Rapido - as an ex UK resident, I am happy to see someone else explain the situation over there and that how ridiculous it is that a national broadcaster can't provide OTA for a city the size of London, Ontario!

I'm a current UK resident who lived in the "city" of Brighton and Hove for several years (population 250,000); much of the town relies on the Whitehawk Hill "main relay" transmitter - I know I did. It's a hilly place.

And there are also EIGHT other relays in the city, covering small suburbs, villages, one even covers a dead zone in Brighton town centre.

Yet much of Brighton can get reception from the main Rowridge transmitter some 50 or so miles away. But try suggesting to the locals that the relays be switched off (if it's good enough for the Canadians) and see how far you get...

Here's a map:

http://tx.mb21.co.uk/mapsys/anatv/rowridge.php (blue is Rowridge coverage; the triangles show the location of each relay)

By the way, every single UK relay will be converted to digital (or already has been), excluding self help relays of course.


Forgive my ignorance, but is the CBC idea that all 7 CBLN transmitters be switched off? (been doing some research).

Forgive my ignorance, but is the CBC idea that all 7 CBLN transmitters be switched off? (been doing some research).

My understanding is that London and Kitchener will be shut off, since they are in mandatory markets. Chatham will also lose its transmitter as it broadcasts on Channel 64, but that area can also get CBET from Windsor over-the-air. That leaves Sarnia, Wingham, Wiarton, and Normandale with transmitters.

I don't see the Kitchener transmitters as necessary (French & English). CBC Toronto is perfectly easy to receive in Kitchener now...and they intend to significantly increase their ERP post-transition.

>>So are you telling us that in Bangor Maine, the cost is amortized over six stations?

Im saying Bangor with a mere 140,000 households in the market - and it is a spread out market, enjoys private investment in no less than 6 full blown HDTV stations over the air, some of which have additional subchannels. CBS, ABC, NBC, Fox, PBS, and an Independent. The American model clearly must work by comparison to the Canadian model. Right across the border in Saint John, NB (population 120,000) and Moncton (population 125,000) there will be nothing.

If Canadian stations arent willing to invest, then why not allow American networks? They appear to see an economic return in small markets.

Im saying the CRTC's broadcasting policy is horrendously flawed to the severe disadvantage of smaller cities in Canada. It was the same thing in the 80's. Bangor had 15 commercial FM stations on the radio whereas Saint John had 2.

The dirty secret at the CRTC is they dont care about anything other than the very largest cities, and that is how they set policy. Actually it is an open secret. US model is totally different. Regulations arent as strict so investment flows to smaller populations.
I wouldn't say that US regulations are less strict -- they're just different.
For example, the fact that small market owners manage to innovate in the states is partly due to the fact that there ARE small market owners -- and that's because of the US regulation that places limits on how many stations a network can own.

The Canadian regulation model is different -- the Broadcasting Act has different goals than the FCC's Communications Act. Specifically, the CRTC has decided that one way to promote the goals of the Broadcasting Act is to allow networks to own most of their stations. The thinking here is that with economies of scale, more (meaningful) Canadian programing can be produced. (We're talking drama and comedy shows, not local news)

If I had to choose between the FCC model and the CRTC model, the CRTC model would be gone so fast you would be shocked. If we had the FCC model in place, you can sure as hell bet that there would be more locally owned stations in NB. And that most of them would probably be on air with their DTV transition. Instead, NB will have a mess on it's hands come September.

Another thing that seems odd is that about 24% of the country is francophone, and yet the SRC will manage to set up more DTV transmitters than the CBC who is serving the other 76%. I would expect more CBC DTV transmitters up and running by September.

I understand small remote markets being a problem to convert to DTV, but we are not talking about small remote markets. Entire provinces with at least a half a million people not even having one DTV transmitter. Odd, very odd.

I don't see why a hi-VHF channel in central NB (Fredrecton area) at about 25kw cannot be operational to cover most of the province. Plus another CBC station in PEI covering parts of NB and NS. I see no reason that a city like London, ON cannot have it's own local CBC station covering most of southern ON.

It's clear that the CBC doesn't care about digital OTA in Canada, because they are too busy sucking money out of BDU subscribers pockets with their specialty channels. Just like all the other mega cluster media owners. But, if that is what you want to be, then you're not a public broadcaster, and should not get any funding.

The Conservative government needs to have the riot act read out concerning the CBC/SRC and the CRTC. Either they are here to serve the Canadian population, or there will be wholesale firings.

I find it crazy to have people pay $30-40 a month for a basic BDU subscription in order to get access to a public broadcaster they are funding.

At least parts of NB can still rely on the two DTV stations in Presque Isle. Maine. You should see what the population numbers are for this small town. Yet, one local DTV station, and another one being a re-transmitter for Maine PBS. Ya! I think the FCC model is better.

I don't see the Kitchener transmitters as necessary (French & English). CBC Toronto is perfectly easy to receive in Kitchener now...and they intend to significantly increase their ERP post-transition.

Is that with an indoor or outdoor antenna? Don't forget many people are unable to install an outdoor antenna and a local transmitter is typically necessary for them.

CBC should lose their mandatory carriage on basic cable in areas of mandatory switch to digital OTA when they shutdown OTA.

>>The Canadian regulation model is different -- the Broadcasting Act has different goals than the FCC's Communications Act. Specifically, the CRTC has decided that one way to promote the goals of the Broadcasting Act is to allow networks to own most of their stations. The thinking here is that with economies of scale, more (meaningful) Canadian programing can be produced. (We're talking drama and comedy shows, not local news)

The Canadian model is broken and I categorically oppose it. The Canadian model is decidedly against the regional nature of the country and therefore the constitution itself. It didnt take 40 years to prove conclusively that Pierre Trudeau's politics are a total failure. Mediocre national entertainment has come at the expense of regional and local media enterprise through foreign investment or otherwise.

