The Broadcasting Act blunder series has identified many of the negative consequences stemming from Bill C-10: the beginning of the end of Canadian broadcast ownership requirements, downgrading the role of Canadians in their own productions, risks to Canadian intellectual property ownership, trade retaliation by the U.S., potential capture of news sites and smaller streaming services, and less consumer choice as services work to avoid the costly Canadian regulatory requirements. Yet for some these costs will still be worth it since their singular goal is to mandate that foreign streaming services contribute funding toward Canadian film and television production. Indeed, Canadian Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault has made this the centrepiece of his “get money from web giants” strategy claiming that this will result in a billion dollars a year by 2023 in new funding. As this post documents, those claims massively exaggerate the likely funding impact.
Post Tagged with: "Cancon"
The Broadcasting Act Blunder, Day 16: Mandated Payments and a Reality Check on Guilbeault’s Billion Dollar Claim
The Broadcasting Act blunder series has previously examined Bill C-10’s enormous cost to the foundational elements of Canadian broadcasting policy including the beginning of the end of Canadian ownership and control requirements and how it downgrades the role of Canadians in their own programming. There is another significant cost that comes from a bill that Andrew Coyne of the Globe and Mail describes as “one of the most radical expansions of state regulation in Canadian history.” At a time when the government has emphasized the importance of intellectual property, the bill opens the door to less Canadian control and ownership over its IP.
The Broadcasting Act Blunder, Day 11: The “Regulate Everything” Approach – Licence or Registration Required
The government’s launch of Bill C-10, the Broadcasting Act reform bill, was careful to note that it was not creating a new licensing system for Internet services. For example, the Canadian Heritage FAQ states “Canadians will still be able to watch all of their favourite programs and access their preferred services. This Bill in no way prevents online streaming services from operating in Canada, or requires them to be licensed.” Previous posts have explored why this is unlikely to be the case with the new rules leading to less consumer choice as services choose to avoid the Canadian market given the new costs and requirements imposed by the government. The Broadcasting Act blunder series continues today with the first of several posts unpacking the shift from licensing to regulation, concluding that for many services, it could be a distinction without much of a difference.
Canadian Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault has painted Bill C-10, his Broadcasting Act reform bill, as a big win for Canadian creators, telling the House of Commons that the bill will mean “more opportunities for our creators and talent in the production sector.” The Broadcasting Act blunder series continues today with a closer examination of how the bill alters the way Canada has traditionally tried to ensure that Canadian talent plays a pivotal role in creating that content. It finds that bill actually downgrades the requirements and opens the door to reduced Canadian participation in productions in their own country.
Canadian Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault has cited the need to improve the “discoverability” of Canadian content as a critical reason to support Bill C-10, his Broadcasting Act reform bill. Speaking of his daughter’s use of digital services, Guilbeault told the House of Commons that the bill “will allow her not only to take advantage of an international offering, but also to discover Canadian content.” While few would oppose ensuring that Canadian content is easy to find and well marketed, the Broadcasting Act blunder series continues today with a look at the evidence on the issue of discoverability, finding there is little to support claims that regulatory intervention for streaming services is needed.