Canadian TV Sucks

Gunsmoke2 - GS2 · 2002-05-27, 08:36 PM

Canadian TV sucks

Six-year-old repeats of drivel, lumberjack contests - no wonder many people want U.S. satellite TV, which is now illegal here

MARLENE BLANSHAY
Montreal Gazette

Monday, May 27, 2002

A common television viewer's lament: so many screens, so little worth watching.

ADVERTISEMENT

It's good thing that Canadian television broadcasting still has its integrity. It almost makes up for the lame programming and lack of choice. Last month, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that it is now illegal for Canadians to decode American satellite television. In a press release (April 26) Industry Minister Allan Rock said, "Today's Supreme Court decision helps preserve and ensure a strong and vibrant Canadian broadcast industry." Heritage Minister Sheila Copps chimed in: "It clearly is a gain for the integrity of the Canadian broadcasting system."

And a loss for those of us who are stuck with Canadian cable and satellite. The Supreme Court decision means that it is no longer a legal gray area for Canadians who receive pirated American satellite signals - it is now illegal. A May 9 article in the New York Times described the lively trade south of the border, where Canadians obtain satellite cards that unscramble signals from U.S. providers in order to receive American programming otherwise unavailable to them.

Do Rock, Copps et al ever watch what's on Canadian cable or satellite? If so, perhaps they'd stop waxing poetic about integrity and vibrancy and ask themselves why one million Canadians are engaging in satellite piracy.

Who needs American satellite when we now have all these great digital cable channels and our own satellite providers with all this vibrant programming? The answer is very simple: Canadian TV sucks, satellite, digital or analog. Canadians are tired of waiting three years to see TV shows from HBO when they finally show up on network television, tired of being stuck behind the aging iron curtain of Canadian broadcast regulations and bored with the lack of choice provided by Canadian networks, all of whom are owned by the same three corporations.

Paucity of Content

I subscribed to Vidéotron's digital TV service last summer and it's specious at best to be touting "integrity" while making it illegal to get American satellite signals since digital cable seems to operate with promise as its premise, luring viewers in with exciting promos but bearing a paucity of content, original or otherwise. Canadian digital channels have sprung up like dandelions in May, but after a few months, it's clear that promise has an expiry date and so does their programming, which seems to repeat itself endlessly while we pay enormous fees for equipment rental, service and installation.

The networks will say, in their own defence, that they don't yet have the money for original, quality programming, which begs the question: why exist at all? For advertising of course, in between which are movies I have seen and don't want to see again, don't want to see at all, can rent on DVD or see on another channel 10 times next month. The promise is that if we wait until they make money, we can see all kinds of great stuff - in the future.

Equally dishonest is the use of American brand-name recognition - using the names of American networks on second- and third-rate Canadian products. I was attracted to digital cable by the possibility of getting channels such as Fox Sports, Prime, Documentary Channel and OLN. The latter is the only network in North America to broadcast coverage of cycling and mountain biking. Both of these are virtually ignored by Canadian sports broadcasters who seem to regard cycling as the domain of European sissies with shaved legs, and mountain bikers as 20-something flakes in baggy shorts who say things like "awesome dude"(this in spite of the fact that the top mountain bikers in the world are Canadian, including world champion Roland Green).

However, I discovered that it's OLN U.S. that shows all those cycling races; OLN Canada airs only the Tour De France, which is sort of like showing only the Super Bowl or the Stanley Cup final. The rest of the year's schedule is taken up with hour upon hour of lumberjack and strongman contests, dog shows and infomercials for Bowflex. While viewers around the world watch the Tour of Spain, Tour of Italy and mountain biking, we in Canada are able to watch sweaty fat men in kilts lift boulders over their heads.

Lucky us - all that vibrancy. As for the other channels, I have only kept a few of them on my service. Documentary Channel is a good idea but the same documentaries have been on their schedule since last November and I've seen nearly every one. TVLand is fun, but it shows me how bad shows don't improve with time or nostalgia.

