Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums banner

CRTC's Conversation on "Television"

123K views 593 replies 109 participants last post by  Dan_Lee 
#1 ·
Peter Menzies, Vice-chairman of Telecommunications at the CRTC, had, what I thought were some interesting comments in his speech yesterday to the CCSA.

Could it be that the CRTC is realizing that resistance is futile?

One of the old assumptions was that the CRTC could act effectively as a gatekeeper. Those who wanted to broadcast to Canadians had to do so under our rules, and Canadians — Martha and Henry — had little access to broadcasting that hadn't been channelled through those rules.

But now the Internet and all the devices that can reach it directly have created a borderless world. We can no longer define ourselves as gatekeepers in a world in which there may be no gates. We can't tell Canadians what to watch, nor should we. They are free to enjoy a much wider range of information and entertainment than ever before. And they are.

How can we act as an enabler of Canadian expression, rather than as a protector?
 
#3 ·
*IF* DirecTV and Dishnet were to sell into Canada, I'm sure that there would be rules involved that would end up with a watered-down selection of channels and services being offered to Canadians. Look at SiriusXM - The Canadian version is running from the American satellites, but the channel lineup is smaller.
 
#5 ·
I just want them to tell the publicly funded CBC to stop encrypting their signals on C Band. They where allowed to shut down many of their repeaters, because they didn't want to do a digital upgrade, but then turned around and encrypted their signal on Anik F1.
 
#7 ·
I agree. We pay our tax dollars for this and there is no reason that these signals should be encrypted. So other countries watch, we do the same to the American's, over the air. The CBC doesn't have much programming, from south of the border. It's mostly news and current affairs. A few game-shows or an odd movie, shouldn't make the American's cringe. The old C Band systems are mostly used in the rural area's, where most of the transmitters where actually turned off. The idiocy of this, was when they did go digital, they encrypted on C Band. It had been in the clear for a very long time. So why do this for no reason? There is only one reason. They want the rural folk to hand over their money to satellite providers, so they can get their cut from the satellite providers.
 
#9 ·
its very true. they cant keep going on the way they are.. just open the floodgates n let us have good tv choices. all that money they have from the support canadian tv crap on your cable bill doesnt help anything. I want tv from the source tnt, tbs, espn fox sports like come on its almost 2014 enough with the stone age tv in this country! directv has literally hundreds of hd channels to watch.. so does our canadian providers.. difference being here its 80% cbc ctv city and other locals repeated across all the time zones. on directv theres actually hundreds of different hd networks. for the record I ditched bell and rogers a long time ago. had a dish sub for many years and now directv. id rather pay them 100 bucks a month before I ever fork over another penny to rogers or bell for 100 channels of the same station
 
#10 ·
We've got Netflix Canada and what else exactly?

C'mon. Menzies is most likely referring to Netflix Canada and all the other legal online options available to Canadians without a VPN or DNS trickery.

I doubt that he's thinking outside the box and getting ready to educate Canadians about the joys of streaming from Hulu or Hulu Plus.

A borderless world? How's it borderless unless you cheat the system?

My fellow Canadians,

Although we have far fewer online options than the Americans do, to watch what we want, when we want to watch it, I would like to introduce you to the world of VPNs, DNS trickery, Slingboxes and file lockers.

Yes, my fellow Canadians, I am urging you to break free from the shackles that the traditional Canadian providers bind you with, and instead switch to the dark side.

Stream, stream, stream to your heart's content! To hell with the terms of service violations!

Did you enjoy the latest episode of Downton Abbey, or will you instead decide to wait until January to watch it on PBS?

That's your choice to make, even though each country chooses to protect its online copyrighted content with geo-blocking technology.

Poppycock, I say!

Instead, march in the streets and demand your viewing freedom!

If you get arrested, there's nothing we can do about that either.

