Where are the Canadian cultural warriors ready, willing and able to articulate why we need Canadian-made television?...
Is there no one among the many producers, writers and actors who benefit from the CTF who is willing to speak out, angrily and passionately, about the outrageous stunt being pulled by certain Canadian cable companies? Representatives of Shaw Communications Inc. and Vidéotron Ltée have been getting away with murder as they flit about the country in their corporate jets, sneering at the public, the CTF, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, and Heritage Minister Bev Oda.
Perhaps those who actually make Canadian TV are cowering in fear. Perhaps they are afraid of the cable companies. If so, they should be ashamed of themselves. Soon, it will be too late and the question will be this: Who speaks for the dead?
I'd love it if this was actually a real call to arms. The problem is timing, right now, of course. The Actors are busy embroiled in their strike or non-strike against the CFTPA, so two groups that might be talking to each other and coming up with a strategy, aren't.
But to take Doyle's argument sideways: why is it that this major thing is going on and the Heritage Committee is content to hear only from CBC executives?
Canada is kind of like that. Business people talking to business people. We make Line Producers the creative geniuses in charge and wonder why they can't speak eloquently about creative (or execute great ideas.) We don't employ a writer-showrunner culture (for the most part) so writers are, as Doyle suggests, mostly cowed and fearful employees. For most Canadian writers, the thought that they would be the ones to be consulted is... well, it's an idea from Mars, you see. Writers are kept as far from the levers of power as possible.
There are a few who could step up and make the argument. I think Chris Haddock could do it. And maybe Don McKellar (who had plenty to say in this space recently) but beyond that, I think things grow rather thin on the ground. Linda Schuyler from Degrassi, maybe. Maybe Brent Butt from Corner Gas.
I think the fact that there AREN'T more obvious choices for creatives to speak out, says volumes about the kind of industry we actually do have here. And maybe the reasons why Shaw has so far gotten away with their behavior. The TV industry is too important to be left in the hands of people who make TV, you see. You run along and play now, and let the grownups talk spreadsheet-talk.
While some of us tilt at windmills, blog-style.
Okay. Back to Vampires now.
13 comments:
My largely uninformed 2 cents:
Should someone have to ask? If you're not invited to the table, isn't he saying you should elbow your way in?
The writers guild sent out a press release. It was kind of weak. Couldn't they agitate and mobilize their membership better? Has there even been a letter to the editor with the creative people's side? Letters/emails/phone calls to Oda or the CRTC? Silly stunts like the WGA does to get attention to its issues? Bueller?
There are some rumblings in the industry publications and on the Internet (DMc: Chief Rumbler?) but you can't tell me there's no way for creative people, individually or collectively, famous or not, to get their voices heard by the decision makers instead of fellow rumblers. Be creative.
If the big names can't be mobilized, why does it have to be Chris Haddock? Why can't it be the someones who want to be the next Chris Haddock?
God, do I sound like Bill Cunningham? First Lisa Simpson, now this ... :)
I'll talk to them(and have been) but I'm still taking the cable guys' side! CTF money isn't being used the way it was supposed to be used.
So, if the Fund gets rescued, what's really been saved? The same system that wasn't working for most of the audience or the artists to begin with.
Instead of building an industry, we're perpetuating a form of welfare.
Guys, we have to realize that this country hasn't changed since the Family Compact. It's not a democracy but an oligarchy, where the elites will always talk to the elites for their own benefit.
To get the kind of television we want, we're going to have to bootstrap ourselves out of this and not keep looking for help from people who really don't have our best interests at heart.
The WGC asserts that Maureen Parker was meeting with individual members of the committee.
Quebecor BLINKED!!
Best news I've heard in over a month. Here's hoping it's a trend.
I don't buy the strike excuse either. Having been in a few myself, I've seen the hard times enflame passions and get people moving on issues they are usually apathetic about.
Doyle's column reflected my own thoughts. Where are these people? These artists? These rebels?
Whatever you think, this is still a democracy. And if someone speaks well and eloquently, others will listen. You don't need to be invited to anything. You don't need to be a member of the committee. You don't need to be a star.
You just need something interesting to say.
Ouimet, due respect, but that's a load.
It just is. Henshaw is certainly right when he nails that this country is the Family Compact. It has always been about elites talking to elites.
All of those people Doyle are talking about traipsed up to the CRTC hearings not two months ago. You may remember it, oh, except you wouldnt. Because except for one article in the Toronto Star by Zerbisias, and maybe a mention by Doyle, the message did not get reported by the corporate media. Even CBC chose to cover the week before -- the elites (the broadcasters and the CAB and your pal Mr. Stursberg) talking about carriage fees.
Then the tent winds up and everyone gets the fuck out of dodge and the next time it comes up, the whiplash response is "where are the artists?"
Fucking cheek.
We are all checking the flight schedules to L.A. and phoning friends to ask what it's like living in Silver Lake. That's where the fuck we are.
The Heritage Committee hearings are turning into a terrible embarassment for Shaw and Videotron. Their grousing about having to kick back a token amount to the industry has ended with them being publically exposed as net profiters from the system. Their humiliation is so complete that you have to wonder if they really knew how the fund worked in the first place.
Geoffrey, you're absolutely correct! They don't know how the Fund works -- and that's their problem.