We now live in a global economy and Canadians are fully aware of what is available elsewhere. Just check out the Internet; I've been reading on the New York Times TV forums for two years about series and movies on HBO and Showtime, which I will probably never see, and jealously read about OLN's coverage of the spring bike races in Belgium.

Drivel Original, at Least

This is not to say all is ideal in American broadcasting. On a recent trip to the U.S., I saw plenty of worthless drivel on the TV in my hotel, but at least some of it was original drivel, not stale, six-year-old repeats of something that was drivel six years ago.

The unspecified future is a long time to make consumers wait for a payoff, and I am not alone as a disgruntled consumer. There have been buzzes among consumers that have reached those in the industry. A recent article in Strategy, a marketing magazine, begged the hucksters "Don't give up on TV yet," seeking to assure their readers that yes, digital cable is getting its act together and everyone can look forward to a bright future with content options, mixed media and other nifty stuff.

While this creative process unfolds, we're paying stiff monthly fees while they learn on the job.

We don't want to hear about integrity and vibrancy. Integrity sounds like creaky documentaries about Canadian politics or the mating habits of the black duck or more heartwarming dramas about poor Maritime families. Vibrancy recalls those dreary arts specials on CBC that no one watches.

When East Germans were allowed to travel to the west, many didn't want to come back. Canadians who have tasted the freedom offered by choice won't stop going to the U.S. for hacked satellite cards. The trade will probably go underground and continue.

If the broadcasters are so concerned about this trend, if they want to keep their subscribers, they should try broadcasting something the public wants to see. Or at least give us some choice.

If we choose to watch drivel, it's our choice and we're paying for it. It's our drivel.

- Marlene Blanshay is a Montreal-based freelance writer.

© Copyright 2002 Montreal Gazette

GS2

hugh · 2002-05-27, 10:22 PM

Quote:

The networks will say, in their own defence, that they don't yet have the money for original, quality programming, which begs the question: why exist at all

Exactly!

Gunsmoke2 - GS2 · 2002-05-28, 12:03 AM

Quote:

Equally dishonest is the use of American brand-name recognition

How many equals are there

GS2

Tripster · 2002-05-28, 05:45 PM

Very well written article that really hits home the views of a LOT of consumers.

Why do the Canadian broadcasters feel that we need our own money losing, cut-rate version of channels like Animal Planet with their 3000 viewer count that no advertiser is really going to touch?

They say it's because of the advertising, this way it can be aimed at Canadians, well explain to me why I see ads for CDs from Time Life Music in US funds airing on Canadian channels then? Shouldn't these offers be in Canadian dollars? Does anyone really want to pay $30US for the Best of Bread?

It's a load of BS, nothing more, I see ads on the US channels I watch that are very relevant to our market, from big brands such as Coke to clothing and other products readily available to us here.

Also, most US cable channels have space in the ad spots for local inserts, these could easily be used to target ads at Canadians while leaving the US content intact.

Nope, these 3 corps can sit back on their licenses and laugh, they have the market cornered, they have no true competitors, they have sliced the pie up nicely amongst themselves, even going so far as to own shares in each others channels.

I hear Movie Central is profitable to the tune of a couple million a year, so why change? There's nobody competing, they have 700,000 subs or so and don't even really try and gain more, when was their last free preview weekend? A long time ago. It's even sweeter that they are owned by a cable company as well I guess. You bet you'll never see HBO unless Shaw is going to make more from sub fees to HBO than they make in current profits from Movie Central.

dcomp11 · 2002-05-28, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Equally dishonest is the use of American brand-name recognition - using the names of American networks on second- and third-rate Canadian products

Lets list the Canadian Brand Rip-Offs

Discovery Channel Canada-See promotions for great specials on TLC for Discovery US but then tune in to see it on our network in a few months, or maybe never.

Bravo!

HGTV Canada

Food Network Canada-Food US used to be availiable, but then the Canadian version showed up and the sched is now flooded with shows with feature Canadian cooks. Some shows which I used to watch on Food US rarely or never show up. These include Food 911, The Best Of: and Ready, Set, Cook

Outdoor Life Network Canada-As mentioned in the article, doesn't provide coverage of bike races.

