When you’re retired, you’re not supposed to get up really early … except to catch a holiday flight! But today, I was up at 5 a.m. to keep my invitation to appear early this morning via videolink before the CRTC hearings in Gatineau, Que. on the TV network’s application for a share of cable revenues.
For those of you lucky enough to sleep in …or who just missed it, but may be interested, here is the brief I read out.
” Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commission,
I realize you already have a huge amount of stats and financial figures at your disposal: so I’d like to talk to you about something I feel I do know a lot about: broadcast quality.
I am deeply concerned about the future of local television in Canada. Although a print journalist originally, many years ago I was made an offer I couldn’t refuse by a local television station in Vancouver …. British Columbia Television.
I was privileged to be able to report for the BCTV Newshour, one of the highest rated local newscasts in all of North America for 26 years … including eight years in Ottawa, covering Parliament Hill, and yes, the CRTC as well.
I believe in local television; I have profited from local television; and since my retirement three years ago, I have fought to defend local television through my blog Keeping it Real. And that is why I have been absolutely distressed by the multi-million dollar campaign of the television networks to convince Canadians …and YOU .. .that their goal, and these hearings, are about saving local television.
Mr. Chairman, I was there. I saw … for years before my retirement, how the conglomerates that took control of Canada’s private television stations, did their hatchet jobs on local television …in particular, local television news.
And this was when they were still racking up profits in the hundreds of millions of dollars.
I personally witnessed the results of the bean-counter philosophy…. shallower news … chasing police, fire and ambulance stories, press conferences, puff pieces …. and doing MUCH LESS in the way of in-depth research of major local issues or investigative series.
Some networks have been unabashed in their cuts of local news programming. Others may have told you they’re spending more … BUT neglected to tell you … they were bulking up their Canadian content at the same time, .. with Morning News, Noon News, Early News, Six O’clock News, and Late News … all using much the same shallower stories over and over.
So I suspect on a cost-per-hour airtime basis … their news programs, as Canadian content, actually cost them a lot less … not more.
At our station, we began to use old video so often, we were told to drop the “Video Files” supers on our stories … thereby making old footage appear new again..
There’s a phrase often heard in Quebec … Je Me Souviens. I remember.
Well, members of the Commission .. je me souviens! Je me souviens when CFCF Montreal had its own reporter and cameraman in Ottawa, doing stories of particular interest to Montreal viewers; je me souviens when CFTO Toronto had its own reporter and cameraman in Ottawa, covering issues specifically important to Ontario viewers; je me souviens when CJOH Ottawa had a staff of hundreds producing all kinds of vibrant local programming … not just being a shadow of what it once was.
And Je me souviens when BCTV, now Canwest Global Vancouver had our own reporter and crew in Ottawa … covering important BC issues.
But coverage of important local, regional or provincial issues as they are dealt with in our nation’s capital, is now almost non-existent.
At some stations … local news has been virtually eliminated … in others, reduced to a few reporters producing “instant” stories requiring little journalistic iniative …. It’s cheap, it’s shallow ..and it shows.
And commissioners, you have been letting them get away with it.
Incredibly, I understand some networks would like to slash or eliminate even more local television news content or shows! How does that save local TV? And, in B.C., I’m very afraid of what will happen AFTER the Olympics!
So don’t believe private tv’s claims they want a share of cable company revenues to save local television: I guess it would have been too embarrassing for them to run ads saying what they really want is a bailout from bad investments, the poor economy and rising costs of buying foreign programs.
Now, it IS true cable companies pay to carry American channels … but I submit to you there is little benefit to American t.v. stations in telling their local advertisers they can offer them audience numbers in Canada. In fact,
Canadian networks BENEFIT from SIM-SUB …where, as you know, their ads get superimposed on American station broadcasts carried on Canadian cable at the same time.
And Canadian networks already actually BENEFIT to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars in extra advertising revenues just because of the huge audiences they get, when cable companies carry their signals.
