GATINEAU – The oral reply phase of a CRTC hearing is the last opportunity for applicants to make their final pleas, respond to comments from competing applicants but also one more opportunity for the Commission to ask questions and, most importantly to raise an issue to ensure it is on the record of the hearing.
Interestingly, in the last phase of this week’s hearing into a mandatory license for an ethnic, multi-language primarily news specialty service, the vice-chair-broadcasting, Caroline Simard, asked each applicant something new: “Could you tell us which are the main steps that you would be doing in order to ensure that their service could be launched day one,” if granted the licence? That illustrates one of the oddities of this hearing. Assuming the Commission issues its decision in the spring of 2019, the winner would have until August 2020 to get ready. But the Commission wanted to make sure.
It also highlights the fact that Rogers, having been granted the licence in 2017 to run until 2020, was given an enormous advantage benefiting from incumbency. It should be noted though that none of the three commissioners who will be making this decision voted at the time when Rogers was granted its must-carry licence.
This phase encapsulates the passion and desperation of applicants who know that their chance of getting this licence is in the hands of people who have never operated a television station, let alone an ethnic television station.
An example of a shot at a competing application came from Corrcan Media’s Joe Volpe, who said: “As a point of comparison only, the analytics on Facebook suggest that interest in our product dwarfs that of OMNI and its affiliate, CHIN International. On that matrix, TLN is barely a blip on the scale.” Of course, Corrcan didn’t quote any actual Facebook viewership numbers to back up that claim.
There are sometimes smiles to be had in a last second plea. Shan Chandrasekar of ATN said “we have the greatest respect for the Commission. There are three major gods in India: the God of Creation; the God of Protection and the God of Destruction, called Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. These are all great characters in India. All three are worshipped and they are all about heaven apparently, but this is an old saying from my grandmother that I learned.
“For us, the CRTC is all three gods. You helped us create. You protected us with policies and, you know, the small amounts that you destroyed us from time to time when genre protection was taken away, then buy-through was taken away, but in spite of all that, we have survived and we want to assure that no matter what happens, whether we get a licence or not, we will continue the mandate that you have given us.’
“I’ve been called a lot of things in the last 15 months. I don’t think ‘Gods’ was among them.” – Ian Scott, CRTC
Chairman Ian Scott responded, laughing: “I’ve been called a lot of things in the last 15 months. I don’t think ‘Gods’ was among them.”
We also saw a bit of apparent smugness of the incumbent rubbing it in when Rogers commented on how other applicants ideas may cause costs to rise at among BDUs. “All of these options create additional costs for BDUs over and above their wholesale rates, whereas our wholesale fee includes our TVE product and does not force BDUs to incur additional costs. Moreover, approval of OMNI Regional will ensure subscriber fees are used to create ethnic and third-language programming rather than start-up costs and capital infrastructure,” said Colette Watson, senior vice-president, television and broadcast operations at Rogers Media.
However, disputed Ethnic Channels Group’s Slava Levin in its presentation,“there is no technical hurdle for BDUs to deliver Voices. Our approach uses the same signal delivery systems as are currently used by all digital services. There are no out-of-the-ordinary costs.”
The Commission will have difficult decisions to make:
- Issue a licence or none at all. Mandatory carriage licences are to give a voice to the voiceless. Having created such a level of expectation, we do not think they could say no to everybody unless they launch a new process to get even better applications. Or, the review of the Broadcasting Act may give the Commission an escape route where the Regulator could say it will wait until the new Act comes in effect to ensure that the new licence is in conformity of the new vision of Broadcasting.
- If the answer is yes, there will be a 9(1)(h) license, would they re-give it to Rogers, who benefits from incumbency? Is it fair to give it to a multi-billion-dollar corporation such a TV license when smaller players are trying to make a go at it independently and perhaps with fresh eyes? We think this will be the main question commissioners and staff will have to solve.
- And, if not Rogers, who among the others could succeed delivering on their promises – or will the Commission just take a chance and go for the best applicant even if their business case appears challenging.
The chairman at some point quoted his mother saying she often told him nothing is impossible, so the only thing we think is impossible at this point, is that the Commission grants two licences…
Undertakings are due December 6th and final written replies on January 14, 2019.