CNBC-Although a US channel, TSN likes to black out PGA golf coverage so they can air it later or never

TNN-Again, a US network but we get a different feed because some Canadian networks said that they had the rights to some shows. Personally, I don't care for WWE Wrestling but I know some people who do. And they hate watching TSN pull the TNN US feed and then censor it even more to meet Canadian Broadcasting Standards

In Digital:

The Biography Channel Canada

BBC Canada (as opposed to BBC America which offers a ton of more programs)

MSNBC Canada-This has to be the biggest joke of all. MSNBC is a US cable news network. People who want US don't care for Canadian Content. First, MSNBC broadcasts repeats in the middle of the night whereas MSNBC Canada decides to run the same infomercials from 3-6am. From 6-9am MSNBC shows Imus in the Morning. MSNBC Canada likes to cut off the first hour for Canadian Content. So we only get 7-9am. Whats worse is for Canadian Content, they show reruns from CBC and CPAC!!! Why would I pay so much extra money for Digital Cable or Star Choice to watch re-runs from CPAC???? And if MSNBC cuts in for breaking news during our CPAC time, we don't get to see it.

TV Land Canada-Again a brand ripoff. I like the US TV Land because they show Retromercials (old commercials). But of course, not on TV Land Canada

National Geographic Channel Canada

Discovery Civilization Canada

Animal Planet Canada

TechTV Canada-At first in September, they basically mirrored the US TechTV's schedule. But lately, while the US net premieres new shows we don't get to see them. Why? At first I thought it was rights issues but most of it has to do with the CRTC license. When the license was given out TechTV US was mostly a computer channel. But in the big ratings struggle they have shifted their programming strategy to more of a general science/tech channel. Some of these shows fall into categorys not included in the CRTC license of TechTV Canada. But the funny thing is that TechTV US is in the clear on C-Band satellite.

Discovery Kids Canada

Court TV Canada-I liked the movies and the investigative shows on Court TV US.

Independant Film Channel Canada

Raptors/NBA.com TV-A lot of stuff pulled from NBA.com TV in the US

FOX Sports World Canada

ESPN Classic Canada

NHL Network Canada

Discovery Health Channel Canada

MTV Canada-Why should I wait months to see The Osbournes when I can see it earlier on the real MTV. CHUM owned MuchMusic complained about MTV Canada because the license was for Connect-a service with stuff for teens. CHUM said it could hurt there business. Yet, CHUM markets MuchMusic into the US with MMUSA with is available on DirecTV.

MTV2 Canada

Now for theme rip-offs

The Shopping Channel-Home Shopping Network, QVC, ShopNBC etc.

YTV-Steals a lot of stuff from Nickelodeon

TSN-ESPN, which I think they are affiliated with in some way

W-Oxygen and the other US women Nets

Teletoon-Cartoon Network

Family Channel-Disney Channel

The Comedy Network-Why should I wait like a week to watch Dennis Miller Live when I can watch it live on HBO. Also, we get the chopped up version because HBO has like 30 minutes of content with no ads where as here they have to edit so they can insert ads. -Comedy Central

History Television-The History Channel

Space-Most of their content can be found on other CHUM networks.-Sci-Fi Channel

MuchMoreMusic-Kind of VH1

CPAC-C-SPAN, which is legally allowed to be in Canada

Star!-Basically a ripoff of E! with a lot of content from E!

CTV Travel- Discovery Travel Channel

--------------------------------

US Networks actually available here:

The Sim-Subbed Nets (ABC,NBC,CBS,FOX)
PBS
A&E
CNN
TLC
CNBC
TNN-kinda
CNN Headline News
The Speed Channel
TBS Superstation
The Golf Channel
BET
Game Show Network
WGN Superstation
WSBK Boston (UPN)
WPIX New York (WB)
KTLA Los Angeles (WB)
In Toronto, WNYO Buffalo (WB) on Rogers Digital

These are all my opinions so you can agree or disagree. I'm sorry if I offended you if you actually like parts of these Canadian Nets over the US ones.

dcomp11

M&M · 2002-05-29, 01:16 PM

For the most part Canadian specialties are indeed rip-offs of US channels. A few are ok, but must suck for sure. I don't like the feeds of the US based specialties being altered either, especially when youplan to watch something that was advertised and it doesn't come.

