Hallelujah!

It would appear the CBC restrictions on the use of their feeds that I have often complained about are gone. I went to look for them today and couldn't find them. Instead I just found this.

What is RSS?

CBC/Radio-Canada RSS (RDF Site Summary) feeds allow you to read through the news you want, at your own convenience.
Using the RSS reader of your choice or by integrating the feed into your blog (or online personal journal), you can access the latest CBC.ca news headlines in your favourite environment!

This new reality, as well as a few others, will be reflected on publicbroadcasting.ca shortly! (not today, I'm tired).

I Want My Radio 3 TV

Radio 3 is, arguably, the CBC's success story of the decade. I say arguably because you can argue about anything but if you choose to argue with the above statement, you're wrong.

Radio 3, in addition to the radio station, is one of the most successful podcasts in Canada, and one of the most popular music podcasts in the world. It is extremely popular with young people (an area in which the CBC usually strikes out) but not only with young people. I've personally talked with people from 14 to 50 who listen to Radio 3.

It is not only successful in it's own rite, it has helped to promote Canadian arts and culture (in this case music) and by extension Canada - something the CBC is supposed to do. It has made Canadian music increasingly popular not only in Canada but around the world and is, I believe, at least partially responsible for the rise of such acts as Broken Social Scene, the Arcade Fire, the New Pornographers, Feist, the Dears, the Stars, and the Hidden Cameras.

Now CBC television isn't doing as well as it could, especially with young people. It is also seeing an annual decline in funds (at least in terms of real dollars) - so why not capitalize and expand on what works?

The possible formats are numerous - a half hour once a week, a half hour 3 times a week, an hour once a week ... whatever works, (you could even stick in on after the Hour) but Radio 3 already has most of the content. Build the show primarily around Canadian music videos - throw in some music news (new albums, tour dates etc), add the occasional interview or even an in studio performance by whoever happens to be in town and viola, Radio 3 TV. It has a built in audience, can be promoted for free on Radio 3 (and even Radio 1 and 2) and it's cheap to produce.

I'm sure there's an excellent reason why not, but I can't think of what it would be personally.

TV Continues it's decline

Before I start I should state that I must not be a TV person, or at least my tastes in Television do not match those of the audience they are after. Despite my high hopes last fall, my 'must watch' schedule for next fall is shorter than it has been in a long, long time. The new shows I liked the best from the AmNets this year (namely Studio 60 and the Black Donnely's) were axed, then Lost, 24 and House all proceeded to jump the shark.

For it's part the CBC cancelled Venture freeing up another half hour. The new programs they introduced didn't do much for me, and I'm less inclined to watch 'the Hour' than I was last year. For me talk shows are all about who the guests are and most of the time the Hour's guests this year just didn't do it for me. I like Gill Deacon generally, but her guests generally didn't do alot for me either (again, not it's target audience).

As for the rest of the CBC's new offerings, as I said at the beginning, I must not be a TV person. Sitcoms are not my thing. I liked BBC's the Office (not the US one though) and I liked CBC's the Newsroom but for the most part sitcoms become too predictable too quickly for me, the jokes become repetitive and I lose interest. Beyond that game shows and 'reality' shows stand almost no chance with me and medical dramas and police dramas (including courtroom, and espionage shows) have been done to such an extent in recent years that they face an hard, uphill battle from the word go. They must basically bring something brand new and exciting or I will tune out half way through the first preview. There was Dragon's Den, it was good. We'll see if it holds up in season 2.

I also have to say that the horizon is not promising. If you take out the sit coms, reality shows, game shows, police and medical dramas there isn't much (at least that has been announced so far) that sounds promising for next season. There is the CBC co-production the Tudors but personally, in all of European history, I can't think of a subject much less interesting than Henry VIII. Then there is Exposure, an idea I pitched to PBS back in 2001 so, obviously I like the idea. But in it's 11 pm Sunday timeslot I doubt I'll ever see it unless it is podcast.

So it turns out that the CBC had it's worst ratings in 5 years despite Rabinovich's statement of the opposite and the CRTC has decided to make it more profitable to import American programs, thus less desirable to make Canadian ones.

You might think that given everything I've said that I wouldn't care about the CRTC decision after all, if no one is making much that I like why should I care about how the funds are distributed? In fact I do care, very much. I just want them to make better programming.