They want to find out where the money is going and under what criteria.
Remember that tired old concept of "no taxation without representation" -- basically the foundation of any democracy? Well that's exactly what's at work here.
The Cablers get no say on how their cash is spent and the audience gets no voice (through ratings)over the content either, despite all the increased cable fees that are passed directly on to them because of the Fund.
Perhaps what is worse, CTF is administered by Telefilm which is a Crown corporation exempt from Freedom of Information rules. Therefore if you want to find out how a producer whose films never made a penny earned millions from them, you can't.
We've had producers state under oath that they kept two sets of books, one for Telefilm showing profits and one for investors showing losses.
We've had companies admit bilking millions from the system by claiming Canadian content that didn't exist.
We're told reliable auditing and overview policies are in place. But if that's the case, why do issues like those above arise and why is the Auditor General flagging practices at the CTF?
As I've said before, I don't want Jim Shaw choosing my programming, any more than I have a right to choose yours. But I do want to know that the money (ultimately taken from me, not Jim Shaw) is being spent as it was intended.
Yes, the Cablers are a protected and pampered bunch; but no less than the Canadian broadcasters they carry; and to some extent, no less than we who survive by Cancon rules.
The Fund has allowed our networks to program not based on ratings or demand but on what buys the cheapest alternative programming or helps them meet their content requirements in the deadest possible viewing hours.
The CBC shouldn't have to rely on the Fund. As our National broadcaster and International voice, it should have the backing it needs from the Governments that created it and wrote its mandate -- seperate and apart from the rest of the business.
All of us are participating in marginalizing our industry, instead of doing the job we thought we were going to do when we joined it -- feeding the entertainment and aesthetic needs of the Canadian people.
Before you start throwing chests of tea in the harbour Jim, no one expects taxation with representation to be a line item by line item affair. (Well, some lunatics in California did in the 80s and it almost destroyed the state's infrastructure.) Otherwise, I'm with you. Yes, the fund has a whole lot of problems. Yes, the CBC abuses its privilage at the expense of the independent producers it was supposed to foster and mostly because the Corpse has been neglected by Government. This can and should be fixed. But isn't the principle of the fund is a good one? Just a hunch, but I assume that Shaw and Videotron, despite protestations to the contrary, don't want the dough back to invest in Canadian culture but to ultimately return it to shareholders.
Keeping two sets of books is fraud of a sort that is usually exposed.
I'm heartened to see "aesthetic" get equal billing with "entertainment".
Hey Jim,
If the cable companies are crying "no taxation without representation", it's disingenuous. The CTF is basically free money for them. Don't forget that back in '96 they were looking at being forced to roll back their monthly subscription fees. Instead of that happening, though, the CTF was created -- with half the amount of the roll-back going into the fund, and half the amount remaining in cable company pockets (from Public Notice CRTC 1996-159):
"The Board explained in its letter that it viewed the Licence Fee Program as continuing to be the appropriate recipient of the contributions made by cable television licensees who would otherwise be required to reduce their basic monthly fee under the sunset provisions of subsection 18(6) of the regulations.."
If anyone should be calling foul about the CTF it should be the consumers, who otherwise would have been looking at a reduction in their monthly cable bill.
So -- "the cablers get no say in how their cash is spent"? -- it ain't their cash to begin with. It's the audience's. Which is why I actually agree with the points you go on to make. The CTF should be more transparent and more accountable to Joe and Jane Canuck sitting at home in front of their TV, going through their monthly bills.
Oh, and if I'm not mistaken, originally the CBC was identified as a main recipient of CTF monies. The fund was created specifically so the CBC COULD rely on it.
Hey Denis, I haven't commented too much on your blog lately, you see I bought a house and it keeps me sooooooooooooooooooooooooooo busy but I wanted to bring up a point. Where, in the friggin' world, do these companies get off deciding policy and flouting regulations? Why hasn't the government gone in with a pair of tin-snips (which by-they-way were on sale at Home Depot this week) and cut off their testicles? If any corporation in the US tries to screw with FCC policy the fines that would be levied would be, and should be, astronomical. Both these companies are flauting a policy in protest. A tax strike? Is that what it should be compared to? Ya. Okay. Maybe. But that would be like the CEO of TD bank refusing to pay his taxes. I don't know how much simpathy that would garner from Rev Canada or the public. I think these companies saw an opportunity with a conservative government in place and a fractionalized argumentative industry to try and save some money and get more control of the industry. SHAME ON THEM and they should be fined one helluva lot o'moolah!
From the Guild email..."As of April 1st, the CTF will be 27% short, which amounts to a loss of $246 million in production volume and the loss of tens of thousands of jobs. That money would finance 15 one-hour drama series of 13 episodes each, or 66 TV movies." So, CTF, where are the 15 one-hour drama series or 66 TV movies from last year when the money was apparently still rolling in? (Are these the equivalent of our 72 virgins?) Sigh. When put in terms like this, it feels not so much like tilting at windmills as hallucinating that they exist in the first place.
Of course Quebecor blinked. There's a good shot they're taking a run at some of the CHUM real estate CTV will have to divest once the acquisition is rubber-stamped, and they can't afford to piss the CRTC powers that be off.
Post a Comment