I work for a Canadian television company, and as a result, I've been heavily involved in the "Save Local Television" and "Local TV Matters" campaigns. This is my take - not speaking as an employee, but as a consumer who is acknowledging their potential bias out front.
It's a real problem. A new member of our team is someone who recently lost her job at CKX in Brandon, after the station turned off after 50 years because CTVglobemedia couldn't afford to keep it running. The goal is not to charge the consumer - the goal is to keep them informed, working, and contributing in their community.
Americans solved the same issue many years ago, but Canadians still haven't figured it out. It will eventually come to pass that cable companies have to pay for all the channels they carry, but for now they just want to take as long as possible before they have to pay - which is why they continue to fight.
The way the cable companies have phrased their commercials as a "tax" and a "bailout" infuriates me. Both words are blatant lies. Any new charges would be charged by the cable providers, not the government - ergo, not a tax. Nor is it a bailout - it's asking someone to pay for the product they sell.
I posted this metaphor on the thread over at Boing Boing on the subject, and I think it covers my view of the issue nicely:
A farmer grows a field full of apple trees, and it ripens into a huge crop. The farmer could drive only a single bushel of apples to market to sell, so he only sells to 10% of the people who wanted to buy.
Then, a man drives in a huge truck and pulls all of the apples off the trees, and sets up a roadside stand just outside of the market, getting 90% of the people who wanted apples. He sells the apples that he got for free at a price that marks up the actual process of getting the apples considerably, even factoring in his truck. The losers are the people at the market who just want to buy some apples at a reasonable price.
The television companies are the farmer. They did all the work producing what they have to offer, but have limited means to distribute it. Then the cable company (the man) comes in, takes all of his hard work for free, and sells it at a marked up price.
Granted, the farmer has a difficult time distributing it, but without the money to buy a new pickup truck that can carry more than a single bushel, he'll have a hard time fixing his distribution model.
The farmer is asking that the man with the truck pay for all the apples the farmer worked hard to grow, instead of stealing them and charging an obscene markup.
That's what the situation is about. Television companies may be lagging behind in distribution, but it still shouldn't mean that cable companies can steal their product and sell it at a markup.
What people say...
David Alleyn said:
Cable is also throwing around prices on the commercials. And seriously, is $10 all that much? People pay far more than that for kick boxing and other pay-per-views.
Naturally during the communication with the “Average person on the street” they conveniently leave out the people who say that it’s not a big deal. They probably had to spend a week getting the footage of five people who are such penny pushers that the threat of $10 seems like a crime.
They mention $400,000,000 in profit is made by the local television stations. But that is for the WHOLE of Canada. With Global, CTV, CBC and others to each major and even small city that large number is easily divided so many times that it becomes mere pocket change. And that is not equally distributed either, some of the smaller cities don’t see a cent of the money, and instead end up in the negative.
Let’s ask Cable one big question. How much profit do you make off of our local TV?
The answer is simple. “More than we want to part with.”
on Thursday November 19, 2009 · (permlink)
What do you think?
Commenting is closed for this article.