CRTC

Hearing: Lets Talk TV: A Conversation with Canadians Sept 16, 2014

Dr. Gregory Taylor (Ryerson University)


1. Chairman Blais and Commissioners,

2. I would like to thank the CRTC for the opportunity to speak today. I believe a
wide-ranging public discussion is necessary at this crucial juncture in
Canadian communication. This hearing reinforces why we need public
regulators.

3. My name is Dr. Gregory Taylor. I work at Ryerson University in Toronto and
I am the author of Shut Off: the Canadian Digital Television Transition. I
spent years studying Canadas transition to digital television and Im not at
all surprised that we are still coming to grips with the regulatory challenges
posed by this conversion. When I finished writing my book, Netflix had only
been in Canada a few months and it was already clear the ground was
shaking beneath the broadcasters feet. Some of the current uncertainty is the
result of technological upheaval, but much is also the product of a profound
industrial inertia.

4. Conventional broadcasters are justifiably nervous, noting a multi year drop
in revenues, and there is no doubt the internet and OTT services will
continue to cut into their market share; however, the numbers from the
Communication Monitoring Report and other sources such as Canadian
Media Research are clear that there is still life in living room TV. Linear
television viewing numbers have remained remarkably consistent given the
proliferation of options. One can see from the hundreds, perhaps thousands
of submissions for this hearing, that conventional television is by no means
dead in this country. I was disappointed last week to hear from people

appointed to oversee our public broadcaster that they are ready to abandon
conventional television altogether.

5. Indeed, I come to praise and resuscitate over-the-air television, not to bury it.
Before we pull the national plug on this foundational sector, that until ten
years ago was referenced in this room as the cornerstone of the system,
lets give it a proper chance to make a contribution. Simply put, Canadians
have never seen the true capabilities of digital over-the-air television. Canada
has continued to approach the OTA sector from a 20th century perspective,
when 21st century digital OTA can be so much more.

6. The ATSC standard chosen by Canada as its national standard in the late 90s,
was originally developed and adopted in the United States because of its
strong OTA signal and the potential to broadcast multiple stations on one 6
MHz channel. In the United States today it is doing just that. I have spoken
on this issue in many places in Canada and I like to invite the audience to find
a US city of similar size to theirs and search that city name and OTA TV.
They are always shocked to discover how many stations are available in the
US. Admittedly, many of those sub stations are inexpensive retro TV and
weather, but that also describes a number of current Canadian cable
channels.

7. The inexpensive and accessible nature of OTA sub channels can open the
door to new ownership regimes. This is what I propose today. There is clear
precedent south of the border. An OTA resurgence is a growing phenomenon
in the US and is proving beneficial for marginalized communities. The
National Association of Broadcasters reports in 2013 that The number of
African-American households depending solely on broadcast TV delivered
over-the-air increased to 22 percent in 2013 (up from 12 percent in 2010)
(National Association of Broadcasters, 2013). Of those that switched from
cable to OTA, over 70% claimed cost was the factor. Clearly, to discontinue

OTA broadcasts in America would disenfranchise the poor. This fact

reinforces the historic root of OTAs place in the greater democratic goals of
mass media: it is accessible to all, not just those who can afford to buy a
subscription.

8. Growth in OTA viewership among African Americans has coincided with an
expansion of African American broadcasters. Bounce TV and the Soul of the
South Network are examples of new, independent broadcasters that have
seen substantial growth broadcasting on sub channels offered by licensed
OTA broadcasters. These independent stations have rapidly expanded and
are now available in cities across the United States. This is precisely what the
ATSC standard was designed to do. With the notable exception of Southshore
Broadcasting in Leamington, Ontario, the multicasting option remains
underexplored in Canada.

9. In broadcasting, Canada has traditionally compared itself to the US and the
UK. In the UK, recent data indicates that living room television viewership is
going up, not down, despite the proliferation of wireless devices
(http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-23521277). The UKs Digital
Communication Infrastructure Strategy, released last month, does not
anticipate a switch off of over-the-air until after 2030
(https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_da
ta/file/346054/DCIS_consultation_final.pdf).

10. Such calls for OTA shut down from major broadcasters in Canada are
premature. I dont believe it is an enormous expense to expand OTA to
incorporate multicasting: Tony Vidal of Southshore Broadcasting is the only
broadcaster I know of using a four signal multicast in Canada. He told me he
did this for under $70, 000. Of course this is a low power station, but his
financial resources are less powerful as well. What I propose is financially
feasible.


11. Under correct policy guidance, Canada can create a more vibrant OTA sector
via multicasting which could assist in maximizing choice, instead of trapping
the Canadian public into BDU contracts with little viable alternatives. Using
sub-channels as avenues for new broadcasters as per the American model,
Canada could introduce a wider variety of non-vertically integrated
programming sources. Canada already has independent OTA broadcasters
such as CHEK in Victoria and CHCH in Hamilton. Allowing access to less
expensive OTA sub channels could encourage new players.

12. Most urban centres in Canada have access to OTA channels and new ones
have been added even outside mandatory markets in communities such as
Kingston. We have a generation of urban cord-nevers about to hit adulthood
they wont buy a cable package no matter how skinny the basic. This is a
market that should prove attractive to some advertisers. Of course
advertising revenues are going to be much lesser for broadcasters than
historic levels, but we also live in an era when on-site satellite trucks can be
replaced with a reporter with a smart phone and a solid data plan.
Production costs are not nearly what they were.

13. I propose that Canada harness the true potential of digital OTA and put
measures in place to encourage multicasting signals. So, at a hearing where
powerful Canadian broadcasters recommend the end of over-the-air service,
I am requesting the opposite. What I envision is the OTA equivalent of the
use it or lose it clause that has been introduced for wireless broadband
spectrum. As a condition of license, 6 MHz license holders must make efforts
to find broadcasters for the sub channels in their multicast signals.

14. Of course there will be resistance. When the cable and satellite providers
also own the conventional stations, no positive change is likely to happen
without a regulatory push.


15. So, why we should continue and expand OTA:

There is data demonstrating continued viewership of traditional television.

It would limit the already disproportionate power of BDUs within the

Canadian system.

Internet architecture has not yet matured to the point where it can replace
OTA, which has no data cap.

Canadian OTA has never actually utilized the true potentials of digital OTA
via multicasting. A fully multicast digital signal (offering 3-4 broadcast
services per 6 MHz license) would provide real competition to BDUs in urban
markets, thereby maximizing choice.

To cut OTA would disenfranchise the poor, who are switching to a more
vibrant OTA sector in the U.S.

16. Quite simply: what have we got to lose? As Commissioner Pentefountas said
to TVA last week, if broadcasters are not happy with it, they can simply give
back the OTA license. I would think there would be other takers for access to
6 MHz of prime spectrum, who may bring a new vibrancy to Canadian
broadcasting.

17. If this strategy does work, we will introduce a new local programming option
and expand broadcasting diversity; if not it requires a minimal investment
and we will know within a few years if the era of OTA TV is indeed over.

18. I thank you for your time.