July 2001
The CRTC Strikes Again
by Lydia Miljan
Canada is one of the most highly regulated countries in the world. One frequently mentioned justification for this is to protect Canadians from harm. In our food industry, for instance, we are protected from unpasteurized cheeses, from dodgy eggs, and our meats must conform to recognized standards of cleanliness. Other areas of Canadian life are also regulated: transportation, housing, and clothing are just the tip of the regulatory iceberg. In fact, it is difficult to think of any facet of Canadian life that has escaped some national or provincial government or agency.
Of course the reason for all these regulations is to ensure that Canadians enjoy healthy, happy lives. Our history is one of Canadians allowing their freedoms to be restricted so that they will face reduced risk. One of the earliest forms of regulation in Canada started with the broadcast industry, initially with the creation of the Canadian Radio Broadcasting Commission, renamed in 1958 the Board of Broadcast Governors (BBG), and finally replaced in 1968 by the Canadian Radio-Television Commission (CRTC). The precursors to the CRTC were installed to protect Canadians from the "invasion" of American culture.
While the ostensible goal of the CRTC is to protect Canadian culture, in practice, it has protected vested interests in Canada against competition from other Canadians. In particular, it would seem that the primary purpose of the communications regulator is not to protect Canadian culture, but to create and maintain the monopolies that currently exist in Canadian broadcasting.
Take, for example, the CRTC's decisions and rulings with respect to the cable industry. In the days when there was a problem with limited dial space (more formally known as "bandwidth limitations") available for broadcast due to the relatively primitive initial technology, there was a legitimate need for a regulatory agency. Regulations kept early, high-powered AM radio stations (notably American) from crowding out other stations of lesser transmission strength. These bandwidth limitations resulted in the commission deciding, based on its defined standards, what kind of messages, through station format control, would be disseminated to Canadians. Although the bandwidth problem has now been solved, the CRTC and its staff of 400 still decide who will broadcast, and what will be aired on Canadian radio, television, and cable.
The CRTC has decided, for instance, that Canadians should have a gay and lesbian channel, and a vast array of cartoon, music, and sports channels. The agency also limits the number and scope of news and information channels available to Canadians.
The CRTC is guided in its decisions by the Broadcast Act, which explicitly states: "where any conflict arises between the objectives of the Corporation set out in paragraphs (l) and (m) and the interests of any other broadcasting undertaking of the Canadian broadcasting system, it shall be resolved in the public interest, and where the public interest would be equally served by resolving the conflict in favour of either, it shall be resolved in favour of the objectives set out in paragraphs (l) and (m)." In other words, if there is a competition between CBC (the public broadcaster) and any private broadcaster, the CRTC will rule in favour of the CBC because, according to the Broadcast Act, that is in the public's interest.
Thus, when space opened up for an all-news channel, the CRTC awarded this lucrative advertising revenue generator to CBC, not to one of the private-sector networks vying for the licence. In tipping the balance to the public broadcaster, the CRTC allowed CBC Newsworld to not only shut out its private-sector competitors, but to do so for a number of years. Only in 1996 did the CRTC award a second, all-news channel—this time to CTV. However, the only way CTV could win the contract was by expressly not competing with CBC's Newsworld. In its application, CTV promised it would "be far different from Newsworld: different because N1 (Newsnet) will cover the headline news in short and concise 15-minute newscasts, while Newsworld does longer "gavel-to-gavel" coverage, interviews, and talk shows." CTV made these promises because its previous applications to compete with Newsworld were rejected by the CRTC. According to the CRTC, CTV's service would have to be "complementary to, and not competitive with, existing Canadian specialty services."
Furthering its stranglehold on the airwaves, the CRTC has now charged CTV's Newsnet with not fully complying with the terms of its licence. The CRTC claims the licence deviance on CTV's part is the result of media personality Mike Duffy broadcasting a daily segment. The CRTC has called this a "show," as distinct from a "concise 15-minute newscast," and as a result has launched a public hearing. In its defence, CTV argues that these appearances do not constitute a show, and that they do, in fact, adhere in design and implementation to the original intent of the licence. The CRTC claims that the reason for the hearing is that it has received a number of complaints about CTV Newsnet. Interestingly, the majority of the complaints come from the CBC itself.
According to a report by Chris Cobb, "The federal broadcast regulator is expected to tell CTV Newsnet that it can no longer broadcast live coverage of routine events or regularly scheduled shows, such as the one now hosted by veteran political reporter Mike Duffy."
Why does Canada need a CRTC? Who is being protected? And what are they being protected from? The CBC has the most to lose if CTV is allowed to compete with the former's service. The CBC's interest in CTV's programming is an indication that it cannot deal with any innovation or deviation from the CRTC's strict licensing rules. As we have seen, the CRTC, rather than protecting Canadians—in this case, from a harmful daily news segment from Mike Duffy— is in fact protecting the CBC from competition.
Reference
Chris Cobb (2001), "All-news Station Proves Too Lively," Calgary Herald, June 13, p. A3.
Lydia Miljan (lydiam@fraserinstitute.ca) is the Director of the Alberta Initiative, as well as the National Media Archive, of The Fraser Institute. She received her Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Calgary.
info@fraserinstitute.ca
4th Floor, 1770 Burrard Street, Vancouver, BC, Canada, V6J 3G7
Tel: (604) 688-0221 Fax: (604) 688-8539 Book Orders: 1-800-665-3558 ext. 580
You can contact us at the above email address for any comments or information requests. Please report any dead links or technical problems.