Canadian auds get their say
MONTREAL The bitter fight over the future of the TV biz in Canada is set to heat up again this week, with the public poised to weigh in on the debate.
CTVglobemedia executive VP Paul Sparkes warns that if the networks don't get a monthly fee from the cable and satellite companies, "we'll be closing stations and the government will have to deal with that."
The exec went even further, saying the media giant might even close major-market stations or get out of the free-to-air TV business altogether to focus on its more profitable cable channels.
If there is no extra money, CTV wants the rules changed to allow it to pull its network from cable systems like Rogers.
Worse yet for viewers, CTV owns the Canuck rights to U.S. shows such as "Desperate Housewives" and could force Rogers to black them out when they appear on the U.S. webs that Rogers carries, such as ABC.
Meanwhile, cable execs claim the networks are looking for an unwarranted handout.
"We're not the ones that are destroying the system," Rogers senior VP Ken Engelhart says. "We're the ones that lost money for years. (The TV networks) have had one bad year and they're saying the sky is falling."
Rogers execs say the Canuck networks are in an irrational bidding war for U.S. shows, which is a big part of the reason they're losing money -- and it's true that spending on American fare has risen sharply in recent years.
CTV also would like the CRTC to radically reduce the Canadian-content requirements for terrestrial networks, which forces them to fill 60% of their weekly skeds with expensive, locally produced shows. CTV would like to see that quota cut to 35% to help their bottom line.
That's an idea that has Canadian screenwriters seeing red.
The response of Maureen Parker, executive director of the Canadian Writers Guild, is unequivocal.
"We'd say -- 'Good-bye, see ya, get out of the business.' They just don't want to make Canadian television. That's their bottom-line position. They overspend in L.A. and it results in a very unhealthy business environment for everyone because there's no money left for Canadian drama."
Way to go, Maureen.
Agency party tonight, then off to Calgary tomorrow to research for the new project. Take care, and if you happen to be in Toronto tonight, I dare say the writer-rip up to beat is Paul Quarringon and the Pork Belly Futures at the Dora Keogh.
7 rumbles:
Nothing like the truth to carve through all the endless spin! First "It doesn't have to be this hard!" and now Maureen just cuts to the Save Local TV chase!
The other thing this proves is that there is no such thing as Global Warming. If Ms. Parker and Jim Shaw are on the same side with you cheering them on, DMc, Hell has officially frozen over!
Have a great time in Cowtown! Do not miss the Flames Sports Bar and their awesome NFL Sunday breakfast or any Calgary hockey game.
And I look forward to the forthcoming post in which you suddenly realize what a great thing the Oil sands are! ;)
I'm thinking of that kid in Greely with the radio station that Industry Canada's making a fuss about as I type this.
I wonder if he and his father might not have some useful advice at the moment. Could the WGC, DGC and ACTRA not pool resources and set up their own (licensed) shop?
It's implied in the article that buying Canadian broadcasting rights for U.S. shows is more expansive than ever. However, I'd like to ask one question: how much does it cost to buy the right to carry an American show?
The Canadian networks are so out of date they are probably still worrying about the Y2K bug and now they are "threatening" to go off the air and only do specialty channels? You know what? Good riddance.
They don't want to put any money into Canadian shows and they don't seem to realize that you can get any American TV show free online minutes after it airs.
What exactly is their business plan? Dump all their money in US shows that everyone can watch anytime they want without tuning in to their broadcast? That's not much of a plan. Even if they do start "blacking out" American shows coming up from US broadcasters it won't make a lick of difference. Their target audience will just download or stream them from the internet commercial free whenever they want.
What they should be doing is getting away from the US shows everyone with an internet connection has access to and developing their own quality shows that people will watch and that American networks will buy the rights to rebroadcast. That's where the money is.
@joe: That's not their target audience. Their target audience is comprised of ad agencies making commercial buys to hit their targets, which still haven't really moved on from straight youth-biased demographics.
BBM, the data gatherer for radio and TV, does make available other demographics, but the large majority of ad agency media buyers ignore these completely.
"They don't want to put any money into Canadian shows and they don't seem to realize that you can get any American TV show free online minutes after it airs."
@Joe:
I'll add another thing. Most Canadian networks just don't get that any of us can watch an American show directly on their native network provided that we have cable. For instance, why should some tune in CTV or Much Music to watch that crap called So You Think You Can Dance? when they can watch it on Fox?
Since they don't want to do anything other than pass on what has been done by the American stations - then I can't think of reason for them to even exist.
If all they want to be is a non-productive middleman throwing on a useless fee for doing absolutely nothing... well I say open the market to the American networks and tell the Canadian ones to sink or swim.
It isn't like there will suddenly be an influx of American programming that drowns out the local content. We already get everything they make, the minute it airs.
As a libertarian I am morally opposed to protectionism and to corporate welfare- but even from a utilitarian point of view, what they hell are they offering in return for the regulations and the dollars?
Post a Comment