Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in ..../includes/class_bbcode.php on line 2958

Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in ..../includes/class_bbcode.php on line 2958
CRTC Complaint site....
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29

Thread: CRTC Complaint site....

  1. #1
    ddire
    Guest

  2. #2
    dishguy
    Guest
    Here is my complaint,
    feel free to do the same.
    Regarding Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2008-358. I am quite upset regarding the above decision. I feel the commission has disregarded it's own rules and regulations by forcing the CTVHD signal onto people who are in no position to receive it through the airwaves you are to regulate. Forcing centralized content onto diverse areas of Canada limits access to undisturbed programming. If you can force my chosen BDU to insert another channel over top of one that I pay for based on nothing other than the fact that it is Canadian I fear for my and my fellow viewers and consumers rights. You endanger my Chosen BDU's business viability at the expense of a channel that I would have no access to near the Manitoba border. While I applaud the CRTC for attempting to promote Canadian programmers I feel that the precedence of protecting CTV's and other channels choice of purchasing American programming and rebroadcasting it rather than buying or producing Canadian content is harming our Canadian broadcasting industry rather than helping it. If you need proof of this please ask stations such as CTV and Global what they spend on purchased American programming as apposed to producing or purchasing Canadian entertainment programming for the prime time slots. As a Commission you are failing the Canadians you are supposed to be serving. This decision just pushes us all farther down the road of Americanized programming on our Canadian channels. Shame on you CRTC. You have both pushed Canadian content back and assailed Canadians rights and freedoms at the same time.

  3. #3

    Unhappy Here is my letter to the CRTC -

    There is NO HDTV station in the Halifax Area. Therefore requiring me to watch CTV's simsub is against the law, against the CRTC regulations and is a cheap way to force Canadians to watch inferior Canadian programming. Your decision to force Bell, SC and the various cable companies to sim-sub the Superbowl with CTV commercial TV is a cheap, non-competitive way to ensure Canadian broadcasters can continue to reap the benefits of foreign broadcasters with none of the expense of producing their own material. It is estimated there are more than 100,000 grey market and illegal black market satellite systems in this country. This decision will do nothing but increase the desire for people to purchase DISHTV and DirectTV from re-sellers in the US.

    Thanks CRTC for once again showing that you are not interested in protecting the rights of Canadians, but only the families that own media outlets.

    Our system of government is based on British Common Law - "what would a normal person do". Well, in this case, a normal person would decide the government is no longer representing them but only the interests of Shaw, Bell, SC, Rogers, Eastlink, Aliant etc and therefore it is not unreasonable to take steps to bypass these, obviously biased decisions.

  4. #4
    I filed a similar complaint last year, not over the Super Bowl, but prior to that due to similar behavior during the NFL season by Expressvu. I also wrote to the federal Minister responsible for the CRTC. It was like a pebble bouncing off a brick wall in both cases. They don't care. CTV has the CRTC in its back pocket and they are going to continue to force national simsubs of CTV Toronto over US HD signal on Expressvu until some politician grows enough onions to blow up the CRTC and start thinking about the people who are voting for them and buying the overpriced, unwanted product that CTV and other providers are forcing on us.

  5. #5
    Sadly the CRTC doesn't care about ordinary people they are there to regulate the tv industrie Period.
    all they will do is to is transfert your complain to CTV wich obviously doesn't care about this because they will blame the CRTC for it
    if you want that to move (if it ever will) you'll have to write to the government
    but again i can't garantee you something it's like a ping pong game where hey throw a ball at each other

  6. #6
    My submission to the CRTC:

    This complaint is related to Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2008-358. I am quite upset regarding the above decision. The commission is disregarding it's own SimSub rules. I live in the Ottawa area and I am a Bell TV customer. CTV has an affiliate in this area (CJOH). With this decision, you are imposing a Toronto HD signal on Bell's Ottawa (and other)customers and you are defacto encouraging and endorsing CTV's decision TO NOT INVEST IN DIGITAL TRANSMISSION and further delaying the conversion from analog signals. What incentive do they have to invest? You should be using every means you have at your disposal to push the Canadian TV industry to "get with the program" and start investing in its infrastructure. You are encouraging the laziness of our Television industry. It is shameful. The airwaves belong to the people, not the corporations.

  7. #7
    dishguy
    Guest
    As expected,
    26 January 2009

    Mr. Sucks to be you:

    Thank you for taking the time to contact the CRTC.

    While your concerns on this matter are appreciated , it should be noted that under the Broadcasting Act, decisions of the Commission are final and conclusive. This means that the CRTC cannot review its decisions. The two avenues of appeal provided in the Act are to the Federal Court of Appeal on questions of law and jurisdiction, with leave of that Court, and to the Governor in Council. However, an appeal to the Governor in Council can only relate to the issuance, amendment or renewal of a licence and not to a denial.
    Since the Commission speaks through its decisions, it would not be appropriate for me to comment on the merits of this particular case. You may, however, wish further review our decision:
    http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2008/db2008-358.htm
    Thank you again for taking the time to contact the CRTC.

  8. #8

    Unhappy Cast in stone

    Decisions are cast into stone and after being proclaimed atop the hill in Ottawa, they can not be altered.

  9. #9

    Well put ....