Yes… Canada’s t.v. networks are going through difficult times … but their specialty channels are still raking in millions in profits. And isn’t that the nature of business … to have ups and downs, without asking their clients for subsidies?
Apart from Canada’s major TV networks, no other corporate losers, in Canada or in the United States, suffering in the economic downturn …. have had the gall to ask for a PERMANENT BAILOUT that would go on in perpetuity ..even when their revenues and their profits return to the hundreds of millions of dollars.
One way or another … anything you allow the private networks to cash in on, through a share of cable revenues, WILL come out of the pockets of ordinary Canadians ….. a permanent taxpayer subsidy to a multi-million dollar-making private industry.
There is no justification for that.
And without ANY GUARANTEE that any bailout would be used to support or repair the local television and local news programming they have so devastated over the past decade.
If the cable companies are making too much money…cut their rates; or let consumers pick and choose channels they want to watch or drop … not be forced to accept bundled packages, paying for some channels we do not want.
But I urge you to let the television networks take care of their own network financial problems.
And if you do grant them any relief …even temporary relief … I urge you to make sure that money goes into LOCAL television and news to stop the on-going decline in those vital services for Canadians.
Thank you..merci beaucoup.”
(For those interested in viewing the presentation and the questions that followed the five invited consumers, check out the CPAC site … www.cpac.ca … to find the CRTC hearings Tues. Dec 8 at around 11 a.m. Eastern. )
Harv Oberfeld
17 responses so far ↓
1 Brian // Dec 8, 2009 at 7:35 pm
harv, I just watched your presentation on cpac. ( Ifast forwarded to part 2 of the broadcast) well done! that 7 minutes was obviously not long enough to go into details, but you got most of the highlights needed for the commission to consider in their final decision.
I was disappointed you did not bring up “net neutrality”. oh well, i guess they have made their decision on that anyway.
2 Kim // Dec 8, 2009 at 8:23 pm
Good work Harv. Thank you.
3 DMJ // Dec 8, 2009 at 10:05 pm
EXCELLENT!
4 Crankypants // Dec 9, 2009 at 4:11 am
Kudos, Harv. You are right on the mark on this issue. Let’s hope the CRTC pays attention.
5 Mike Chisholm // Dec 9, 2009 at 4:21 am
Well said Harvey. It’s been a bit confusing over the past few months following the ball of the competing interests, but you seem to have nailed it. It would be a snowy day in Hell if companies like CanWest received a monthly bundle of cash from cable viewers and actually spent it to beef up newsrooms, spend money on investigations instead of weather sh0ts, and God forbid, set up journalistic training and mentor ship programs for novice journalists and ethnic minorities. I remember the days of real newsrooms, fearless and outspoken reporters, tough demanding bosses and critical thinking as a prerequisite to join. There are vestiges of this left in print but it’s disappearing in the broadcast industry.
(Response: Mike was also a reporter at Canwest when I was there. Thanks for speaking out Mike.. more of us must … especially from INSIDE once free to do so. It’s not to criticize those still working in the industry … but to fight on their behalf! And only the complete $ellouts don’t understand or appreciate that. h..o)
6 Laila // Dec 9, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Brilliant Harv!
You did in seven minutes what scores of advertisements on our channels were not able to do over the last few months.
Not only did you present and establish your points so effectively, you did so in a way that the layperson can understand the situation and ‘get’ how these events have affected the quality of what we see on air.
I’ve heard several people comment over past weeks that they still didn’t ‘get’ what this is all about- I do explain, but I also always send them to your site for the full story.
I always wanted to be an investigative reporter,Harv, and often regretted not making that happen over the years. However, when I read your statement, I know without fail that I’m not missing a thing, because the capacity is simply no longer there to support those kind of positions – financially, or editorially. It must be terribly frustrating for those new graduates entering the field,full of passion and fervor for truth, to see what the newsrooms have been reduced to.
