QUEBECERS ENJOY HOMEGROWN television fare, programs that tell their stories and reflect who they are. But are we taking our television programming for granted?
One might think so in view of the weak Francophone response to the CRTC’s invitation to participate in a conversation about the future of television (see Stéphane Baillargeon, “L’écran rêvé: Le CRTC s’interroge sur ce à quoi devrait ressembler la télé de l’avenir,” Le Devoir, November 11). This is one of the reasons why Quebecor Media is encouraging the public to participate in the discussion and submit comments to the CRTC by November 22, 2013.
Videotron was a trailblazer in “pick and pay” cable TV. Its Custom Package, introduced in 1999, has been a resounding success: more than 80% of new subscribers now choose it over the ready-made plans. We believe this history and this success can inform the discussion on the future of Canadian television.
Pick and pay lets customers choose only the channels they want to watch. This consumer-friendly approach has discouraged cord-cutting, as far as possible, and has surely encouraged new customers to sign up. However, it has not prevented cord-shaving as customers scale back their cable plans and shift towards content available via the Internet through services such as Netflix, YouTube and Apple TV.
While the coin that online “over-the-top” (OTT) services dangle before consumers is shiny, it has another side, one that has long-term implications for homegrown creativity and production. Why? Because the success of OTT does not benefit Canada’s broadcasting system. These foreign services completely elude existing regulatory controls. While cable providers such as Videotron must support Canadian programming to the tune of more than $500 million per year, foreign OTT services pay nothing. The Netflixes of this world use the money they collect from Canadians to increase their international market share and build huge financial war chests with which to compete against Canadian players.
As a result, the production of Canadian content is jeopardized, since it is funded in large part by Canadian cable providers. Consumers could well be the losers, for the weakening of Canadian cable companies means dwindling contributions to television production and therefore less funding for the Canadian content that audiences want.
It comes down to fewer popular programs that audiences can relate to, smaller audiences and lower advertising revenues for broadcasters. It’s a vicious circle.
The review of the television system launched by the CRTC is critical in the current context. The CRTC wants to give consumers more choice and flexibility, something Videotron has long been doing. But this is not without consequences. It entails costs for the cable provider without generating any additional revenues. Videotron no longer forces customers to take any channels and therefore cannot guarantee its broadcaster partners the same subscription and revenue levels.
So, if the CRTC wants to take a pro-consumer tack, it must also ensure that the regulatory system and all industry players adopt an approach that takes into account the impact of these disruptive technologies and business practices on the costs and revenues of the cable providers, which must still continue innovating and investing massively in their systems.
A cheaper cable package sounds good, but what is the price?
Robert Dépatie is president and CEO of Quebecor and Quebecor Media and CEO of Videotron.