Sincerely,

Fake Menzies
 
#11 ·
It is different option but "freedom" I would not say that. As you can watch thousands of shows on netflix or hulu plus , you can not watch CP 24 which I love or HGTV or TSN or many other channels.Do not get me wrong I have cancelled my services recently too but I know that for many people it would be very hard to cut the cord completely.
I am not sure if I will be able to do it as I have tried this before , but this time I am more determined than ever thanks to bell, their lies and fraudulent business practice .
 
#13 ·
bev fan said:
you can not watch CP 24 which I love or HGTV or TSN or many other channels.Do not get me wrong I have cancelled my services recently too but I know that for many people it would be very hard to cut the cord completely.
I'm pretty sure that as more people start streaming video over the internet the content providers will be more than happy to follow their customers there.

The only organizations that stand to lose with this change are stations that few people would normally subscribe to but still get customers because of bundling deals.

For companies like HBO which produce premium content that people want, they can get their $5/month per subscriber (or whatever it is) without having to convince people to sign up for $100/month cable services and buy a bunch of expensive and proprietary STB hardware.

If someone wants to watch Game of Thrones (ignoring piracy for a moment) would it be easier for HBO to convince more people to get a $100/month cable package and related hardware, or would it be easier to convince them to buy the episodes for $3 each, or to subscribe to all HBO content for $10/month?

When you cut out middle men, both the buyer and the seller benefits.
 
#14 ·
CRTC waves the white flag

I also got excited when I first read Menzies' comments, but then I realized that he basically said nothing, other than implying that the CRTC can't/won't regulate Netflix because the Internet is a loophole that allows foreign invaders to bypass traditional outlets to distribute and purchase desirable content.

You can rename XBMC ... Pirateland.

We can rent/buy movies and tv shows online, without having to subscribe to cable/satellite.

We can subscribe to Netflix Canada.

We can subscribe to some radio/music content sources.

The CRTC is not going to open up any "borders" that have already been closed.

The CRTC always tells us what channels we can't have or watch.

The CRTC isn't happy that we can use the loophole called the Internet to basically ignore them.

Menzies comments are simply his way of saying that the CRTC is a dinosaur that is about to become extinct ... unless somebody figures out a way to crush the advancing armies of foreign invaders before they arrive on Canadian soil and take over.

He asks the question: "How can we act as an enabler of Canadian expression, rather than as a protector?" because he knows that the CRTC is fighting a losing battle.

The truth is, Peter, most of us don't want you to protect anything but our right to avoid the Canadian providers acting as middle men for content that we can rent/buy/steal online.
 
#17 ·
Exactly. The CRTC is doing very little that copyright laws, copyright holders and industry concentration don't already do already. Copyright holders effectively restrict content distribution by outside broadcasters. Just look at the number of services that are geoblocked to see that. Industry concentration effectively keeps out foreign competition. Wind is the perfect example. Even big foreign investment money can't crack the stranglehold that Bell, Rogers, Shaw, Telus and Cogeco have on the Canadian marketplace. The CRTC should become an advocate of consumer and independent broadcaster rights, not a protector of corporate interests. The corporations effectively take care of themselves, without any regulatory help.
 
#18 ·
smallmj said:
But when the middle men own all of the sellers, and they own the roads that deliver the products, we get hosed.
I assume you're talking about CTV and Global?

CTV and Global don't produce content, so they're not the companies I was referring to in my previous post. Netflix, Hulu, YouTube and all the people who produce content on the internet don't seem to be adversely influenced by BDUs.

When you say the middle men "own the roads", I assume you're talking about cable companies also being ISPs. I don't think this will be a ongoing issue as long as there is competition provided by other ISPs. The cost of moving data has been dropping rapidly over the last 20 years, and I see no reason for it to stop. I live in Alberta and Telus and Shaw are doing a good job competing with each other, and we enjoy reasonable prices for high quality internet services.

Some people may be concerned that there isn't a competitive environment for ISPs. Well, I'd say that it's up to the government to make sure that we don't end up with situations where a ISP has a monopoly in a particular region and then creates a "special" price list for that region.
 
