OTTAWA – Let’s not get lost in the weeds, Canadian broadcasters have told the CRTC.
With respect to calls for more specific Canadian content spending requirements suggested by some parties to the group-based licence renewals of the private broadcasters, broad and flexible rules will do a much better job than micro-managing the broadcasters’ Cancon spending obligations – and any requirements to spend additional money on Canadian content should be rejected, say those broadcasters.
CTVglobemedia, Rogers Media, Shaw Media and Corus Entertainment argue that many, particularly those from the creative sector, are trying to re-write the rules by requiring specific spending obligations on particular types of Canadian programming, notably programming of national interest (PNI).
Rogers Media says adopting amendments to the group licensing framework, one only established last year, would be “grossly unfair” to the private broadcasters. “It would undermine the integrity of the licensing process and create further uncertainty in what is already a very challenging environment,” the company tells the commission.
Shaw Media agrees, noting that the CRTC should also resist siding with parties wanting spending requirements in specific areas such as documentaries, regional production, kids programming and feature films. Increasing broadcasters’ obligations to spend in specific areas, while on the surface may seem appropriate, in practice will limit their ability to meet viewing demands of Canadians, the company adds.
“Specialty service niches and PNI will together ensure that all under-represented Canadian programming categories will be served. In an era of vast consumer choice, both within and outside the regulated system, how and how much each specific category or subcategory is served should be left to the strategies of each corporate group and how they choose to meet their viewers’ demands,” Shaw writes.
The Canadian Media Production Association’s (CMPA) proposal for stricter spending requirements on Cancon for specialty services is also unworkable, according to the Shaw. Given the variety of minimum Cancon spending for channels such as HGTV (0%), Showcase (75%) and Independent Film Channel (25%), the CMPA suggestions are “neither appropriate nor necessary, are inconsistent with the objective of greater flexibility as espoused by the Commission in its licensing framework, and should be rejected,” Shaw tells the Commission.
“Yet while independent producers are apparently prepared to take the risk that broadcasters move spending between and among their programming services, they are apparently not prepared to give Showcase, Slice, or Food Network the flexibility to air less independently produced programming, while other services air more,” the company adds.
Broadcasters take aim at each other
While the majority of the broadcasters’ comments were shot in the direction of the production community, they did lob a few volleys at each other. Shaw, for instance, took issue with Rogers’ suggestion that the Commission essentially do away with genre protection rules beginning on September 1, 2011.
Rogers used its reply comments to take aim at CTVglobemedia Inc.’s proposal for a uniform, industry-wide Canadian programming expenditure (CPE) of 30% suggesting it’s self-serving, doesn’t take into account the historic results of other broadcast groups and therefore should be rejected. It notes that while CTV and Shaw can easily achieve group CPE of 30% with little spending in OTA because of their vast holdings of Category A services, Rogers can’t.
“With more OTA stations than specialty services, we automatically skew towards a CPE number that is lower than 30%,” explains Rogers. “Moreover, with only three Category A services, Rogers would be required to reach a much higher level of CPE for its conventional television assets than either CTV or Shaw in order to reach the same 30% group target.”
Corus agrees, noting there is nothing in the group licence framework to suggest that the four broadcast groups should be subject to the same CPE requirement. “The appropriate CPE obligation for each group is to be set on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the recent historical expenditures of each group on Canadian programs,” it writes.
Corus argues that according to CRTC policy CPE requirements will be based on historical spending. Besides, it adds, its commitment to a 29% CPE would result in $657.9 million spent on Canadian programming over the new licence term, a level the company says is already higher than its historical spend in this area. A CPE rate higher than this would be contrary to commission policy.
CTV insists in its reply comments that the Commission’s proposal policy is clear: “the base spending level for each designated group, as an aggregate, should be a minimum of 30% of the group’s gross revenues.” But if the CRTC chooses to adopt a lower CPE level, then it should be uniform for all broadcasters.