These are some of the main reasons I have almost abandoned "Canadian TV" I have my basic Star Choice, but the rest is all DirecTV.

Snoman · 2002-05-30, 08:21 PM

I see I'm not the only one who thinks the same things about our "tv culture".

2002-05-27, 08:36 PM	#1
Gunsmoke2 - GS2 Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 467	Canadian TV Sucks Canadian TV sucks Six-year-old repeats of drivel, lumberjack contests - no wonder many people want U.S. satellite TV, which is now illegal here MARLENE BLANSHAY Montreal Gazette Monday, May 27, 2002 A common television viewer's lament: so many screens, so little worth watching. ADVERTISEMENT It's good thing that Canadian television broadcasting still has its integrity. It almost makes up for the lame programming and lack of choice. Last month, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that it is now illegal for Canadians to decode American satellite television. In a press release (April 26) Industry Minister Allan Rock said, "Today's Supreme Court decision helps preserve and ensure a strong and vibrant Canadian broadcast industry." Heritage Minister Sheila Copps chimed in: "It clearly is a gain for the integrity of the Canadian broadcasting system." And a loss for those of us who are stuck with Canadian cable and satellite. The Supreme Court decision means that it is no longer a legal gray area for Canadians who receive pirated American satellite signals - it is now illegal. A May 9 article in the New York Times described the lively trade south of the border, where Canadians obtain satellite cards that unscramble signals from U.S. providers in order to receive American programming otherwise unavailable to them. Do Rock, Copps et al ever watch what's on Canadian cable or satellite? If so, perhaps they'd stop waxing poetic about integrity and vibrancy and ask themselves why one million Canadians are engaging in satellite piracy. Who needs American satellite when we now have all these great digital cable channels and our own satellite providers with all this vibrant programming? The answer is very simple: Canadian TV sucks, satellite, digital or analog. Canadians are tired of waiting three years to see TV shows from HBO when they finally show up on network television, tired of being stuck behind the aging iron curtain of Canadian broadcast regulations and bored with the lack of choice provided by Canadian networks, all of whom are owned by the same three corporations. Paucity of Content I subscribed to Vidéotron's digital TV service last summer and it's specious at best to be touting "integrity" while making it illegal to get American satellite signals since digital cable seems to operate with promise as its premise, luring viewers in with exciting promos but bearing a paucity of content, original or otherwise. Canadian digital channels have sprung up like dandelions in May, but after a few months, it's clear that promise has an expiry date and so does their programming, which seems to repeat itself endlessly while we pay enormous fees for equipment rental, service and installation. The networks will say, in their own defence, that they don't yet have the money for original, quality programming, which begs the question: why exist at all? For advertising of course, in between which are movies I have seen and don't want to see again, don't want to see at all, can rent on DVD or see on another channel 10 times next month. The promise is that if we wait until they make money, we can see all kinds of great stuff - in the future. Equally dishonest is the use of American brand-name recognition - using the names of American networks on second- and third-rate Canadian products. I was attracted to digital cable by the possibility of getting channels such as Fox Sports, Prime, Documentary Channel and OLN. The latter is the only network in North America to broadcast coverage of cycling and mountain biking. Both of these are virtually ignored by Canadian sports broadcasters who seem to regard cycling as the domain of European sissies with shaved legs, and mountain bikers as 20-something flakes in baggy shorts who say things like "awesome dude"(this in spite of the fact that the top mountain bikers in the world are Canadian, including world champion Roland Green). However, I discovered that it's OLN U.S. that shows all those cycling races; OLN Canada airs only the Tour De France, which is sort of like showing only the Super Bowl or the Stanley Cup final. The rest of the year's schedule is taken up with hour upon hour of lumberjack and strongman contests, dog shows and infomercials for Bowflex. While viewers around the world watch the Tour of Spain, Tour of Italy and mountain biking, we in Canada are able to watch sweaty fat men in kilts lift boulders over their heads. Lucky us - all that vibrancy. As for the other channels, I have only kept a few of them on my service. Documentary Channel is a good idea but the same documentaries have been on their schedule since last November and I've seen nearly every one. TVLand is fun, but it shows me how bad shows don't improve with time or nostalgia. We now live in a global economy and Canadians are fully aware of what is available elsewhere. Just check out the Internet; I've been reading on the New York Times TV forums for two years about series and movies on HBO and Showtime, which I will probably never see, and jealously read about OLN's coverage of the spring bike races in Belgium. Drivel Original, at Least This is not to say all is ideal in American broadcasting. On a recent trip to the U.S., I saw plenty of worthless drivel on the TV in my hotel, but at least some of it was original drivel, not stale, six-year-old repeats of something that was drivel six years ago. The unspecified future is a long time to make consumers wait for a payoff, and I am not alone as a disgruntled consumer. There have been buzzes among consumers that have reached those in the industry. A recent article in Strategy, a marketing magazine, begged the hucksters "Don't give up on TV yet," seeking to assure their readers that yes, digital cable is getting its act together and everyone can look forward to a bright future with content options, mixed media and other nifty stuff. While this creative process unfolds, we're paying stiff monthly fees while they learn on the job. We don't want to hear about integrity and vibrancy. Integrity sounds like creaky documentaries about Canadian politics or the mating habits of the black duck or more heartwarming dramas about poor Maritime families. Vibrancy recalls those dreary arts specials on CBC that no one watches. When East Germans were allowed to travel to the west, many didn't want to come back. Canadians who have tasted the freedom offered by choice won't stop going to the U.S. for hacked satellite cards. The trade will probably go underground and continue. If the broadcasters are so concerned about this trend, if they want to keep their subscribers, they should try broadcasting something the public wants to see. Or at least give us some choice. If we choose to watch drivel, it's our choice and we're paying for it. It's our drivel. - Marlene Blanshay is a Montreal-based freelance writer. © Copyright 2002 Montreal Gazette GS2