    Quote Originally Posted by Ross View Post
    Decisions are cast into stone and after being proclaimed atop the hill in Ottawa, they can not be altered.
    Here is the reply I received to my first letter to the CRTC on the 20th of January:
    ________________________________________________
    Message Thank you for taking the time to contact the CRTC.

    Signal Substitution and the Superbowl

    Signal substitution occurs when a Canadian TV station requests that larger cable companies or a satellite company (Bell ExpressVu or Star Choice) insert the signal of the Canadian TV station on the channel of a more distant station (usually an American station) that is showing the same program at the same time. This means that the Canadian viewer will see the program, but from a Canadian source.

    This is significant to Canadian broadcasters who have paid substantial sums of money to have the exclusive right to broadcast the program in Canada. Holding the broadcasting rights gives the Canadian broadcaster the exclusive right to benefit from the sale of commercial advertising during the airing of the program. Advertisers wanting to reach the Canadian audience may purchase commercial air-time from the Canadian station who holds the exclusive right to broadcast the program in Canada. Canadians viewing Canadian stations strengthens these stations and the broadcasting system as a whole. The CRTC has a duty, under the Broadcasting Act, to foster a strong and financially viable domestic broadcasting industry and the simultaneous substitution regulations of the CRTC are designed to protect the rights held by Canadian broadcasters.

    High Definition (HD) Service

    Simultaneous substitution should not interfere with a viewer's ability to see the best quality program available. It is the Commission's policy that a signal of a better quality should not be replaced with a lesser quality signal. Whether or not a subscriber's cable company or satellite company will carry out a request for HD signal substitution depends on whether or not the Canadian television station broadcasts a signal of equal or better quality with which to replace it. The availability of this HD signal largely depends on the location of the cable or satellite company and the technology that they use to receive and deliver their signals. There are several different scenarios and subscribers should check with their service providers as to the specific substitutions that will be carried out.

    Cable companies that can not receive the over-the-air HD signals in Vancouver, Calgary and Toronto will not be required to substitute the service. However, many of these cable companies receive their signals via a satellite company in order to redistribute the signals to their cable customers. If the cable company receives its CTV signal via a satellite company that has already carried out the HD substitution prior to delivering the signal to the cable company, then the viewer will receive a substituted signal.

    Bell ExpressVu uses a substitution technology, on the ground, to substitute the signal prior to sending the signal up to its satellite for distribution. Therefore, it substitutes the signal with a CTV over-the-air HD signal, such as those from Vancouver, Calgary or Toronto, and distributes those signals to all of its subscribers. That means that no matter where you are located, if you are a Bell ExpressVu satellite subscriber or a cable company receiving your HD signal from Bell ExpressVu - you will receive a substituted HD signal.

    Star Choice uses a different technology and its substitution is done directly in the subscriber's box. Star Choice customers will receive a substituted HD service if they are located within a CTV over-the-air HD signal. Where Star Choice does not have an HD signal of equal or better quality, it will not be required to substitute the service for a lesser quality signal.

    I hope this helps to explain the different scenarios depending upon the location of your provider and the technology it uses to receive and deliver its signals

    unquote:

    What it really means is because Bell's equipment is inferior to SC it is rewarded by being allowed to sim-sub the entire Canadian footprint.

    _________________________________

    Here is my reply to the CRTC this evening:

    Thank you for your 'canned' response which I could have written myself. I am fully aware of what the regulations are. And what they are there for. The original purpose was to ensure the viability of Canadian Television by preserving the advertising revenue from programs purchased by Canadian broadcasters when transmitted in the same time period. Because Bell's equipment is inferior to SC, they are allowed to take the easiest way out and sim-sub the entire continent instead of being forced to find a way to sim-sub areas by postal code or geographic reference. We have no HD here in the Maritimes and unless the government FORCES stations to spend the money, we aren't likely to any time before the sun goes super-nova.

    This has been perniciously used in recent years to ensure that Canadian broadcasters can purchase the rights to American broadcast material, and by ensuring that SOMEWHERE in Canada, if the material is on at the same time then the Canadian signal can be superimposed over the American signal.

    This has resulted in virtually all programing between 7 pm and eleven pm in the evening being nothing but canned American programming "proudly presented by" Canadian broadcast companies. This ensures they spend the very least amount of money necessary to ensure that even though subscribers purchase the rights to American Networks CBS, ABC, NBC, and Fox, the majority of their 'actual' picture content will be Canadian 'value added' content. Value added that is, for Rogers, Bell, Eastlink, StarChoice, Aliant and so on, with little or no VALUE added for the consumer who actually pays the bills.

    Your mandate is to protect Canadian content, provide work for Canadian actors, and protect the rights of Canadian citizens to enjoy the best programming available on the airways. What you are really doing is protecting the profits of large corporate entities (many family owned) who could care less about what is right and wrong with Canada and only care about the $bottom line$.

    Thanks for nothing

    __________________________

    Once again the consumer sucks hind tit! CJCH here in Halifax is one of the most successful and profitable stations in Canada. The supper news show outdraws the CBC and Global 2 to 1 combined!

    It will be years, YEARS before CJCH feels the need to go HD. Imagine how long they would take to go HD if the CRTC did their job and said they couldn't simsub the Halifax area until there was an HD signal to protect!

    Gawd ......... these political appointee's make me sick.



  10. #10
    Your response to them is right on the money (so to speak). Well said.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •