FINAL REPORT ON THE CANADIAN NEWS MEDIA
Volume 1 of 2
Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications
Chair: The Honourable Lise Bacon
Deputy Chair:The Honourable David Tkachuk
June 2006
MEMBERSHIP
The Honourable Lise Bacon,Chair
The Honourable David Tkachuk,Deputy Chair
and
The Honourable Senators:
Willie Adams | *Marjory Lebreton, P.C. (or Gerald Comeau) |
Pat Carney, P.C. | Terry M. Mercer |
John Trevor Eyton | Pana Merchant |
*Daniel Hays (or Joan Fraser) | Jim Munson |
Janis G. Johnson | Gerard A. Phalen |
| Rod A.A. Zimmer |
*ExOfficio Members
In addition, the Honourable Senators GeorgeBaker, P.C., Tommy Banks, Michel Biron, Eymard G. Corbin, Pierre De Bané, P.C.,Consiglio Di Nino, Joyce Fairbairn, P.C., J. Michael Forrestall, Aurélien Gill,B. Alasdair Graham, P.C., Leonard Gustafson, Laurier L. LaPierre, JohnLynch-Staunton, Lorna Milne, Wilfred P. Moore, Nancy Ruth, Pierre-Claude Nolin,Mira Spivak, Gerry St. Germain, P.C., Terry Stratton, and Marilyn TrenholmeCounsell have participated in this study since the tabling of theInterim Reportin April 2004.
Research Staff:
JosephJackson, Library of Parliament
TerrenceThomas, Library of Parliament
David M.Black, Special Advisor to the Committee
The Committee alsoexpresses thanks to Alexandre Drago in the office of the Chair; Rhonda Walkerand Robin Hay in the office of the Deputy Chair; Céline Ethier in the office ofSenator Fraser, former Chair; Tracy Bellefontaine in the office of SenatorJohnson and Till Heyde, former Clerk of the Committee, and Jessica Richardsonwith the Committees Directorate, for their contributions to this study.
ORDER OF REFERENCE
Extract fromtheJournals of the Senate of Thursday,April 27, 2006:
The Honourable Senator Robichaud,P.C., for the Honourable Senator Bacon, moved, seconded by the HonourableSenator Dallaire:
That the Standing Senate Committeeon Transport and Communications be authorized to examine and report on thecurrent state of Canadian media industries, emerging trends and developments inthese industries; the media's role, rights, and responsibilities in Canadiansociety; and current and appropriate future policies relating thereto;
That the Committee submit its finalreport to the Senate no later than June 30, 2006 and that it retain until July31, 2006 all powers necessary to publicise its findings; and
That the papers and evidencereceived and taken and the work accomplished by the Committee on the subjectsince the Second Session of the Thirty-Seventh Parliament be referred to theCommittee.
The question being put on themotion, it was adopted.
Paul C.Bélisle
Clerk of the Senate
(This Order ofReference is similar to the Committee’s Orders of Reference for this studyduring previous parliamentary sessions.)
A. Technology: Catalytic and Disruptive. 2
B. What the Committee Set Out to Do. 5
C. What the Committee Heard. 5
D. The Purpose of this Report6
PART II:CAUSES FOR CONCERN.. 9
A. The Impacts of Concentration of Ownership on Diversity in Canadian NewsMedia. 9
2) National and provincial news bureaus. 11
3) Centralized news coverage. 12
4) Potential impacts on analysis and opinion. 13
B. The Watchdogs Do Not Bite. 14
2) Regulators neglect the news. 15
C. The Public Broadcaster is Too Many Things to Too Many People. 19
PARTIII: IN DEFENCE OF THE PUBLIC INTEREST. 23
A. Cross-Media Ownership and Concentration. 23
1) Media and theCharter of Rights. 23
2) International practices. 24
B. Policies to Promote News and Information Programming. 28
1) Clarify theBroadcasting Act28
2) Lower barriers to entry into the market29
3) Increase monitoring of conditions of licence. 30
4) A variety of enforcement powers for the CRTC.. 31
C. Back to Basics for the CBC.. 33
2) Public broadcasters should complement, not compete with, private broadcasters. 36
PART IV:RELATED FEDERAL POLICIES TO CONSIDER.. 40
B. An Appropriate Tax Regime. 44
1) A more inclusive definition of charitable foundations. 44
2) Enforcing foreign ownership rules. 44
3) Tax treatment of inherited media businesses. 45
C. Protecting Freedom of the Press. 46
1) Protecting sources and material46
3) Whistleblower legislation. 48
1) Access for Minority Language Communities. 50
PART V: AND FOR THE RECORD…... 53
3) Statements of principle and codes of ethics. 56
4) Canadian Broadcast Standards Council57
C. The Role of Education and Research. 57
1) Education of journalists. 57
2) Support for journalism schools and other training. 59
D. Diversity in the Newsroom.. 61
APPENDIXA: THE STUDY PROCESS, WITNESSES AND SELECTED BRIEFS. 66
APPENDIXB: LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS. 88
CHAIR’S FOREWORD
On March 19, 2003, the Senate authorized the Standing Senate Committeeon Transport and Communications to launch a study of Canadian media industries.An interim report was tabled by the Committee in May 2004. Over threeyears have elapsed between the initial mandate and the tabling of the finalreport. During that time, we saw two federal elections and a prorogation ofParliament. Each time, the Committee had to be restruck and given a new orderof reference from the Senate.
During the first session of the 39th Parliament, I had theprivilege of being elected Chair of the Committee by my colleagues. Having notbeen a member of the Committee at the time of the public hearings and Committeedeliberations on the drafting of the various versions of the report, I onlyrecently became involved in the deliberations. It would be remiss not to acknowledge the contributions of every senatorwho worked on the Committee at one time or another during the three years ofour study. In particular, we mustacknowledge the work of Senator Joan Fraser, who chaired the Committeefrom the start of the study until very recently, and Senators Leonard Gustafsonand David Tkachuk, the two deputy chairs during this period.
I would also like to thank everyone, from the Committee clerks to thesupport staff, not to mention the Library of Parliament’s research staff, whohelped to make this study a reality. Thank you for your dedication and hard work. Without the combined efforts of everyoneinvolved, this report could not have come to fruition.
The Honourable Lise Bacon, Senator
Chair
PART I: INTRODUCTION
A free press,free expression – it’s the last line of defence for all the other freedoms.…
No matter howimperfect things are, if you’ve got a free press everything is correctable, andwithout it everything is concealable.
Tom Stoppard
Night and Day.
And there werenever in the world two opinions alike, any more than two hairs or two grains.Their most universal quality is diversity.
Michel de Montaigne
Of the Resemblance of Childrento their Fathers
To make informed decisions, citizensneed a wide range of news and information. They also need access to a broad anddiverse array of opinions and analyses about matters of public interest.Journalists are important providers of such information, as are the informationmedia that transmit such material. This is why the freedom of the press iswidely recognized as a central pillar of any democracy.
In
Innovations in technology coupledwith recent changes in the ownership of certain news media groups in
A. Technology: Catalytic and Disruptive
Traditionally, news was supplied tothe public in a fixed format, such as a newspaper, or at a fixed time, such asthe 6 o’clock news. News organizations decided what news to supply, what eventsto report on, and how resources needed for the process should be allocated. Inthis traditional “news as supplied” world, readers and viewers were largelypassive consumers of the news.
Innovations in communicationtechnologies – in particular the widespread availability and use of theInternet – have changed this picture beyond recognition. Most major newspapersnow offer electronic editions; 24-hour television news services cover breakingnews as it happens; Internet search tools allow users to seek out news from anear limitless number of sources; personal web logs (or blogs) offer a range ofperspectives on news and current events; and cell phones and other portabledigital devices provide news and information tailored to personal interests.Taken together, these relatively recent innovations have made it possible forcitizens to be more active participants in what is sometimes referred to as a“news on demand” culture.
In light of these developments,consumer markets for all forms of news media have fragmented dramatically inrecent years, triggering a widespread struggle for economic viability among
The argument is sometimes made thatthe “news on demand” culture will, in the near future, render the “news assupplied” model obsolete. This outcome, however, is far from certain for anumber of reasons:
1. The traditional mediastill generate the majority of news reporting.Much of the news on the Internet issupplied by traditional media sources, notably newspapers and broadcasters. Fewonline services provide the quantity and quality of original reporting that isgenerated by the traditional news media.[2] At present, there are few successful business models for stand-alone Internetnews gathering organizations.
2. If the price of onlinenews and information goes up, consumption may decline.Although the Internet and othertechnologies offer efficiencies in the cost of physically producing anddistributing information, there are still costs associated with covering thenews and producing news reports. In cases where advertising revenue does notcover costs, the online news and information provider may have no choice but tointroduce subscription fees to stay in business.
3. The credibility of onlinenews and information is sometimes uncertain.It will take time for online mediasources to establish levels of credibility similar to traditional media sources.This may lead Internet users to question the accuracy of an online news source,particularly if it is less well known.
From the perspective of theproducers of print and broadcast news, one of the most disruptive effects ofonline news sources has been the diversion of advertising revenues. Classifiedad revenues make up a large proportion of the total revenue of most newspapers;a variety of Internet sites, such as e-Bay and Craigslist, now compete forthese listings. Online sites offer the competitive advantages of a largermarket and more informative and interactive listings. This phenomenon hasnotable but as yet unclear implications for journalists employed by the printand broadcast media.
Consider, for example, theconsolidation of news gathering organizations, the fragmentation of audiencesand the associated impact on revenues. It is often the case that structural changesin the industry and shareholder pressures lead to cost-cutting measures,including reductions in the number of journalists. Taken one step further,fewer journalists could mean less or no coverage of a particular topic.
The Committee believes that, while onlinenews and information is of growing importance, its presence may not be thesolution for many of the issues raised in this report. The proliferation andpopularity of blogs is a case in point. While it is true that they are astimulating element of today’s news and information environment and that theysometimes have a near instantaneous impact on public debate, they do notgenerate the volume or type of news generated by traditional news providers. Onthe contrary, most blogs supplement news and current events with additionalfacts and a wide range of opinions.
For these reasons, the Committeebelieves that over the medium term – possibly the next fifteen or twenty years– there will be a mix of news gathering organizations: some Internet-based,others distributing traditional print or broadcast news and yet others using amix of distribution mechanisms. Indeed, despite the proliferation of theelectronic media, newspapers and broadcasters will continue to generate much ofthe news and information that citizens obtain.
B. Whatthe Committee SetOutto Do
The Committee issued an interimreport in April 2004. The information in that report should be considered anintegral part of this report.[3]
This Committee’s formal mandate (seepage ii) was vast, covering the entire field of media in
The Committee has avoided proposalsthat violate freedom of expression or freedom of the press and other media.
The Committee has also kept in mindthat public policy must foster the sustainability of
C. What theCommittee Heard
Many Canadians believe that public policyhas not kept pace with change. Witnesses who appeared before the Committeeraised many concerns regarding the state of news gathering organizations, theplurality of owners, and access to a diversity of viewpoints. The Committeethanks all those who appeared to share their thoughts on the state of the newsmedia in
The Committee’s Interim Reportprovides a detailed account of what it heard up to March 2004; Volume II ofthis report summarizes much of what has been heard since that time.Observations of greatest importance in light of the Committee’s mandate were asfollows:
On media concentration.Many witnesses expressed concern about concentration of ownership inparticular regions and the potential dangers this poses to diversity ofopinion. A number of witnesses criticized the Competition Bureau and the CanadianRadio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) for failing toaddress these issues adequately. Some of the most vocal concerns came from thejournalists.
On the national public broadcaster.The Committee heard that all is not well with
On the legal and professional environment for working journalists.Witnesses expressed concern over theimpact of the legal system on the work of journalists: problems with access toinformation laws, the absence of adequate whistleblower legislation, theabsence of appropriate policies to protect journalists from police searches,and Section 4 of theSecurity of Information Act,which makes it a crimefor a journalist to possess a government secret.
On training and research. Witnesses made note of the lack of training support for journalists andpointed out that Canada does not have a permanent centre with stable funding forresearch on the media similar, for example, to the Pew Institute in the UnitedStates.
On federal support programs.The Committee learned that federal support forpublications (notably postal subsidies and magazine support) does not take intoaccount the availability of the Internet as a distribution mechanism and relatedchallenges triggered by changes in the media environment.
D. The Purpose of this Report
Numerous witnesses also argued thata focus on profits has led to increased media concentration, raising concernsabout a possible deterioration in the quality of news in
While the Committee recognizes theimportance of sustainable news media organizations, it does not agree that theunfettered free market is as optimal or benign as its proponents sometimesargue. Consolidation, that is, the centralization of some activities, isdifferent from concentration and the Committee has seen evidence that there arenews media organizations with excessively dominant positions within individual Canadianmarkets. Such concentration of ownership could have negative consequences forthe public interest. The lack of appropriate regulation has led to the presentsituation.
This volume of the Committee’s finalreport on the Canadian news media discusses these important issues, and others,in greater depth; where appropriate, recommendations and suggestions areoffered.
- Part II of this Volume elaborates on the Committee’s main areas of concern, including the impact of news media ownership concentration on the diversity of sources and analysis available to Canadians, the absence of federal control over news media ownership, and the role of the national public broadcaster.
- Part III contains the Committee’s recommendations to reflect better the public interest in policy related to the Canadian news media.
- Part IV makes further recommendations concerning existing support policies for the news media and journalists in
- Part V makes suggestions and recommendations on matters outside federal jurisdiction, including self-regulation in the news media industry, continuing education for journalists and diversity in the newsroom.
The second volume of this reportoffers more detailed discussions of key issues raised in this volume andprovides supporting material that helped shape this final report.
PART II: CAUSES FOR CONCERN
Among the many strengths of theCanadian news media system is the presence of a number of profitable companiesthat run successful and high quality print and broadcasting news operations. Importantcontributions are also made to news and information by the CBC, provincialeducational broadcasters, not-for-profit services such as the cable publicaffairs channel CPAC and the aboriginal television network APTN, and communityradio and television stations.
These strengths are offset bywarning signs. Four serious problems are apparent:
1. Many regions and markets are characterized by high levels ofconcentration in news media ownership and/or cross-ownership.
2.
3. There is no recognized mechanism that allows the public interest inthese issues to be discussed and reviewed in an open, transparent anddemocratic manner.
4. Many current rules and programs discourage or inhibit new voices andorganizations from entering the news media industry.
The first, second, and fourthproblems are discussed in the sections below and the third is explored in PartIII.
A. The Impacts ofConcentration of Ownership on Diversity in Canadian News Media
Some witnesses, in particularofficials from large media companies, argued that concerns about ownership concentrationand consolidation were misplaced, and that there was no evidence of harm fromrecent changes in the structure of ownership in the media sector. Otherwitnesses, mainly journalists, pointed out several areas of concern. Oneexample is the closing of news bureaus – international, national and provincial– and, more generally, the centralization of news coverage. These practices, itwas argued, reduce the diversity of both news and analysis available toCanadians.
1) Foreign news bureaus
Jeffrey Dvorkin, the Ombudsman atNational Public Radio (NPR), told the Committee during a site visit to
Cost-cutting in the wake of mediaacquisitions has also led to the closing of some Canadian news bureaus. In anera of globalization Canadians need to have their own eyes and ears to reporton world news from a Canadian perspective. The following table shows the numberof foreign bureaus operated by Canadian media companies as of November 2005.
Canadian Foreign News Bureaus (November 2005) | ||
Organization | Foreign Bureaus | Locations |
CanWest | 2[8] | |
CBC | 12 | Bangkok, Beijing, Dakar, Jerusalem, London, Mexico City, Moscow, New York, Paris, Rio de Janeiro, Shanghai[9] and Washington |
CTV | 9 | |
Globe and Mail | 7 | |
La Presse (Gesca) | 3 | |
TorStar | 6 | |
Journalist James Travers explainedthe importance of foreign news bureaus to the Committee:
Maintaining foreignbureaus … ensures momentous events will not take readers by surprise. That hasnever been more important and the importance will continue to grow as worldevents accelerate and this country tries to find its place in them. Morepractically, keeping Canadian journalists in the field ensures that thegovernment and its agencies do not operate overseas with a unanimity thattaxpayers would never tolerate at home. If we are to understand ourselves andbe full citizens of the world and if we are to grasp the importance of evolvingpatterns, then newspapers must have the resources to play a meaningful part.Without those resources, readers, newsrooms and the quality of public debatesuffer irreparable harm.
