Forget the TV titans

If you needed proof of the enduring power of television in Canada, look no further than the tens of thousands of comments submitted to the CRTC over the last month.

Canada's TV titans have been in full battle mode for our hearts and wallets since the government told the CRTC to ask "consumers" what they thought about proposed changes to the TV system. In one corner, the broadcasters are proposing that they get paid a negotiated amount from the cable and satellite companies for the carriage of their TV signals. In the opposite corner, the cable and satellite guys are proposing that the broadcasters go and get stuffed. From dueling full-page newspaper ads to cloying spots on TV and YouTube, with tweets and Facebook groups along the way, it's been hard to miss.

Broadcasters are boasting that 130,000 people wrote to the CRTC in support of their "local TV matters" campaign. The cable guys, meanwhile, say that "tens of thousands" of people wrote in to oppose a "TV tax." You can be sure that this is the most the CRTC has ever heard on any issue. And it has TV and newspaper ads to thank for it.

It's not yet clear what the CRTC and the government will make of the whole exercise, but the simplest conclusion one can draw is that: a) a lot of people like their TV, and especially their local stations; and b) most people don't want to pay more for it.

Unfortunately and not surprisingly, the TV titans' propaganda war barely scratched the surface of what is really going on in the world of Canadian television.

It is as true today as it was at the dawn of Canadian TV: the private market will not provide what Canadians have always recognized we need from our broadcasting system. This includes programming in both official languages -- local, regional, national -- that reflects and reaches this diverse and sparsely populated country and that is made by, for and about the people who live in it. That's why we have the CBC, and why we need to fund it better than we have been. It's why we have programming funds and a range of other regulations that help ensure a Canadian presence on our screens -- as weak as these collective programs are compared with public media strategies in other countries. Unfortunately, the current debate [1] over TV focuses almost entirely on market logic and consumers, instead of public media and citizenship.

The prevailing market logic has meant that local TV stopped being a priority years ago, coinciding with the rise of the national private networks -- CTV, Global and Rogers/City. The real money is in the primetime simulcast of Hollywood programming. They pay a small proportion of the cost of the original production, rely on the Hollywood PR machine to popularize the shows, and reap the rewards from advertisers. Providing Canadian perspectives on the world -- be they in news, movies or sitcoms -- takes a very distant back seat to the profits generated by American programs.

Local programming (mainly news) is fine in the big markets -- aka major cities -- if you have top ratings. It's a worthy investment to catch the big-city eyeballs with your supper-hour local news since you have a better chance of keeping them for your primetime Hollywood lineup. But in the smaller markets, the local programming hook has stopped being worth the trouble. It's too much cost for too little return. That's why we've been seeing the private networks begin to close down small-city local stations... CTV in Brandon and Global in Red Deer [2]. They still reach viewers in the small towns via cable or satellite, but those viewers don't get the benefit of local news or other programming.

While the broadcasters say that their proposal to negotiate "value for signal" will save local TV, it won't save small-town local TV. The economics won't change.

The other evidence that small-town viewers are not a priority is the plan that almost no one is talking about to shut down free TV signals that serve one-third of the population. As the industry transitions to digital by 2011, broadcasters have quietly told the CRTC they want to shut down their transmitters in all but the major cities. In response, the CRTC mandated that only 29 cities -- those bigger than 300,000 and all provincial and territorial capitals -- must get digital over-the-air signals after the transition. If that happens, 11 million Canadians would have no choice other than to pay for cable or satellite to watch any TV at all. Cable and satellite providers are rubbing their hands in glee.

Among the tens of thousands of comments generated by the broadcasters and the cable and satellite companies, the CRTC will also find nearly 2,000 messages from people calling for a new approach to small-town local television that does not cut off 11 million people from access to free TV signals. Participants responded to a campaign led by Openmedia.ca [3] and the Canadian Media Guild [4], on a tiny fraction of titans' budgets, to call on Ottawa to come up with a new plan for small-town local television that includes continued access to free TV signals.

The Canadian Media Guild has proposed a model for local TV in smaller communities that would use the new digital technology to provide more channels to small-town viewers at a lower cost per broadcaster. The model is based on the capacity for a single digital transmitter and frequency to send out six standard-definition signals, a process known as multiplexing that is being used around the world. The idea is that the local small-town broadcaster -- public, private or community station -- set up the multiplex and rent space to other regional and provincial broadcasters. The group of channels sharing the transmitter would share the costs. This would provide a significant level of free Canadian TV service to the local viewers and a clear alternative to cable and satellite in smaller communities. A poll commissioned by the CMG last summer in Kamloops, B.C. -- one of the cities slated to lose its free TV signals under the CRTC and broadcaster plan -- indicates that 30 per cent of cable viewers there would give up their cable subscription for six Canadian stations. What's more, 42 per cent of people under the age of 35 said they were interested in such a service, which would also fit well with the objectives of the country's Broadcasting Act [5].

The reality is that big-city viewers can already opt out of paying ever-increasing cable and satellite fees. In Toronto, for example, viewers with rabbit ears can already pick up nine local channels with no monthly fee. This service is not affected by the switch to digital and the community TV sector is already looking at ways it could tap into some of the additional digital capacity for true community use. It is highly unfair to remove this service from hundreds of smaller communities across the country, and it runs counter to any principles of public media.

We can't pretend that any of the TV titans stands up for the interests of us as citizens. Nor can we let the market decide what's on TV. That just leads in one direction -- more U.S. programming, more profits for big media companies. Quality Canadian programming requires investment in public broadcasting and local broadcasting infrastructure. That's not a choice offered by the private networks or the cable and satellite companies. But it is a choice the CRTC should offer the citizens of Canada.

Karen Wirsig is the communications co-ordinator of the Canadian Media Guild. David Skinner is Associate Professor Communication Studies at York University. Both are members of the steering committee of Openmedia.ca [3].

Comments