That is the great thing about the internet and free speech, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

has_to_be:

Regarding the government. Probably none as they don't care about us. Even the Municipal government does not want new businesses to come.

I want to watch as much hockey as possible, and I am not the only one.

ESPN doesn't play any hockey other then the short news. I can't live with that. Others also can't live with that.

Sure, you and others can live with that but most can't. TSN has huge numbers regarding hockey.

What does ESPN show that we don't get here on the 5 Sports Channels?

TSN does produce some of its own hockey coverage, but a lot of time, it picks up the feed from Versus. ESPN used to hold the US cable rights, so they did used to show a lot of hockey, but they lost the rights to Versus in the States. So you'd need Versus up here too to get the original games back. And other than some CFL games, again, TSN picks up the rest of its sports programming.

The other Canadian sports networks also pick up a lot of their sports programming from the US networks too, especially NBA basketball and College Football / Basketball. For fans of US college sports, having access to the ESPN family of networks would be priceless.

I agree with DSGamby, it's all about the numbers. Considering there are huge hockey fans in this country, that is what the sports networks cater to and show more of. In the U.S, it's all about football and a lot of college sports, so that is what they show a lot of. It's simple business... you provide what the marketplace wants.

TSN does produce some of its own hockey coverage, but a lot of time, it picks up the feed from Versus. ESPN used to hold the US cable rights, so they did used to show a lot of hockey, but they lost the rights to Versus in the States. So you'd need Versus up here too to get the original games back. And other than some CFL games, again, TSN picks up the rest of its sports programming.I would bet that TSN produces the majority of its top rated shows. This would include regukar season hockey games involving Canadian teams, Stanley Cup playoff games, the World Jr Championship, the Olympics, the CFL, Blue Jays games, and curling.

If Versus was available in Canada the hockey games would not be shown since they don't own Canadian rights to NHL games. They would be blacked-out with a message like "this show is not available in your area"

Was going to post this a while ago but just wanted to be sure if this good thing would last.Such a wonderful pleasure it is for me to once again be able to watch Sunday Night Football on NBC without the dreaded simsub monster rearing its
ugly head.For some reason TSN 2 dropped the Sunday night game from their schedule which is find with me.

Noaa, in the area where I live, CTV managed to simsub two different standard definition games, even though we only get one CTV standard definition station!!! How unbelievable is that!

As I'm new maybe this has been discussed but the CRTC has ruined BBC Canada as it now shows so many Holmes on Homes, and gardening junk and I presume this is to comply with the CRTC regs. I don't understand why I should have to see Canadian content when subscribing to a specialty BBC channel to see British shows.

There's no reason TSN couldn't exist with ESPN. There's not a lot of overlap. I understand that TSN airs a lot of popular Canadian sports programming (hockey, curling, WJHC, CFL). But they DON'T air a lot of other sports that I would love to see. Solution? Give us ESPN and I can watch lots of college sports (plus NBA, but I'm not a fan of that - although many are). The people who love TSN can have that too.

Also, there are packages to get most/all games for each sport. It's just that in Canada, this is a debacle. In the U.S., they actually air what they say they will, and plenty in HD.

How I see it.
The CRTC regulates radio, television and telecommunications in Canada, and is itself reportable to Parliament. But each market is regulated differently.

Telephone service is regulated the most tightly. No foreign ownership is currently allowed over I believe 25% in Telephone or Cellular (the Harper gov’t recently made a precident setting exception for Wind Mobile). There is a requirement for incumbent telcos (TELUS, Bell, Sask Tel , MTS etc) to repair out of service lines in 24 hours or less or there can be fines levied to the providers. This is apparently monitored by the CRTC. I guess this is OK, but if you give crap service people can just leave. Do we really need a telephone Gestapo? Foriegn opwnership is kind of a strange one too. I'm not sure what its for, maybe to make sure the guys at the top stay wealthy. It certainly doesn't protect jobs in Canada. Many companies contract out buying, sourcing, and call centers to outside country providers. TELUS certainly does and thats common knowledge, so the foreign ownership rules obviously aren't intended to protect Canadian jobs or to keep the money in Canada. If they are, HELLO OTTAWA IT AIN'T WORKING!

Internet is not currently regulated, and so ShawPhone, which is not actually a telephone system but an internet application, is not regulated in the same manner as say a TELUS phone line. There are no requirements to restore service in 24 hours or less for Shaw. Likewise there is no regulated requirement to have an out of service internet connection repaired in any time limit, for any Canadian provider. Incumbent telcos instead are required to offer wholesale internet in bulk as it were to independent providers at a CRTC regulated cost. There is no such requirement for Shaw, as being a cable provider makes their regulation entirely different. Shaw is basically 'off leash' to the CRTC when compared to the much more regulated TELUS or any other Canadian telephone company for instance.

This is just another part of the twisted and IMO foolish mandate of the CRTC to ‘encourage competition’ in the industry. I think if you want to be a provider you should set up your own network, not be able to mooch of another company that HAS spent the money to build a network, who then is required by regulation to sell wholesale time to another startup company on thier network at a price set by a third party (the CRTC) who should have nothing to do with it in the first place. All this BS to supposedly enable a competitor to enter the market? Why? If they can’t afford to be competitive on their own dime then perhaps they should find another business. But that’s just my opinion. Government meddling in an industry to try to make the ‘playing field level’ is ridiculous. No one ‘levelled the playing field’ for the original companies when they set up. In addition I’m not sure the gov’t should be in this kind of business, they neither understand the industry or the emerging technology. Hell every few months it seems the gov’t looses some files for confidential information, they can’t keep their own house in order, now they want to run communications companies. Its absurd.