Allan Thompson, a former journalistand currently a journalism professor at
...to cover 56 countries, ahalf-dozen wars, three incipient famines, the most corrupt mining industries inthe world — and, oh yes, the fact that 36 million people have HIV/AIDS and willdie within the decade, barring some dramatic international intervention.
2) National and provincialnews bureaus
In the past, many local newspapers hadcorrespondents in
Fragmentary evidence was provided ina submission to the Committee by a former journalist, Professor ChristopherWaddell of
Professor Waddell emphasized thepreliminary nature of his research and noted that there are many influences onvoter turnout. One possibility is that when citizens lose a localinterpretation of national events, they feel less connected to nationalpolicies and less inclined to vote for those who set these policies. AsProfessor Waddell noted,
Nationalnews services … produce qualitatively different coverage than the individualnewspapers with their own reporters in
It would beuseful for researchers to explore this more fully.
In some cases, bureaus coveringprovincial legislatures have also been closed or reduced. In Vancouver, forexample, the Committee heard that the city’s major dailies, theSunand theProvince, no longer have reporters at the provincial legislature inVictoria and instead depend on their sister paper, the VictoriaTimes-Colonist, for coverage. TheCommittee was also told that theProvinceno longer has a forestry reporter, even though forestry represents one of theprovince’s most important economic industries.
3) Centralized news coverage
A further concern relates to centralizednews coverage. There has always been some tendency, especially during times of reducedbudgets, for organizations with more than one news outlet to centralize certaincoverage to make more efficient use of available resources. For example, if membersof a newspaper chain contract jointly for a central source of sports listings, themoney saved can be used to develop or provide coverage that otherwise would notbe affordable.
Centralization, however, can also comeat a cost. The perception that only the “centre” matters was exacerbated byEnglish CBC TV’s early 1990s decision, now partly reversed, to scale back somelocal and regional news coverage. Witnesses from outside
Other witnesses raised concerns overCanWest’s decision to create a Canadian News Desk (CND) to feed wire copy and re-editedmaterial across its chain from various papers on subjects such as fashion,food, homes, personal finances, automobiles and health.[11]
Centralization can also occur at thelocal level. The Committee was told that the Gesca newspaper group in
In short, some witnesses wereworried that a continued stress on centralization by Canadian media groups wouldlessen the diversity of news and information in
4) Potential impacts onanalysis and opinion
Concerns about diversity also applyto analysis and opinion. Public debate based on differing views is thecornerstone of democracy, and the news media provide a vital space where thatdebate is carried out. The right of proprietors to voice their opinions ontheir editorial pages has long been considered fundamental to freedom of thepress. Difficulty arises, however, if one proprietor owns so many media outletsthat his or her opinions crowd out others.
Several witnesses before theCommittee expressed concern about a potential loss of diversity in analysis andopinion. Such concerns had been heightened by CanWest Global’s 2001announcement that national editorials would be featured two or three times aweek in its daily newspapers. Under this policy, CanWest’s English-languagepapers would not be allowed to publish dissenting editorials.
Although CanWest later withdrew thenational editorials of its own accord, the initial announcement aroused great controversyamong journalists. Some columnists who publicly disagreed with the policy hadtheir columns dropped from the papers, even though the company had said thatdivergent views would be permitted on op-ed pages. At theMontrealGazette,journalists protested against the policy by withholding their bylines. Inresponse, the paper’s management posted a memo warning employees that publicstatements criticizing the policy:
violate the legalrequirement for primary fidelity to the employer. Case law supports sanctions,including suspension or termination, against those who persist in disregardingtheir obligations to the employer after clear warning. …
No one, journalistor otherwise, has the right to work atTheGazette. It is a privilege that carries with it the obligations ofprudence, diligence, honesty and fidelity to the employer.[13]
However correct these observationsmay have been in law, this was a clear message that dissent from the views ofhead office was a firing offence. As several witnesses reminded the Committee,the greater the media concentration, the harder it is for a journalist
B. TheWatchdogs Do Not Bite
The legal and regulatory framework shouldsupport diversity while not interfering with news, editorial content or discussionsof public affairs. The federal government has several important responsibilitiesin this regard. It funds the national public broadcaster and appoints the CRTC,which regulates the broadcasting system; the federal Competition Bureau hasjurisdiction over certain economic components of the private media sector.
1) The legislative role
TheCanadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms establishes a fundamental“freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression including freedom of thepress and other media of communication.” Some claim that freedom of speech placesthe press and other news gathering organizations outside of any government lawor regulation that is not a law of general application (that is, a lawaffecting the news media only in the same way that all other Canadians areaffected).[14] Supportersof this argument believe that theCharterrights of news and information organizations supersede any special laws thatmight apply to them.
The claim that no legislation of anykind can apply specifically to news gathering organizations is unduly broad. Ascan be seen in the table below,
Government Influences on Media
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 2 ("... Freedom of press and other media of communication.").
Laws Competition Act Legislation of general applicability (no media-specific provisions). Overseen by the Competition Bureau
Broadcasting Act Regulates all broadcasters (only influence on print media is on regulation of cross-media companies; in 1999 the CRTC decided that new media on the Internet would not be regulated as broadcasters). Overseen by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC)
Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act Income Tax Act Investment Copyright Act Security of Information Act Access to Information Act
Relevant Government Policies Cultural Education (Provincial responsibility) National Security Official Languages
Relevant Government Programs Publications Assistance Program |
The legislation that many witnessessaid should apply more specifically to the news media sector is theCompetition Act. Freedom of expressionunder theCharter is not necessarilydependent on the ownership interests of a particular private company. Freedomof expression is enhanced, encouraged and more easily exercised if there arenumerous owners.
2) Regulatorsneglect the news
Two federal agencies administer thelegislation and regulations that have an impact on the corporate practices of Canadiannews gathering organizations. The Competition Bureau is responsible for mattersrelating to theCompetition Act, including media mergers that might affectcompetitive markets. The CRTC regulates the broadcasting system; changes ofownership that involve broadcasting licences must have its approval.
A his
a) The Competition Bureau
The Competition Bureau applies a generalizedform of economic analysis of individual firms’ behaviour to judge whether aparticular market is competitive. As it explained in a submission to theCommittee:
The Bureau strives to ensurethat
As a law of generalapplication that covers all businesses in
In practice,prices are used to gauge the conditions in a market for goods orservices. In the media market, where radio, television and some newspapers aresupplied free of charge, the Bureau’s focus price is generally the price ofadvertising.
While it is true that some readersbuy a newspaper for the advertising, most are interested in the news,information and other non-advertising features. The same is true for radiolisteners and television viewers, who are seeking out content, not commercials.Clearly, a principal public interest about the news media should be the diversityof news and opinion. For this reason, advertising costs are not always the bestindicator of market conditions for the news media given that rates can stay thesame (or even decline) in the wake of increased concentration of ownership.
The way the Competition Bureau definesa market may also impede it from preventing anti-competitive practices in theCanadian news media industry. The Competition Bureau’s general analyticalframework may lead it
Conceptually, a relevantmarket is defined as the smallest group of products,including at least one product of the merging parties, and the smallest geographicarea in which a sole profit-maximizing seller (a “hypothetical monopolist”)would impose and sustain a significant and non-transitory price increase abovelevels that would likely exist in the absence of the merger.[17]
This definition of the news market,combined with the potentially misleading analysis of prices in the advertisingmarket, has led to significant concentration of ownership of various media in
The Competition Bureau’s operatingprocedures may be well suited to analysing most markets for goods and servicesin
This is in sharp contrast
b) The Canadian Radio-television and TelecommunicationsCommission
The Department of Canadian Heritageis responsible for broadcasting policy, but policy development has been largelydelegated to the CRTC. The CRTC’s current policy approach focuses on the publicinterest in cultural aspects of broadcasting, e.g., the genre of music playedon radio stations, and is one oflaissezfaire towards news and information. The CRTC is also concerned about theeconomic viability of Canadian broadcasters and the availability of Canadiancontent. The absence of policies respecting news and information programming,however, has resulted in a decrease in news programming, particularlynoticeable in radio.
The CRTC takes its mandate from theBroadcasting Act, which may explain whyit has placed a greater emphasis on cultural and economic matters than on newsand information. TheBroadcasting Act[19]states that the Canadian broadcasting system should:
encourage the development ofCanadian expression by providing a wide range of programming that reflectsCanadian attitudes, opinions, ideas, values and artistic creativity, bydisplaying Canadian talent in entertainment programming and byoffering information and analysisconcerning
The mention of “information andanalysis” comes near the end of the list of objectives, suggesting that it isof lesser importance.
The CRTC’s 1998 Commercial RadioPolicy and 1999 Policy Framework for Canadian Television are examples of the lowpriority placed on news and information programming.
The Radio Policy allows a singleowner to hold three stations in a given language in smaller markets — with amaximum of two on the same frequency band; and four — two AM and two FM — inmarkets with eight or more stations. It has three stated objectives:
1. Ensure a strong, well-financed radio industry,
2. Ensure pride of place for Canadian artists, and
3. Ensure that a French-language presence in radiobroadcasting is maintained.[20]
News and information is not a majorobjective. Diversity of news voices is, however, mentioned as a policyobjective in the discussion of ownership issues:
One of the objectives of theCommission's longstanding policy on common ownership has been
As for television, the CRTC’s 1999policy calls for Canadian content regulation only where necessary. With respect
The Commission appears to argue thatnews can take care of itself:
The Commissionbelieves that, in the new television environment, there are sufficient marketincentives to ensure that audiences will continue to receive a variety of localnews without regulatory requirements. News programming is a key element inestablishing a station's identity and loyalty with viewers and is generallyprofitable. Further, licencees may not solicit local advertising in a marketunless they provide local news or other local programming. [para. 47]
In short, the CRTC’s hands-offapproach to the regulation of news broadcasting seems to be based on twoarguments. The first is that news is profitable, or at least breaks even; infact, however, profits from original news programming are often limited,thereby prompting certain broadcasters to purchase more profitable programming(e.g., American sitcoms). The second argument is that there are numerousalternative sources of news; yet, as this report shows, the existence ofnumerous delivery systems does not necessarily mean that there is a diverserange of news sources, particularly in smaller communities.
As for media concentration andcross-media ownership, the current regulatory system offers little protectionagainst particular adverse effects of ownership concentration on the diversityof voices. This absence of regulatory focus has allowed media dominance byindividual players in
To sum up, the CRTC’s regulatoryapproach to news has had consequences for the Canadian media landscape. Inparticular, less news content is now offered on many Canadian radio stationsand few Canadians now list radio as a main source for news.[23]
C. The Public Broadcaster isToo Many Things to Too Many People
Since the earliest days of radio, ithas been argued that broadcasting could be used to inform, educate and unitepeople. These goals led to the creation of a number of public broadcastersaround the world. The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) is widelyrecognized as the pre-eminent example of a public broadcaster.
1) A broad mandate
The mandate of the CBC has beenmodified and refined over time. The 1991 revisions to theBroadcasting Actestablish that the Corporation’s mandate is to provideprogramming that should:
(i) be predominantly and distinctly Canadian,
(ii) reflect
(iii) actively contribute to the flow andexchange of cultural expression,
(iv) be in English and in French,reflecting the different needs and circumstances of each official languagecommunity, including the particular needs and circumstances of English andFrench linguistic minorities,
(v) strive to be of equivalent qualityin English and in French,
(vi) contribute to a shared national consciousnessand identity,
(vii) be made available throughout
(viii) reflect the multicultural andmultiracial nature of
According to some observers, thebreadth of the CBC’s mandate has led to unnecessary competition with theprivate sector. CBC’s English and French television networks, at least sincethe 1950s, have tried to be full-service networks, providing a wide range ofprogramming – news and information, public affairs, drama and sports. Thisstrategy worked well until the late 1980s, prior to the arrival of a broadrange of specialty channels available to most Canadian households. Since thattime the CBC’s audience shares for its English and French services havewitnessed dramatic declines.
CBC national news and informationprogramming, however, has maintained an audience share competitive with thoseof private broadcasters. For example, in 2004-05, its flagship English-languageevening news show,The National, whichruns on both the main network and Newsworld, averaged a total audience ofapproximately 1,057,000 viewers, compared to 714,000 for Global National News and1,480,000 for the CTV Evening News.[24]
2) A limited budget
Although its mandate is broad, theresources made available to the CBC have been reduced over time. The CBC’s mostrecent budget includes a parliamentary appropriation of almost $1 billion andearned revenue, mostly advertising, of almost $400 million. This budget issmall if compared to some national public broadcasters[25]and seems especially modest when one considers the number of services provided,of which the main ones include: national television and radio networks in Englishand French, digital television specialty services, and an extensive online newsand information web service. Indeed, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC)has a budget four times greater to serve a country physically many timessmaller and more densely populated than
As the graph below shows, the currentCBC budget is less than what it received in the early 1990s and is far less inconstant dollars (after inflation adjustment). CBC budgets have been undersustained pressure for at least two decades. The most severe cuts occurredduring the 1990s when the federal government was attempting to bring its budgetdeficit under control. Although there has been some reinstatement of CBCfunding, it is still well below what it was in 1990-91. Also evident in thegraph is that CBC budgets have not exhibited extended periods of stability. Sincetelevision series can take three years to bring to the screen, unpredictablebudgets make the planning and development of new programs or services all themore difficult.
The fall in value of the CBC’s parliamentaryappropriation (approximately 20 per cent in real dollars) has forced theCorporation to increase its reliance on earned revenue, largely television advertisingdollars. This in turn has forced CBC television to focus on ratings rather thanon its core mandate, public broadcasting.[26]It has also forced the CBC to make unpopular decisions, such as the decision(now partially reversed) to reduce the quantity of local news and publicaffairs programming in certain regions.
Source:CBC, Annual Reports
Where there is a large range of localnews services available (for example, in
PART III: IN DEFENCE OF THE PUBLIC INTEREST
Part I of this report noted continuingchanges in the way that news and information are gathered and disseminated, aswell as the impact of technological change on Canadian news media. Related tothese changes are important matters of public interest that need to becarefully addressed. The Committee has considered various options for defendingthe public interest in ensuring a diversity of news sources; these range frommaintaining the status quo to a fundamental realignment of the mandates of bothfederal regulatory agencies.[27]Fourconsiderations have guided theCommittee’s approach to devising a workable mechanism that might define anddefend the public interest:
1. Any proposed solutionmust recognize, as a matter of policy and law, that there is a public interestin news media mergers.
2. The public interestshould be acknowledged and recognized in a set of institutional arrangements whennews media mergers are considered.
3. The mandates of theCRTC and the Competition Bureau should be changed in a manner that allows thefirst two considerations to be recognized and allowed to flourish.
4. Any solution mustaddress important issues surrounding theCanadianCharter of Rights and Freedoms and the public interest.
A. Cross-Media Ownership andConcentration
As this report has already noted, thereis a public interest in having a diversity of ownership in the Canadian newsmedia to increase the potential for diversity of sources of news, information,and analysis in particular markets or regions. While many cities in
1) Media and theCharter of Rights
Media companies in
In presentations before thisCommittee, proprietors and chief executive officers have tended to extend theirclaim of a special status (that is, independence from government interferencein news operations) to a much larger and more contentious claim, that all oftheir operations should be free from any form of government regulation otherthan laws of general application (for example, libel, slander, tax andemployment law). The Committee believes that this claim goes too far and doesnot represent an appropriate extension of theirCharter protections.
This being said, the Committeeaccepts the principle that the government has no role in the newsrooms of thenation. Nothing that is proposed in this report should be construed asinterfering in the news operations of media organizations. The Committee alsoagrees that proprietors should run their companies as they see fit, producingproducts ranging from world class,
The media’s right to be free fromgovernment interference does not extend, however, to a conclusion thatproprietors should be allowed to own an excessive proportion of media holdingsin a particular market, let alone the national market. Yet the currentregulatory regime in
2) International practices
The Canadian situation with respectto media mergers or media concentration is atypical among large democracies. Frenchlaw, for example, restricts the ownership and control of private sec
3) A new mechanism
One challenge is the completeabsence of a review mechanism
Finding a workable option is noteasy. Previously proposed solutions (e.g., establishing a national presscouncil; requiring special protections for editors of chain-owned newspapers)have not been adopted and, in the view of this Committee, do not address the absenceof a public interest test for news media mergers. These realities have led theCommittee to conclude that an appropriate review mechanism for
The mechanism should:
1) In no way interfere in the internal workings of news gatheringorganizations.
