Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2008-358 - Regarding Simsub of Super Bowl

[hugh]

If Bell had a PPV of the HD American feed, would that break the rules?

The U.S. Broadcast is owned by NBC.

If Bell or anyone else tryed to sell it as a PPV event they would be sued by NBC.

[flyfishNS]

I just sent this to the CRTC - can't hurt...

Decision 2008-358
"It is evident that Bell TV deviated from its usual practice in its simultaneous substitution of the HD versions of the 2008 Super Bowl broadcast by performing that substitution on a local basis and limiting it to the Toronto and Vancouver markets. Although this method of simultaneous substitution may be seen by some as more consistent with the way that cable BDUs perform it, the Commission is of the view that Bell TV should not be permitted to choose the applicable regulatory approach depending on what works to its greatest advantage in a given set of circumstances."

The above is from the decision of the CRTC regarding the simsubbing of the Super Bowl last year. I live in an area of Nova Scotia not served by any digital broadcaster over the air (unlike people in either Toronto or Vancouver), so if I wish to watch the Super Bowl in HD, I must use my Bell ExressVu service to do so. Last year, Bell, in a very wise move, allowed all of us to view either (our choice you will note) the sim subbed or non-simsubbed version. I understand that they should have done more to eliminate this choice in areas served by Canadian HD purveyors of OTA programming, but this is not the case where I live, so I am now disadvantaged by the CRTC’s new decision.
Finally, the irony of doing this to protect a Canadian distributer, who is distributing an American event is not lost on those of us who would simply wish to see the game broadcast in its best possible format – an unadulterated HD Broadcast without simsubbing, but no, because this American event might draw Canadian viewers we will allow the LOWERING of TV Broadcast standards and deprive many Canadians of the right to watch the broadcast on their very expensive Canadian bought equipment in the broadcasts native transmission (it is a known fact that simsubbing lowers the quality of the broadcast, and since the commercials are not properly synched all the time, we often miss pieces of the show).
This is abhorrent and needs immediate action before this year’s Super Bowl.

[chaingunsofdoom]

Just thought I'd post the canned reply that Bell is sending out via their email 'contact us' link when you ask them a question:

"Thank you for your email inquiry dated 1/29/09. My name is XXXXXX and I am pleased to assist you.

I understand that you would like to know if you will have a US feed for
the Super Bowl for this year. I will try my best to help you.

Thanks for writing to Bell TV and notifying us about your query. I am
glad to know about your interest in US feed for Super Bowl. Regretfully,
all SD and HD feeds of Super Bowl 2009 will be simulcast, meaning all
feeds will air Canadian Commercials. CTV has purchased the Canadian
broadcasting rights for the Super Bowl. The only Super Bowl broadcast
legally permitted to be shown in Canada is the one from CTV. Most, if
not all, American advertisers choose not to purchase commercial airtime
from CTV, hence the absence of American ads during the broadcast. Signal
substitution allows Canadian stations buying exclusive rights to air the
Super Bowl in Canada, to benefit from the sale of commercial advertising
during the airing of the program. These CRTC regulations apply to ALL
Canadian television providers. Hope I have been able to resolve your
query. Thanks again for contacting Bell TV's e-Customer Service
Department.

[flyfishNS]

Hi,
Yes-
and the CRTC's actual response to my e-mail (Yes, they did respond! Well, that's something, anyway...)

Thank you for taking the time to contact the CRTC.

Signal Substitution and the Superbowl

Signal substitution occurs when a Canadian TV station requests that larger cable companies or a satellite company (Bell ExpressVu or Star Choice) insert the signal of the Canadian TV station on the channel of a more distant station (usually an American station) that is showing the same program at the same time. This means that the Canadian viewer will see the program, but from a Canadian source.

This is significant to Canadian broadcasters who have paid substantial sums of money to have the exclusive right to broadcast the program in Canada. Holding the broadcasting rights gives the Canadian broadcaster the exclusive right to benefit from the sale of commercial advertising during the airing of the program. Advertisers wanting to reach the Canadian audience may purchase commercial air-time from the Canadian station who holds the exclusive right to broadcast the program in Canada. Canadians viewing Canadian stations strengthens these stations and the broadcasting system as a whole. The CRTC has a duty, under the Broadcasting Act, to foster a strong and financially viable domestic broadcasting industry and the simultaneous substitution regulations of the CRTC are designed to protect the rights held by Canadian broadcasters.

High Definition (HD) Service

Simultaneous substitution should not interfere with a viewer's ability to see the best quality program available. It is the Commission's policy that a signal of a better quality should not be replaced with a lesser quality signal. Whether or not a subscriber's cable company or satellite company will carry out a request for HD signal substitution depends on whether or not the Canadian television station broadcasts a signal of equal or better quality with which to replace it . The availability of this HD signal largely depends on the location of the cable or satellite company and the technology that they use to receive and deliver their signals. There are several different scenarios and subscribers should check with their service providers as to the specific substitutions that will be carried out.

Cable companies that can not receive the over-the-air HD signals in Vancouver, Calgary and Toronto will not be required to substitute the service. However, many of these cable companies receive their signals via a satellite company in order to redistribute the signals to their cable customers. If the cable company receives its CTV signal via a satellite company that has already carried out the HD substitution prior to delivering the signal to the cable company, then the viewer will receive a substituted signal.

