Dear Editor,
The purpose of this letter is to clarify and correct certain references made in recent articles published by Cartt.ca summarizing the CFTPA’s submission to the CRTC’s review of its regulatory framework for over-the-air television (Broadcasting Notice of Public Hearing CRTC 2006-5).
Specifically, the October 5 article titled “TV POLICY REVIEW: Dropping the 12-minute limit as TV reaches a tipping point” states that the CFTPA is in favour of fee-for-carriage of over-the-air television signals. In fact, we took a neutral stance on the fee-for-carriage issue. To clarify, we neither endorse nor oppose the concept of fee-for-carriage. We do, however, state that the CRTC needs to consider the implications of implementing a fee-for-carriage on the broadcasting system as a whole, and add that if the Commission decides to endorse the concept, any such fees should be directed to independent production.
In addition, the October 12 commentary titled “COMMENTARY: First Impressions” incorrectly states that the CFTPA has asked for a $2 per subscriber per month fee-for-carriage rate. Cartt.ca has clearly confused the CFTPA with another intervener in this respect as nowhere in our submission do we make reference to a specific fee amount.
In our view, what is written about our submission (and how it is interpreted) is as important as what we actually said. We therefore request that you clarify and/or correct these issues to your readers.
Sincerely,
Guy Mayson
President and CEO
(Editor’s note: We did, indeed, confuse the CFTPA submission on these two facts with the submission from the Canadian Media Guild. Cartt.ca regrets the errors and has corrected the stories here and here.)