(Response: Thank you Laila! I was happy to be able to stand up for local television and in particular local television news. What I find very telling though is that my appeal to the Commission on their behalf received almost no coverage from local television or their affiliated newspapers in this market… even though the invited “witness” was one of best known journalists in B.C., who has won numerous awards, provincially and even nationally.. Fear? Management Intimidation? Or just an example of what happens under concentration of ownership? But the important outcome is that I, and the other consumers who appeared, have made it clear to the Commission the damage the networks have done to local programming and news. Hopefully that will help stop the destruction. h.o. )
7 Harris // Dec 9, 2009 at 6:50 pm
Harvey,
I watched you for years on BCTV and wondered when you disappeared…now I know. Although what you’re doing “retired” in Ottawa’s climate, I’ll never know.
Beautiful presentation that clarified things nicely for me (and I work in news media) over the tussle between TV and cable carriers. As my friend Peter said, “a pox on both their houses”! Well done. With your permission, I’ll send it to my contact list.
(Response: Please send it to everyone you know: that’s how we get this blog spread around… and keep important discussions going. (I retired after 38 years to travel/enjoy more and I’m taking my Xmas/New Years break in the sun starting next week. Already feel guilty!
I found it interesting that local media failed to cover the issue of local t.v. news’ future at the CRTC! Tells me a lot about management’s plans for more cuts to come ..if the CRTC lets them. Scary. h.o.)
8 Gord L // Dec 9, 2009 at 7:57 pm
Well done Harvey! I have felt this way all along. Your testimony is excellent, coming from a high profile reporter such as yourself.
(Response: Thanks … we should all be speaking up about this more: a society in which local news is eliminated or mostly reduced to ambulance chasing, without aserious invesitgative arm, is ripe for corruption and poor decision making. h.o.)
9 Robert // Dec 9, 2009 at 8:36 pm
Listened to part of the Macomb and Leslry pert of the NW afternnon on Monday. I didn’t get to listen to much but it seemed the big news was Tiger. The criticism by a caller about the station and its reporting of government news and interviews was met with derision and comments about how great they are at holding the gov’s feet to the fire. As usual they are their own biggest fans. And Macomb does a good job compared to the others.
(Response: I like Macomb too. I alerted NW to the morning hearing …guess they just didn’t consider local news as important to Vancouver listeners/viewers as local television/news. h..o)
10 Lynn // Dec 9, 2009 at 11:06 pm
I suspect they will have to consider more cuts when the advertisers realise the very audience they are peddling to are disappearing because of the lack of quality news reporting.
Thank you Harvey for taking time out to sit down and give the CRTC insight. You didn’t have to do it. Well done.
Enjoy your fun in the sun. Merry Christmas!!
(Response: You’re right..I didn’t have to do it…but I couldn’t just stand by and let it all happen without saying something. Merry Christmas to you too and everyone reading. h.o)
11 Masterofnothing // Dec 10, 2009 at 1:11 am
Good job Harvey.
The CRTC sounds like they’re gonna have a tough decision this time. Following you, the “Big 3″ – wiseguys got up, poor mouthed some more, and begged the CRTC to run the Cable business – man!
What would be equitable would be for the CRTC to put EVERYTHING on the dial as a “speacialty” pick and pay with packages of “basic” with 20 selections. Local OTA as well as a pick and pay so that’s where the rubber will hit the road. The CRTC should also allow the local CABLE community channel “compete” as a local as well – hopefully prompting the currently NETWORK owned re-broads that call themselves “LOCAL” to do more – BETTER, like they used to do when they were privately owned stations. – now they’re tabloid clones of one another.
12 Ruben // Dec 10, 2009 at 4:28 am
Harvey,
I was surprised to see we were on the same panel. I had come across your blog while researching my presentation.
You did a great job of laying it out.
Thanks!