2) Be easily understood. The steps that would be taken in consideration ofa media merger and the organization(s) responsible for undertaking specificactivities should be clearly identified.
3) Establish how the organizations involved would bring their particularexpertise to the discussion of the public interest. For example, it shouldinclude a workable process for the involvement of both the Competition Bureauand the CRTC.
4) Allow for an open and transparent process resulting in a public reportto a minister (or ministers).
5) Include clear accountability for the consideration of the publicinterest. This is in sharp contrast
6) Not depend on the good will of a particular individual or organization.
7) Have clear and definite timelines, be independent and objective andguarantee that the public interest in a free and vigorous system of newsorganizations can be discussed.
The most effective way to proceedwould be to enact a new section of theCompetition Act to deal with themergers of news gathering organizations. This new section should include thefollowing assessment criteria:
- Cross-media ownership in particular markets;
- Development of a dominant position in particular advertising, production or distribution markets; or
- Mergers that involve acquiring more than, say, 35 per cent of a particular audience, or subscribers.[30]
The new section should alsoestablish the procedures
The Committee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 1 That a new section, dealing with mergers of news gathering organizations, be added to theCompetition Act. This new section should: a) trigger automatic review of a proposed media merger if certain thresholds are reached; b) allow the appropriate ministers to order a review of proposed mergers; c) set out the process that will be followed when a merger is being reviewed, including the appointment of a panel to conduct the review. |
The new section should not interferewith the Competition Bureau’s current responsibilities under Section 93 of theCompetitionAct, which concerns the factors tobe considered regarding the prevention or lessening of competition. However,in the case of cross-media mergers, the CRTC’s responsibilities for the Canadianbroadcasting system need to be recognized. For this reason, the new section oftheCompetition Act should require the CRTC to be involved in publichearings related to the public interest in a merger involving broadcastorganizations.
To establish the CRTC’s role in the newmechanism, theBroadcasting Act would also need to be amended to spellout the Commission’s responsibilities in the event of a public interest reviewof a merger of news gathering organizations.
The Committee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 2 That legislation governing the CRTC be amended to require the CRTC to participate, when appropriate, in the panels established by the new section of theCompetition Act. |
Neither the Competition Bureau northe CRTC is likely
A review would be automaticallytriggered if:
- The Minister of Industry or the Minister of Canadian Heritage asked for a review because circumstances suggested that the public interest might be adversely affected by a merger.
Or,
- A proposed merger of news gathering organizations (newspapers, broadcasters or other media) would lead, within a particular region or market, to a possible dominant position that exceeded a certain limit. That limit would focus on ownership within a given mediumand cross-media ownership. It could use a number of criteria: for example, audience share, number of news outlets in relation to the total number in that market, or total potential audience. What matters most is that the criteria for automatic review be clear and public.
The review of the public interest inthe merger would take place during a specified time frame – say, six months – andwould follow specified steps, including public consultation. The panel’s reportwould include recommendations and would be made public at the same time that itwas sent
The decision
4) Transparency is key
An equally crucial element of themerger review process will be transparency though the public consultation, the reportingand parliamentary oversight. The openness of the process will be the safeguardagainst decisions that might be made, or appear to be made, on grounds otherthan the public interest.
Furthermore, both for regulatorypurposes and to enhance transparency in public debate, it is equally importantthat current information on the ownership of media outlets be available. TheCommittee heard testimony that this is not always the case. With this in mind,the Committee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 3 That all news media outlets be required |
B. Policiesto Promote News and Information Programming
As explained in Part II of thisvolume, the Committee considers the CRTC’s current policy approach to be undulyfocused on the public interest in cultural and economic aspects ofbroadcasting, with a corresponding lack of attention to news and information.This is one reason why news programming has disappeared from portions of
The following sections outline someproposals for re-tooling the CRTC’s mandate and policies in such a way thatdiversity issues concerning news and information programming would be properlyrecognized.
1) Clarify theBroadcasting Act
A fundamental problem identified earlierin this report is the fact that Section 3 of theBroadcasting Act makesonly a passing reference to news and information.[31] Section 3 is important because itlays out the objectives for
RECOMMENDATION 4 That Section 3(d) of theBroadcasting Act be amended to give a clear priority to news and information programming within the Canadian broadcasting system. |
In addition, Section 5(2), whichdeals with the powers of the CRTC, should be amended to give a higher priority
RECOMMENDATION 5 That Section 5(2) of theBroadcasting Act, which deals with the powers of the CRTC, be amended. The amendment should state that the Canadian broadcasting system “gives a high priority to news and information programming within the Canadian broadcasting system.” |
2) Lower barriers to entry into the market
The CRTC’s mandate to monitor theeconomic viability of the broadcasting system has led it to limit the number ofnew licences issued. For example, even if it is technically feasible to have anadditional broadcasting service in a particular market – and someone is willingto offer a new service – the CRTC may find that additional competition wouldundermine the economic viability of existing licence holders and deny theapplicant. This process helps explain why
Viewing new entrants as having a negativeimpact on the broadcasting system will lead to decisions that go against thepublic interest. This is especially true given the low priority given to newsand information programming. There will be fewer owners and sources of news andinformation within
The Committee believes that analternate approach is required and that the financial health of current licenceholders should not be the sole criterion. This would help to ensure that thenews and information programming available to Canadians would be as diverse andall encompassing as possible. TheCommittee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 6 That the CRTC adopt a more open approach to the benefits that may flow from competition within the provision of news and information programming. |
3) Increase monitoring of conditions oflicence
The CRTC imposes conditions oflicence on all broadcasters. For example, in recent instances where there hasbeen a consolidation of media ownership, the CRTC has imposed conditions tokeep separate the news operations of any cross-owned print and broadcast media.[32] The Commission has also requiredthese organizations to make public service announcements inviting those peoplewith concerns about the news policies of cross-owned media to send theircomplaints to the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC).[33]
In practice, conditions imposed onowners of consolidated media interests are largely un-enforced. In testimonybefore the Committee, the Chair of the CRTC acknowledged that the Commission haddone little to determine whether the requirements for separate newsrooms hadbeen met. Furthermore, the CRTC has more recently indicated that it might delegatemonitoring of compliance with these conditions to the CBSC.
In the view of this Committee, suchan arrangement is unworkable. Public service announcements are often too vagueand technical to convey an understanding of the issues involved.[34] Important matters having to do with media mergers should not be delegatedto a secondary body remote from normal accountability mechanisms; moreover, theCBSC’s mandate relates only to broadcasting, which precludes comments onimportant elements of media cross-ownership.
The CRTC should enforce the licensingconditions it imposes with respect to news and information programming as itdoes other broadcast standards. For example, the CRTC recently removed thelicence of a broadcaster (see next section) that it concluded had contravenedbroadcast standards of appropriate speech. When the CRTC imposes conditions oflicence (for example, on the separation of print and broadcast newsrooms as theresult of a merger) it should monitor compliance and sanction fornon-compliance, as required. TheCommittee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 7 That the CRTC not delegate important matters having to do with media mergers and conditions of licence to the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC) or any other body. |
Furthermore, the Committee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 8 That the CRTC properly monitor the terms and conditions that it imposes on the news operations of companies involved in cross-media mergers. |
4) A variety of enforcement powers for the CRTC
To enforce its decisions, the CRTC islimited to two actions: revoking a licence or renewing a licence for a shorterterm. The Commission is extremely reluctant to revoke a broadcasting licence, exceptin the most unusual of circumstances. Renewing an existing licence for a shortperiod (often two years) is the alternative. This has happened in the recentpast with Vision TV and with CHOI-FM. Vision TV was required to develop abetter system to track and report on Canadian content requirements; thereafter,its licence was renewed for a full term. In the case of CHOI-FM, theCRTC renewed its licence for just two years in 2002; two years later, it deniedCHOI’s renewal application on the grounds that it had failed to meet itsconditions of licence.[35]
Renewing a licence for a shortperiod of time may not be the most efficient or appropriate sanction for aminor licence infraction, especially since the process of licence renewal cancost a broadcaster several hundreds of thousands of dollars each time. Withthis in mind, the Committee is of the view that the CRTC should have the powerto impose fines on broadcasters who fail to meet some part of their conditionsof licence (much as the Commission has proposed to do for telecommunicationscarriers).
The Committee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 9 That the Government of Canada give the CRTC the power to levy fines on broadcasters. |
5) Community programming
TheBroadcasting Act recognizes that citizen and community access isimportant. In this spirit, Canadian radio and television broadcasting policymakes it possible for citizens to develop programming and services that relateto their interests.
Community television is delivered via
CRTC regulations require cablecompanies to contribute what amounts to about $80 million a year in support ofcommunity television services.[36] Various witnesses told theCommittee that citizen access to the broadcasting system can be an importantsource of diversity of opinion and information. The Committee also heard thatcommunity radio can make an important and unique contribution to the lives ofpeople in smaller or more remote communities, or those who share particularlanguages or interests.
The CRTC imposes conditions,requirements or restrictions on both community broadcasters and incumbentbroadcasters. While each community broadcaster (television and radio) hasdifferent rules and regulations specific to its situation, they are all discouragedfrom competing with incumbent licence holders in any meaningful way, and are allsubject to a number of restrictions (e.g., low power signals) that limit theirreach.
There have been longstandingdisputes over the role of community television and what types of programmingshould be available. Cable companies insist on exercising some control sincecommunity programming is done largely by volunteers who use the cable company’sequipment and studios. Volunteers argue that some cable companies have reducedcommunity access and are more interested in using the community channel as avehicle to promote the cable company, than as a vehicle to promote communityaccess to the broadcasting system. It is difficult to judge the accuracy ofthese accusations as there is no monitoring or enforcement of an incumbent’s obligationto provide access. The Committeerecommends:
RECOMMENDATION 10 That the CRTC revise its community television and radio regulations to ensure that access to the broadcasting system is encouraged and that a diversity of news and information programming is available through these services. |
There is also an absence ofinformation on community broadcasting. While the Committee does not supportonerous reporting requirements for broadcasters and distributors, it doesbelieve that the CRTC and the Government of Canada should be required tocollect timely and appropriate information on community broadcasting. Thiscould be accomplished through general purpose surveys or a series of casestudies. Having such information would allow the public to understand betterwhat is being accomplished and what remains to be done. The Committee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 11 That the CRTC and the Department of Canadian Heritage jointly develop an information system that will provide relevant and timely information on community broadcasting activities in both television and radio. |
C. Back to Basics for the CBC
In a world of media concentrationand cross-media ownership the importance of the CBC as an alternate source ofnews and information programming is greater than ever. A favourite Canadianpastime is to criticize the CBC, including its news coverage, but in fact theCBC provides news programming that is of a high calibre. This is a nationalachievement that should be strengthened, not diminished.
The Committee recognizes that theCBC’s current mandate far exceeds what the annual appropriation from Parliamentcovers. Even so, the CBC has done its best to maintain its services, even thoughsome comparable services are available from private broadcasters, or could beprovided by private broadcasters.
Scott Stirling, President and CEO ofNewfoundland Broadcasting Company, described the CBC’s dilemma this way to theCommittee:
What are you?Are you taxpayer-supported or are you advertiser-supported? There is a conflictin the decision making. If I were supported by two sources, then I would haveto ask: On what am I basing my decision? Will I put on a commercial program so thatI can take advantage of advertising or will I do something for the public good?There is a conflict, almost a type of schizophrenia.
1) A revised mandate
Given the speed with whichbroadcasting is changing, what was an appropriate mandate for the CBC in the1950s and 1960s is no longer appropriate today. The challenge is to use aworkable method to refine the CBC’s mandate so that it reflects currentrealities and is linked to the budget. One way to do so would be to reorganizethe process by which the CBC is authorized to continue operating and the rolesof the various players in the process. The current process by which thecontinued operation of the CBC is authorized is as follows:
- The CBC prepares an annual plan, together with a requested budget, that is approved by the Board of Directors.
- The plan is forwarded to the government, which then accepts or modifies the requested budget.
- Every seven years the CBC applies to the CRTC for a licence renewal and the CRTC usually imposes various licencing conditions.
A more appropriate process wouldfocus on clarity of roles, longer-term consistency and increasedaccountability. It would work in the following way:
- Two years before licence renewal a series of public hearings and research would be conducted, either by a parliamentary committee or by an independent commission struck by the government. These would result in a report on the current state of the broadcasting system and suggestions for the mandate of the CBC.
- The CBC, through its Board of Directors, would respond with a proposed new mandate, and the government would indicate the budget it is willing to provide for the mandate as recommended by the Board of Directors.
- The package – mandate and budget – would then be approved or amended by Parliament.
- The results of this process would be reported to the CRTC at the time of licence renewal, but the CRTC would not have the power to amend the mandate as approved by Parliament.
Such a process would, if carried outproperly, bring clarity to the mandate-setting exercise and theresponsibilities of the various parties involved. It would require at least twochanges to the current situation: first, there would have to be along-term, stable and realistic budget forthe duration of the licence; second, the period for which the licence is givenshould be longer than seven years – perhaps ten. In this way the mandate wouldbe reviewed publicly, a budget to carry out the mandate provided and anappropriate planning horizon established. An additional benefit would beclarity in the role of the various actors.
Over time, budget allocations shouldalso be sufficient to allow the CBC to remove advertising from its televisionservices. As was the case when ads weredropped from CBC radio, this would free CBC TV from the need to compete head-onwith the private sector. It would allowthe Corporation to focus on what a public broadcaster is particularly suited todo.
The Committee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 12 That the government establish a more coherent system for refining the mandate of the CBC. This system should include commitment to a long-term planning horizon, a ten-year licence renewal and a long-term budget that provides appropriate stable funding. |
RECOMMENDATION 13 That the CRTC not have the power to alter the terms of the mandate for the CBC agreed to by Parliament and the Government. |
RECOMMENDATION 14 That the CBC develop a plan to focus on its core mandate and that the Government of Canada enter into a review process with the CBC to develop an agreement on the budget required to provide distinctive and complementary services to Canadians.
Once a mandate has been determined, the government should make a commitment to provide the realistic and stable funding on a long-term basis. This funding should be sufficient to allow the CBC to remove advertising from its television services. |
This system would take several yearsto implement. In the meantime, the Committee emphasizes that the CBC shouldfocus more of its resources on core elements of its mandate.
2) Public broadcasters should complement, not compete with, private broadcasters
In a large and diverse country suchas
At least two areas come to mind:sports programming and commercially successful American movies. This Committeebelieves that the CBC should greatly reduce its broadcasting of professionalsports (e.g., hockey games) and the Olympics since these are activities thatwill be covered by other broadcasters in both official languages. In addition,broadcasts of professional sports are readily available everywhere in
Sport is, of course, part ofCanadian culture. Professional sports are increasingly carried by specialtychannels and this trend will continue. This tendency, evident in the
The same comments apply to movies. Duringthe winter of 2004-05 when National Hockey League games were not available dueto a lockout, the CBC offered “Movie Night in
RECOMMENDATION 15 That CBC television focus its efforts on providing a range of services that do not inappropriately duplicate those of the private sector. In particular, the CBC should leave coverage of professional sports and the Olympics to the private sector. |
Complementarity should not, however,be taken to mean that the CBC will withdraw entirely from all services that areprovided by private broadcasters. News is one area where private and publicbroadcasters both play an important role. In some aspects of news coverage thepublic broadcaster can do things that private broadcasters cannot. Michael J.Carter, President and CEO of TQS and Cogeco Diffusion, told the Committee:
[I]t is impossible for privatebroadcasters to provide international news coverage. TQS cannot afford toprovide that kind of coverage, but SRC, the French CBC, can and does.
The Committee is aware that eliminatingprofessional sports coverage and commercially successful American movies will requirereplacements for a great deal of programming – perhaps hundreds of hours ayear. The Committee is also aware that this will lead to the loss ofadvertising revenues that have traditionally been generated by sports andtransferred to other programming areas.[37]Therefore, the transition will require some planning but the Committee isconvinced it needs to be done.
Specifically, it will require:
- Recognition by the management of the CBC that the core mandate needs to reflect a greatly changed reality and that there is little to be gained from acting as if the CBC is the only Canadian network capable of delivering sports;
- Alliances with other public broadcasters to replace the lost programming.
