Networks Propose Charging Fees to Carry Their Signals

scribblet · November 29, 2006

I'm surprised nobody has commented on this. If they get their way what would you do, would you go back to rabbit ears, would you protest and cancel TV until it is reversed? This is just another tax, more money for the CBC too.

http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2006/11/27/carriage.html

A proposal by Canada's broadcasting networks to charge cable and satellite companies fees to carry their signals is one of the more contentious items on the agenda as the CRTC begins a major TV policy review Monday.

The broadcast regulator is hearing submissions on what the networks call "subscription fees." The cable and satellite industry has another name for them — a "tax" on TV signals that Canadians now get for free.

So-called carriage fees, if approved, would see Canadians pay several dollars more a month on their cable or satellite bills for local channels from such broadcasters as CTV, CanWest, CBC and CHUMCity.

In its submission to the CRTC, CanWest proposes a 50-cent-a-month fee per subscriber for each private, local or regional over-the-air TV station, when their signals are carried by satellite or cable systems.

.....

The CBC — which also supports the idea of subscription fees — says conventional broadcasters face tough times as audiences fragment and advertising growth slows.

August1991 · November 29, 2006

There are other requests before the CRTC concerning rules for specialty channels and how commercial networks can include advertising.

I frankly the CRTC should just get out of this entirely. There is enough competition now between cable and satellite. I'm astonished that in 2006, a government tribunal is making decisions about how many minutes of advertising a broadcaster can insert.

If CTV wants to charge cable companies for its product, or charge for allowing different feeds in different time slots, let it try. If a cable company tries to pass the cost on to customers, let it try too.

I know that in English-Canada there is the issue of so-called "Canadian content" but maybe there are other ways to deal with that.

Remiel · November 29, 2006

Hey, without the CRTC, we would of never had anything like the Crawlspace, or the Zone. I was reading just the other day that because of those limits, YTV was able to find its current model of added content, which was quite succesful. Sometimes, limits create innovation.

jdobbin · November 29, 2006

I'm surprised nobody has commented on this. If they get their way what would you do, would you go back to rabbit ears, would you protest and cancel TV until it is reversed? This is just another tax, more money for the CBC too.
http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2006/11/27/carriage.html

A proposal by Canada's broadcasting networks to charge cable and satellite companies fees to carry their signals is one of the more contentious items on the agenda as the CRTC begins a major TV policy review Monday.

The broadcast regulator is hearing submissions on what the networks call "subscription fees." The cable and satellite industry has another name for them — a "tax" on TV signals that Canadians now get for free.

So-called carriage fees, if approved, would see Canadians pay several dollars more a month on their cable or satellite bills for local channels from such broadcasters as CTV, CanWest, CBC and CHUMCity.

In its submission to the CRTC, CanWest proposes a 50-cent-a-month fee per subscriber for each private, local or regional over-the-air TV station, when their signals are carried by satellite or cable systems.

.....

The CBC — which also supports the idea of subscription fees — says conventional broadcasters face tough times as audiences fragment and advertising growth slows.

Cable companies have been very profitable by basically taking free stations and re-broadcasting them. This isn't just the CBC. Private companies have been arguing about it for many years.

I think that in exchange for not having to provide money for Canadian content production that cable be required to pay the fee.

jdobbin · November 29, 2006

There are other requests before the CRTC concerning rules for specialty channels and how commercial networks can include advertising.
I frankly the CRTC should just get out of this entirely. There is enough competition now between cable and satellite. I'm astonished that in 2006, a government tribunal is making decisions about how many minutes of advertising a broadcaster can insert.

If CTV wants to charge cable companies for its product, or charge for allowing different feeds in different time slots, let it try. If a cable company tries to pass the cost on to customers, let it try too.

I know that in English-Canada there is the issue of so-called "Canadian content" but maybe there are other ways to deal with that.

Cable companies can now insert commercials as well into U.S. signals that they re-broadcast. It's getting a bit ridiculous.

The CRTC could be eliminated but there are many outstanding issues of re-broadcasting, Internet, copyright, ownership and Canadian content that would need to be resolved.

geoffrey · November 30, 2006

I think that in exchange for not having to provide money for Canadian content production that cable be required to pay the fee.

You mean have you pay the fee? Companies don't pay taxes or fees silly.

The CRTC could be eliminated but there are many outstanding issues of re-broadcasting, Internet, copyright, ownership and Canadian content that would need to be resolved.