Ruben
(Response: Actually, I remarked to those in the room with me in Vancouver how vindicated I felt after listening to your presentation, coming from the same point of view and reaching the same conclusions. I personally think the CRTC’s mind is alread made up ..to give the networks cable $$$… but I do believe we have made it much more difficult for them to do that without requiring at least some of it be plowed back into local programming and especially local news. h.o.)
13 Dan // Dec 10, 2009 at 6:56 pm
Great presentation Harvey.
Speaking of fluff news, recently there was a fire at Main & Broadway, the Bill Good show presented a 2 or 3 seconds of cell phone footage and then a live report from the location at 6:30 where a reporter standing across the street from the fire in the dark where all you could see was her and the yellow police tape, regurgitated everything that had all ready been said.. Not exactly news reporting. I think that Bill and Tony must be inwardly embarrassed.
Happy Holiday and Merry Christmas.
(Response; Merry Christmas, Happy Hannukah, Happy Ramadan and a Happy New Year to you and everyone else reading. Who’d i miss?
h.o.
14 kootcoot // Dec 10, 2009 at 8:22 pm
Hurrah for you Harv! I’m with you 100% on this issue. It is ridiculous on its face that the telecorps are spending so much advertising money to convince me that they are working in my interests.
As a musician and music producer at one time I have watched as local support for cable channels disappeared over the years. A classic example is Shaw Cable in the Kootenays, who were supposed to provide access to local content and productions in return for their cable monopoly. Now as far as I know you can’t even pay your bill in person (much less register a complaint) in Nelson much less view or produce any local content in the now closed (and maybe even torn down) studio/admin building.
I really think that concentration (and general greed) is the bane of communications today and the reason real journalism at both the local and larger levels is in such bad shape today. The biggest corporate piggies get the government they pay for, and they still can’t get it right, because of their greed (ie. C anWest/the bailed out banks/the automakers) but if you notice all those folks (well maybe with the exception of Canwest) are doing just fine thanks, bank profits are setting records again – will they still after the stimulus injections run out?
15 Lynn // Dec 11, 2009 at 2:51 am
Extortion at the criminal is illegal, what do you call it at the political and corpoorate level?
Bailouts? I am fed-the-hell up with the hand outs.
Enough already!
(Response: Well, I’m against them too … unless my Canwest pension goes under and the government decides to save it. Typical Canadian, eh? h.o.)
16 Henri Paul // Dec 11, 2009 at 3:18 am
Harv– said, Dec 10, 2009 at 6:56 pm
Merry Christmas, Happy Hannukah, Happy Ramadan and a Happy New Year to you and everyone else reading. Who’d i miss? h.o.
———————————————————–
You missed Jesus , its his birthday.
(Response: Isn’t that what Christmas is all about? Or were those wise men just bloggers doing research? And actually, I think all the evidence is the Jesus was NOT born Dec 25 …so once more, I was correct. LOL! h.o)
17 Cheramlak // Mar 1, 2012 at 4:21 am
You don’t think that Quebecor will have the cnnahel packaged up with popular cnnahels like CNN as quick as they can? Do you not think that perhaps a trade will be made between BCE, Rogers, and Quebecor to make sure that each of them gets their pet cnnahel pushed into a package that pretty much assures that the vast majority of users end up paying, even if they aren’t viewers?With these three companies owning all sides of the game (networks, stations, production, and distribution methods), do you not think that situation screams out “triopoly”? It is clear that they have figured out that the best way to make money in the TV game in Canada isn’t to produce what people want, but rather to produce a cnnahel that can be packaged up with popular services that people will pay for, and as a result will pay for the (unwatched) Canadian service. Yes, Sun News will lead to more jobs, but honestly, they might as well just tack $1 a month on to every cable and sat bill and use as journalistic welfare payouts. With so little actual demand for the cnnahel, the only way this one floats is if consumers are put in a position to pay for it even if they don’t want it (because they want other cnnahels in the package).
Leave a Comment
CAPTCHA Code is needed.