About Me

My photo
I grew up in a small town, dreaming of becoming a professional writer. Today in my final year as a journalism student at the University of Regina I am living on the edge of realizing this dream. After working in a weekly and daily newsroom I have faced the tough realities of life as a reporter. In this blog I will try to offer insight into the state of media today and how it impacts the world as we know it. My philosophy as a writer is to tell stories for the purpose of bridging the gap of understanding between people.

Tuesday, November 24, 2009

Battle for Local TV

My purpose for the latest media article was to provide a clear picture of the issues surrounding carraige fees for local TV broadcasting signals.

Leading up to the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission public hearing which began on Nov. 16, two opposing campaigns tried to sway public opinion. Conventional broadcasters including CTV, Global and CBC entered a coalition to "save local TV," while cable and sattelite providers lashed back telling people to "stop the TV tax."
Many of my friends outside the media seemed very confused about the subject, and they were not alone in wondering which side to believe.

I spoke to Wade Moffatt, the general manager for CTV Regina, as well as a spokesperson for Access Communications to hear both sides of the story. Moffatt said most conventional broadcasters are losing revenue and without the right to negotiate with cable companies to charge a fee for their signal, as many as 30 local TV stations could close in Western Canada.
Tasha Lupanko, from Access, argued that cable companies should not have to pay because they actually add value to local TV broadcasters because they are carried in basic cable packages which reach a wide audience.

Cable and satellite providers are calling the fee for carraige proposal a "TV tax" because it would force them to pay to broadcast local signals even though they have always been free to everyone. If this is implemented, they say cable rates will have to increase. Meanwhile, conventional broadcasters are calling for regulation of cable fees to make sure consumers do not bear the brunt of this expense.

The Local Programming Improvement Fund has also been a key point brought up by both sides. This fund requires cable and satellite providers to pay a levy of 1.5 per cent on their profits to support local television stations. However, this fund was only a temporary measure put in place to save local broadcasters from closing last year when the industry was in economic downfall.

So I ask you. Should cable companies pay to deliver local signals? Or should conventional broadcasters find a different way to fix their business model?
After deciphering the misinformation campaigns of both sides, I think you will find that the truth lies somewhere in between.

To read my full article go to:
http://www.jschool.ca//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=204&Itemid=1

No comments:

Post a Comment