Why? Copyright and ownership can be dealt with through the courts. Canadian content is a joke, no one watches it anyways, why waste money on it. If enough people care, their will be a financial reward to produce it.

jdobbin · November 30, 2006

You mean have you pay the fee? Companies don't pay taxes or fees silly.
Why? Copyright and ownership can be dealt with through the courts. Canadian content is a joke, no one watches it anyways, why waste money on it. If enough people care, their will be a financial reward to produce it.

I agree. We pay the fee. At the moment we pay a fee to cable companies for Canadian content. I think the fee should be cancelled and that the government shouldn't try to prevent any channel from charging to air on cable.

I also agree that Canadian content is not watched. We should eliminate the CRTC, the CBC, ownership restrictions, Canadian content, cross ownership restrictions and let the American cable companies, satellite companies and the like into Canada.

geoffrey · November 30, 2006

I agree. We pay the fee. At the moment we pay a fee to cable companies for Canadian content. I think the fee should be cancelled and that the government shouldn't try to prevent any channel from charging to air on cable.
I also agree that Canadian content is not watched. We should eliminate the CRTC, the CBC, ownership restrictions, Canadian content, cross ownership restrictions and let the American cable companies, satellite companies and the like into Canada.

Excellent. The fee for fee trade seems reasonable.

Is copyright material being abused? Why haven't the CBC and others gone to court to prevent companies from essientially selling their product unlicensed?? I certainly can't re-broadcast movies or TV shows at whim.

jdobbin · November 30, 2006

Excellent. The fee for fee trade seems reasonable.
Is copyright material being abused? Why haven't the CBC and others gone to court to prevent companies from essientially selling their product unlicensed?? I certainly can't re-broadcast movies or TV shows at whim.

The law as it is written allows cable companies to broadcast over the air signals. The CBC and others are now looking to have those rights of broadcast paid for.

August1991 · November 30, 2006

I also agree that Canadian content is not watched. We should eliminate the CRTC, the CBC, ownership restrictions, Canadian content, cross ownership restrictions and let the American cable companies, satellite companies and the like into Canada.

Whoever has hijacked the real jdobbin, please note that it is forum policy not to pay any ransom demands so your little ploy won't work.

margrace · November 30, 2006

I must have strange family members, neighbours and friends because most of them watch a lot of the CBC. Must all be crazy aye.

cybercoma · November 30, 2006

Government sponsored extortion anyone?

Canadian content must be carried -- you're not allowed to opt out -- and now you must pay for it.

And another thing, half of the Canadian content programming and whatnot is paid for with funding from the Canadian Government anyhow (read: your tax dollars), now they want us to pay more simply for the networks.

White Doors · November 30, 2006

They can charge fees if they want as long as we have the right to subscribe to individual channels rather than 'blocks' as we currently have to.

Figleaf · November 30, 2006

The initial justification for the CRTC was the advantageous allocation of limited bandwidths to broadcast operators. This mandate has been agressively interpreted by subsequent incumbent commissioners, of course. The scope of the mandate also grew drastically when new delivery technology expanded the relatively small number of usable broadcast frequencies to include the full big-pipe panoply of access technology now employed.

The question of the CRTCs relevancy in the new paradigm is a fascinating one. I would not be surprised if a Harper majority were to radically reconfigure the CRTC, given the opportunity.

jdobbin · November 30, 2006

Whoever has hijacked the real jdobbin, please note that it is forum policy not to pay any ransom demands so your little ploy won't work.

I have repeatedly said that no one watches Canadian content in numbers anywhere near U.S. numbers. There is no market for it. Even a show like Corner gas cannot be paid for by CTV without government help. A Canadian network could not exist without blocking American media companies from owning it. Cable companies could not exist without free content to distribute nor remain Canadian owned without protection.

I say scrap it all. Will anyone notice? Probably not.

If anyone disagrees with this, explain why no change should be made?

Of if someone thinks that there is a need for Canadian content, explain how it could be funded?

Remiel · November 30, 2006

*twitch, twitch*

Must not... hijack... thread... with long dissertation... on... *urgh* making quality programming!

jdobbin · November 30, 2006

They can charge fees if they want as long as we have the right to subscribe to individual channels rather than 'blocks' as we currently have to.

