1  

CRTC  Hearing:  Let’s  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  Canada’s  transition  to  digital  television  and  I’m  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  

  2  

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,  

let’s  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  

  3  

OTA  broadcasts  in  America  would  disenfranchise  the  poor.    This  fact  

reinforces  the  historic  root  of  OTA’s  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  UK’s  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  don’t  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.      

  4  

 

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  won’t  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.        

  5  

 

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.