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

2002-05-28, 05:45 PM	#4
Tripster Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 64	Very well written article that really hits home the views of a LOT of consumers. Why do the Canadian broadcasters feel that we need our own money losing, cut-rate version of channels like Animal Planet with their 3000 viewer count that no advertiser is really going to touch? They say it's because of the advertising, this way it can be aimed at Canadians, well explain to me why I see ads for CDs from Time Life Music in US funds airing on Canadian channels then? Shouldn't these offers be in Canadian dollars? Does anyone really want to pay $30US for the Best of Bread? It's a load of BS, nothing more, I see ads on the US channels I watch that are very relevant to our market, from big brands such as Coke to clothing and other products readily available to us here. Also, most US cable channels have space in the ad spots for local inserts, these could easily be used to target ads at Canadians while leaving the US content intact. Nope, these 3 corps can sit back on their licenses and laugh, they have the market cornered, they have no true competitors, they have sliced the pie up nicely amongst themselves, even going so far as to own shares in each others channels. I hear Movie Central is profitable to the tune of a couple million a year, so why change? There's nobody competing, they have 700,000 subs or so and don't even really try and gain more, when was their last free preview weekend? A long time ago. It's even sweeter that they are owned by a cable company as well I guess. You bet you'll never see HBO unless Shaw is going to make more from sub fees to HBO than they make in current profits from Movie Central.

2002-05-29, 01:16 PM	#6
M&M Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 314	For the most part Canadian specialties are indeed rip-offs of US channels. A few are ok, but must suck for sure. I don't like the feeds of the US based specialties being altered either, especially when youplan to watch something that was advertised and it doesn't come. These are some of the main reasons I have almost abandoned "Canadian TV" I have my basic Star Choice, but the rest is all DirecTV.

2002-05-30, 08:21 PM	#7
Snoman Join Date: May 2002 Location: At my computer Posts: 375	I see I'm not the only one who thinks the same things about our "tv culture".