|
|Monday Sept 6, 2004 |
BACK |
NEXT
THE CRTC'S STIFLING RULES
Why won't
regulator allow CTV to compete on level playing field?
I was watching breaking news coverage on CTV
Newsnet along with a friend not long ago. Then, all of sudden, the
network stopped its "live" coverage of the event to broadcast some
news highlights of the major events of the day.
The person in charge should be "shot," said my friend, who is not a
journalist.
Indeed, those annoying interruptions are like putting hot pepper on
ice cream; even my friend, who works in construction, could see it.
Of course not many people know the rules imposed by the Canadian
Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) on
CTV-Newsnet. They don't know the agency's rules often make
professional journalists running the show at CTV look like
professional fools.
CTV Newsnet and its French-language affiliate LCN are licensed by
the CRTC to provide breaking news as long as headline news is
presented every 15-minute block. Under its current agreement,
Newsnet must break into live coverage by broadcasting headline news
for at least two minutes. CTV has argued for one minute
interruptions.
Because of these draconian rules, what often happens is that viewers
like my friend end up switching channels when CTV-Newsnet interrupts
its live coverage with news updates.
The question is: why is the network put in this awkward situation?
To protect CBC Newsworld? Hardly.
If the event is an international one, a viewer can choose from
several other news networks on the dial, such as CNN, meaning CBC
won't necessarily win over a new viewer. In fact, if the event is
about foreign affairs, there is a strong possibility that the viewer
will switch to CNN.
If, instead, the event is Canadian, there are some considerations.
Fortunately, here in Canada we don't get news of major catastrophes,
shootings or earthquakes very often. Most of the time, the breaking
news is about political press conferences, the coverage of the daily
Question
Period, and the statements from the leader and ministers after that.
In this case it is important to have a choice. Often we see CBC and
CTV interviewing different leaders. The viewer will change channel
depending on the importance and the relevance of the guest each
network has on the air.
Changing channel because they have a bad choice of guests is
acceptable; what is not acceptable is that professional journalists
are made to look like fools to regular viewers in the name of a rule
that is not helping improve Canadian content, doesn't help the CBC
(and it shouldn't), and creates a disservice to Canadian viewers by
eliminating choice.
The restriction might have been useful seven years ago when the
environment was different. Now we have nine English-language news
networks, mainly American and many others (BBC for example) seeking
to enter the Canadian market. If there is space for other foreign
broadcasters, without jeopardizing other Canadian oulets, like CBC,
why does the CRTC consider only CTV Newsnet a source of concern?
Why does the CRTC want to regulate what cannot be regulated, meaning
the content, and refuses to regulate what it can, meaning the
carriage, leaving it completely in the hands of the cable companies?
"What we are asking for is the right to compete fairly with other
news networks," says Robert Hurst, President of CTV News, who is
only arguing for the "right to make newsroom decisions based on news
merit, not on stopwatch timings or other arbitrary criteria; the
right, in this wired, globalized information age, to give our
viewers a Canadian perspective on the news of the day."
Is that too much to ask from the CRTC? Is it too complicated to let
the journalists to do their job, to be journalists?
|
