THERE’S SO MUCH UNINFORMED nonsense on display in the Canadian consumer media about how the Canadian television industry works and the CRTC’s role in it that most of us in the business tend to just ignore it.
Columnists and reporters at many daily newspapers, in on-line forums and sometimes even on radio or television, misplace blame for many things broadcast – and most often they lay fault for anything they perceive is wrong with the system at the feet of the CRTC. For a reporter, it’s a really easy score. Why do a little work and figure out what’s what when an easy mark like the Commission is just sitting there.
And what’s not to love about that, right? Isn’t CRTC-bashing a favorite pastime of the industry? Of Canadians in general? Don’t get me wrong, the CRTC deserves some of the bashing it gets, but it takes far too many hits, in my mind.
But the sheer volume of criticism and the thousands of words written on the Commission and the cultural pain it supposedly inflicts on Canadians every year – with so much of it is just plan wrong – it’s probably best left ignored. People believe what they want to.
But the column on the front of the Arts & Life section of Monday’s National Post would surely claim a national newspaper award for general ineptness, if there was such a dishonour.
The writer, Tara Ariano, in her extended whine about a show called Project Runway, blames the CRTC for just about everything. The fact that Life Network made a business decision to air the series weeks delayed when compared to its original U.S. showing on Bravo? The CRTC’s fault.
Canadian specialty services generally resist risk and wait to see if shows are hits in the U.S. before committing to bringing them here. So should Life have aired Project Runway at the same time as Bravo (U.S.)? If I’m the programmer, yes. But I’m not – and neither is anyone at the CRTC.
The Commission, according to the columnist, is also what stands in the way of we iPod owners being able to download American TV shows from iTunes. Where to begin with that one? How about the fact the CRTC doesn’t regulate the Internet and that geographic copyright ownership is what’s holding up deals for Canadians. Those U.S. TV shows aren’t available in Mexico, Bolivia, Russia, Thailand or any other country either, except the U.S. Does the CRTC’s influence extend globally?
(And don’t get me started on how the Post’s Arts & Life section is the TV and film section of a newspaper owned by a broadcaster, CanWest Global.)
The consistent kicker to this type of bleating is always that the CRTC is all that stands between us and the Nirvana that is the U.S. TV system. If only the Commission was abolished, all would be well!
Sigh.
CRTC policies reflect the Broadcast Act – an Act of Parliament. The Commission is absolutely bound by this old piece of legislation. Commissioners or staffers can not change it or choose to operate outside of it.
It took me all of 15 seconds to find the relevant parts of the Act. They’re right there at the beginning and should be pretty easy for any other reporter to find:
Broadcasting Policy for Canada
[Declaration]
3. (1) It is hereby declared as the broadcasting policy for Canada that
(a) the Canadian broadcasting system shall be effectively owned and controlled by Canadians;
(b) the Canadian broadcasting system, operating primarily in the English and French languages and comprising public, private and community elements, makes use of radio frequencies that are public property and provides, through its programming, a public service essential to the maintenance and enhancement of national identity and cultural sovereignty;
(c) English and French language broadcasting, while sharing common aspects, operate under different conditions and may have different requirements;
(d) the Canadian broadcasting system should
(i) serve to safeguard, enrich and strengthen the cultural, political, social and economic fabric of Canada,
(ii) encourage the development of Canadian expression by providing a wide range of programming that reflects Canadian attitudes, opinions, ideas, values and artistic creativity, by displaying Canadian talent in entertainment programming and by offering information and analysis concerning Canada and other countries from a Canadian point of view,
(iii) through its programming and the employment opportunities arising out of its operations, serve the needs and interests, and reflect the circumstances and aspirations, of Canadian men, women and children, including equal rights, the linguistic duality and multicultural and multiracial nature of Canadian society and the special place of aboriginal peoples within that society, and
(iv) be readily adaptable to scientific and technological change;
(e) each element of the Canadian broadcasting system shall contribute in an appropriate manner to the creation and presentation of Canadian programming;
(f) each broadcasting undertaking shall make maximum use, and in no case less than predominant use, of Canadian creative and other resources in the creation and presentation of programming, unless the nature of the service provided by the undertaking, such as specialized content or format or the use of languages other than French and English, renders that use impracticable, in which case the undertaking shall make the greatest practicable use of those resources;
(g) the programming originated by broadcasting undertakings should be of high standard;
(h) all persons who are licensed to carry on broadcasting undertakings have a responsibility for the programs they broadcast;
(i) the programming provided by the Canadian broadcasting system should
(i) be varied and comprehensive, providing a balance of information, enlightenment and entertainment for men, women and children of all ages, interests and tastes,
(ii) be drawn from local, regional, national and international sources,
(iii) include educational and community programs,
(iv) provide a reasonable opportunity for the public to be exposed to the expression of differing views on matters of public concern, and
(v) include a significant contribution from the Canadian independent production sector;
And, it goes on for about 13,700 words. In the Act, it says Canada or Canadian 112 times by my count. It’s pretty clear what the Broadcasting Act is all about. The system has to be Canadian. Period.
Does it need updating? Of course. I think you’ll find many at the Commission who’ll tell you that. And with the current government, that might even happen.
But until then, I’m going back to ignoring silly things I read.
To comment on this or any other story, e-mail us at editorial@cartt.ca
