Substitution Sunday: Missing Super Bowl commercials just part of the issue

If one academic had his way, you would have no problem watching the latest wacky and titillating commercials from the United States during the Super Bowl this Sunday. Not that this is the main reason Michael Geist, Canada research chair in Internet and e-commerce law at the University of Ottawa, has proposed doing away with simultaneous substitution. Rather, it’s that he feels it’s an outdated policy. “I think that it’s a policy that may have made sense back when it was first established many years ago, but in many ways, given the kinds of changes we’ve seen from a technological perspective, from a broadcasting perspective, it belongs, I think, in another era,” he said in a phone interview. Simultaneous substitution is the CRTC rule requiring service providers, at the request of broadcasters, to replace television signals from distant Canadian or U.S. stations with those of a more local station when the same program is being shown at the same time. A section of the CRTC’s website explains that the policy is meant to “protect the rights of broadcasters” by allowing them have truly exclusive rights to programming they’ve purchased so they can maximize the value of their advertising slots by having the largest audience possible. Geist said the basis of this policy, launched in the early 1970s, was to support the broadcasting industry overall by increasing the amount of money being made in the sector, which would, in theory, benefit broadcasters, service distributors and content producers. However, he said as more viewers watch shows at times of their choosing, through services like on-demand video and over-the-top, online streaming, the value proposition of simultaneous substitution has lessened. “That notion that people are sitting down to watch a program at a particular time, and there’s a need to substitute, is increasingly part of bygone era,” Geist said. “More and more people are accessing their content at different times, and so even the value that accrues to the broadcaster is diminishing over time.” Still, Geist acknowledged that the value of the Canadian television market to broadcasters and distributors “would be somewhat diminished because they would not be as profitable.” Phil King, president of sports and entertainment for of BCE Inc.’s CTV network, said simultaneous substitution remains “necessary” and “crucial” to the very existence of conventional broadcasters in this country. “It’s fairly simple; without , there would be no Canadian conventional networks in Canada,” he said in a phone interview. “We would be shut down.” If viewers could watch U.S. programs with no substitutions, “nobody would watch ,” he said. “Everybody would watch the original networks.” On the notion of replacing U.S. programs with Canadian content, King said: “It’s impractical to think that you can pick up 21 Canadian shows to compete against American shows coming in here. … I don’t think there’s enough money in the system to do it. There wouldn’t be enough ratings in the system to do it. I’m not even convinced there’d be enough people to produce that volume of content in Canada.” Geist said Canadian content producers are hurt by simultaneous substation because the policy encourages broadcasters to shape their prime-time schedules around what U.S. networks are doing. “What invariably tends to happen is the U.S. counterparts begin to make changes as they start shuffling their programming schedule to account for programs that haven’t been successful, or ones that have … and then what you end up with is the Canadian broadcasters are forced to respond,” he said. “And of course the big loser in all of this becomes the Canadian program because it gets shuffled just to whatever spot might now be made available. So viewers have a hard time finding it.” King said this argument is “50 per cent right … except that without there would be no Canadian shows to worry about.” He said simultaneous substitution, by maximizing the amount of revenue broadcasters get, benefits Canadian content producers. “All broadcasters in Canada have to put X amount of our sales — not profits revenues — into a pot to spend on Canadian programming, which we all do. That’s how our news is second to none and competes just as good against the foreign news that comes in here. Without we simply couldn’t afford it.” Going even further, King suggested U.S. networks could simply not be allowed to broadcast in Canada, as is the norm in other western countries. U.S. programs are still carried by domestic broadcasters in other countries, he noted. King said this “then lets you schedule how you want allows you to own your own schedule.” He said U.S. conventional broadcasters, whose signals are taken by Canadian service providers for little compensation, would likely not protest such a change. Another option King proposed is non-simultaneous substitution, which would be the running of Canadian feeds of U.S. shows on U.S. channels — with Canadian commercials — even if Canadian broadcasters schedule the same shows at different times. CRTC Chairman Jean-Pierre Blais has said simultaneous substitution rules could be changed as a result of an ongoing review of Canada’s television system, as Canadian broadcasters and producers are relying less on American programming due to the success, even internationally, of Canadian programs. The CRTC’s Phase 1 report of its Let’s Talk TV process, released Wednesday, said: “Several participants complain about the practice of simultaneous substitution. … They raise concerns about the poor quality and timing of the substitution, which causes them to miss the beginning or the end of a program or miss advertising content, particularly in the Super Bowl. “Some actively question why Canadian broadcasters should receive additional advertising support and why American networks are not permitted to broadcast their programming, without alteration, in Canada. Some participants suggest that this practice be restricted or banned outright.” Scott Hutton, the CRTC’s executive director of broadcasting, said the Super Bowl, due to the loss of U.S. commercials, is typically when the commission gets the most complaints about simultaneous substitution. The start of the National Football League season also tends to be when complaints spike, and that’s usually related to technical mishaps that can lead to viewers missing part of a game. “That famous last two minutes (of gameplay) that takes a half-hour is hard to manage for everyone,” Hutton said in a phone interview. He said it’s too early to speculate on what changes to the substitution policy might occur as a result of the CRTC’s review, but he emphasized that “Canadians are right at the centre” in terms being the priority of whatever results from the process. He added that by “Canadians,” he means not just consumers, but the whole country, including industry sectors. “Many viewers have issues with the disruption , but there are many advantages to everyone in the system,” Hutton said. While the Super Bowl might be a key event that prompts talk of simultaneous substitution, Geist said he can’t see any real industry impact from whether or not Canadian viewers get to see the game’s U.S. commercials. “I don’t know that there are any real consequences other than the frustration that consumers have because the commercials seem to be part of that broader entertainment experience around the Super Bowl,” he said. CTV’s King — whose network will broadcast the Super Bowl as it has for several years — said public backlash over the issue of what commercials people see during this sporting event has been overblown. “Mostly what we get are four or five misinformed reporters that keep bringing it up every year,” he said. “We don’t tend to get a ton of calls. I mean, most people are not begging to see foreign ads.” King added that “it should be far, far, far less of an issue than it was in the past. Why? You can go online and see all 36 ads if that’s what you’re dying to see. ... Go on YouTube. A lot of advertisers are pre-releasing them now on YouTube to catch the buzz of everyone talking about them.” — With reporting by Derek Abma at dabma@thewirereport.ca and editing by Anja Karadeglija at akarad@thewirereport.ca

Substitution Sunday: Missing Super Bowl commercials just part of the issue

Broadcast | January 29, 2014

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Substitution Sunday: Missing Super Bowl commercials just part of the issue

Broadcast | January 29, 2014

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Related Stories

Rogers’ purchase of Bell’s MLSE stake not being challenged by Competition Bureau ‘at this time’

Rogers buys Bell’s stake in Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment for $4.7B

Rogers sells Monday night NHL rights to Amazon Prime streaming service

CRTC finds Rogers in the wrong in OneSoccer carriage dispute

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us