OTTAWA – The term “equitable” is not synonymous with “equal” as it pertains to the allocation of air time to registered political parties and candidates, the CRTC has told a listener of Quebec City’s CHOI-FM station.
In a letter dated February 7, the Commission responded to a complaint from an individual who alleged that the RNC Media-owned station’s programming during the 2017 Quebec City municipal elections “demonstrated a clear bias” towards a specific political party. The complainant, who included a breakdown of the station’s programming and an assessment of the relative time dedicated to various registered parties, claimed that the station therefore violated section 6 of the Radio Regulations, 1986.
Section 6 of the Radio Regulations, 1986 (Regulations) stipulates that:
During an election period, a licensee shall allocate time for the broadcasting of programs, advertisements or announcements of a partisan political character on an equitable basis to all accredited political parties and rival candidates represented in the election or referendum.
In its response, the station said that it had provided each registered political party with equal opportunities to discuss their electoral platform on air, adding that numerous invitations to appear were extended to representatives of the various parties during the course of the electoral period, many of which were either declined or not responded to. It also stressed that it had broadcast two separate political debates with representatives from various parties, plus defended its electoral coverage.
The CRTC sided with the broadcaster, noting that its enforcement of this regulation seeks to ensure that the public is adequately informed of relevant political issues in order to inform their electoral decisions.
“It would be unreasonable to adopt the complainant’s interpretation of this provision as requiring that a broadcaster dedicate equal broadcast time to all candidates and parties and that rejected offers of broadcast time play no part in assessing compliance with this regulatory requirement”, reads the letter. “In that case, a decision by one party or candidate to forgo interview opportunities would mean that the undertaking could air no interview conducted with any party representative or candidate. This interpretation would run counter to the purpose of the regulation.”
The Commission also determined that no further regulatory action is warranted as the licensee’s programming during the 2017 municipal election period did not breach the Regulations.