I'm more than happy to advocate for greater arts and cultural funding in Canada overall. Arts and culture are woefully underfunded by any reasonable measure in Canada and, after all, great nations are remembered by their great works of art and other cultural expressions much more than for their economies, or militaries or anything else.

So I will continue to do all that I can to get more funding and exposure for Canadian artists in all fields, but please TV people - stop copying the Americans and importing formulas from Japan and Britain. Take risks, be creative, try new things, some of it will surely bomb, but some won't and I know that I am not alone when I say there is a vast audience in Canada waiting to watch new, original, compelling programming. You just have to meet them half way.

The CBC Shouldn't Quit Daytime (again)

After going 5 years without a serious daytime program the CBC finally got back into the game in 2006 with the Gill Deacon Show. Unfortunately, as Antonia Zerbisias puts it, the show was Dumbed down, smothered, then axed. Personally, I would like to see the show continue. I would like to see Gill back next fall, and I would like to see the show given some freedom to take some risks, rather than simply trying to be CBCs version of the View, or Oprah or .. whatever. I would like to see the show given the green light to develop it's own personality and to attempt to appeal to audiences that are missed by existing daytime television (which in reality is most people - in a 24 hour world the potential 'daytime' audience has changed dramatically). If you like Gill, and the show and would like to see it back in any form, please drop an email to layfield@cbc.ca.

Exposure

Personally, I think that Exposure is a brilliant idea. I must admit though that I'm biased, I presented almost the exact same idea to PBS in 2001.

Is it though, as Tod Maffin suggests the new Zed? The short answer is no. There are obvious similarities: for one thing they are making some of the same mistakes. The show is scheduled to be on at 11pm on Sundays - a time slot where it is virtually guaranteed that it won't find an audience. I can only hope that they have the good sense to podcast it (not part of it, or highlights, but the entire thing.)

Exposure is also far more limited than the original Zed. Zed was, after all, about film, animation and art and music and virtually everything independent, artistic and cultural so even in concept Exposure is shooting for a narrower audience.

I fully intend to watch the show (though not at 11pm on Sundays) and to do what I can to promote it, but I have a nagging fear that unless they podcast this, put serious effort into promoting it and give it time (a few years) to build an audience that Management will find the results less satisfactory than they found Zed.

The New Shot Heard Round the World

09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0

Big Media, as represented by the RIAA and MPAA in the states has lost yet again. A little piece of code made it's way onto the internet yesterday. The little piece of code, it turns out, was accidentally published to the internet by the AACS (Advanced Access Content System) and will unlock the copy protections on all HD-DVDs and possibly blue ray discs released to date. The MPAA freaked out and got a cease and desist order against Digg and apparently many others - there are still scattered reports of cease and desist and other such things flying around the internet.

Digg decided, initially, to comply with the court order and deleted posts containing the code. Digg users revolted posting thousands of messages containing the code. Faced with a choice between banning all of it's users and fighting the cease and desist order, Digg founder Kevin Rose decided to 'at least die trying' and stopped deleting the stories.

It should also be pointed out that even if Digg does delete all of the stories it is now appearing in chat rooms, on bulletin boards, in email lists hell, you can already get the code printed on t-shirts, coffee mugs and bumper stickers - the genie is out of the bottle, and the code is out there for anyone who wants it.

One more time for those who haven't caught on yet. The rules for media and copyright have changed. You cannot control the flow of your content anymore. If people want it and you don't make it available they will take it anyway, they will use it how they want to and when they want to, they are going to share it with their friends, and swap files online - and no matter how much time, energy and money you waste on lawsuits and lobbying there is no going back. For every law you lobby for there is an army waiting to oppose it, for every technical protection you implement there are hordes of end users that will work to find a way around it.

For most of the history of media (in terms of television, radio, recording and film this means about 100 years) most media producers wanted an audience, now they seem to be doing everything possible to keep people away from their content. Those media companies and content producers that want to survive are going to have to shift their focus from fighting with their audience to learning to work within the new rules. Those that don't want to survive - just keep doing what you're doing.

Canadian Television on E!

Do you live in fear that Brittney Spears will get a haircut without your knowing? Are you afraid that some Hollywood starlet will slip into rehab and no one will tell you? Are you concerned that Kim Bassingers divorce will become final and you'll be the last to know? Well fear no longer.

Via Torontoist E! The all entertainment network is coming to Canada. It will be replacing CHCH Hamilton (too much local/regional news in Canada anyway). So, you can also rest assured that as long as they get a Canadian to tell you who's out this week on 'America's Next Top Model' that they will get a big tax subsidy.