3) Governance
The Committee’s study has led it toconclude that the CBC’s system of governance is confusing and lacksaccountability. The CBC has a Board of Directors, a chair and a president, allappointed by the Government of Canada. The Board is responsible for importantmatters related to the CBC’s future and long-term strategy, and providesoversight of its management. The CBC reports to Parliament through the Ministerof Canadian Heritage. Although the CBC is funded by an annual parliamentaryappropriation and is responsible
One area for improvement is inappointments
RECOMMENDATION 16 That the Board of Direc |
RECOMMENDATION 17 That appointments to the Board of Directors be reviewed by an appropriate parliamentary committee. |
No single appointment is moreimportant than that of the President. Once the Board and the Chair have beenappointed, they should prepare a list of potential candidates for the Presidentand the government should select the President from this list. Such anarrangement would make it clear that the President is directly responsible tothe Board. This would clarify governance matters. The Committee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 18 That the appointment of the President of the CBC be made by the government from a list of candidates prepared by the Board of Directors of the Corporation. |
4) Budget issues
Good management and accountability willalso require sound, stable budgets for the CBC. The CBC lacks the resources
CBC television should be more likeCBC radio. It should provide:
- Services that are not available elsewhere;
- Distinctive services of high quality in news and information programming; and
- Services
The Committee is convinced that if considerableimprovement is not made, theraisond’êtrefor the national public broadcaster will be lost. The changes recommendedhere would require an increase in the CBC’s parliamentary appropriation to offsetthe lost advertising revenues from sports and commercially successful Americanmovies.
5) Accountability
With long-term stable funding andagreement on its mandate, the CBC would be more clearly accountable toParliament. For Parliament to decide whether the Corporation is fulfilling itsmandate, CBC annual reports should provide more information about thecorporation’s activities and audiences. Since the Corporation depends on theparliamentary appropriation, more candour about success and failures will be essential. The Committee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 19 That the Corporation be required to prepare annual reports that provide adequate information so that Canadians and their parliamentarians can determine what progress is being made in meeting the CBC’s mandate. |
PART IV: RELATED FEDERALPOLICIES TO CONSIDER
This part of the report makesrecommendations concerning a number of federal policies that have consequencesfor the business environment of the Canadian news media, the legal environmentfor journalists and the availability of minority language news and information.These recommendations seek to update longstanding federal policies, many ofwhich are no longer responsive to changes in the competitive landscape or 21stcentury methods.
A. Direct Support
The Canada Magazine Fund (CMF) andthe Publications Assistance Program (PAP) are two sources of direct federalsupport for producers of media in
1) MagazineSupport
The magazine industry brings importantdiversity to the Canadian news media. There are currently more than 2,300magazines published in
According to one witness, profitmargins in the magazine industry average 6 to 8 per cent, which is low relativeto other media.[38] Thesemargins leave Canadian magazine publishers vulnerable to downturns in theadvertising market or changes in government support, and less able to competewith publishers from outside Canada (overwhelmingly from the United States).
The Department of Canadian Heritageoversees the Canada Magazine Fund (CMF). The Fund was announced in 1999 as a$150 million program over three years; its budget peaked at just over $30million in 2001-2002. The greatest portion of the budget goes to contentcreation: participating magazines report expenses for content creation andreceive funding based on each participant’s relative spending. An adjustment ismade for smaller publishers, to ensure that they receive proportionately morethan the larger publishers. The part of the CMF not geared to content focuseson attempts to improve the marketing and the market share of Canadianmagazines.
An executive with Magazines Canada commentedon CMF funding levels:
The Canada MagazineFund has been at many different levels over its short life. It started, onpaper, at a $50 million level but never achieved that level of funding in itslifetime. It achieved approximately $35 million at one point. It is now a$16 million program, $10 million of which is an editorial contentprogram. The remainder is dedicated to small magazine business development andto infrastructure improvement.[39]
For more than a century Canadian programshave supported the production, distribution and promotion of Canadian books,magazines and newspapers. The Committee recognizes the value of these programs,but sees a pressing need to make them more responsive to the changing globaleconomy, as well as the introduction of new technologies.
The Committee also believes that theexisting regulatory structure and program support tends to favour incumbents,with the unintended consequence of creating barriers to entry for additionalsources of news and information.
A balance needs to be struck betweensupport for incumbents and traditional distribution systems and support for newentrants and innovative initiatives. Some of the funds in existing supportprograms could be redirected to deal with changes in the world of news andinformation. The Committee believes that the best solution would be to developmechanisms (direct or indirect) to provide incentives and support for start-upsand innovative approaches to news gathering. The Committee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 20 That the Department of Canadian Heritage develop a component within the Canada Magazine Fund that would provide support for the start-up of magazines and recognize Canadian editorial content distributed via mechanisms such as the Internet. |
2) Postal subsidies
The Publications Assistance Program(PAP), a postal subsidy for periodicals, has existed in one form or another sinceConfederation. It helps to connect Canadians by offsetting the cost of reachingreaders so that subscription costs are the same throughout the
country. The Department of CanadianHeritage, in collaboration with Canada Post Corporation (CPC), supports themailing costs of eligible publications, which include magazines and smallcommunity newspapers. This funding, which was $49.4 million in 2004-2005, goesto magazines (roughly 80 per cent) and small community newspapers (roughly 20per cent).
John Thomson of Magazines Canada toldthe Committee that the postal subsidies are one of
The PublicationsAssistance Program is a market‑driven program that helps to create astronger and more competitive industry. Based on the design of the program, apublisher must have a prepaid subscription contract with a reader before themagazine can be delivered. Subsidies are drawn only once revenue has beensecured, which means every penny of subsidy goes toward the affordability of asubscription a Canadian has first chosen to purchase with their own money. Froman economic and productivity standpoint, the Publications Assistance Program ishighly efficient and helps the magazine sector drive its own performance andpursue increased circulation revenues.
He noted, however, that the programwas in crisis.
The budget for that program has been at $49million for a number of years. It was slated to drop to $45 million this year(2005). That drop has been postponed for one year. Even so, we learned onSeptember 2 of this year … that there was not enough money in the fundeven for this fiscal year.
For example, atCanadian Geographic for the second half ofthe year, on 60 days' notice we have a 35 per cent increase in our cost ofmailing magazines. That will rise to 52 per cent next April 1 as comparedto the prior year.
In the space of 12 months, wehave a 52 per cent increase in the cost of mailing our magazines…For mostCanadian magazines, this really is a crisis. We have nothing like those kindsof profit margins or the ability to cut costs when we are already hard pressed.
Mr. Thomson said that the increaseddistribution costs represented “more than we spend on all the contributors tothe magazine – all the freelance writers, photographers, artists andillustrators that contribute toCanadian Geographic – in a year.” The short notices given for thecuts in the subsidy, moreover, destroy the predictability of funding. The Committee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 21 That realistic and stable funding be made available for the Publications Assistance Program. |
Some witnesses suggested thatrelaxing some of the criteria for receiving the postal subsidy would helpstart-up publications. Currently, for example, publications must have been inoperation for one financial year and have paid circulation of at least 50 percent of total circulation. The Committeerecommends:
RECOMMENDATION 22 That the Publications Assistance Program be amended to provide more efficient support for small and start-up publications (allowing publications to be eligible after, for example, four issues or four months rather than after one year). |
3) Broadband access
In the coming years virtually allnews and information programming will be available in a digital format, meaningthat media consumers will require broadband access to high speed digital communicationsnetworks.
Broadband access to the Internet iscurrently available to most Canadian households via telephone, cable and satellitesystems. For Canadians living in or around large metropolitan areas, acquiringbroadband access is not a problem. It is a problem for Canadians living insmaller, rural and remote communities.
Since access to such a system willbe a necessity for citizens who want to be informed or have access to a host ofservices, the Government of Canada has supported a series of initiatives tobring broadband access to rural and remote regions of the country. There havebeen two main strategies: a subsidy for satellite services and the installationof equipment to bring wireless broadband services to a community.
On November 14, 2005 the (then) Ministerof Finance announced that “to better connect rural, remote and aboriginalcommunities to global networks, [the Government of Canada] will invest $100million to extend broadband services.”[40]The Committee believes that these initiatives should be continued so that allcommunities in
RECOMMENDATION 23 That the government of |
B. An Appropriate Tax Regime
Numerous witnesses and submissionsto the Committee made suggestions about how the federal tax system could beused to assist the Canadian media sector.
1) A more inclusive definition of charitablefoundations
Incentives to encourage philanthropicsupport of the media were mentioned by several witnesses. An amendment to the definitionof charitable foundations in theIncomeTax Act could increase funding for certain media undertakings such as amedia research centre or not-for-profit periodicals. Such foundations exist inthe
The Canada Revenue Agency hascriteria for charitable foundations. In general, the organization benefitingfrom charitable giving must not be operating a for-profit business. If, asseveral witnesses suggested, independent periodicals do not make profits andwould be willing to accept a not-for-profit designation, there should be scopefor well-crafted criteria
In the Committee’s view, charitablefoundations could be an important source of support that encourages the growthand survival of not-for-profit independent news media. Charitable foundationscould also support the growth and development of research centres that focus onimportant issues related to journalism and news media. The Committee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 24 That the Ministers of Finance and Canadian Heritage enable the use of charitable foundations |
2) Enforcing foreign ownership rules
The Canada Revenue Agency (CRA),with the advice of the Department of Canadian Heritage, moni
The CRA could detect violations of thisprovision during audits of businesses that had claimed a deduction foradvertising in a Canadian newspaper. To do so, it would have
The Committee notes, for example,the recent growth of third language publications – what one witness describedas an explosion. Many of these publications have links
RECOMMENDATION 25 That the CRA strengthen its procedures for determining whether a periodical is Canadian. |
3) Tax treatment of inherited mediabusinesses
The editor-in-chief of one paper arguedthat the current application of theIncomeTax Act leads to the sale of family-owned newspapers, because capital gainstax must be paid when the newspaper is transferred to the next generation.[41]Few independent papers remain in
The suggestion that the transfer ofownership of an enterprise within a family receive special capital gains treatmentunder theIncome Tax Act is notwithout precedent. For example, due to concerns over the disappearance of thefamily farm, there are special rollover rules for the transfer of farm propertywithin a family. These rules allow the deferral of capital gains taxation onthe sale or transfer of property used in a farming business to a child,grandchild or great-grandchild (including a spouse of a child or child of aspouse). The property covered by the rules includes land, buildings andequipment located in
Over recent decades, the greatmajority of
RECOMMENDATION 26 That the Minister of Finance defer capital gains taxes paid on the transfer of family-owned newspapers from generation to generation. |
C. Protecting Freedom of the Press
In a society with a truly freepress, awkward facts, whether awkward
Several witnesses argued that thecurrent system does not reflect the open society that
1) Protecting sources and material
There is a long tradition ofjournalists protecting their sources, refusing
The case of Mr. Peters revived thediscussion about shield laws that allow journalists
In the case of Juliet O’Neill, theRCMP invoked Section 4 of theSecurity of Information Act
A journalist charged under Section 4cannot argue that it was in the public interest to possess or disclose theinformation.[42] Othersections of the Act, such as Sections 13 and 14, which cover offences forunauthorized communication of special operational information by “Every personpermanently bound to secrecy,” do offer the possibility of a public interestdefence. The Committee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 27 That theSecurity of Information Act be amended to provide for a public interest defence in Section 4. |
Another useful improvement would beto require greater ministerial responsibility in the issuance of searchwarrants. The Committee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 28 That applications to judges for search warrants for journalists’ notes and similar material have a higher level of accountability; they should be signed personally by a minister. |
2) Access to information
Citizens in a democracy need to seehow the government is operating
Several witnesses argued that theway theAct is currently applied can bean impediment
There has also been considerablecriticism of the costs attached to requests for information. A witness beforethe Special Senate Committee on the Anti-Terrorism Act told of receiving a billfor $25,000 for a request to the Department of Environment.[43]In May 2005, theOttawa Citizen reportedthat a woman in
The former federal government promisedto table legislation to improve theAct.The present government has included some proposals for change in Bill C-2, theproposed Federal Accountability Act, introduced on April 11, 2006.[46]
In the opinion of this Committee, improvementsshould simplify and speed up access, expand coverage and ensure that costs arereasonable. A limited, costly and slow system constitutes a barrier to the flowof information. The Committee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 29 That the access to information system be: a) simplified to be more transparent and accessible; b) expanded to include crown corporations; and c) monitored so that costs for searches are reasonable and searches are conducted with reasonable dispatch. |
3) Whistleblower legislation
The CNA study on Freedom ofInformation also led to related calls for whistleblower legislation. Suchlegislation gives protection to government employees from reprisals forreporting on government wrongdoing and financial abuses. Parliament passed suchlegislation in 2005, and presented further changes in this field with theintroduction of the proposed Federal Accountability Act.
Government departments have concerns,as the potential release of all information related to a department – somethingnot envisaged by the 2005 law – could inhibit policymaking. The Committeebelieves that these concerns can be met, however. A larger problem could be thatcivil servants may not understand the protection they are being given. Theprovisions of the whistleblower legislation should be widely distributed andexplained, especially to anyone covered by the law. The Committee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 30 That all departments and agencies ensure that their employees are made aware of the existence of any whistleblower legislation and its provisions. |
4) Copyright
Freelancers have always been asignificant part of the news business; they provide coverage of topics or areaswhere the news media cannot afford to hire full-time staff. At Committeehearings, several witnesses raised concerns with “universal rights” contractsthat newspapers sometimes impose on freelancers. These contracts requirefreelancers to give up all rights for all time, with negative consequences forthe freelancer’s economic well-being. In the past, a freelancer could resell astory to several media, thus managing to earn a living by building on whatmight have been a modest payment for its first use. With some large mediagroups now asking for universal rights, the freelancer’s capacity to earnincome has been sharply diminished.
Witnesses also noted that somecontracts require that they relinquish their moral rights, thus enabling themedia proprietor to reuse, cut or alter the work in any way it judges appropriate.
The Committee heard suggestions thattheCopyright Act should be amendedto preserve long-run rights over sales and to prevent the relinquishing ofmoral rights. Copyright, as the name indicates, was developed as a way toensure that artists had the rights to determine who could copy their work. Thiswas to prevent unauthorized copying, which provided no income to the artist,and which proved a disincentive for artistic work.
Over time, copyright law has becomeextremely complicated, in part because of changes in technology. Freelancersargued that they should not be forced to give away rights to reuse their workor moral rights to control how it is altered. Other witnesses, notablyrepresentatives of newspaper owners, argued that the universal rights contractwas common in some fields, such as entertainment, while still others suggestedthat the contract with freelancers should be negotiated. The Committee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 31 That the Competition Bureau examine universal contracts with freelance journalists to determine whether they involve an abuse of dominance by one of the parties to the contract. |
RECOMMENDATION 32 That the Minister of Canadian Heritage examine whether there is any abuse of authors’ rights in the requirements imposed by universal contracts and, if so, explore amendments to theCopyright Act. |
D. Diversity
An important aspect of diversity inthe media is that all citizens can see themselves fairly and accuratelyrepresented in the media. The mainstream media produce news and information inone of
Witnesses noted that officiallanguage minorities are not always well served by the mainstream media. Theyalso noted that official language minorities and ethnic publications do notalways get their fair share of government advertising
1) Access forMinority Language Communities
For minority language communities
As several witnesses pointed out,there are a number of ways the CRTC could promote the concept of linguisticdiversity. Some suggest the licensing of more community radio stations aimeddirectly at official language minorities.[47]This proposal has merit, but the resources of these stations are almost alwayslimited. Another suggestion from witnesses was that the CRTC ensure thecarriage of more programming in both official languages.