Scrapping the CRTC would let the companies do what they want. Hell, I think that we are five years from now being able to completely customize our channels individually. No package, over the Internet, from several companies, no mandated channels such as Newsworld or whatever. You could go all American, no Canadian content. Or all sports, no womens' channels.

Digital technology should allow for any time of channel, audio or video, games, Internet, phone, home security or the like.

We have to stop thinking small and completely open the market.

We should sell terrestrial bandwidth not being used for wireless companies to set up cell phone service. The objective in Canada should be to have the least expensive, most competitive cell phone network in the world. We should all all international competitors into the Canadian market.

Who wins? We all do. You'd be able to order a cup a coffee on your cell phone by punching numbers in front of a vending machine like they do in Finland. You'd be able to watch a short video on your phone like they do in the States for cheap.

jdobbin · November 30, 2006

I must have strange family members, neighbours and friends because most of them watch a lot of the CBC. Must all be crazy aye.

If Canadians have a hankering for the CBC, I think that the channel should go commercial free. I think the network has no choice but to go sports free as well, including the Olympics. They should also go completely Canadian or international programming other than American (leaving that market to private broadcasters.

I think CBC Newsworld should be sold.

This would be a $200 million gift to private broadcasters. In exchange for that, all broadcasters radio and television should be required to pay a cut towards public broadcasting. Likewise, all cable and satellite companies would be required to pay a cut towards the CBC as well to lessen the burden on taxpayers.

Alternatively, if people don't want the CBC, it should be sold our shut down.

One thing is certain, the debate on its future should happen.

jdobbin · November 30, 2006

Government sponsored extortion anyone?
Canadian content must be carried -- you're not allowed to opt out -- and now you must pay for it.

And another thing, half of the Canadian content programming and whatnot is paid for with funding from the Canadian Government anyhow (read: your tax dollars), now they want us to pay more simply for the networks.

Cut it all. Lobby the government. Say no to CBC, no to Canadian ownership, no to Canadian cable and satellite, no the CRTC, no, no, no.

No one watches Canadian content. Certainly not in any numbers that it actually makes money.

Canada should try to achieve the biggest revolution in broadcasting, phone service and Internet that the world have ever seen.

It's time to open the debate and not be timid about it all.

jdobbin · November 30, 2006

*twitch, twitch*
Must not... hijack... thread... with long dissertation... on... *urgh* making quality programming!

Are you talking Canadian programming or programming in general? Everyone has different tastes. Some people's tastes run to Masterpiece Theatre. For other people it is Trailer Park Boys.

Renegade · November 30, 2006

*twitch, twitch*
Must not... hijack... thread... with long dissertation... on... *urgh* making quality programming!

Do tell, why should the government be in the business of making quality programming? How about cars? Should they set up a comission to ensure that that manufactures only made quality cars?

How about we try the novel idea of letting consumers decide if they want quality or crap?

Black Dog · November 30, 2006

must air a certain percentage of content that was at least partly written, produced, presented, or otherwise contributed to by persons from Canada

I say no to your nos.

No one watches Canadian content. Certainly not in any numbers that it actually makes money.

No one watches "Canadian Idol?" "Trailer Park Boys?"

jdobbin · November 30, 2006

Do tell, why should the government be in the business of making quality programming? How about cars? Should they set up a comission to ensure that that manufactures only made quality cars?
How about we try the novel idea of letting consumers decide if they want quality or crap?

The only thing the government should be concerned about is safety in manufacturing and standards for fuel, etc.

If the governments gets out of that area, then I'd like roads to be privatized because why should we be subsidizing users of the road system?

Higgly · November 30, 2006

Great thread.

If the major networks want to charge the cable companies, I say go for it. This will mean every supplier on the cable path will be an identifiable charge.

The customer should have the right to pay for only the suppliers s/he wants, and reject undesirables. This could mean the end of bundling.

We can only hope.

And for the record, I am ready and willing to pay for the CBC; I am not ready and willing to pay for CTV and Global.

jdobbin · November 30, 2006

must air a certain percentage of content that was at least partly written, produced, presented, or otherwise contributed to by persons from Canada

I say no to your nos.

No one watches Canadian content. Certainly not in any numbers that it actually makes money.

No one watches "Canadian Idol?" "Trailer Park Boys?"

Neither show actually makes money. They both require subsidies.

If there is a government reason for Canadian content, we ought to state it plainly. There is certainly not a market for it that actually makes money and pays for the production.