Shame on Doyle for buying into culture of violence

Personally, I don't think that Tony Burman's decision not to air the video by the Virginia Tech killer had anything to do with avoidance. John Doyle rambled on about the decision ad-nauseum in his monday Globe and Mail column. Doyle, laughably, even compares the Virginia Tech killings to the War in Iraq.

"The planes carrying the multiple coffins of American soldiers are hidden from view without protest from broadcasters."

Americans have a right and a duty to see the images from Iraq. The occupation of Iraq is, after all, being done in their name, with their money by a government they elected. The massacre at Virginia Tech was not.

There are a few things about popular culture, especially American popular culture, that Mr. Doyle does not seem to know about.

First, there seems to be an obsession amoung some with serial killers and other famous criminals. Movies and TV specials about the Manson Family, or Son of Sam, the Boston Strangler, Jack the Ripper etc., are always sure to draw a crowd. In some fairly recent American films such as Natural Born Killers and Silence of the Lambs (and it's related sequels) blood thirsty serial killers actually manage to become the protagonist.

Second, "You're not anyone in America unless you're on TV." - Nicole Kidman in "To Die For" Anyone ever see Jerry Springer? How about Maury (sp?) Povich? There is virtually nothing Americans wont do to get their 15 minutes. They will debase and humiliate themselves, even lie about the sordid details of their personal lives only to be on television for a few minutes and American television - where nothing is too personal, salacious or morbid will let them.

Third, there is an unhealthy facination with guns and violence in the U.S. I don't think that I really have to demonstrate this to anyone, I'll simply point out that the number of annual homicides in the U.S. is 2-3 times the number of Americans who have been killed in Iraq to date. Killing in the U.S. is a sure fire way to gain notoriety.

In the case of Virginia tech, the murderer made a video and sent it to NBC. Obviously part of his motivation was getting on television, gaining notoriety and grabbing his 15 minutes of fame. American television played right along, reinforcing to closet sociopaths everywhere that it would, in fact, work.

I know that this is Canada, and not the US. I know that the culture here is different. but Canadians, especially younger Canadians seem so fascinated with American culture that the difference between the two is thinning. As everyone in media knows, American film, American television and an increasing percentage of American music are dominating the Canadian charts. Whatever the impact of this might be it is certainly true that gun crime is on the rise in Canadian cities.

It is also true, sadly, that Canadian media (including the CBC all too often) have been complicit in this. Even 'Canadian content' rarely focuses on those things that make Canadian culture different, unique and better than U.S. culture anymore. They take the government subsidies and make copies of US shows, entertainment 'news' shows about the U.S. or programs where the characters are generically North American, not distinctly Canadian.

Finally, and this came up on Denis McGrath's blog the day of the shootings, we live in a difficult age, and "Change requires will". The problems that face society today - poverty, disease, pollution, global warming and violence are not going to change on their own. We have to decide to make change and we have to be willing to make some sacrifices to make change happen. In many of these cases the price we pay will be economic (and it will sting.)

In this case all that's happened is John Doyle has been deprived of the opportunity to hear the ramblings of a homicidal maniac. It's a sacrafice that I think we can all live with. Personally, I applaud Tony Burman's decision to not air the tape. I applaud his decision not to reward a murderer. I applaud his decision to stand up for what makes Canada different.

As for my 'right to know'. The CBC might, on another occasion, have grizzly autopsy photos from a traffic accident - that doesn't mean I want to see them (whether I have the right to or not.) If John Doyle needs a fix of sensationalism and gratuitous violence - I'd suggest he try this.

Passing This Along: The Hidden City

Rec'd via email: Thought those of you who want to know might want to know.

So here's the scoop.......DNTO's pop culture professor and neurotic jock, Nick Purdon, is working on a brand new radio show - and he needs your help!

But first, some background. The show is called "Hidden City," and it willl air this summer on CBC Radio One. The idea is to explore the hidden things - unwritten rules - behaviours - and activities that most of us don't notice but are integral to life in the city. It is about exploring the life of that unique human creature known as the "urbanoid."