Digital technology has increased thecapacity of cable and satellite systems. These systems are now able to offer hundredsof channels, making possible the provision of channels to serve officiallanguage minority groups. The Committee recognizes that certain smaller distributionsystems are not able to provide a full range of services; this is an issue oftiming and is not insurmountable. Once they have the technology, increasing theamount of official minority language programming becomes possible. The Committee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 33 That the CRTC require cable and satellite systems, as technology permits, to expand the offering of official minority language programming, phasing in the requirements for the smaller distribution systems. |
In addition, the Committee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 34 That, as technology permits, the CRTC encourage the national distribution of English and French provincial educational broadcasters. |
Some representatives of officiallanguage minority media argued that the government should ensure that theyreceive a fair share of any government advertising that is going
2) GovernmentAdvertising
Section 11 of theOfficial Languages Actrequires that thegovernment place advertisements in both English and French media whereverpossible. As witnesses told the Committee, some departments fail to meet thisobligation.[48]
The Official Languages Commissionerhas reported that year after year, 15 per cent of all the complaints receivedby her office are related to failure to use the minority language press. In2002, the Commissioner made 18 recommendations on this point, including 17aimed at four specific government departments. In 2005, she reported that onlyfive of the 18 recommendations had been fully implemented.[49]
The law must be obeyed and anyappeal process in the face of a lack of compliance by federal departments mustbe streamlined. The Committeerecommends:
RECOMMENDATION 35 That all federal departments be ordered to comply with the law relating to advertising in both official languages. |
RECOMMENDATION 36 That the Treasury Board ensure that the system for handling complaints with respect |
Witnesses representing the ethnicmedia also argued for a greater share of government advertising. The federalgovernment has made efforts to explain the criteria it uses in allocating itsadvertising budget, but there appears to be slippage between stated policy andthe actual practices followed.
Government advertising should reachthe intended audience. One witness in
RECOMMENDATION 37 That the system of government advertising in the media be modified a) criteria for placing advertising are transparent and b) ethnic media have the criteria for the placement of advertising in their media explained |
PART V: AND FOR THE RECORD…
In the view of this Committee, the Canadiannews media system would be a stronger one if more attention were paid to fourelements of the system over which the federal government has little or no jurisdiction.
A. Wire Services
Today, about one-third to one-halfof news and editorial content found in Canadian newspapers comes from newsagencies, wire services or press associations. Canadian Press (CP) is the mainwire service in
This Committee believes that one wayto foster the diversity of news voices in
As an example, CP (with itsbroadcasting division, Broadcast News) has its own network of journalists,photographers and bureaus across the country. The co-operative structure of CPalso allows it to benefit from the shared contributions from its members ofnews and pictures. This cross-country network of news organisations provides diversenews sources to all its members. In particular, and in contrast to other newsbureaus, it does so in both official languages. CP also has taken significantsteps to be present on the Internet.
This Committee is concerned that theeconomic viability of CP may be under threat, which could have consequences onthe universal accessibility of a diversity of news and information in
If CP or comparable wire services nolonger existed, small, independent news organisations would be less able tocover international, national and, at times, even regional stories. This wouldbe detrimental to the existing diversity of news voices in
B. Self Regulation
News organizations have developed anumber of practices that amount to forms of self-regulation. For example, newsorganizations will publish (or, more rarely, broadcast) corrections of mistakesthat have appeared in news copy. Newspapers also publish letters to the editorand many of these are about errors of fact or dispute the interpretation givenin a story.
These practices create incentivesfor news organizations to strive for complete accuracy. A newspaper orbroadcaster that becomes known for “getting the story wrong” risks losingreaders, listeners or viewers to more reliable sources of information. Nonetheless,there have been complaints about the efficacy of these practices; the Committee’sresearch shows that there is a widespread sense that journalists are reluctantto admit their errors and slow to do so.[52]Partly in response to these perceptions, the news media have developedadditional mechanisms for self-regulation. These include: public editors (ombudsmen);press councils; the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council; statements of principle.
1) Public editors
Although the idea of a public editor(or ombudsman) is not new and such mechanisms exist in other countries,
As a full-time public editor wouldrepresent a considerable expense, many newspapers are of the view that thepaper would benefit more by having an extra journalist. Many smaller papershave so few journalists that having a public editor would be unmanageable. Itmight be possible, however, to pool a media company’s resources in a givenregion so that one public editor could serve several of its properties. The Committee suggests:
SUGGESTION 1 That the news media make efforts to establish Public Editor positions. |
2) Press councils
Press councils are voluntary bodiesestablished by newspapers to consider complaints from members of the public.[53]They can make a valuable contribution to the practice of journalism. Inaddition, since the council is not affiliated with a particular newspaper, a citizenis more likely to feel that the complaint was judged impartially, particularlyin those cases where council members include representatives of the public.
Frequent complaints about presscouncils, however, are that they are not well known, that they tend to react tocomplaints rather than acting on their own initiative, and that they are under-funded.Another problem is that their procedures and processes vary, and a council’smembers may not include practising journalists. Finally, the mandate of presscouncils covers only newspapers.
Most provinces have press councils, butthere are no councils in the Territories or in
SUGGESTION 2 We strongly support the creation and ongoing support of press and media councils in |
SUGGESTION 3 We suggest that members of the press and other interested organizations work to strengthen and enhance the work of existing press and media councils. Council members should include experienced journalists. |
3) Statements of principle and codes of ethics
Many news gathering organizationshave, or are developing, statements of principle. These differ from newsroomguides to style or journalistic practice in that they set out theorganization’s broader philosophy about its journalists’ responsibility. Auseful feature of some statements is the commitment that the news organizationwill cover the affairs of its proprietors in exactly the same way that itcovers any other organization. Some organizations argue, however, that the samemessage is conveyed if a statement of principle pledges that coverage will bewithout fear of or favour to anyone. Brunswick News, which unveiled its newstatement of principle when it appeared before the Committee, took thatposition. On balance, it seems likely that an explicit assurance would be a strongersignal to both the journalists and the public that news coverage will not bebiased in favour of the proprietor’s interests.[55]
Not all Canadian news organizationshave statements of principle. Of those that do, some make the statements widelyavailable, for example by posting them on a web site, while others make themavailable only to senior personnel in the organization. The Committee suggests:
SUGGESTION 4 That news organizations that have not done so develop statements of principles that apply to their news gathering activities, and include explicit pledges that the interests of the proprietors will be treated in exactly the same way as all other news coverage.
We further suggest that the statement of principles be made public and be widely distributed within the organization, in particular to its journalists. |
4) Canadian Broadcast Standards Council
As noted in Part IV of this report,the CRTC has indicated that it might give the CBSC the responsibility tomonitor compliance with conditions of licence regarding the separation ofnewsrooms. In the view of this Committee (see Recommendation 7), such anarrangement is neither workable nor desirable.
The Canadian Broadcast StandardsCouncil (CBSC) is maintained by Canadian broadcasters as a mechanism to reviewcomplaints about the practices of broadcasters or specific coverage of an issue.In the past, the CRTC reviewed such complaints but they are now dealt with bythe CBSC. For example, the CBSC has established codes for adult content or offensivecontent. It is also working on a cross-ownership code with members of theindustry. These codes reflect conditions established by the CRTC when granting broadcastlicences. The Committee has the following suggestion for the CBSC:
SUGGESTION 5 That the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council make transparent its complaint mechanism and that it add people with paid experience in journalism to its review processes. |
C. The Role of Education and Research
The quality of news and informationavailable to Canadians would be improved by initiatives such as offeringlife-long learning opportunities to working journalists, and establishing moreeducational institutions for journalists in training.
1) Education of journalists
The Davey Report in 1970 suggestedthat most newsrooms were “bone yards of broken dreams.”[56]Eleven years later, the Kent Commission quoted Davey and argued thatconcentration and conglomerate ownership had increased the frustration,confusion and malaise affecting journalists.[57]Today, the 24-hour news day and the need for multi-tasking have added to thepressures on journalists.
One way to mitigate journalists’burn-out would be to build significant education experiences into theircareers. As universities recognized long ago, such sabbatical leaves can ensurethat the creative mind remains alert and responsive to new challenges. Anotherbenefit of allowing for opportunities for formal or informal study to thequality of journalism in
Employers can benefit from having journalistsproduce better reporting and analysis because a better news product is morelikely to retain and attract audiences. As such, most companies have some formalor informal training programs. The formal programs can include bringing inexperts to train employees (for example, on how to use a new computer program)or sending employees to colleges and universities to attend relevant courses. Informaltraining can include having a senior employee mentor a newcomer. Many newsorganizations, particularly the larger newspapers, also have intern programsthat give students experience in a newsroom. Some media companies provideopportunities for journalists to further their studies. Furthermore, there arefellowships available to journalists in
One witness[61]suggested that federal departments should devote part of their communicationsbudgets to provide some support to mid-career journalists in the form offellowships or internships. The Committee canvassed various governmentdepartments and found that only a few offered such opportunities. Of the few thatdid, the Journalism and Development Initiative at the Canadian InternationalDevelopment Agency was the program that most closely reflected what the witnesswas suggesting. Journalists with more than 3 years experience with Canadiannews outlets can apply.
The Committee believes that morebroadly-focused programs should be established to ensure that all journalistshave access to mid-career educational opportunities. The Committee suggests:
SUGGESTION 6 That news organizations provide more, and more regular, opportunities for mid-career training for journalists. |
The Committee also recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 38 That federal departments and agencies explore arm’s length partnerships with recognized non-profit or professional journalists’ associations to provide fellowships for mid-career journalists, with the fellows being chosen by journalists or independent third parties. |
2) Support for journalism schools and other training
Large firms are major donors toschools of journalism; their contributions finance academic chairs andscholarships. Some contributions are purely philanthropic, others are offsetsrequired by the CRTC as a condition of licence following a transfer ofownership.
The
SUGGESTION 7 That large media firms continue, and indeed increase, support to Canadian schools of journalism. |
The Committee recognizes thatgovernment must tread carefully in these matters to avoid influencing, orappearing to influence, the news media. A potential role for the federalgovernment, however, would be via arm’s length partnerships. Examples of suchcollaborations are the CAJ-CIDA Fellowship and the Jack Webster Foundation-CIDAFellowship.
3) Research
There are periodic pollsand studies of the Canadian media. Some of these are carried out by university schoolsof journalism or departments of communication while others are produced byfederal task forces or parliamentary committees. The Committee notes that theseare not a substitute for a permanent, full-time research centre devoted to thestudy of the Canadian news media that produces regular reports on its findings.
Several witnesses pointed toresearch centres in the
SUGGESTION 8 That |
Another option would be a network ofcentres of excellence. The federal government has supported a number ofnetworks of centres of excellence in medicine, engineering, and the socialsciences. There is no reason why a similar network could not be created to fundresearch on the news media in
RECOMMENDATION 39 That a network of centres of excellence for research on journalism and the state of the Canadian news media be established. |
Centres of excellence could fund researchersin the university community with support from private sector partners and theSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC).
There is another desirable federalgovernment contribution. As this report has pointed out, a number of governmentprograms support, directly or indirectly, the work of journalists or theviability of important elements of
RECOMMENDATION 40 That the Government of Canada require its departments and agencies to carry out timely evaluations and reviews of legislation and programs that have an impact on the health and vitality of Canada’s news and information system. These studies should be conducted in an open and transparent manner and the results made publicly available. |
4) Media literacy
Although education is a provincialresponsibility, some witnesses urged the federal government to find a way tosupport media literacy. News and information become more useful when its consumers– readers, listeners and viewers – can distinguish between high and low qualityreporting and recognize the role that news can play in a well-functioningdemocracy. The Committee suggests:
SUGGESTION 9 That secondary schools include courses in media literacy. |
D. Diversity in the Newsroom
Several representatives of racialand ethnic minorities told the Committee that they were concerned about howthey are represented by the mainstream media and the roles that they play in
Professor John Miller of the
Since 1994 there has been someprogress, but “mostly in the part-time area more than in the full-time area,” ProfessorMiller said. Patrick Hunter of theCanadian Race Relations Foundation agreed that some progress was being made,but:
The questionis, are they [minority journalists] getting absorbed into the process and beingallowed to develop, to train, and to be mentored. I am not sure. I do not wantto say categorically that they are not given the same attention, but it is adifficult thing, when the news organization is trying to trim, and they do nothave enough time and personnel to be mentors as well to people coming in.
Ensuring progress in the employmentof minority journalists in the mainstream media benefits all Canadians. Ithelps to increase the available diversity of views and unifies communities by makingminority groups an integral part of Canadian society. The Committee suggests:
SUGGESTION 10 That news and information organizations, in their hiring decisions, attempt to obtain a demographic balance reflective of the larger society. |
PART VI:TO SUM UP
The Committee has learned a greatdeal about the current state of the Canadian news media. While there is muchthat is working well, there are also some serious causes for concern.
In general, the Committee has found thatCanadians remain well served by their news gathering organizations. There are,however, areas where the concentration of ownership has reached levels that fewother countries would consider acceptable. There are also regions that are notwell served, either by the private sec
The Committee notes that uses of newcommunications technologies have significantly affected and will continue to affectthe way Canadians produce, obtain and consume news and information. This beingsaid, it is convinced that the contributions of the long-established newsgathering organizations will remain of fundamental importance for many years tocome.
The challenges facing
While Canada has a number ofregulations and programs designed to prevent foreign ownership of Canadianmedia, corresponding rules to prevent high levels of concentration of ownershipof media properties, either in particular regions or within the country as awhole, do not exist. The Committee has also found compelling evidence that theresponsible authorities have not used the processes available to them to limitmedia concentration.
The current situation, with itsstrengths and weaknesses, is the result of a long and often difficult historyof efforts by individuals to build strong and profitable news organizations, andthe efforts of officials to deal with complex situations that do not lendthemselves to one easy solution.
After more than three and a halfyears of study, the Committee has developed a strong sense of how federalpolicy could be amended to protect and further strengthen
The Committee came
As this reporthas pointed out several times, an important element of a free press is thatthere be a variety of different sources of news and opinion. This can only beguaranteed if there is a plurality of owners. The country will be poorly servedif as few as one, two or three groups control substantial portions of the newsand information media in particular markets or within the country as a whole.
In simple termsthere is a public interest in having a plurality of owners. There is also apublic interest in complementing private sector news organizations with anational public broadcaster.
Unfortunately,
As for the rolesand responsibilities of
There are very high levels ofconcentration of ownership or outright market domination in certain Canadianmedia markets. These situations pose special problems. Excessive levels ofconcentration and the domination of particular markets by one media groupengender distrust in the very institutions that Canadians rely upon for theirnews and information.
The Committee’s vision covers whatmight be called the architecture of the system. Without interfering withcontent, the government can help foster an environment that supports theproduction of high quality news and information and a wide diversity ofviewpoints.
The Committee’s 40 recommendationsare guided by the conviction that the more owners, the better. In theCommittee’s view it is imperative that theBroadcasting Act and theCompetitionAct be amended. Without changes to these two pieces of legislation, it willbe impossible to develop a mechanism that allows discussion of the publicinterest in media mergers. It is alsocrucial to establish a more effective mechanism for setting the mandate of theCBC.
This report also makes 10 suggestionson matters largely outside of federal jurisdiction that would complement theCommittee’s recommendations to the federal government. These suggestions coulddo much to help improve the supply and quality of news available to theCanadian public.
It is impossible to have democracy without citizens and impossible toexercise meaningful citizenship without access to news, information, analysisand opinion. The core of this report addresses crucial factors related to theexercise of citizenship. The public interest in healthy and vibrant news mediais as important as the public interest in the rights and freedoms of individualcitizens. It is time to recognize this interest and develop, in
APPENDIX A: THE STUDYPROCESS, WITNESSES AND SELECTED BRIEFS
The Senate first authorized theCommittee to undertake this study on March 19, 2003, during the Second Sessionof the Thirty-Seventh Parliament. The Committee’s hearings began on Tuesday,April 29, 2003, and continued, with an interruption due to a prorogation ofParliament, until the tabling of theInterimReport on the Canadian News Mediaon April 1, 2004. By that time, theCommittee had heard from 68 witnesses.
Since tabling theInterim Report, the Committee has heardfrom 236 more witnesses. In particular, during the First Session of theThirty-Eighth Parliament the Committee travelled across the country, holdingmeetings in Vancouver, Calgary, Regina, Winnipeg, Toronto, Montreal, St.John’s,
During the course of its work, theCommittee commissioned a number of studies: (i) a review of the CRTC byProfessor Richard Shultz; (ii) a survey of Canadians’ use of and attitudesabout Canadian media; (iii) a brief content analysis of selected communitynewspapers; (iv) a study from the Carleton University Survey Centre providing apreliminary content analysis on the extent to which newspaper reporting at fourCanadian dailies has changed over a period of 10 years; and (v) an analysis bythe Centre d’études sur les médias on cross-media ownership of informationsources in Montreal’s English-language and French-language markets, and in theVancouver market. The Committee also received considerable input from Canadiansin the form of written submissions and briefs, as well as collecting a largequantity of relevant information.
