Canada's OTA Broadcasters Not Touting DTV!

[windows7]

It's absolutely shameful that less than a year before the DTV transition, there's absolutely no broadcaster awareness (TV/newspaper/radio), nor is the government of Canada taking out TV/newspaper/radio ads informing the public of this (I assume they're responsible).

I know we're not the U.S., but even before the original Feb. deadline lapsed to June, they were out in full force informing Americans of the switch about 16 months in advance. Even when June finally came around and there were still some Americans who were confused by the lack of signals when the day came for them, or thought they were prepared when they weren't.

On August 31, 2011, there's going to be a mass confusion and outrage by Canadians and it will be a combination of the OTA broadcasters (no matter their network affiliation) and the government of Canada for being willfully negligence in educating.

I'm glad I've all but bailed on Canadian OTA (enjoying simsub-free American networks and Canadian and American cable channels). They don't deserve my attention for multiple reason and this just is one more to pile on!

edit: I guess the fact I don't watch Canadian OTA (even via cable) would tell me I'm not certain there's a transition awareness campaign going on (I don't watch CTV, Global, CBC, etc.), but I sure don't read it in my newspaper, nor do I see specialty channels CTV/Global own running PSAs.

[Blackburst]

I agree, not a word about DTV channels available over the air coming from stations. And since many of these stations groups also own Newspapers, they don't even list the US stations with their new DTV channel numbers (x.1, x.3 etc). Just look at your local newspaper TV listings!

But, I can tell you that the transition is well on it's way. Small steps, but marching along. And here is what makes me believe that. Some co-workers I know are looking at OTA, with a Apple TV or Netflix set-up. This in order to cut cable.
Not happy with what they get for what they pay with BDU's. They are looking at OTA, and having movies through the Apple TV or Netflix on their TV's.

This is still in the first stages, but you can already see people looking around for options in order to cut the BDU cord.

[ota_canuck]

In addition to OTA for local independent & network broadcasts, there is now the option to rent movies or use Netflix.ca [about $10 monthly] to stream movies and reruns of television series through existing equipment such as your Wii or Xbox.

[stampeder]

Cogeco's attitude towards DTV is well known at our site so you can read about their fibs here:

Cogeco Misleading Consumers About DTV Transition

Let's stick to the actual DTV broadcasters in this thread as best as possible.

[stampeder]

Originally Posted by ota_canuck

Are Canadian broadcasters even obligated to educate Canadian viewers regarding the August 2011 analog shutdown? When would it start and will they even mention that antenna DTV is an option, or will they just state that cable/sat viewers won't be affected?

Here's what the CRTC has said about that:

Consumer education and awareness

25. In Broadcasting Notice of Consultation 2010-169, the Commission set out its preliminary view that the broadcast of public service announcements (PSAs) is the most effective and efficient means of ensuring that over-the-air television viewers are adequately prepared for the digital transition. In addition to seeking comment on this and other measures that could be undertaken by broadcasters, it sought comment on the role BDUs and other licensees could play in creating greater awareness among Canadians regarding the transition.

26. Broadcasters indicated their intentions to air PSAs, noting that such efforts will ensure maximum audience retention following the transition and are thus in their best interest. BDUs also indicated their intentions to participate in a consumer education campaign based on the need to respond to consumer demand for information regarding the transition.

27. Many parties, including Canwest, the Canadian Cable System Alliance, MTS Allstream and the Public Interest Advocacy Centre, emphasized the urgency of launching a consumer education campaign. Most indicated that PSAs should begin at least one year ahead of a given market’s conversion and that they should increase in frequency. Parties generally recommended that the information contained in the PSAs include:

• what is happening, where, when and why;
• who will be affected and what to do; and
• references to a toll-free number and/or website with more detailed information.

28. Finally, parties generally called on the Government to lead and fund a coordinated consumer education campaign consisting of PSAs for multiple media (e.g., TV, radio, print), websites, call centres and volunteer programs. In this regard, some parties suggested that the Government produce standardized PSAs or fund their delivery (e.g. through the purchase of airtime). Canwest, the Canadian Media Guild and Channel Zero suggested the creation of a special task force or committee comprising major stakeholders to design and execute a consumer education campaign.

29. Rather than the imposition of reporting and monitoring obligations on licensees, parties recommended the use of public research surveys, funded by Government or the Commission, to ensure the effectiveness of the education efforts.

