IN APRIL OF THIS YEAR, A&E Networks was the first of the American cable channels to reveal their "upfront" presentation to throngs of media buyers, advertising executives and other assorted folk.
I wasn’t there, of course, but I’m sure it was a slick presentation with some of the stars of all of its cool new – if a bit jarring – programming. (When you’re used to "Biography" and "Murder She Wrote" reruns, shows like Gene Simmons’ Family Jewels and Criss Angel: Mindfreak seem a little out there for A&E.)
What was notable in the Broadcasting & Cable report I read after the presentation was that A&E Television Networks president and CEO Abbe Raven told the guests that in 2006 alone, the company will spend US$500 million on its drama and lifestyle programming.
That’s half a billion American dollars for shows to be carried on A&E, History Channel, Biography and a few other smaller channels.
Half a billion dollars. With the Canadian TV consultants in full swing now preparing for the TV Policy Review this fall, I thought I’d do a little comparison to what we spent here recently on Canadian programming, to what Mr. Raven has approved there.
According to the CRTC’s 2006 Broadcast Policy Monitoring report, the eligible expenditures on Canadian programming among all conventional Canadian TV stations, the CBC and specialty and pay, totaled about C$1.54 billion in 2005.
But if you break it down by our TV broadcast regulation categories, it gets a little more interesting, or alarming or depressing, depending on your point of view. I figured the "A&E categories", if you will, sounded like category 2 (analysis and interpretation and long-form documentary), category 7 (drama and comedy) and category 11 (general entertainment and human interest).
In 2005 in those categories, the eligible expenditures for Canadian programming was a little over $680 million. That’s for all of our channels across the country. All of our English and French and other local stations, the CBC and the private networks and the 141 pay and specialty services that filed statements with the Commission last year, combined.
This year A&E is spending – with today’s exchange rates – a little over C$560 million. On seven.
How does the Canadian system compete with this? Should it? With this kind of cash gap, can we hope to make our programming as good as what we can see on A&E? We sure don’t have the resources to make it as plentiful.
We all know the reasons why our market is different. We’re a tenth the size. American programmers commission dozens and dozens of pilots and bring many new shows to air each fall just to see barely a handful make it out of their first season.
Can’t be done here. Most shows green-lighted in Canada make it to air. We don’t have the economies of scale to bring a show to fruition and dump it after an episode or two.
But what do YOU think?
What must the upcoming TV Policy review do to address the future of TV in Canada? Does it matter that A&E spends more on reality shows than all of our channels spend together on drama?
What is Canadian programming? How should it be defined and who should pay for it? How should it be produced? Is making Canadian drama now too expensive? Can we tell "our own stories?" What are "our own stories?" Should we continue to protect our industry and our jobs?
Does any of this matter when held up against all the media consumption opportunities presented by new technologies and the border-quashing capabilities of the Internet?
Let us know at editorial@cartt.ca and we’ll run your thoughts upcoming COMMENTARY. You can remain anonymous if you like, just be sure to note in your e-mail that we should not print your name.
Everyone who sends in at least 100 words on the topic will be entered into a draw for a 512 KB iPod shuffle. This COMMENTARY ORIGINALLY APPEARED ON AUGUST 10TH.
Only from Cartt.ca!