The following is the full list ofthe Committee’s 304 witnesses, as well as an indication of the individuals metwith during fact-finding work. This list is followed by a selection of thebriefs and documents received during the Committee’s work.
WITNESSES
Second Session, Thirty-SeventhParliament
Tuesday, 29 April 2003
As Individuals:
Tom Kent, Fellow,
Mark Starowicz, Executive Producer,CBC CineNorth.
Thursday, 1 May 2003
As Individuals:
Patrick Watson, former Chair of theCBC;
Russell Mills, Neiman Fellow,
Gerald Caplan, former Co-Chair, TaskForce on Broadcasting Policy;
FlorianSauvageau, Director, Centre for Media Studies, Laval University and formerCo-Chair, Task Force on Broadcasting Policy.
Tuesday, 6 May 2003
AsIndividuals:
ChristopherDornan, Director,
DeniseBombardier, journalist and author.
Thursday, 8 May 2003
As Individuals:
Marc-FrançoisBernier, Professor, Department of Communication,
Gaëtan Tremblay,Professor, Department of Communications, and Co-Director of theInterdisciplinary Research Group on Communication, Information, and Society,Université du Québec à Montréal.
Tuesday, 13 May 2003
As Individuals:
Vince Carlin,Chair and Associate Professor, School of Journalism,
Carolyn Newman,Independent Producer;
Charly Smith,Independent Producer.
Thursday, 15 May 2003
As anIndividual:
Roger D. Landry,Former Publisher of La Presse.
Tuesday, 27 May 2003
As an Individual:
Donna Logan, Director,
FraserInstitute:
Neil Seeman,Senior Policy Analyst, Fraser Institute and Director, Canadian StatisticalAssessment Service;
Patrick Luciani,Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute.
Thursday, 29 May 2003
As Individuals:
Jamie Cameron,Professor,
Pierre Trudel,Professor, L.R. Wilson Chair in Information Technology and Electronic CommerceLaw, Public Law Research Centre, University of Montreal.
Tuesday, 3 June 2003
AsIndividuals:
Brian MacLeodRogers, Lawyer;
ChristopherMaule, Distinguished Research Professor, Department of Economics and
Tuesday, 10 June 2003
As anIndividual:
Kirk LaPointe.
Thursday, 12 June2003
AsIndividuals:
Tim Casey,Managing Director, Media and Entertainment, BMO Nesbitt Burns;
Andrea Horan, Communicationsand Media Analyst, Westwind Partners Inc.
Tuesday, 17 June 2003
Canadian Newspaper Association:
Anne Kothawala, President and ChiefExecutive Officer.
As anIndividual:
Peter Kohl.
Thursday, 19 June 2003
AsIndividuals:
Clark Davey,former newspaper publisher;
Hamilton Southam,former Director of Southam Inc.;
Wilson Southam,former Director of Southam Inc. and Southam Newspapers;
James Travers.
Tuesday, 23 September 2003
Competition Bureau:
Gaston Jorré, Acting Commissioner ofCompetition;
Peter Sagar, Deputy Commissioner ofCompetition.
Thursday, 25 September 2003
Canadian Radio-Television andTelecommunications Commission:
Charles Dalfen, Chairperson;
Andrée P. Wylie, Vice-Chairperson,Broadcasting;
Marc O'Sullivan, Executive Director,Broadcasting Directorate.
Tuesday, 7 October 2003
Rogers Communications Inc:
Philip B. Lind, Vice-Chairman;
Ken Engelhart, Vice-President,Regulatory Law;
Alain Strati, Director, RegulatoryAffairs.
Rogers Media Inc.:
Anthony P. Viner, President.
Rogers Publishing Limited:
Brian Segal, President and ChiefExecutive Officer.
Thursday, 9 October 2003
Our Public Airwaves:
Arthur Lewis, Executive Director;
Sheila Petzold, Chair of theCoordinating Committee;
Doug Willard, Past President of theCanadian Teachers’ Federation.
Tuesday, 21 October 2003
As an Individual:
Armande Saint-Jean, Professor,Department of Literature and Communications,
Thursday, 23 October 2003
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation:
Carole Taylor, Chair, Board ofDirectors;
Robert Rabinovitch, President andChief Executive Officer;
Tony Burman, Editor in Chief, CBCNews, Current Affairs and Newsworld, CBC Radio, TV and cbc.ca;
Claude Saint-Laurent, SpecialAdvisor to the President and Chair, Journalistic Standards and Practices;
Alain Saulnier, General Director ofInformation, French Radio.
Tuesday, 28 October 2003
Quebecor Inc.:
Luc Lavoie, ExecutiveVice-President, Corporate Affairs.
Thursday, 30 October 2003
Transcontinental Media Inc.:
André Préfontaine, President.
Tuesday, 4November 2003
Corus Entertainment Inc.:
John M. Cassaday, President andChief Executive Officer;
Paul Robertson, President, CorusTelevision and Nelvana;
John P. Hayes, President, CorusRadio;
Kathleen McNair, Vice President,Corporate and Regulatory Affairs, General Counsel.
Thursday, 6 November 2003
CHUMLtd.:
JaySwitzer, President and Chief Executive Officer;
SarahCrawford; Vice-President, Public Affairs;
PeterMiller, Vice-President, Planning and Regulatory Affairs.
Third Session, Thirty-Seventh Parliament
Thursday, 26 February 2004
Council on American-Islamic Relations
Sheema Khan, Chair;
Riad Saloojee, ExecutiveDirector.
As an Individual:
Clifford Lincoln, M.P.
Tuesday, 9 March 2004
Canadian Media Guild:
Lise Lareau, President;
Scott Edmonds, Vice-President,Canadian Press Branch.
Periodical Writers Association of
Michael OReilly, President;
Doreen Pendgracs, Past Member, NationalExecutive.
Thursday, 11 March 2004
National Guild of Canadian Media, Manufacturing,Professional and Service Workers/Communications Workers of
Jan Ravensbergen, President.
Lois Kirkup, President.
Tuesday, 27 April 2004
LeDevoir:
Bernard Descôteaux, Director.
Tuesday, 4 May 2004
Association de la presse francophone:
Francis Potié, Director General;
Annick Schulz, Director ofCommunications and Government Relations.
Chris Wilson-Smith, National BureauChief.
Thursday, 13 May 2004
Friends of Canadian Broadcasting:
Ian Morrison, Spokesperson;
Noreen Golfman, Chair of theSteering Committee.
First Session, Thirty-Eighth Parliament
Tuesday, 16 November 2004
National Ethnic Press and Media Council of
Thomas S. Saras, President;
Mashadi Massood, Vice-President, Press.
Wednesday, 17 November 2004
Canadian Federation of University Women:
Susan Russell, Executive Director;
Sheila Clarke, Director of Legislation.
The Walrus:
Ken Alexander, Publisher.
Tuesday, 23 November 2004
As an Individual:
Ben Chin,
Western Standard:
Ezra
Wednesday, 24 November 2004
Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Unionof
Peter Murdoch, Vice-President;
Joe Matyas, President,
John Spears, Journalist,
As an Individual:
Christopher Waddell, Carty Chair in Businessand Financial Journalism,
Wednesday, 1 December 2004
As an Individual:
Allan Thompson, Professor,
Tuesday, 7 December 2004
As Individuals:
John Miller, Professor,
Kim Kierans, Director,
Monday, 13 December 2004
TVN Niagara Inc.:
Wendell G. Wilks, Chief Executive Officer.
REAL Women of
Gwen Landolt, National Vice-President.
As an Individual:
Paul Winkler.
Corriere Canadese:
Angelo Persichilli, Political Editor.
As Individuals:
Peter G. Reynolds, Deaf TV;
D. Peter Reynolds, Deaf TV;
Hasanat Ahmad Syed, South Asian JournalistsClub;
M. Sultan Qureshi, South Asian JournalistsClub;
Derek Luis, Executive Director, CanadianDiversity Producers’ Association.
Tuesday, 14 December 2004
TVOntario:
Isabel Bassett, Chair and Chief ExecutiveOfficer;
Blair Dimock, Director Strategic Planning;
Ingrid McKhool, Senior Advisor, StrategicPlanning and Regulatory Affairs.
Association of Canadian Advertisers:
Ron Lund, President and Chief ExecutiveOfficer;
Bob Reaume, Vice-President, Policy andResearch.
Canadian Race Relations Foundation:
Karen Mock, Executive Director;
Patrick G. Hunter, Director of Communications.
Doris Anderson, Chair;
Mel Sufrin, Executive Secretary.
As Individuals:
June Callwood;
Terence Corcoran.
Wednesday, 15 December 2004
As Individuals:
Will Straw, Department of Art History andCommunication,
Enn Raudsepp,Director, Journalism Department,
Syndicat des travailleurs de l'information duJournal de Montréal:
M. Martin Leclerc, President;
Jérôme Dussault, Vice-President.
Associationdes radiodiffuseurs communautaires du Québec:
Lucie Gagnon, Secretary General;
Magalie Paré, Director General of RadioCentre-Ville and Member of the Board of Directors of ARCQ.
George Bakoyannis, Past President of the
Debbie Dore, Board Member,
Greg Duncan, Executive Director.
Association of Quebec Advertising Agencies:
Yves St-Amand, Director General;
Gregor Angus, President BBDO Montreal, andPresident of the Association of Quebec Advertising Agencies;
François Vary, Consultant and President of the
As Individuals:
Deepak Awasti, Greater
Charles Shannon,
Andre Seleanu, freelance journalist;
Del Hushley.
Thursday, 16 December 2004
Regroupement des syndicats de Gesca:
Monique Prince, Desk Journalist at La Presse,and Co-ordinator of the Regroupement
Louis Larivière, Publicity Representative at LaPresse, President of the Syndicat des travailleurs de l'information de laPresse;
Charles Coté, Journalist at La Presse and FirstVice-President of the Syndicat des travailleurs de l'information de La Presse;
Fernand Bélanger, Journalist at La Voix de l'Estand President of the Syndicat national des employés de La Voix de l'Est;
Stéphane Gousse, Desk Employee at Le Soleil andPresident of the Syndicat des employés de bureau du Soleil.
Fédération nationale des communications:
Chantale Larouche, President;
Pierre Roger, Secretary-General.
Télé-Québec:
Paule Beaugrand-Champagne, President andGeneral Manager;
Denis Bélisle, Secretary-General and GeneralManager of Legal Affairs;
Jacques Lagacé, General Manager of CorporateAffairs.
Fédération professionnelle des journalistes duQuébec:
Alain Gravel, President;
Claude Robillard, Secretary-General.
Association des journalistes indépendants du Québec:
Fabienne Cabado, independent journalist andSecretary of the AJIQ;
Jean-Sébastien Marsan, independent journalistand President of the AJIQ.
Conseil de presse du Québec:
Raymond Corriveau, President;
Robert Maltais, Secretary-General.
Monday, 31 January 2005
Media Union of
Janet Ingram-Johnson, Secretary-Treasurer.
As Individuals:
Patrick Nagle;
Ian Mulgrew.
Canadian Association ofJournalists,
Deborah Campbell, President;
Deborah Jones, Member.
As an Individual:
Catherine Murray, Associate Professor ofCommunications,
Canadian CommunityNewspapers Association:
John Hinds, Executive Director;
Peter Kvarnstrom, President.
Ming Pao Daily News:
George Ho, Deputy Editor.
The Knowledge Network:
Wayne Robert, General Manager;
Sarah MacDonald, Director of Programming,Television and New Media.
The Tyee:
David Beers, Editor;
Charles Campbell, Contributing Editor.
As an Individual:
Paul R. Willcocks.
City of
Nick Volkow, City Councillor.
As Individuals:
Pedro Mora,
James MacKinnon, Campaign for Press andBroadcast Freedom;
Bob Hackett,
Rafeh Holays, Canadian Arab Federation;
Riadh Muslih, Adala - Canadian Arab JusticeCommittee;
Brian Campbell, B.C. Library Association;
Barbara Joe May, B.C. Library Association;
Donald G. MacKenzie;
Ralsab Ward, Professor and Director, Institutefor Computing;
Richard Ward, Community Media EducationSociety;
Kevin Potvin,
Joan Jenny, Northern Comfort Productions;
Chris Budgell;
Isabel Minty;
Sid Chow Tan.
Tuesday, 1 February 2005
As Individuals:
Donna Logan, Director,
Mary Lynn Young, Professor,
Stephen J. A. Ward, Professor,
Fairchild Television Ltd.:
Winnie Hwo, News and Current AffairsController,
As Individuals:
Jhenifer Pabillano, Student,
Richard Warnica, Student,
Kesten Broughten, CITR Radio;
Brad Badelt, Student,
Darcy-Anne Wintonyk, Student,
Meeha Mann;
James Weldon, Student,
Carrie May Siggins, Student,
Robert Annandale, Student,
Dustin Pirillo.
Wednesday, 2 February 2005
Bruce W. Hogle, Chair;
Colleen Wilson, Vice-Chair;
Robert Ardiel, Executive Secretary-Treasurer.
Dennis Merrell, Executive Director;
Roger W. Holmes, President, AWNA and Publisher,Wainwright Star Chronicle.
Access Television:
Ross Mayot, Vice-President, Administration andBusiness Affairs.
As Individuals:
Rebecca Aizenman;
Oscar Fech.
Thursday, 3 February 2005
As Individuals:
Patricia Bell, Head,
Gillian Steward, Visiting Professor,
Sharon Butala;
Mary Thomson;
Donald Johnson;
Kashif Ahmed, Communications Director, Muslimsfor Peace and Justice;
Connie Deiter,
Friday, 4 February 2005
Farmers' IndependentWeekly:
Anders Bruun, Co-owner, Corporate Secretary,and Legal Counsel;
Lynda Tityk, Co-owner and Vice-President;
Conrad MacMillan, Associate Publisher.
Canadian BroadcastingCorporation:
René Fontaine, Director of French Radio,Prairies;
Gilles Fréchette, Broadcasting Manager, FrenchRadio (
Lionel Bonneville, Director, French Televisionfor the West.
Société franco-manitobaine:
Daniel Boucher, Chairman and Chief ExecutiveOfficer.
La Radio communautaire duManitoba, Envol 91 FM (CKXL):
Annie Bédard, Director General;
Jacob Atangana-Abé, Treasurer.
La Liberté:
Sylviane Lanthier, Director and Editor inChief.
Murdoch Davis, Publisher.
Aboriginal PeoplesTelevision Network:
Jean LaRose, Chief Executive Officer;
Wayne McKenzie, Director of Operations;
Wilf Blondé, Chief Financial Officer;
Rita S. Deverell, Director of News and CurrentAffairs;
Tim Kist, Director of Marketing;
Kent Brown, Director of Human Resources.
As Individuals:
Kristjan Anderson;
Lesley Hughes.
Wednesday, 16 February 2005
Torstar Corporation:
Robert Prichard, President and Chief ExecutiveOfficer, Torstar Corporation;
Pat Collins, Executive Vice President,Newspapers, Torstar Corporation;
Michael Goldbloom, Publisher,
Jagoda Pike, President, CityMedia andPublisher,
Sue Gaudi, Assistant General Counsel and ChiefPrivacy Officer, Newspapers, Torstar Corporation.
Tuesday, 22 February 2005
Shaw Communications Inc:
Ken Stein, Senior Vice President, Corporate andRegulatory Affairs.
Wednesday, 23 February 2005
Canadian Association ofBroadcasters:
Glenn O'Farrell, President and Chief ExecutiveOfficer.
Tuesday, 8 March 2005
Gesca Ltée:
Guy Crevier, President.
Tuesday, 12 April 2005
Cogeco Inc.:
Michel J. Carter, President and Chief ExecutiveOfficer, TQS and Cogeco Diffusion;
Yves Mayrand, Vice-President, CorporateAffairs.
Wednesday, 13 April 2005
CanWest Global CommunicationsCorporation:
Richard C. Camilleri, President, CanWestMediaWorks;
Steve Wyatt, Vice President andEditor-in-Chief, Global Television News;
Gerry Nott, Editor-in-Chief, Canadian NewsDesk, CanWest News Service, CanWest MediaWorks Publications;
Scott Anderson, Editor-in-Chief, OttawaCitizen, and Vice President and Editor-in-Chief, CanWest MediaWorksPublications;
Geoffrey Elliot, Vice-President, CorporateAffiars;
Charlotte Bell, Vice-President, RegulatoryAffairs, CanWest Media Works Television and Radio.
