CRTC upholds ‘paternalistic’ approach to community TV, CACTUS says

The CRTC upheld a “paternalistic” stance toward the community television sector in its new regulatory policy released Thursday, Catherine Edwards, a spokeswoman for the Canadian Association of Community Television Users and Stations (CACTUS), said in an interview. “They completely ignored the request by just about every community intervener at the hearing that these channels should finally be in community hands,” Edwards told The Wire Report. During a CRTC hearing to develop a new community television policy last April, CACTUS proposed to establish 250 community-run production facilities across Canada, which would draw on a cable company levy to produce community television and multimedia programming. Cable companies with more than 20,000 customers are required to pay a broadcast levy that amounts to two per cent of the revenues collected from subscribers. In 2008 that levy totalled $116 million. But the CRTC did not stray too far from its 2002 policy for the community television sector, keeping control of community cable channels in the hands of cable companies like Rogers Cable Communications Inc., Shaw Communications Inc. and Cogeco Cable Inc. “We went into that hearing, and our submission said that the 2002 policy works. That’s essentially what the commission said this time around,” Colette Watson, vice-president of Rogers TV, said in an interview. “There really was no overwhelming need to send $120 million to a group with no track record.” Under the new policy, cable companies will be expected to increase their community access programming from 30 per cent of the community channel’s total programming to 50 per cent. The new programming requirements must be met by 2014. The commission defines community access programming as that originating with a community member not employed by the cable company and where community members can exercise creative control over the show. Cable companies will also be required to report more information about their community television expenditures and public outreach. They will have to tell the commission how many volunteers they have, how many of them contribute, how many training sessions they hold, and other details about their relationship with the local community. According to numbers provided to the CRTC by the cable companies, in 2009, 54 per cent of Cogeco’s community television programming fell under the community access definition; for Shaw it was 48 per cent; and for Rogers, 37 per cent. “There’s some small measure of accountability there now, but they didn’t address the underlying problem of providing access and control to the community,” Steve Anderson, national coordinator with OpenMedia.ca, which supported the CACTUS proposal for community-controlled stations, said in an interview. Edwards said that even under the new reporting requirements, the cable companies will find ways to get around the community access programming rules. She said in the past, they counted a program as community access programming if it featured the community in any way, without necessarily being a community production. “The whole cable model of community TV just doesn’t work anyway,” Edwards said. “Only 60 per cent of people get cable now.” But the CRTC recognized that video-on-demand services could be a valuable way to distribute community television content. Telus Corp. distributes community content in Vancouver, B.C., and Edmonton and Calgary, Alta., where the company offers three hours of community television content per week in each city. “We’re doing exactly what the commission wants in its policy and therefore being so aligned in both our approach with the commission’s intent … it would not require us to make any major change to what we’re already doing,” Ann Mainville-Neeson, Telus’ director of broadcast regulation, told The Wire Report. “There’s no doubt that throughout the hearing, what came out loud and clear, is that BDUs are doing a great job with community programming,” Mainville-Neeson said. But Anderson said the decision did not reflect the will of most Canadians. “This decision is a reminder that we need to find some way to make sure the CRTC is more independent from the influence of the government and these big companies,” he said. CACTUS had something of a supporter on the commission. CRTC commissioner Michel Morin issued a dissenting opinion to the decision, in which he said the commission adopted a “paternalistic community model.” “In my opinion, the Commission’s position is tantamount to a denial of adult status to community groups, since it is still the BDUs that will be determining the content of access programming,” Morin wrote. Anderson and Edwards said that the commission’s recently released policy for the community radio sector was more balanced because it gave the independent community radio sector more control over its own funding. “Often there’s a lot more freedom of the press in print and radio than there is in TV,” Edwards said. “TV is always the most highly controlled because there’s more money in it and it’s considered more influential.” Watson said the decision reflects that most Canadians are happy with their community television service. “Overall I would say this is a validation of how Rogers does community television and we will comply with all the new reporting requirements,” Watson said. jmigneault@thewirereport.ca

CRTC upholds ‘paternalistic’ approach to community TV, CACTUS says

Broadcast | August 27, 2010

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