One of our episodes is about noise in the city, and we're interested in exploring it at the micro-level - as in, the noise that drives neighbours crazy. We're looking for people who are currently at war with a neighbour about loud music, barking dogs, shrieking kids, or any of the gazillions of noises that drive the modern urban dweller batty. We want people who've been feuding for a while. People who've tried to reach out to their neighbour, to no avail. People who are at their wit's end. If anyone knows such a person (or maybe it's you!) then we'd love to hear from you! Please email me, Sara Tate, at sara_tate@cbc.ca with the subject line "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!!"

Maybe we'll even be able to help you solve your noisy neighbour problem. We look forward to hearing from you!

Merci,
The Hidden City team.

Open Internet Coalition?

There is no doubt that the internet will, to an even larger extend than it already has, have a dramatic impact on the world. The implications for media are becoming more obvious by the day, but this is just the beginning. As more and more people come online and the average age of internet users goes up there will be profound implications for government and politics, religion and culture.

One only has to look at the effects that the printing press, radio, television and film had on society. The difference with the internet is the low, low barrier to entry and the fact that anything put on the internet is instantly available to the entire world.

This is the first truly populist, democratic media revolution in the history of mankind. We can all guess and speculate about it's ultimate ramifications but, to date, every guess about the future of the internet and how far reaching it's effects might be has fallen dramatically short of the mark.

It is also true that since the dawn of the internet, it has been a constant battle: between traditional and new media, between anarchy and control, between those who see the Web as a medium for sharing ideas and information and those who only see it as a medium for sales, and all too often between content creators and consumers.

I would like to suggest that it's time for a cease fire. I believe that the vast majority of people who use the Internet have more areas of agreement than points of division. So, I believe it is time to unite on the points where we agree and try to hammer out our differences on the points where we do not.

I believe that nearly everyone would like to see an internet where:

Everyone has an opportunity to be heard with a minimum of regulation.

Consumers have easy access to content that they enjoy.

Content creators can be paid fairly.

Conflicts between content producers and consumers are settled fairly and without law suits or the threat of law suits.

Individual privacy is protected.

Actual crime such as spam, identity theft, fraud and child pornography is minimized and punished when it happens.

So, If I am right about this, I would like to hear from content producers, internet users, service providers and nearly everyone else with a stake in this to discuss the creation of an Open Internet Coalition.

The idea at this point is vague. I don't know how these discussions will be held. It is entirely possible that more can be added to the list above. It is likely that separate coalitions will have to be set up in different countries (to deal with that country's specific issues.) But ideally those groups would remain in communication with one another to share ideas and work together when possible.

If you would like to be a part of this, or (especially) if you have ideas about how this coalition can be organized and communicate please get in touch at beach.justin[at]gmail[dot]com.

(Simultaneously posted to Hype, Circles Around the Square and JustinBeach.com)

CRTC Enters Dangerous Ground

The CRTC has entered a "Proceeding to Review the Diversity of Voices in the Canadian Broadcasting System". There are both good and bad potential outcomes to this. According to CBC.ca the CRTC will look at, amoung other things:

Whether a company holding both distribution and programming undertakings will hurt diversity of voices.

What are the concerns when a single company owns both radio and TV licences in a single market?

How has permitting cross-ownership of TV stations and newspapers played out?

Have the limits the CRTC placed on owners helped ensure diversity?

Needless to say, this could have profound and far reaching consequences for the CBC (not to mention Canada's other large media companies.)

The CBC article also indicates though that "Canada's federal broadcast regulator will be considering extending its jurisdiction over new media" - although this is not specifically mentioned in the CRTC's press release. Regulating Television and Radio (with a limited amount of airspace) is one thing, but regulating the internet is something else.

If this leads to such outcomes as net neutrality, well and good but if it is the CRTC's intention to, as they say, ensure "a diversity of voices" then they should take no further action on new media (or the internet). Ensuring a level playing field is fair, and a good role for government, but otherwise regulating, in any way the content available on the internet would run counter to the above stated goal.

The internet already has a great diversity of voices. It has no borders and should remain that way. The internet has become a kind of 'fair trade agreement' for art, ideas and information and unlike NAFTA, this one is working. Any attempt, beyond net neutrality, to regulate content on the internet should be taken as nothing less than censorship and the stifling of free thought.

Hopefully, no attempt at such censorship will be made. But, if you are unsure and want to join us in keeping an eye on the situation, please join us in the group Canadians for New Media Freedom and be sure to let the CRTC know how you feel about this as it relates to television, print, radio and new media.