30. The Commission notes that parties’ comments with respect to the Government’s role in establishing a consumer education campaign are consistent with a recommendation contained in its 23 March 2010 report to the Government on the implications and advisability of implementing a compensation regime for the value of local television signals. Specifically, the Commission recommended that the Government fund and lead a coordinated national consumer education and awareness program to ensure that Canadians are well-informed with regard to their access to local television services and any required consumer action. The Commission added that the Government should establish a working group tasked with implementing a comprehensive, coordinated national DTV consumer education program with involvement from all stakeholders, including broadcasters, cable and satellite companies and consumer groups.

31. The Commission notes broadcasters’ intentions to undertake efforts to inform Canadians of the transition in order to maximize audience retention. It further notes that BDUs and other licensees can and intend to respond to consumer demand for information regarding the transition using a variety of means. However, the Commission expects broadcasters, BDUs and other licensees to actively participate in the creation and implementation of a coordinated national consumer education program. As part of this program, the Commission further expects broadcasters to publish and maintain a comprehensive account of their transition plans on their websites. The Commission considers that this program should begin no later than 1 March 2011. The Commission may adopt regulatory measures, as part of a coordinated national consumer education program or otherwise, in order to ensure that Canadians are informed concerning the transition.

As found in this CRTC document: http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2010/2010-485.htm

Unfortunately instead of words like must or will I'm sensing a lot of should, could, might...

[ota_canuck]

Yes,.. very ambiguous!

It seems to be strictly on a voluntary trust basis [for now]: If there is conflict of information, misleading information or if the broadcasters fail to provide reasonably suitable educational transition information, then the "Commission may adopt regulatory measures". I'll take that as becoming a mandatory/regulatory order to comply should the broadcasters make little effort or a failed effort to provide accurate and truthfull transitional information on this current voluntary basis.

The Commission may adopt regulatory measures, as part of a coordinated national consumer education program or otherwise, in order to ensure that Canadians are informed concerning the transition.

[stampeder]

The usual type of "we'll set up a committee to study it..." bafflegab.

[PlayitSimple]

My guess is that the broadcasters will air a few ads 1 month or probably 1 week before the deadline and then they will say we did our part. At the very least they could put something up on their websites, so far I see nothing on any of the broadcasters sites- pathetic to say the least!

[GeorgeMx]

Many people writing in this thread are only thinking about one side of the issue. Over 90% of TV viewers have cable or satellite service that will not be affected at all by the 2011 analog shutdown in parts of the country. The OTA digital transition message has to be aimed at existing users of OTA where the transition will actually occur. There is no mandate for the message to create awareness of OTA, generally advocate OTA or try to convince BDU customers to switch to off-air reception. Any advertising campaign will have to be carefully designed to avoid creating confusion and unnecessary call volume to the BDU call centers. The BDUs did not create the requirement for the digital conversion message nor should they be sideswiped by poorly executed advertising messages.

A few posters in the DHC forum repeat their option that BDUs brainwash viewers to keep subscribing. The opinion is often linked to a belief that masses of cable and satellite customers would cancel service if they just understood that 'free' HDTV is available off-air. The opinion is not supported by the evidence.

Cable started when viewers could not get good quality television signals off-air, or the television networks they wanted. Once the distribution infrastructure was established, entrepreneurs started creating program services specifically for cable distribution. These new channels attracted viewers who had good off-air reception because the viewers wanted the new shows. The 90% plus of Canadian viewers are on cable or satellite because most of the programs they want are not available off-air.

If you want to convince your friends and neighbours to switch to OTA, then go ahead and do it but make certain you also tell them what they won't get. Be honest - no TSN, Sportsnet, Discovery Channel, or CNN, just CBC, CTV, Global and other Canadian services. In the border areas you can add the US networks but you might also want to discuss reception problems such as lake effect (loss of signal) in much of southern Ontario. If your potential convert lacks the knowledge and skills to install the antenna and support structure (tower) then you might add the $500 plus it is likely to cost for a contractor to do the job.

I don't believe that cable, satellite or even electronics stores have the responsibility to educate potential customers about OTA reception. Similarly, I don't think any business should spin the facts about the DTV transition to make viewers think that OTA will not be available in the future. I believe that television broadcasters have an obligation to inform their off-air viewers about the impending DTV transition with sufficient lead time for viewers to get a new TV or an adaptor box, or to make an informed choice to subscribe to a BDU service. The advertising needs to be limited to the markets where the transition will actuallly occur.

The government acting through Industry Canada should support and partially subsidize the transition advertising as the federal government is the party responsible for imposing the transition in the first place. They will need an implementation committee to get the industry coordinated and advertising created on a timely basis. The Canadian Association of Broadcasters is a good place to start with cooperation from CBC, SRC and provincial broadcasters like TVO.

