I can buy both those arguments and I guess the original document does leave that impression, but that would all be quite subtle.

Lance Gleich, Toronto ON

I am worried that some of your contributors may be taking your synopsis of our submission, which highlights only a couple of its points, as the sum total of our position.

To be clear, CBC/Radio-Canada believes that the new media world is a large and important part of its future. It is a central pillar of the strategic themes identified in the Challenge Us! process. Providing space for Canadian expression on the maximum number of platforms that Canadians want to use to consume media is, we believe and multiple Parliamentary committees have confirmed, now part of our mandate. As you know, we are expending a lot of energy and creativity on developing new ways of providing that space either using current resources or by finding new ways of generating funds.

Last week’s submission was not our last word on the subject. The Commission will initiate a broad review in the fall and we intend, as usual, to submit a fully developed, forward-looking position that describes our role and how it fits into the larger system.

Last week’s filing was a preliminary one, in response to the CRTC’s initial question of whether it was framing the issues properly. We did not want the public debate to move forward and public policy decisions to be contemplated based on what we perceived to be two faulty assumptions in the Commission’s framing of the issues. And those are:

1. That the consumption of broadcasting content found on new media is replacing the consumption of traditional broadcast media, particularly television; and

2. That new media represents a major business opportunity for Canadian broadcasters.

Today and, to the extent that we can foresee, into the future, the vast majority of high quality broadcast content found on any platform is going to be produced by traditional broadcasters. Public policy decisions based on the assumption that that supply of quality Canadian content will be financed by a one-for-one shift of revenue from traditional to new media would lead to a severe weakening of the country’s main creators of Canadian broadcasting content.

That is not the CRTC’s intention and we want to ensure that the debate from the outset reflects not only the future potential but the current reality of the new media universe.

Thanks,

Steven Guiton
Regulatory Affairs

This one might as well be titled “Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States.”:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080718-major-eu-p2presearch-project-hopes-to-kill-traditional-tv.html

And here we see what happens when old media types get a sudden terrifying glimpse of the future:
http://adage.com/brightcove/single.php?bcpid=1370868150bctid=1655754265

Am halfway through the document and already the CBC looks more foolish than I was prepared to believe.
This is absurd.
Are they suggesting that cablevision had no effect on the CBC?
So the iPod has had no effect on radio, and neither has XM and Sirius.
That’s like suggesting iTunes has no impact on CD sales.

Progressive is not a word we associate with the CBC. (but Conservative is!) A more appropriate word is Petrified, as in a state of paralysis resulting from fear.

While they don’t think it is in immanent danger of replacing radio and TV, they seem willing to play in the space.

Although they did cancel Search Engine.

The CBC has no such funding excuse for keeping its head similarly in the sand. I’m rather shocked by this CBC submission. What do they think they are protecting?

CBC is a loser in this battle.

In UK broadcasting parlance, a “public service broadcaster” is one that is motivated less by market factors (i.e. profitability, progressive revenue growth, etc.), and more by a mandate to create art and cultural products, usually with some modicum of public support, and generally “push the envelope” with regards to new platforms, new thinking about content, etc.

I’m not sure if the CBC’s submission supports or rejects that suggestion, but Canada’s public broadcaster seems to have moved away from it after abandoning brave experiments such as ZeD, Exposure, jPod/xPod, etc.