broadcasters, copyright collectives, and labour unions all point to an increased regulatory role for the CRTC.
The underlying theme of many stakeholder submissions is that unregulated new media represents a threat to the current regulated Canadian content model.
For example, SOCAN, a copyright collective, implausibly argues that "Canadians have fewer Canadian programming choices available to them when they use new technologies than they do when they access conventional television and radio stations."
SOCAN is by no means alone in promoting more Internet regulation in the name of Canadian content. ACTRA, which represents over 21,000 performers, argues that the CRTC should be "the catalyst for the Commission to review its New Media Decision as early as possible."
The Friends of Canadian Broadcasting go even further, maintaining that "Canadian broadcasting policy should recognize new delivery systems such as MP3 players, satellite radio receivers, and interactive Web clients as part of the new Canadian broadcasting system. If the Commission is unable or unwilling to regulate their content, it should be charged with ensuring that a percentage of the revenue they generate from the distribution of these services is circulated into the system."
The broadcaster perspective surprisingly also envisions greater regulatory involvement. Although the Canadian Association of Broadcasters does not call for the re-consideration of the new media decision (it actually seeks lighter regulation for all broadcasting media), it expresses concern about the implications of Internet video – particularly streaming video from U.S. broadcasters – for the Canadian market.
The CAB seeks to recast Canadian broadcast history by maintaining that "from its very beginnings, a separate rights market has been a central objective of the Canadian broadcasting system, and an underpinning of Canadian broadcasters' ability to support Canadian content." According to the CAB, a core goal of Canadian broadcast policy has been the reliance on cheap and profitable U.S. content in order to subsidize the creation of unprofitable Canadian content.
With the growing popularity of Internet streaming, the CAB fears that U.S. broadcasters will simply stream their programming into Canada and thereby diminish the value of those programs on Canadian television networks. In response, the CAB seemingly wants the CRTC to erect barriers to Internet streaming, concluding that "all reasonable public policy measures and instruments will be needed to maintain the integrity of a separate and distinct Canadian program rights market."
While the CAB is right that the Internet is erasing the distinction between geographic markets and that U.S. broadcasters are likely to stream on a global basis in the near future, the likely impact on Canadian content is precisely opposite of what it suggests.
Rather than reducing the production of Canadian content, Internet streaming and new media create incentives for more Canadian productions since profitability in the emerging environment will depend upon original content that can be distributed across all platforms, old and new. If Canadian broadcasters are unable to rely on cheap U.S. programming, they will be forced to compete by investing in their own original content.
Interesting movement by the broadcaster’s assotiations.
Do you think it has something to do with the recent arguments by the Canadian majors Shaw and Videotron to stop contributing the CTF?
Bests,
JA
“unregulated new media represents a threat to the current regulated Canadian content model”… Ummm, no kidding! But the internet, ie: the WWW, is a WORLD WIDE WEB. Canadian legislation alone will be but a drop in the bucket in terms of “controlling” the internet for Canadians. Unless the feds decide to put up a gigantor firewall like China has.
\”If Canadian broadcasters are unable to rely on cheap U.S. programming, they will be forced to compete by investing in their own original content.\”
What? Invest in their content – it might lower profits and their stock price might drop! The CRTC can\’t allow that…
Executive Producer, Galacticast.com
An an internet video producer I’m really peeved that the CRTC are trying to lay claim to our territory. I believe in a free internet without national boundaries and I don’t want to be regulated by my own government. They may be regulating in the name of “the diversity of voices”, but once they have jurisdiction over us, what is to keep them from fining us for using the F-word or for being too edgy?
In response to the CRTC’s interest in regulating new media, I’ve contacted the EFF, the Video on the Net Alliance and Jeff Jarvis of Buzzmachine.com. I’ve also creative a group on Facebook to discuss the implications of the CRTC’s involvement in new media here:
[ link ]
If you’re on Facebook, I’d be honoured if you’d join the discussion.
Best regards,
Casey
[ link ]
Screw the CRTC
Of all the statist insults that are thrown at us each day, the CRTC takes the cake. Even as a paying customer, if you have a dish manufactured in the USA, with service provided by an American company, we as consumers could be thrown in jail or fined hundreds of thousands of dollars for going against the federal government. Essentially, in this country it is illegal to circumvent Canadian advertisers. Fuck the CRTC and the Feds. I can’t wait to bypass every Canadian content producer out there, that is their punishment for going along with all of this CRTC induced foolishness. Give me a Joost like service for $30-$40 a month with unfiltered content from whomever – I’ll take that over a Canadian cable or satellite company any day. I’m sure I won’t be the only one, and in typical Canadian fashion, they’ll begin to react to this five years too late. Good riddance!
newkon
unregulated new media represents a threat to the current regulated Canadian content model”… Ummm, no kidding! But the internet, ie: the WWW, is a WORLD WIDE WEB. Canadian legislation alone will be but a drop in the bucket in terms of “controlling” the internet for Canadians. Unless the feds decide to put up a gigantor firewall like China has.
cellotin forum
bedava online oyun
Boy, this really peezes me off. It is the “W W W” N O T “C W W” !! Months ago I couldn’t believe there were some things that I suddenly couldn’t see video footage on some Web pages where I got a message, on MSNBC I think, saying “content not available in Canada”(or whatever). I really got tee’d off when I wanted to see a clip from Jon Stewart’s Daily Show Webpage and this time got not only the same but it told me if I want to see this clip to go to some Canadian Website to see it. Geeeez, eh? C’mon…..
It’s like one guy here said, what next? Are they going to put a big Firewall on the country like in China?? Is this freedom?
Mr. Government please stay out of it…please please pleeeeeeeze…
Canadian producers…Make It(good) and They will Come