Monday, 18 April 2005
NewfoundlandBroadcasting Company:
Scott Stirling, President and Chief ExecutiveOfficer;
Douglas W. Neal, Senior Vice-President;
Jim Furlong, Director of News;
Jesse Stirling, Vice-President, Sales andMarketing.
As an Individual:
Ivan Emke, Professor, Department of SocialScience,
Le Gaboteur:
Steven Watt, Director General.
As Individuals:
David V. Jones;
Craig Westcott, Current Affairs Editor, TheExpress;
Patrick J. K. Hanlon, Member, Catholic CivilRights League of
Tuesday, 19 April 2005
Canadian Associationof Journalists:
Paul Schneidereit, National President;
The Chronicle Herald:
Sarah Dennis, Vice-President, Brand andContent, The Halifax Herald Limited;
Bob Howse, Editor-in-Chief;
Terry O’Neil, Managing Editor.
Shunpiking Magazine:
Tony Seed, Editor and Publisher;
Gary Zatzman.
As Individuals:
Bruce Wark, Associate Professor of Journalism,
Kevin Cox, Allnovascotia.com;
Racquel Reid; Allnovascotia.com;
Philip Bruce McLean;
Shalom Mandaville, Soil and Water ConservationSociety, Metro
Alison Tofflemire.
Wednesday, 20 April 2005
As Individuals:
Michael Cobden, Maclean Hunter Professor ofJournalism,
Brian Warshick;
Tim Currie,
Le Courrier de laNouvelle-Écosse:
Denise Comeau Desautels, Director General.
As Individuals:
Raymond Plourde;
Jason Lawrence.
Thursday, 21 April 2005
As an Individual:
Erin Steuter, Associate Professor, Departmentof Sociology,
Gary MacDougall, Managing Editor.
As Individuals:
Philip Lee, Director of Journalism,
Jackie Webster;
Robert Pichette.
David Henley;
Jack MacAndrew.
L’Acadie Nouvelle:
Clarence LeBreton, President of the Board ofDirectors;
Jean St-Cyr, Managing Editor;
Gilles F. Haché, Director of Sales andMarketing.
As Individuals:
John Steeves;
David Cadogan, Past President, CanadianCommunity Newspapers Association;
Jonathan Franklin;
Bernard Robichaud, Agence de presse atlantique inc.;
Bethany Thorne-Dykstra;
Eric Tobin;
Charles LeBlanc;
Gilles Haché, Le Moniteur Acadien;
Claude Bourque;
Kevin Matthews, Max Media Ltd.;
Maurice Rainville;
Jean-Marie Nadeau,
John Murphy,
Friday, 22 April 2005
As an Individual:
Marie-Linda Lord, Professor,Information-Communication Programme, University of Moncton.
La Voix Acadienne:
Marcia Enman, General Director.
Victor Mlodecki, Vice-President and GeneralManager.
Tuesday, 10 May 2005
As an Individual:
Damian Tambini, Head, Programme in ComparativeMedia Law and Policy, Centre for Socio-Legal Studies,
Wednesday, 11 May 2005
The Globe and Mail:
Edward Greenspon, Editor-in-Chief;
Sylvia Stead, Deputy Editor;
Patrick Martin, Comment Editor.
Tuesday, 14 June 2005
CTV News.
Robert G. Hurst, President;
Tom Haberstroh, Vice-President;
Joanne MacDonald, Vice-President.
Tuesday 18 October 2005
Magazines
John L. Thomson, Chief Executive Officer, and Publisher, CanadianGeographic;
Jim Everson, Executive Director, Public Affairs;
Sylvaine Gombert, Former Board Member.
Wednesday 19 October 2005
Canadian BroadcastStandards Council:
Ronald I Cohen, National Chair;
John MacNab, Executive Direc
Teisha Gaylard, Direc
As an individual:
SELECTED PERSONS MET DURING FACT-FINDING WORK
Cynthia Kinch, Director of Programming, English Network Television News(“The National”).
Donna Logan, Director,
Claude Adams, Instructor, Broadcast Journalism,
Gabriela Perdomo;
Darcy-Anne Wintonyk, Student,
Jhenifer Pabillano, Student,
Glenda Conrad, Student,
Kenneth Ferree, Federal Communications Commission;
Scott Keeter, Pew Research Centre;
James Gattuso, Heritage Foundation;
Gregory Sidak, American EnterpriseInstitute;
Cecilia Wexler, Vice-President,Common Cause;
Mark Lloyd, Senior Fellow, Centre for American Progress;
Chuck Goldfarb, Library of Congress;
Angie Welborn, Library of Congress;
Mike Getler, Ombudsman,
Jeffrey Dvorkin, Ombudsman, National Public Radio;
Chantal de la Rionda, National Public Radio;
Neil Fried, Counsel, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives;
Rachel Welch, Democratic Counsel, Committee on
Lee Carosi, Office of Senator John McCain;
Daphna Peled, Office of Senator Byron Dorgan;
Steve Miller, Office of Senator Conrad Burns;
The Honourable Frank McKenna, Ambassador of
SELECTED DOCUMENTS AND BRIEFS RECEIVED DURING STUDY
Second Session, Thirty-SeventhParliament
1. Marc-François Bernier – Brief for appearance
2. CBC/Radio-Canada – Various documents and background material forappearance
3. Canadia Newspaper Association – Various documents and backgroundmaterial for appearance
4. CRTC – Opening remarks for appearance and follow-up correspondence
5. Vince Carlin – Extracts of draft chapters of a book
6. CHUM, Ltd – Opening remarks and other documents for appearance
7. Competition Bureau – Opening remarks for appearance and follow-upmaterial
8. Corus Entertainment– Opening remarks for appearance and follow-upmaterial
9. Clark Davey – Speech to the Canadian Club,
10. Christopher Dornan – Brief for appearance and follow-up information
11. Marc Edge – “The Press We Deserve: A Legacy of Unheeded Warnings”
12. Fraser Institute – Opening remarks and other materials
13. Andrea Horan – Brief for appearance before the Committee and“Advertising Spending: Insights from the Field (March 18, 2003)”
14. Tom Kent – Brief for appearance
15. Peter Kohl – Submission to the Committee
16. Donna Logan – Brief for appearance and other documents
17. Roger Landry – Opening remarks for appearance and “Définition du journalLa Presse et de son orientationidéologique”
18. Médias Transcontinental – Brief, list of newspapers, annual report, andother information
19. Russell Mills – Speaking notes for appearance, remarks for conference atMcGill on 14 February 2003, and other documents
20. Our Public Airwaves – Brief and copy of “Public Service Broadcastersaround the World” (January 1999, McKinsey and Company for the BBC)
21. Public Interest Advocacy Centre – “Give Me that old Time Relgiion: TheReturn of Vertical Integration,” by Michael Janigan
22. Quebecor – Opening remarks for an appearance and other information
23. Enn Raudsepp – “Rethinking Institutional Media Ethnics,” “MediaAccountability and Responsibility,” and “Why We Need an Inquiry”
24. Brian MacLeod Rogers – Course Outline (JRN 243,
25.
26. Wilson Southam and Hamilton Southam – “A Diversity of Voices at Risk?”and other documents
27. Erin Steuter – “Freedom of the Press Is for Those Who Own One: MonopolyMedia in
28. Syndicat des communications de Radio-Canada – “Changes in SportsCoverage on the Première chaîne of Radio-Canada Before and After Cancellationof the Late-Evening Sports News”
29. Gaëtan Tremblay – “Should the Rules Governing Foreign Ownership ofCanadian Media Be Reviewed?”
30. Pierre Trudel – “Memorandum on Freedom of the Press and EditorialFreedom in Canadian Law”
31. Anthony Westell – Various articles
32. Correspondence from Robert Pulsford, dated 7 September 2003
33. Correspondence and documents from Anne Vespry, dated 12 September 2003
34. Dwayne Winseck, “Netscapes of Power: Convergence, Consolidation andPower in the Canadian Mediascape,” fromMedia,Culture and Society, 2002, Vol. 24
35. Transcripts of a 13 May 2003 interview with Donna Logan on “Sounds LikeCanada”
36. Press release from the Task Force on Broadcasting Policy dated 22September 1986
37. Excerpts from a comments on a case before the Federal CommunicationsCommission (US) dated 2 January 2003
38. Library of Parliament – “Some Media Issues,” 27 January 2003
39. Council of Europe – “Media Diversity in
40. Alain Dubuc – “Who controls
41. Mark Starowicz –“The Great Media Shift,” 10 February 2000
42. Adam Finn, Stuart McFadyen, and Colin Hoskins – “Valuing the CanadianBroadcasting Corporation,” 2003
43. Maurice E. Stucke and Allen P. Grunes – “Antitrust and the Marketplaceof Ideas,”Antitrust Law Journal,Vol. 69, 2001
44. Various documents from the Annual conference of the McGill Institute forthe Study of Canada, 2003
45. Excerpts fromCRTC Broadcasting Policy Monitoring Report, 2002
46. Competition Bureau, Media Advisory, “Why Media Concentration Is Not aBureau Concern,” June 29, 1999
47. Competition Bureau and CRTC (Interface), News Release of November 22,1999 with Backgrounder
48. Documents from Culture and Communications
49. Press Releases from Culture and Communications Quebec dealing withAdvisory Committee on Information Quality and Diversity (September 6 and 27,2002), including text of Belgium’sLoi relative à la reconnaissance et à laprotection du titre de journaliste professionnel; including article fromLeDevoir providing most recent information on the subjects contained in thepress releases
50. Progressive-Conservative Roundtable on Media Concentration, July 31,2002
51. “Not in the Newsroom! CanWest Global, Chain Editorials and Freedom ofExpression in
52. “Media Consolidation/Encouraging Diversity of Electronic Media,” MediaAccess program (US)
53. Excerpts from the 2001-2002 Annual Report of the CBC
54. Matthew Fraser, “The CBC’s Choice: Constellations or CoreCompetencies?,”Policy Options, September 2000
55. Colin Hoskins, Stuart McFadyen, and Adam Finn, “Refocusing the CBC,”CanadianJournal of Communication, Winter 2001, Vol. 26
56. P. Finlay,Concentration of Ownership in the Media: A Review of thePrincipal Issues, November 1999, Canadian Heritage Media Studies
57. Dennis Price,Ownership of Cultural Businesses: An InternationalComparative Profile, December 2001, Canadian Heritage Media Studies
58. Marie-Hélène Lavoie and Chris Dornan,Concentration and NewspaperOwnership: An “Old,” and Still Unresolved, Problem, 2002, Canadian HeritageMedia
Third Session, Thirty-SeventhParliament
59. Canadian Federation of University Women – Report to the Committee, 2004
60. CRTC – Correspondence from the Commission
61. Canadian Council on American-Islamic Relations – “Today’s Media: CoveringIslam and Canadian Muslims,” 26 February 2004
62. Friends of Canadian Broadcasting – Correspondence and follow-upinformation
63. Green Party of
64. Extracts fromOur CulturalSovereignty: The Second Century of Canadian Broadcasting, June 2003, Reportof the House of Commons Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage and governmentresponse
65. Le Devoir – Follow-up information to appearance
66. Viggo Lewis – Correspondence
67.
68. TNG
69. Periodical Writers Association of
70. Doris Baltruschat, “Television and
71. Centre d’études sur les medias –Médiaset vie démocratique, 1 November 2002
72. Information on journalism schools in
First Session, Thirty-EighthParliament
73. Aboriginal Peoples Television Network – Presentation to the Committee
74. Access Media Group – Presentation to the Committee
75.
76.
77. Association des journalistes indépendants du Québec – “Toward UnionRepresentation for Independent Journalists”
78. Association des radiodiffuseurs communautaires du Québec – Brief to theCommittee
79. Association of Canadian Advertisers – Presentation to the Committee
80. Association of Quebec Advertising Agencies – “Opinion of theAssociation…on the Impacts of Media Convergence on the Publications Industry”
81. Patricia Bell – Presentation to the Committee
82.
83.
84. David Cadogan – Presentation to the Committee
85. Campaign for Press and Broadcast Freedom – BC Chapter – Presentation tothe Committee and follow-up correspondence
86. Canadian Association of Broadcasters – Presentation to the Committee andgeneral information
87. Canadian Broadcast Standards Council – Presentation to the Committee andgeneral information
88. Canadian Community Newspapers Association – Presentation to theCommittee
89. Canadian Ethnic Journalists’ and Writers’ Club – Report to the Committee
90. Canadian Federation of University Women – Brief to the Committee
91. Canadian Press – Information on the CP
92. Canadian Race Relations Foundaiton – Presentation to the Committee andgeneral information
93. CanWest Global Communications – Presentation materials and follow-upcorrespondence
94. Cogeco – Presentation to the Committee and general information
95.
96. Media Union of
97. Communicaitons, Energy, and Paperworkers’
98. Conseil de presse du Québec – “Rapport d’activités 2003-2004,” “ThePress and Aboriginal Reality,” and decision on case number D2003-06-067
99. Terence Corcoran – Various articles and speeches
100. Courrier de la Nouvelle-Écosse – Text of speech at the Congrès mondialacadien 2004
101. CTV News – Presentation material, “Policy Handbook,” and follow-upcorrespondence
102. Bob Davies – “One Trues Story of How the System Actually Did Not Work”
103. Deaftv – Presentation material and background information
104. Ivan Emke – Presentation to the Committee, “Community Newspapers andCommunity Identity,” “Survey of Community Newspaper Editors in
105. Farmers’ Independent Weekly – Submission to the Committee
106. Fédération professionnelle des journalistes du Québec – Brief to theCommittee
107. Robert G. Gauthier – Submission to the Committee
108. Gesca – Brief to the Committee and follow-up correspondence
109. Globe and Mail – “Code of Conduct”
110. Bob Hackett – Submission to the Committee andThe Missing News: Filters and Blind Spots in Canada’s Press
111. Robert Hajaly – “Democracy, Freedom of Expression, and the Control ofNewspapers”
112. Kime Kierans –EndangeredWeeklies: A Case Study of Three Maritime Community Newspapers
113. The Knowledge Network – Presentation and brief to the Committee
114. L’Acadie Nouvelle – Presentation to the Committee
115. La Voix acadienne– Examples of various advertisements
116. The Western Standard – Presentation material
117. Donna Logan – Canadian Media Research Consortium, Computer Tabulations
118. Marie-Linda Lord – “Challenges for Acadian Media: The Press Monopoly andSpeaking Out – The Situation in
119. Magazines
120.
121.
122. John Miller – “Who’s Telling the News? Race and Gender in
123. Catherine Murray – “The Media,” inPolicyAnalysis in
124. Patrick Nagle – Submission
125. National Ethnic Press and Media Council – “Working to Make Canada a TrueCommunity of Communities,” and follow-up material
126. TNG
127. Alexander Norris – Brief to the Committee
128.
129.
130. Radio communautaire du
131. Enn Raudsepp – Follow-up material
132. REAL Women of
133. Vic Roschkov – Brief to the Committee
134. Shaw Communications – “A Presentation by the Strategic Counsel: Consumersand the Future of Household/Personal Technologies,” “Shaw Annual GeneralMeeting, January 13, 2005,” and “Cabled
135. Société franco-manitobaine – Brief to the Committee
136. South Asian Journalists Club – Brief to the Committee
137. John Steeves – Follow-up correspondence
138. Erin Steuter – “Freedom of the Press if for Those Who Own One: TheIriving Media Monopoly in
139. Tristan Stewart-Robertson – Submission to the Committee
140. Syndicat des travailleurs de l’information duJournal de Montréal – “Le Journal de Montréal et la propriétécroisée”
141. Télé-Québec – Presentation to the Committee
142. Torstar – Brief to the Committee and follow-up correspondence
143. TV Niagara – Presentation and follow-up correspondence
144. Christopher Waddell – “Newspaper Cutbacks and Falling Voter Turnout – Isthere a Link?”
145. Stephen Ward – “The Future of Journalism Ethics Amid Revolution”
146. Megan Wennberg – “Judging Democracy by Its Weakest Link: WhenHere Becomes Their”
147. Quebecor – Correspondence from Mr. Luc Lavoie with the Chair (16December 2004)
148. Transcontinental Media – Correspondence from Mr. André Préfontaine withthe Chair (15 June 2005)
149. Association de la presse francophone – Follow-up correspondence
150. Canadian Media Research Consortium – “Report Card on Canadian NewsMedia”
APPENDIX B: LIST OFRECOMMENDATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
The Committee recommends:
RECOMMENDATION 1
That a new section,dealing with mergers of news gathering organizations, be added to theCompetition Act. This new section should:
d) trigger automatic review of a proposed media merger if certain thresholdsare reached;
e) allow the appropriate ministers to order a review of proposed mergers;
set out the process that will be followed when a merger is being reviewed,including the appointment of a panel to conduct the review.