[Jase88]

GeorgeMx: The top 15 television shows in Canada are available OTA. Certainly not all programming can be received OTA...but most of the mainstream stuff can be.

I don't believe anyone here is advocating that a DTV advertising campaign attempt to sway people to give up their BDU subscriptions. Three basic points need to be communicated to those currently using OTA: (1) how to prepare for DTV from an equipment perspective, and (2) how to continue receiving your channels if you live in a non-mandatory DTV region, (3) and when to expect the changes.

The government should be subsidizing the cost of such an advertising campaign, using a small fraction of the funds that it will see from auctioning the spectrum that will be vacated by the DTV transition.

And while I agree that BDU's are under no obligation to educate their potential or existing customers on the DTV transition, they should be obligated to at least provide factual information when commenting on such.

[stampeder]

To fracture a famous movie quote: "What we have got here is a failure to communicate."

GeorgeMx, consumers seem to be perplexed by what they see as a notably missing marketing commitment to the new technology. One of the most common questions I hear from those new to OTA is along the lines of "how come they haven't told anyone about it", which is a question I struggle to answer. It seems that Canadian broadcasting executives are convinced (to our minds, quite wrongly) that the real count of actual, living OTA viewers is inconsequential. Their rare communications on the topic seem to say that the DTV transition has been something that they would wish away if they could. Would it hurt them one bit to display their DTV channel info on their station identification bugs, banners, and advertising? Consumers find it downright odd that the hugely superior new technology is simply not being touted when it is worthy of singing from the broadcasters' rooftops. OTA broadcast executives seem to be obsessed with how to cook the steak while none of them is selling the sizzle. To capture the imaginations of Canadian consumers, they need to embrace DTV publicly and readily. Like you, I see no business value to why the BDUs would have cared to do that up until recently, but the fact of the matter is that in today's industry the broadcasters are the BDUs. I am in favour of a new marketing synthesis for these newly combined companies, in which the quality of OTA viewing is stressed for local programming and prime time hit TV series, while the value-added of specialty channels and quantities of options are kept as the raison d'etre for BDUs.

To sum it up from my perspective, while the broadcasting technicians (who we all admire and wish all the best for) and the regulators are focusing on the technical requirements of PSAs, the broadcasting executives of the newly combined and powerful Broadscaters/BDUs are not giving enough information or acknowledgement to such a great product, and consumers in the know are getting quite anxious, especially when miniscule ERP levels are sprung on them.

[frontpl8]

George MX. Since I switched from satellite to OTA I haven't really missed all the extra channels, you mention except for TSN. Many people I have talked to, who bought new HD sets, were led to believe that the only way to get HD programming was through the appropriate HD box from their local provider, even though many of these people, only care to watch network television anyway, and have no interest in any of the specialty channels. What we are trying to portray,and the government should do the same, is let people know that this option is available, and there maybe no need to subscribe to a service, and pay for HD boxes,if you don't want to.
Like I said earlier, many people have assumed there was no more OTA, and have been paying for something they can get for free, just with the cost of antennas,and gear. How many people are paying for tv, because they simply aren't aware the programs they want, are available OTA for free? My guess is lots.

[Kraven]

I'm not sure what the big fuss is about... there is no financial incentive for broadcasters/distributors to advertise/promote/acknowledge OTA. Why would they? Tell people the channels they are paying for can be had for free, and in better quality... yeah that will go over well.

Bottom line, these companies answer to shareholders.

[tvlurker]

Well, that is exactly what the fuss is about. Every broadcaster (other than CJON St John's, Thunder Bay TV, CHEK, Pattisson, and CTS) has a vested interest in promoting BDU use.

For Shaw/Global. Rogers, Bell CTV, Corus, this is obvious.
For others:
CBC: gains revenues from CBC News Net, Bold, Documentary that cross-subsidize the main network, as well as LPIF revenues for local news in small markets (especially in Quebec: Rimouski, Saguenay, Estrie, Mauricie).
CHCH: owned by specialty broadcaster Channel Zero
Zoomer Media, RNC Media: have interests in specialty channels

In the States, there are limits on common ownership, which allows there to be a market among local broadcasters to increase their individual revenues by carrying sub channels (which also often garner local BDU carriage)

[Kraven]

The only channel I've noticed that advertises its OTS signal is WPTZ (Burlington VT's NBC). The only thing BDU's will give you willingly is the bill so I dont expect anything from them. However, CBC, being a crown corportation, I'm disapointed but not surprised.