Discussion:
Canadian Heritage Standing Committee rejects fee-for-carriage
(too old to reply)
Taylor
2009-06-20 07:13:07 UTC
Permalink
http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/showthread.php?p=943419#post943419

Rogers reacts:

Rogers Applauds Canadian Heritage Standing Committee Report and its
rejection of fee-for-carriage

TORONTO, June 19 /CNW/ - Rogers today applauded the efforts of the
Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage on the release of its report
on The
Evolution of the Canadian Television Industry.
On April 20th, a Rogers' panel led by Vice Chairman, Phil Lind,
appeared
before the Committee to argue over-the-air broadcasters already
receive many
regulatory advantages and that while all businesses across the country
had
been impacted by the economic downturn, there was no convincing
evidence to
prop up the financial results of the broadcasters with a government
bail out.
Rogers cited the negative impact on consumers of the proposed fee
which would
have resulted in increases of between $4 - $6.00 per month per
subscriber.
After weeks of review and consultation with a broad range of
interested
parties, the all-party committee made a number of recommendations to
assist
the broadcasting sector but most importantly did not support the
controversial
proposal of 'fee for carriage'.
"The number one issue from our perspective was the proposal to tax
consumers put forward by the broadcasters. Despite a non-stop lobby
effort by
CTV to influence federal politicians, the report did not endorse the
fee for
carriage concept," said Phil Lind, Vice Chairman, Rogers
Communications Inc.
"We are encouraged as well by the rejection of fee for carriage and
"value for
programming" by the Government Members of the Committee in their
reasoned
Supplementary Report."
The Government MP report spoke to equity and stated that this "report
must now indicate our most fervent and rigorous opposition to any
potential
fee for carriage system, either negotiated or imposed, that would have
a
detrimental effect on the consumer. We believe it is fundamentally
unfair to
expect Canadian consumers to pay new and substantial charges each
month to
their cable or satellite distributor to reflect such a system." The
report
further noted that "the 90% of Canadians who currently receive their
television signals from a cable or satellite BDU already pay 5% of
their
monthly subscription fee to support the production of Canadian
television
programming."
The Government Members rejected the proposal, the Heritage Committee
did
not support the concept, and fee for carriage as proposed by the
broadcasters
has already been twice rejected by the CRTC in recent years. "The
Heritage
Committee Report should serve as an important reference point for the
upcoming
CRTC review of broadcast renewal licences," added Phil Lind.

Source: Rogers Press Release June 19th

---

Bell reacts:

Bell welcomes Heritage Committee rejection of Fee-for-carriage

OTTAWA, June 19 /CNW Telbec/ - Bell today welcomed the decision by the
House of Commons Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage not to
recommend the
imposition of fee-for-carriage on satellite and cable services, and
their
customers.

"We're pleased that the Committee saw through the smokescreen of
broadcaster hype to see fee-for-carriage for what it is, a tax on
consumers,"
said Mirko Bibic, Bell's Senior Vice President, Regulatory and
Government
Affairs. "BDU customers should not have to pay for something that is
available
for free over the air."

Bell hopes the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications
Commission (CRTC) takes notice of the Committee's decision, and in
particular
the categorical rejection of fee-for-carriage from the Committee's
government
members, during the CRTC's continued review of local TV issues. During
that
process, Bell looks forward to renewing its proposal for a "freesat"
solution
that would significantly reduce the broadcasters' costs to convert
their
signals to digital.

If conventional broadcasters do not replace all their analog towers
with
digital towers, many Canadians are at risk of losing access to over-
the-air
television channels. Bell's proposal would guarantee access to these
TV
channels to consumers, helping avoid any new tax on consumers or
government
bail out for Canadian broadcasters. The only requirement for consumers
would
be the purchase and installation of a compatible satellite dish and
digital
receiver.

"If Bell's recommendations are accepted by the CRTC, then consumers
would
be able to receive a package of at least five digital TV channels
without
having to subscribe to Bell TV," added Mr. Bibic. "For many consumers,
that's
more channels than they can access today over-the-air and at no
charge."

Source: Bell Press Release June 19th

MetromediaSquare.com
SFTV_troy
2009-06-20 11:19:30 UTC
Permalink
all-party committee made a number of recommendations to assist
the broadcasting sector but most importantly did not support the
controversial proposal of 'fee for carriage'.
The United States already has this. Cable companies pay 1-2 cents per
home per month to each of the local stations carried. They are exempt
from the fee if the station invokes the "must carry" rule.
Brian Smith
2009-06-20 18:06:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by SFTV_troy
all-party committee made a number of recommendations to assist
the broadcasting sector but most importantly did not support the
controversial proposal of 'fee for carriage'.
The United States already has this. Cable companies pay 1-2 cents per
home per month to each of the local stations carried. They are exempt
from the fee if the station invokes the "must carry" rule.
At least the US has a very reasonable plan. The networks in Canada wanted 50
cents per station carried and their already is a "must carry" rule. Not to
mention that cable and satellite companies already half to fork over 1% of
their *revenues* into a TV development fund which doesn't seem to have
resulted in much development by the networks, at least much of quality.

Brian
Bill Steele
2009-06-22 18:21:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Smith
Post by SFTV_troy
all-party committee made a number of recommendations to assist
the broadcasting sector but most importantly did not support the
controversial proposal of 'fee for carriage'.
The United States already has this. Cable companies pay 1-2 cents per
home per month to each of the local stations carried. They are exempt
from the fee if the station invokes the "must carry" rule.
At least the US has a very reasonable plan. The networks in Canada wanted 50
cents per station carried and their already is a "must carry" rule. Not to
mention that cable and satellite companies already half to fork over 1% of
their *revenues* into a TV development fund which doesn't seem to have
resulted in much development by the networks, at least much of quality.
Brian
Fee for carriage is a bit of nonsense imposed by the broadcast lobby
before the cable lobby got big enough to stop it. Being carried on cable
systems effectively increases a station's viewership and therefore
enhances the rates it can charge for advertising, so if anything the
stations should be paying the cable companies. Fee for carriage is why
our community was without a UPN, and later CW, station for about three
years.
Warren Oates
2009-06-23 11:37:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Steele
Fee for carriage is why
our community was without a UPN, and later CW, station for about three
years.
... those were the golden years.
--
Suddenly he realized that he was alone
with a giant halfwit on a dark deserted street.
-- Chester Himes
Loading...