CRTC hears opposite takes on social benefits of zero-rating

GATINEAU, Que. — The question of whether differential pricing practices (DPPs) can be used for socially beneficial purposes came up on the fourth day of the CRTC’s hearing on DPPs Thursday, where accessibility advocates argued against zero-rating while Telus Corp. representatives said it could be used to promote cultural content. “If you were to impose an outright ban on differential pricing, you would miss out on opportunities to promote Canadian culture,“ said Ann Mainville-Neeson, Telus vice-president of broadcasting policy and regulatory affairs. Like Telus, almost all wireless and Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have expressed some form of support for differential pricing practices during the week-long hearing. For Canada Day, for example, Telus could zero-rate the National Film Board (NFB) app to allow people to watch its Canadian content, Mainville-Neeson suggested in response to a question from commissioner Linda Vennard, who brought up the issue of the cultural space in the context of the hearing. Vennard added: “that would go along with social goals as well, possibly access to health care, that sort of thing, too. We need to think beyond the commercial space. That’s our role.” It’s a point similar to that made by the Canadian Media Producers Association (CMPA) in a written intervention to the proceeding. The association, which isn’t appearing at the hearing this week, said the CRTC “should be open to considering ways in which differential pricing practices related to Internet data plans could be used to promote the discoverability of and consumer access to Canadian programming." Earlier in the day, Media Access Canada (MAC), a coalition advocating for Canadians with disabilities, told the CRTC that zero-rating shouldn’t be allowed. Acting CEO Anthony Tibbs told the panel the group is worried about the emergence of a two-tiered Internet system, “where luxuries such as high-definition entertainment videos and games are zero-rated or prioritized in special service lanes, while applications and services that are essential to Canadians with a disability are relegated to slower, data-capped access paths to the open Internet.” The solution to that problem though, isn’t zero-rating accessibility applications, the group told the CRTC. Kim Kilpatrick of the Canadian Council of the Blind said zero-rating such services would mean users have just several options to pick from while “most applications and services we need are likely to be excluded from this special treatment.” Choosing which services to zero-rate out of the “universe” of applications and services that are available wouldn’t be feasible, practically speaking, the group added. It told the panel that a lot of such services are data-intensive, and that it supported proposals, such as that of advocacy group OpenMedia, to eliminate or substantially increase data caps. Kilpatrick told the panel about services that, for instance, help blind individuals navigate by calling a sighted volunteer to help guide them or to help them read printed materials in a meeting, and said such tools are “more critical than someone playing Pokémon Go.” OpenMedia representatives were also asked by CRTC chairman Jean-Pierre Blais about using differential pricing practices for social objectives, such as education or increasing usage of digital platforms by low-income households. “What we worry is that carving out exemptions and allowing differential pricing disproportionately puts ISPs in the position of being gatekeepers,” campaigns director Josh Tabish said. OpenMedia executive director Laura Tribe noted that “there are a lot of really noble social causes that people can use the Internet for, and that’s usually why zero-rating is heralded for all the great value we can add.” But, she said, “those are benefits of using the Internet, and what we’re trying to do is not put ISPs in the position of being able to choose, or the commission in a position of choosing what is a social cause, what is appropriate and what is not, but letting those users decide what actually is the most critical way to use that and benefit from that.” — With reporting by Anja Karadeglija at akarad@thewirereport.ca and editing by Charelle Evelyn at cevelyn@thewirereport.ca

CRTC hears opposite takes on social benefits of zero-rating

Broadcast | November 3, 2016

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

CRTC hears opposite takes on social benefits of zero-rating

Broadcast | November 3, 2016

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

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Related Stories

Telus’ arguments for incumbent access to wholesale regime not supported by competitors

CRTC finalizes terms of Uvagut TV distribution

Bell won’t participate in subsidized broadband projects if wholesale access for Big Three continues, signs agreement with CNOC

CRTC announces changes to Broadband Fund

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us