I don't see the Kitchener transmitters as necessary (French & English). CBC Toronto is perfectly easy to receive in Kitchener now...and they intend to significantly increase their ERP post-transition.

According to the proposed contours of CBLT-DT post-transition, there is still a gap between it and CBLN London, if it were to convert to digital with the same contours as the analog signal has. Notably, western Waterloo Region and Brant County, and much of Norfolk County would lose out, as those areas currently rely on Channel 56 and are out of range of the Grade B contour of Channel 5.

Roger, they specifically stated that less than 1% of Canadians will need to turn to a cable or satellite provider.
That's still about 300,000 people who will effectively lose CBC reception unless they shell out for cable (if available) or satellite (also if available).

I thought CBC was our national broadcaster? I guess their mandate has changed.

Is that with an indoor or outdoor antenna? Don't forget many people are unable to install an outdoor antenna and a local transmitter is typically necessary for them.
Being from the KW area (Cambridge), you can get digital CBC Toronto (english) fairly easy with an outdoor antenna (regardless of height - my antenna is outside only about 10' above ground and I get CBC digital). Even with the antenna (DB8) inside the house, I could get CBC digital.

You cannot get CBC toronto with just a small indoor antenna though. But if you have an outdoor antenna on your roof or tower, you should pickup CBC english/french (digital) from Toronto (plus most of the other digital channels from Toronto). That seems to be the general consensus on the KW area reception thread.

>>The Canadian regulation model is different -- the Broadcasting Act has different goals than the FCC's Communications Act. Specifically, the CRTC has decided that one way to promote the goals of the Broadcasting Act is to allow networks to own most of their stations. The thinking here is that with economies of scale, more (meaningful) Canadian programing can be produced. (We're talking drama and comedy shows, not local news)

The Canadian model is broken and I categorically oppose it. The Canadian model is decidedly against the regional nature of the country and therefore the constitution itself. It didnt take 40 years to prove conclusively that Pierre Trudeau's politics are a total failure. Mediocre national entertainment has come at the expense of regional and local media enterprise through foreign investment or otherwise.
Gerry, I'm not disagreeing with you here. I was just pointing out that the US is not necessarily less-regulated, just differently-regulated.

And the FCC regulations are full of silly legalisms, like using the principle of "first service" to postal hamlets in order to systematically move rural stations closer to metropolitan areas in order to become rimshots.

It's quite obvious that the CBC has been ignoring it's mandate and it's own goals since 1989. That's when the CBC decided to serve the London, Kitchener and surrounding areas with repeaters instead of real CBC stations or a new affiliate to replace CFPL. Maybe they thought that CKCO and CFPL would serve the cities adequately but that changed some time ago.

As to the Canadian vs US models, I have no doubt that we would still have thriving independent stations under a US style model of broadcasting. Distant, network owned stations, such as CTV and Global Toronto, would not be allowed on satellite or cable BDUs. US stations would also not be allowed in areas where they are not available OTA. That would give rise to independently owned local stations that would compete for network affiliation in order to carry popular, profitable programming and local news. As it is, the large networks just see smaller stations as distant 'profit centers' rather than local community services. Meanwhile, they draw off potential local advertising revenues with their distant network stations in a few major cities.

Is that with an indoor or outdoor antenna? Don't forget many people are unable to install an outdoor antenna and a local transmitter is typically necessary for them.
I was able to receive it with a simple rooftop antenna. And remember that I live in a heavily forested area...and I'm not in the highest part of my city.

The days of rabbit ears and loops are essentially over--even for most in the US. ERP's are down everywhere digital has been deployed.

The days of rabbit ears and loops are essentially over--even for most in the US.

I wouldn't say they are over. I know people who receive local DTV with an indoor antenna. I agree it doesn't work for everyone though.

...
As to the Canadian vs US models, I have no doubt that we would still have thriving independent stations under a US style model of broadcasting. Distant, network owned stations, such as CTV and Global Toronto, would not be allowed on satellite or cable BDUs. US stations would also not be allowed in areas where they are not available OTA. That would give rise to independently owned local stations that would compete for network affiliation in order to carry popular, profitable programming and local news. ...
If Canada had followed the US regulatory model then 2 key factors would have influenced market development. First, Canadian BDUs would not be carrying US stations or distant Canadian stations because the local Canadian stations would invoke the FCC right to delete (blackout) any program from outside the market within a period from one week before to one week after the local station broadcast. Local program exclusivity would be preserved so all viewers wishing to see a program would have to watch it on the local station. Program exclusivity gives the local station strength to demand better rates from advertisers and gives the advertiser better value because the viewing audience is not fragmented over multiple stations on cable and satellite.

Second, BDUs would be paying the local stations for carriage. Local television in the US gets a chunk of money from cable and satellite for the right to distribute their signal. If you want the network programming you have to pay the local TV station. The local broadcaster keeps a transmitter on the air to backup the negotiations. If the cable or satellite company says no to the local station demands for money and carriage of its sub-channels then the broadcaster can deny carriage and viewer still has the option to watch OTA.

Broadcasters should have fought the battle with the BDUs several decades ago to get total local program exclusivity but they failed to do it. Instead, they allowed Expressvu to carry distant Canadian stations to all subscribers throughout the country without even demanding substitution. Now is too late because they are owned by the BDUs.