Bell ExpressVu uses a substitution technology, on the ground, to substitute the signal prior to sending the signal up to its satellite for distribution. Therefore, it substitutes the signal with a CTV over-the-air HD signal, such as those from Vancouver, Calgary or Toronto, and distributes those signals to all of its subscribers. That means that no matter where you are located, if you are a Bell ExpressVu satellite subscriber or a cable company receiving your HD signal from Bell ExpressVu - you will receive a substituted HD signal.

Star Choice uses a different technology and its substitution is done directly in the subscriber's box. Star Choice customers will receive a substituted HD service if they are located within a CTV over-the-air HD signal. Where Star Choice does not have an HD signal of equal or better quality, it will not be required to substitute the service for a lesser quality signal.

I hope this helps to explain the different scenarios depending upon the location of your provider and the technology it uses to receive and deliver its signals.

[GeorgeMx]

Originally Posted by hugh

The U.S. Broadcast is owned by NBC.

If Bell or anyone else tryed to sell it as a PPV event they would be sued by NBC.

I am splitting hairs a bit Hugh, but broadcast rights are owned by the NFL. NBC licensed the rights for the U.S. and CTV licensed them for Canada. PPV rights are normally separate from broadcast rights so anyone wanting to offer NFL football as PPV would have to secure those rights in their geographic area from the NFL. The NFL is very aggressive about protecting its broadcast and other rights and will sue when it believes they are being violated.

[Brit Canuck]

Well, Shaw followed the rules and did the simsub, replacing all American feeds with Canadian feeds, as ordered by the CRTC.

But incredibly, it was CTV that screwed things up, by cutting away early from the Post Game Show.

Here in Vancouver, at 7:30 PM Pacific, just as the trophy presentations were ending, CTV suddenly cut away in the middle of a commercial break without any announcement, and let local affiliates start their newscasts, before the NBC Post Game program had finished.

I'm guessing that Shaw's offices here are typically shortstaffed on Sunday nights, because it took about five or six minutes for them to switch back to the Seattle/Detroit feeds. So viewers here missed at least five minutes of the Post Game Show, thanks to CTV.

Shaw fulfilled its obligations to the CRTC to present only the Canadian content.
But in my opinion, by cutting away early from the Post Game show, CTV failed to air the SuperBowl telecast in its entirety, and therefore violated its agreement with the CRTC ruling.

In my opinion, I think we all need to bring this to the attention of the CRTC, and let them know that the Canadian broadcaster that started this in the first place is not living up to its end of the bargain, and that next year, the status quo from the 2008 game - one Canadian feed, one American feed - must be restored.

Comments are welcome.

[hugh]

Lots of off-topic posts and rants removed.

This thread is to discuss the broadcast decision.

[hugh]

I am splitting hairs a bit Hugh, but broadcast rights are owned by the NFL.

Agreed but it should be noted that the broadcast used by CTV was the NBC broadcast because their is no such thing as an NFL broadcast.

[w3aponx]

Originally Posted by chaingunsofdoom

The only Super Bowl broadcast
legally permitted to be shown in Canada is the one from CTV.

That's more than a little misleading from Bell. They should have said:

The only Super Bowl broadcast legally permitted to be shown by Bell is the one from CTV.

, as the cable providers for instance can continue to simsub by market as they do all year. Even the CRTC reply quoted by flyfishNS is very clear that there are other legal signals in Canada under some circumstances.

I sympathize with Bell somewhat in that they tried to do what customers wanted last year (only because it happened to make economic sense to them, granted) and got slammed for it. But I still find it a bit dishonest to misrepresent the situation via their customer support department. To comply with CRTC regulations and make customers happy on Superbowl day, they would have to "correctly" simsub every day of the year, but I don't see how it would make sense overall for them. There's really no point (well, assuming that the simsubbed signal is at least as good as the US one, but that's the Canadian broadcaster's part of the bargain to uphold) in favoring U.S. commercials over local Canadian ones on any day but Superbowl day.

[ap501]

Being fans more of the ads than the game, we almost scrapped plans for a Super Bowl party at our place after learning of the CRTC decision.
However, most people who were coming agreed to come anyway, as I'd planned to play them off the internet into the big screen after the game.
But then, lo and behold -- Shaw here in Victoria did not sub the KING-HD Seattle feed.
YAY!
Great ads, and an awesome game, to boot!
Were there other cities where Shaw did not simsub?
How'd they get away with that?

[Dante.Xaiver]

After deign some extensive reading for about an hour im to confused to understand and must as this question

why cant canadian tv develop and promote its tv industry to fairly compete with the US industry , why must they Simulcast

[Classof83]

Because they are:

1. too afraid to compete against US networks
2. they are lazy
3. they are not creative
4. they like to make easy money and are willing to take their own risks
5. luckily the rest of the world isn't like this and doesn't just steal other people's work by paying them off

[ferrgwrig]

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[CrazyInSane]

Canadian networks have it easy, as you can see. They barely ever produce their own content (and even if they do, it's usually just a cheap Canadian version of a US/international show), and they ride on the wave of US network programming.

The only day you'll see Canadian networks compete is the day CRTC limits or eliminates simultaneous substitution. This will not happen in the near future.

[NB Josh]

It happens in most countries around the World, except for the US of course. Hollywood programming is simply more attractive to consumers than domestic programming in most countries. However, it is worse it Canada then in other countries.