#19 ·
I hear discussions on the radio yesterday that CRTC was looking at Netflix - are they a broadcaster now and concerns over Canadian content. What a waste of time. What will they do - have only recycled news broadcasts available for certain hours or "little hobo only" time ?

Enough with the forced content - if content is good - people will watch it.
 
#20 ·
I think the CRTC talking about the future where they won't be able to wield the sort of power that they had in the past - primarily because anyone can publish video now on YouTube - some of which is really good.

I must say, I'm much more interested in seeing the next Epic Rap Battle of History than I am interested in seeing the next Grey's Anatomy.

Unless the CRTC is going to emulate the "Great Firewall of China", I don't see how they will be able to administer Canadian content rules.
 
#21 ·
Unless the CRTC is going to emulate the "Great Firewall of China", I don't see how they will be able to administer Canadian content rules.
But the CRTC has been in existence for a long time, and there is an incumbent bureaucracy with a vested interest in justifying the existence of that bureaucracy.

Whilst it may seem far-fetched, I would not rule out that we may see ANY measure no matter how draconian that supports (that bureaucracy under the guise of supporting) Canadian content promotion/protection.
 
#23 ·
And thank goodness for that.

With the current government, we have some fleeting hope that the airwaves may be opened up to US providers. With the alternative parties, Robellus will only get stronger and limit our choices more while charging us a whole lot more.

We should remember that the previous government fought long and hard to make it a criminal act for Canadians to view satellite television from any other country. And they succeeded.

Which leads us to the crap we have to watch today that is "authorized".
 
#27 ·
The current government has been in power for quite a long time, and ROBELUS has only gotten stronger during that time. Rules have not been changed to discourage that in any serious way.

Which government was it that oversaw the buyouts of virtually everything such that we now have ROBELUS owning all the content creators (and the openly biased "news" coverage from CTV on the Verizon issue)?

That would be the current one. They've been playing softball, tinkering around the margins. When they decide to get serious about breaking up this oligopoly, then they'll deserve some praise.
 
#30 ·
That only means that the law enforcement institutions are not doing their job.
Passing severe laws that are disconnected from reality, deeming masses of people criminals for exercising basic human rights, and then the enforcers of those laws turning a blind eye whenever certain financial or other conditions are met - that is exactly the way the corrupt totalitarian regimes operate. Basically - the opposite of the rule of law.
Everybody should always remember this law and who passed it.
 
#31 ·
JamesK said:
CTV, City TV, Global and many "cable" channels are owned by Bell, Rogers, Shaw etc. They all produce some of their own content, either directly or through other companies.
I think you're confused about the difference between licensing content and creating content.

Running a news program isn't creating content in the sense that news shows have a extremely short shelf life - I'm only referring to content that retains value over years. Content where the demand approaches zero after 24 hours doesn't apply here.

What content does CTV actually own in the sense that Netflix would want to license it, and CTV would own the IP? Go look at their show list and try and find something that CTV actually makes/owns and that Netflix would like to license.

Lets look at their line-up:
The Amazing Race
The Amazing Race Canada
America's Next Top Model
Anger Management
Arrow
Betty White's Off Their Rockers
The Big Bang Theory
Blue Bloods
Castle
Conan
Criminal Minds
CSI
The Daily Show
Dancing with the Stars
etalk
The Goldbergs
Grey's Anatomy
Hostages
Hot in Cleveland
Late Night with Jimmy Fallon
Law and Order: Special Victims Unit
The Listener
The Listener: Double Date...with Death
Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.
MasterChef
MasterChef Canada
MasterChef Junior
The Mentalist
Mistresses
Motive
Motive: The Dark Corner
The Neighbors
Once Upon A Time
Orphan Black
Person of Interest
Played
Satisfaction
Saving Hope
Saving Hope: Last Call
Shark Tank
So You Think You Can Dance
The Tomorrow People
The Tonight Show with Jay Leno
Trophy Wife
Two and a Half Men
The Vampire Diaries
The Voice
W5
The X Factor
I don't think anyone (Netflix/Amazon/Hulu) is lining up to license "etalk".
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top