OTTAWA – Canadian television viewers want more content choices and have mixed feelings about the way their television is currently delivered to them, according to the first phase of the CRTC’s Let's Talk TV: A Conversation with Canadians.
The Commission issued the Phase 1 report Wednesday, based on the 1,320 comments it received from October 24 – November 22, 2013. As Cartt.ca readers will recall, the initiative kicked off by asking Canadians the following three questions:
1. Programming: What do you think about what’s on television?
2. Technology: What do you think about how you receive television programming?
3. Viewer toolkit: Do you have enough information to make informed choices and seek solutions if you’re not satisfied?
Most comments were received from the online discussion forum (450), followed by e-mails (322), phone (304), and the intervention webform (244) which includes letters (10) and faxes (4). More than 25 Flash! conferences were hosted with over 1,250 participants, but the CRTC is still analyzing those reports and therefore did not include that data in this report.
The Commission said that the next phase of the conversation will be launched in February with the publication of the Let’s Talk TV Choicebook, an interactive questionnaire that will ask Canadians to elaborate on certain issues raised in Phase 1.
The information collected in the report, the Flash! conferences and the questionnaire will be reviewed at the official public proceeding, which will be the third phase of the process. That process will begin in spring 2014 and a public hearing will be held this September.
“The response from participants was immediate and enthusiastic”, said CRTC chair Jean Pierre Blais, in the report’s preamble. “It confirmed without a doubt that Canadians are not only passionate about their television system, but also have interesting ideas regarding how it should evolve in response to their needs and interests. Ultimately, this input will help shape a proposed framework that is flexible and responsive to a communication environment that is in constant flux.”
Highlights from the report include:
Programming
– Many participants say they are shifting away from linear (scheduled) television towards a more on-demand model either from their BDU or online;
– Many want to receive a broad diversity of programming from throughout the broadcasting system including from public, private or community stations. While participants say that programming of interest to them is available from the licensed or unlicensed system, many comment on the decreasing quality of programming, particularly that is available in the licensed system;
– Participants are mixed on the notion of Canadian content. For some, regulations that require exhibition of and financial support for Canadian programming are no longer relevant; others suggested that the current quota based system is responsible for inferior productions. Many argue that Canadian programming must be made available on multiple platforms to ensure its success.
– Canadians are divided on the role of the CBC. Some participants flat out reject the need for a national public broadcaster, objecting to the material it broadcasts and the amount of public funding devoted to it; others see a continued need for the CBC but objected to the CBC’s practice of broadcasting advertising given that it is already well funded by the tax payer. Many feel that the CBC and other provincial public broadcasters should be offered by BDUs for free across the country, particularly in French-language minority communities outside Quebec.
– Many participants express concern about advertising. They dislike both the amount of advertising and the extent to which advertisements are repeated. Others note that they have to pay subscription fees for channels that also broadcast advertising and question why they are effectively charged twice for the same programming.
Technology
– While many participants state that they still watch television using a television set fed through either a set-top box or an antenna, some have shifted their viewing habits to obtain their programming from a mix of platforms that include BDUs and multiple online-based offerings from established Canadian broadcasters as well as Netflix, YouTube, iTunes and sports leagues such as the NHL Network.
– Participants often cite costs as relating to their viewing habits. Many participants feel that subscriptions to BDUs are becoming more and more expensive, and some expressed frustration at packaging practices and the costs and perception of value related to the purchase of equipment such as set-top boxes.
– Despite the emergence of multiple platforms that allow many participants greater control over the content to which they have access, many say that the broadcasting system still leaves them without meaningful choice. For instance, some Canadians express dismay at having to purchase standard definition (SD) channels from their BDU when all of the programming they view is in high-definition (HD). They are at a loss to understand why, when the programming already exists in SD, they are forced to pay more for the exact same content in HD format.
– The ability to choose between platforms remains out of reach for many, such as those in rural and remote areas of the country without the high-speed broadband access needed to access on-line platforms, or a lack of access to over-the-air television services. Demographic factors such as age, income and whether someone lives with a disability were also stated as ways that decrease access to multiple delivery platforms.
– Some participants support channel packaging, considering that packages provide diverse content at a reasonable price, however, many participants want the ability to pick the channels that they want and to pay for only those they have chosen to purchase.
– While new platforms appear to be increasingly important for Canadians, some suggest that the distribution of audio-visual content, including the distribution of services by over-the-air signals, will continue to play an important role. In this regard, some suggest that over-the-air services should be encouraged to multiplex their offerings and make full use of the spectrum they have been licensed to occupy.
Viewer Toolkit
– Participants provided the fewest comments on the viewer toolkit compared with other issues.
– Some participants are satisfied with the information that they received from television service providers, while others think that BDUs are less than forthcoming about their packaging and pricing, leaving them at a loss to understand why they do not receive the services to which they thought they had subscribed.
– Some participants feel that BDUs provide poor or inconsistent customer service. They identify long wait times when calling the customer service line, a lack of follow-up from customer service representatives (CSRs), or a seeming unwillingness of CSRs to address complaints and find solutions within the organization. Others think that the service that CSRs provide over the phone is not as good as that provided by in-store representatives.
– Some participants believe that service providers could make better use of their existing infrastructure to provide better information. For instance, they suggest that the electronic programming guide should provide better information on the channels offered and the programming that is broadcast.
– Barriers that participants identify with regard to changing packages or service providers can be broken down as follows: the lack of meaningful choice, contracts, and technology. All of these relate to the costs of switching.
– Many say that the Canadian television system is not fully accessible to many persons with a hearing or visual disabilities. Some participants with hearing disabilities are concerned about the overall quality of closed captioning and feel that the CRTC is not doing enough in this regard. Participants with a visual disability indicate that many platforms, including personal video recorders and other set-top boxes, mobile applications, and other platforms that require on-screen interaction are not accessible.
– Some participants do not know how to raise concerns with television service providers. Others are aware that they can register complaints about billing and content either through the CRTC or the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC). While some express satisfaction, particularly about this process in providing Canadians a voice to raise concerns particularly with BDUs, some think that complaining to the CRTC doesn’t generally provide satisfactory results. These participants think that the CRTC cannot or will not do anything with complaints.
– Help-lines and other self-service options such as FAQs are suggested as methods for dealing directly with service providers, as are more collaborative options such as user forums and online chats with CSRs. Some participants think these options for interaction should be made more accessible for persons with disabilities.