Television is also regulated by the CRTC, but that regulation is mainly the same type as radio. They hand out the broadcast licenses and regulate Can Con (can con, more nanny state BS). They say which channels are ‘basic cable requirements’. It’s the CRTC that decides I get to HAVE the French channels and pay all the expense (federally funded with my tax dollars of course) associated with giving them to me, whether I want them or not.

Conrad Finkenstien and his minions have long outgrown their usefulness. Canadians are not well served, nor do they get good value or any tangible benefit from the CRTC. The sooner it goes the better. Let all the old fuds on the board go find something productive to do. If they want to have good Canadian content for Canadian viewers, then redirect the money we use to keep the CRTC going to creative people and make it.

Ahhhhhh, so purgative. Thanks for the place to rant. I feel better now.


- another TELUS tech

I've seen a huge improvement in the Canadian sports channels US programming since the "live sports percentage" restrictions were lifted on Sportsnet & TSN2. I'd like to see TSN start up a new channel branded ESPN Canada and load it with the programming that's not making it accross the border, including ESPN Sportscenter.

The least of Canadian television's problems is their sports channels... in fact if the CRTC were to fall and competition from US channels flooded in, the sports channels up here would prevail. Movie channels & specialty channels on the other hand... not a chance!

I am getting so sick of hearing about hockey on TSN. Just because I, as a Canadian am "supposed" to live, breathe, and sleep hockey doesn't mean I do. "Oh my god! John Tavares ate a plate of Pasta before getting a hat trick!". DSGamby no offence, but please get of your hockey high horse and see things from other peoples perspectives. If you want to watch Hockey 24/7 then go ahead but don't justify that for mediocre coverage of other sports on our national "sports" network (more like national sport network).

For the record, I watch and enjoy hockey but I find the coverage on TSN quite excessive. On the other hand I think ESPN has way too little hockey coverage and way too much NFL/NBA/MLB coverage. That is why I think allowing people to watch both networks is the best option as it allows people to get exposed to all the major sports.

I'd like to see TSN start up a new channel branded ESPN Canada ...

Ugh ... lets hope they dont do that. I'd rather see the "real" ESPN here. Look at HBO CANADA ... nowhere near as good as its US version ... its not even owned in part by the original channel.

seanwrestledude: I do see from other peoples perspective. What you need to understand is that NHL and hockey in general in Canada are ratings gold. Does that mean everyone in Canada wants to watch hockey 24/7, of course not. Even though I don't care about the others sports, I know that there are others who watch the other sports. I don't watch the Sports Network news often but when I do, hockey is shown the most but the other sports do get a fair showing. Could it be more, of course but more people want hockey than the other sports.

Again all I am saying is that If they launched ESPN in addition to TSN and TSN2 then everyone would be happy.

ha and I thought they were going to discuss something Serious, but no this is the CRTC

1. Copywrite law amendments or why if you get paid for something you can't get money again and agin and again and again for the same thing .forever .... only in copywrite law do some think this is just?

2. Why the big telco's charge and extra month after someone can legaly terminate one of their Devil's pack contracts . Again it takes em 30 seconds to check mark a box to stop an account , why an extra month's pay for them ?

:confused:

instead the CRTC has to be invovled in a schoolyard name calling case -- what a waste of taxpayer dollars , again :( maybe they see themselves as somehow wronged in this matter ?

Ugh ... lets hope they dont do that. I'd rather see the "real" ESPN here. Look at HBO CANADA ... nowhere near as good as its US version ... its not even owned in part by the original channel.
Of course I'd rather see the real ESPN instead of a watered down Canadian version, but I was just being realistic as to what would be more probable.

It's now been five years since a supposedly free-market party came to power in Ottawa, and yet here we still are, with the CRTC controlling what we can see on TV and hear on the radio, still regulating as if this was 1980 and there wasn't nearly unlimited space on the dial for broadcast content for consumers to choose from, if only the state would let them.

The problem is that while I'm sure the vast majority of Canadians would agree that yes, they should have the choice of watching ESPN or the real HBO or the real MTV or listening to an oldies station that doesn't have to play Gordon Lightfoot every day, there is no organized interest fighting for consumer freedom. The cable companies don't want consumer freedom because they don't want to have to compete against DirecTV. The broadcasters don't want consumer freedom because they don't want to have to compete against foreign stations. And the cable companies are also big broadcasters. It goes without saying that the entertainment production industry (the producers and the unions) want to prevent as much competition as they can. No one is looking out for the consumer.

There needs to be some kind of grassroots organization to defend the interest of consumer choice -- Canadians for Broadcast Freedom or something. The group could send op-eds to newspapers, organize letter-writing campaigns to MPs and regulators, even picket the CRTC's offices with signs saying "Free my TV" to get publicity (I'm sure the National Post would run that story).

The group could also lobby in cases like the discussions over music streaming at the Copyright Board. Pandora is an amazing service, but Canadians can't use it because our government doesn't have a pro-consumer orientation and hasn't taken the steps necessary to allow for those kind of sites to thrive here.

I personally couldn't be involved because I work in the media industry and would get fired.

Keep in mind the current government has had a minority those five years. It took 13 years of majority Liberal rule to get the broadcasters fully protected and the CRTC shaped to do their bidding. They also lobbied heavily to make it a criminal act to watch foreign signals and were successful.

Its hard to undo 13 years of manipulation to ensure the media favours your political party and the broadcasters.

Now the television providers own most of the networks and local stations (thanks to the CRTC).

If the Conservatives tried to reform the CRTC and/or allow foreign competition the BDU owned media would crucify them. The opposition parties would jump on board and force an election.

We need a majority Conservative government to ever see change. Otherwise our television and internet choices will continue to be severely limited with ever increasing prices.

Ok I would like to know who makes decisions on their policy. And is it an arms length
relattionship with the government.