RECOMMENDATION 2
That legislation governing the CRTC be amended to require the CRTC toparticipate, when appropriate, in the panels established by the new section of theCompetition Act.
RECOMMENDATION 3
That allnews media outlets be required
RECOMMENDATION 4
That Section 3(d) of theBroadcastingAct be amended to give a clear priority to news and information programmingwithin the Canadian broadcasting system.
RECOMMENDATION 5
That Section 5(2) of theBroadcastingAct, which deals with the powers of the CRTC, be amended. The amendmentshould state that the Canadian broadcasting system “gives a high priority tonews and information programming within the Canadian broadcasting system.”
RECOMMENDATION 6
That the CRTC adopt a more open approach to the benefits that may flowfrom competition within the provision of news and information programming.
RECOMMENDATION 7
That the CRTC not delegate important matters having to do with mediamergers and conditions of licence to the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council(CBSC) or any other body.
RECOMMENDATION 8
That the CRTC properly monitor the terms and conditions that it imposeson the news operations of companies involved in cross-media mergers.
RECOMMENDATION 9
That the Government of Canada give the CRTC the power to levy fines onbroadcasters.
RECOMMENDATION 10
That the CRTC revise its community television and radio regulations toensure that access to the broadcasting system is encouraged and that adiversity of news and information programming is available through theseservices.
RECOMMENDATION 11
That the CRTC and the Department of Canadian Heritage jointly develop aninformation system that will provide relevant and timely information oncommunity broadcasting activities in both television and radio.
RECOMMENDATION 12
That the government establish a more coherent system for refining themandate of the CBC. This system should include commitment to a long-termplanning horizon, a ten-year licence renewal and a long-term budget thatprovides appropriate stable funding.
RECOMMENDATION 13
That the CRTC not have the power to alter the terms of the mandate forthe CBC agreed to by Parliament and the Government.
RECOMMENDATION 14
That the CBC develop a plan to focus on its core mandate and that the Governmentof Canada enter into a review process with the CBC to develop an agreement onthe budget required to provide distinctive and complementary services toCanadians.
Once a mandate has been determined, the government should make acommitment to provide the realistic and stable funding on a long-term basis.This funding should be sufficient to allow the CBC to remove advertising fromits television services.
RECOMMENDATION 15
That CBC television focus its efforts on providing a range of servicesthat do not inappropriately duplicate those of the private sector. Inparticular, the CBC should leave coverage of professional sports and theOlympics to the private sector.
RECOMMENDATION 16
That the Board of Direc
RECOMMENDATION17
That appointments to the Board of Directors be reviewed by an appropriateparliamentary committee.
RECOMMENDATION 18
That the appointment of the President of the CBC be made by thegovernment from a list of candidates prepared by the Board of Directors of theCorporation.
RECOMMENDATION 19
That the Corporation be required to prepare annual reports that provide adequateinformation so that Canadians and their parliamentarians can determine whatprogress is being made in meeting the CBC’s mandate.
RECOMMENDATION 20
That the Departmentof Canadian Heritage develop a component within the Canada Magazine Fund thatwould provide support for the start-up of magazines and recognize Canadianeditorial content distributed via mechanisms such as the Internet.
RECOMMENDATION 21
That realisticand stable funding be made available for the Publications Assistance Program.
RECOMMENDATION 22
That thePublications Assistance Program be amended to provide more efficient supportfor small and start-up publications (allowing publications to be eligibleafter, for example, four issues or four months rather than after one year).
RECOMMENDATION 23
That thegovernment of
RECOMMENDATION 24
That theMinisters of Finance and Canadian Heritage enable the use of charitablefoundations
RECOMMENDATION 25
That theCRA strengthen its procedures for determining whether a periodical is Canadian.
RECOMMENDATION 26
That theMinister of Finance defer capital gains taxes paid on the transfer offamily-owned newspapers from generation to generation.
RECOMMENDATION 27
That theSecurity of Information Act be amendedto provide for a public interest defence in Section 4.
RECOMMENDATION 28
Thatapplications to judges for search warrants for journalists’ notes and similarmaterial have a higher level of accountability; they should be signedpersonally by a minister.
RECOMMENDATION 29
That theaccess to information system be:
d) simplified to be more transparent and accessible;
e) expanded to include crown corporations; and
f) monitored so that costs for searches are reasonable and searches areconducted with reasonable dispatch.
RECOMMENDATION 30
That alldepartments and agencies ensure that their employees are made aware of theexistence of any whistleblower legislation and its provisions.
RECOMMENDATION 31
That the CompetitionBureau examine universal contracts with freelance journalists to determinewhether they involve an abuse of dominance by one of the parties to thecontract.
RECOMMENDATION 32
That theMinister of Canadian Heritage examine whether there is any abuse of authors’rights in the requirements imposed by universal contracts and, if so, exploreamendments to theCopyright Act.
RECOMMENDATION 33
That theCRTC require cable and satellite systems, as technology permits, to expand theoffering of official minority language programming, phasing in the requirementsfor the smaller distribution systems.
RECOMMENDATION 34
That, astechnology permits, the CRTC encourage the national distribution of English andFrench provincial educational broadcasters.
RECOMMENDATION 35
That allfederal departments be ordered to comply with the law relating to advertisingin both official languages.
RECOMMENDATION 36
That theTreasury Board ensure that the system for handling complaints with respect
RECOMMENDATION 37
That thesystem of government advertising in the media be modified
c) criteria for placing advertising are transparent and
d) ethnic media have the criteria for the placement of advertising in theirmedia explained
RECOMMENDATION38
Thatfederal departments and agencies explore arm’s length partnerships withrecognized non-profit or professional journalists’ associations to providefellowships for mid-career journalists, with the fellows being chosen byjournalists or independent third parties.
RECOMMENDATION39
That a network of centres of excellence for research on journalism andthe state of the Canadian news media be established.
RECOMMENDATION40
That the Government of Canada require its departments and agencies tocarry out timely evaluations and reviews of legislation and programs that havean impact on the health and vitality of Canada’s news and information system. Thesestudies should be conducted in an open and transparent manner and the resultsmade publicly available.
------------------------------------------------
The Committee suggests:
SUGGESTION 1
That the newsmedia make efforts to establish Public Editor positions.
SUGGESTION 2
We strongly support the creation and ongoingsupport of press and media councils in
SUGGESTION 3
We suggest that members of the press and otherinterested organizations work to strengthen and enhance the work of existingpress and media councils. Council members should include experiencedjournalists.
SUGGESTION 4
That newsorganizations that have not done so develop statements of principles that applyto their news gathering activities, and include explicit pledges that theinterests of the proprietors will be treated in exactly the same way as allother news coverage.
We furthersuggest that the statement of principles be made public and be widelydistributed within the organization, in particular to its journalists.
SUGGESTION 5
That the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council make transparent itscomplaint mechanism and that it add people with paid experience in journalismto its review processes.
SUGGESTION 6
That newsorganizations provide more, and more regular, opportunities for mid-careertraining for journalists.
SUGGESTION7
That largemedia firms continue, and indeed increase, support to Canadian schools ofjournalism.
SUGGESTION 8
That
SUGGESTION9
Thatsecondary schools include courses in media literacy.
SUGGESTION10
That newsand information organizations, in their hiring decisions, attempt to obtain ademographic balance reflective of the larger society.
[1] The downward trend in daily circulation is not universal. Some papershave recently recorded circulation gains. Many papers, however, have suffered gradualcirculation drops for many years now, and there are some indications that thistrend may be accelerating. This pattern is not unique to
[2] There are comparatively few Internet-based news gatheringorganizations. The Tyee, an Internet news service based in
[3] This Committee’sInterim Report is availableon-line atwww.parl.gc.ca/en/Content/SEN/Committee/373/tran/rep04apr04-e.htm.
[4] Theother two were: Report of the Special Senate Committee on Mass Media, “TheUncertain Mirror” (The Davey Report),
[5] Two examples illustrate this point. In 1937the
[6] The CBC provides a number of services in French and in English. Thisreport uses ‘CBC’
[7] NPR, however, still has 18 bureaus abroad. Foreign news accounts for 40per cent of NPR’s news stories and is one of the most popular elements of itsprogramming.
[8] Southam News, whose major newspaper assets were eventually acquired byCanWest Global, had 11 foreign bureaus prior to the acquisition.
[9] This bureau did not become operationaluntil March 2006.
[10] Submission to the Committee: “Newspaper Cutbacks and Falling Voter Turnout – Is There a Link?”
[11] These concerns are not based on the fact thatthe CND is in
[12]
[13] TheGazette,Memorandum: Advisory/Reminder
[14] TheBroadcasting Act is a recognized exception to this rule. The originaljustification for theAct was thatthe broadcast spectrum was limited and that use of it therefore had to beregulated.
[15] Schultz,Richard J.,Mandatesand Operation of the CRTC and Competition Bureau In Media Mergers andAcquisitions,March 2005.
[16] TheCompetition Bureau,“The Competition Bureau’s Work in Media Industries: Background for the SenateCommittee on Transport and Communications,” 2003.
[17] CompetitionBureau, Merger Enforcement Guidelines, (Part 3: Market Definition), September2004, paragraphs 3.3and 3.4. A footnote
[18] CompetitionBureau, Annual Report2004 - Reviewing Mergers.
[19] See Section 3(1)(d)(ii). The full text ofSection 3 of theBroadcasting Act isfound in Volume II.
[20] Public Notice CRTC 1998-41 (Commercial RadioPolicy 1998).
[21] Public Notice CRTC 1999-97 (Building onSuccess – A Policy Framework for Canadian Television)
[22] Further details are presented in Volume II.
[23] See Volume II for the Committee’s researchdata on Canadians’ media use preferences.
[24] Volume II presents information for newscastsduring the day for the period August 30, 2004 to April 3, 2005.
[25] In1999,
[26] CBC radio has not carried ads since the 1970s.
[27] The Committee’s analysis of the various options is discussed in VolumeII.
[28]
[29] Recently, the Commission to Investigate Media Concentration preventedthe publisher Axel Springer AG from buying the country’s biggest televisioncompany, saying the merged firm would have “dominant power” over publicopinion.
[30] The 35 per cent threshold for market share is used by the CompetitionBureau when examining mergers and possible cases of abuse of dominant position.The Bureau notes that factors other than market share are important and thereis not always a direct correlation between market share and dominance, so the35 per cent figure is not used as a fixed limit. (See the discussion inCompetition Bureau, Merger Enforcement Guidelines, Paragraphs 4.12 – 4.13,www.competitionbureau.gc.ca).
[31] Section 3 of theAct is includedin Volume II.
[32] See Volume II for examples of CRTCconditions of licence for broadcasters.
[33] The CBSC was created in 1988 by
[34] Examples of these announcements are included in Volume II.
[35] In July 2004, the CRTC denied the applicationby Genex Communications Inc. for the licence renewal for its French-languageradio station in
[36] Broadcast Distribution Undertakings arerequired to contribute 5% of their revenues to some combination of the CanadianTelevision Fund (CTF) and community television. Cable companies can chooseeither option or a combinationof both (e.g., 2% to community television and 3% to the CTF). Satellitedistributors contribute 5% to the CTF and do not contribute to communitytelevision.
[37] Accordingto the CRTC Broadcasting Policy Monitoring Report, 2005, about 42 per cent ofviewership hours for the English-language CBC were directed at sports programsin 2003/2004 (for Radio-Canada, the figure was about 11 per cent). Revenue fromadvertising and program sales in that year was $282 million. The precise amountof advertising revenue tied to sports programming is not available, but it ispresumably substantial.
[38] John L. Thomson, Chief Executive Officer andPublisher,Canadian Geographic,Magazines
[39] Jim Everson, Executive Director, Public Affairs Magazines
[40] Economic and Fiscal Update by the Minister ofFinance, November 14, 2005.
[41] Bob Howse, Editor-in-chief, theHalifax Chronicle Herald, Follow-upletter to the Committee, May 9, 2005.
[42] There is no specific and overriding definition of “public interest” inlaw. Generally, as in Section 15 of theSecurity ofInformation Act, the definition isvague and involves a balancing test: the benefits to the public from disclosureexceed the benefits to the public from non-disclosure. Public interest thusinvolves more than simple interest or curiosity on the part of the public.
[43] Joan Russow, Special Senate Committee on theAnti-Terrorism Act, October 17, 2005.
[44] Robert Cribb and FredValence-Jones, “A ‘Culture of Secrecy’ Blocks Public Access to Information: GovernmentData Released in Just One-third of Cases, Audit Finds,” Ottawa Citizen, May 28,2005.
[45] CNA, “In Pursuit of MeaningfulAccess to Information Reform,” Brief submitted to Justice Minister Cotler andTreasury Board President Alcock, February 2005.
[46] One proposal would extend theAccess to Information Act to cover someCrown corporations, including the CBC; information related to journalistic,creative or programming activities would be excluded. The government also tabled a discussion paperentitled “Strengthening theAccess toInformation Act – A Discussion of Ideas Intrinsic to the Reform of theAccess to Information Act” on April 11, 2006. The government plans to have the matter studied in committee beforeadopting a more comprehensive reform package.
[47] In 2004, for example, the CRTC approved two new French-languagecommunity radio stations in
[48] See, for example, the testimony ofDenise Comeau Desautels ofLe Courrier dela Nouvelle-Écosse on April 20, 2005.
[49] “The Use of the Official LanguageMinority Press by Federal Institutions - Follow-up.” Office of the Commissionerof Official Languages, January 2005. (The four departments were: Treasury BoardSecretariat, Communication Canada, Public Works and Government Services andCanadian Heritage.)
[50] Peter Kvarnstrom, President ofthe Canadian Community Newspapers Association, on January 31, 2005.
[51] A number of large media groups also exchangeinformation among their own members.
[52] See Volume II.
[53] Press councils are financed by the industry;in
[54] February 1, 2005.
[55] For example, theWashington Post statement of principle says: “The newspaper’s dutyis to its readers and to the public at large, and not to the private interestsof the owner.” Volume II includes examples of statements ofprinciple.
[56] “The Uncertain Mirror,” Report of the Special Senate Committee on MassMedia (The Davey Report),
[57] Royal Commission on Newspapers (The
[58] The Atkinson Charitable Foundation wasestablished in 1942 by Joseph E. Atkinson, former publisher of theToronto Star. The one-year fellowship of $75,000 includescompensation for research expenses. All full-time Canadian journalists in print or broadcast media areeligible to apply for the annual competition, but those who have achieveddistinction in reporting on policy issues will be preferred.
[59] The CJF, a non-profit organization founded in 1990 to support and rewardexcellence in Canadian journalism, awards three or more Canadian Journalism Fellowshipsper year at the
[60] The Jack Webster Foundation was founded in1986 to promote the achievements of reporters based in British Colombia. The fellowship was established in2000 and was made possible by a donation from Standard Broadcasting Co. and is valued at up to$10,000 for research-based submissions and up to $6,000 for skills-enhancementsubmissions.The competition is open to all B.C.broadcast journalists who have been practising for at least three years with aB.C. radio or television station or news service. Freelancers may also apply.
[61] Allan Thompson, December 1, 2004.
[62]
[63] John Miller, December 7, 2004.
TheCommittee report is available in PDF format(Portable Document Format). These type of electronic documents retain the original look and feel -- complete with text, graphics, photos and colour -- of their printed versions, and can be disseminated independently of computer platform or distribution media.
Acrobat Readers are freely available and enable Windows, Macintosh, DOS and UNIX users to view, navigate through and print any PDF document.
If you need more information on how to use this format or require a reader for your platform, you may wish to visitAdobe Systems Incorporated.
[8]ページ先頭