Democracy comes to television

Via Dan Misener (and you really should read his entire post on the subject but...) Democracy is basically a combination RSS Aggregator, Bittorent client and video player - which means basically a combination of iTunes and file sharing software. It means that any program that is out there on the internet (legally or not) you can watch, download or subscribe to. In terms of traditional TV - picture a PVR combined with video on demand all built into the set. This is the television of the future and it is here (in a crude form) now.

What it means in the short term is that everything is online - every show, every movie (even the ones still in theatres) along with all the personal video blogs (vlogs) and independent stuff and all have equal footing. This is either a great and wonderful thing (if you're a viewer/consumer or independent content producer) or a really horrible terrible thing (if you're a network and don't want to adapt.)

The TV Is Dead. Long Live the TV

Awesome article from Wired that everyone interested in either the Internet or television should read, print and pin to the bulletin board for future reference.

But even as network executives try to balance old and new, a new generation of online video producers is emerging, with no historical constraints to limit the ambitions of what some call "small TV."
The economics of TV production have irreversibly changed, this new generation argues. Cheap cameras, easy editing tools and practically free distribution online allow the masses to make low-budget but compelling content.
"The cost of producing a good show has come down so far that someone can produce a good sitcom out of a living room, or a good drama out of the garage," says Dina Kaplan, chief operating officer of Blip.tv, which hosts independent video programming. "The gatekeepers of an NBC or CBS will have a lot less power in five years than they have now."

full story ...

On this weeks annoucnements

A flurry of annoucements this week from the Ceeb, for one thing they announced their new shows for fall including The Border "a fast-paced, hard-driving series set in Toronto in a paranoid post-Sept. 11 world concerned with security crises, terrorist infiltrations, cross-border police actions and trafficking in everything from enriched uranium to abducted children"

All I can do is sigh about this one - so it's kinda like "Intelligence East"? Personally I think there is enough fear about terrorism, even 24 seems on the verge of jumping the shark, but that's just me.

New shows aside, another 41 layoffs were announced including people from "Communications, HR, and Sales and Marketing." I've pointed out all the reasons before but it seems to me that the last thing the CBC needs to cut is communications and marketing. On a related not, I should mention that the Friends of the CBC MySpace is at 4,000 plus now and growing at 15 (ish) a day. When I get the chance I'll set up similar accounts on other social sites.

The most shocking of yesterday's announcements though, to me anyway, was the cancelling of Venture. Unique amoung Canadian business programs, Venture was the ultimate how to, or how not to, guide for entrepreneurs - taking you weekly into the lives of people trying to start their own business and showing you their trials and triumphs, the things that made their business' succeed or fail.

Yes, it was for a niche audience, but a very special niche audience without whom Canada's economic future may be bleak - It was, and is, the kind of programming that a public broadcaster should be doing and it's cancellation is further evidence that desire, at the CBC to be a public broadcaster is waning.

Hockey Fight In Canada Gets More Attention

The Toronto Star has picked up the Hockey Fight in Canada story originally reported by Oimet on Friday. The Star has apparently conversed with the sites owner and unlike Tod Maffin's willful surrender of CBCRadio4.com it appears that the CBC may have to fight for hockeyfightincanada.com

Dead Things Strikes Again

Everyone who is at all interested in Canadian Television (or Television in general) should regularly read Denis McGrath's Dead Things on Sticks. Which I'm sure you all already do. Just in case you missed it though - go read his take on (amoung other things) the closing of the design department "the CBC Bobbles It's Legacy.

Bureaucratic organizations just cannot be trusted to make decisions that have to do with history or legacy when it comes to broadcasting. TV and cultural product is simply different. It's not just a product, it's a reflection of a society. And as the notion of "reality" becomes ever faker thanks to TV, preserving that which helps us really define our industry grows ever more important.

End of the road for HD?

Well not yet anyway, but if this technology works - if they can make it smaller and clearer it may eventually be what replaces High Definition. Imagine if the entertainment center in your living room were gone replaced by strategically mounted cameras along the ceiling. Now imagine turning on the national and instead of watching a TV screen, Peter Mansbridge's desk appears where your entertainment center used to be.

It's still years away, but if they can make the machine shown in this video smaller, improve the resolution and bring down the price (which given time I've little doubt they can do) - this may be the television set of the future.

Blogosphere

A couple of blog posts today worth checking out. The first is from Colin Keigher at the Gateway, a very positive note, that discusses more funding for an ad free CBC.

With the amount of new electronics that we buy on a day-to-day basis, I’m certain the CBC could eventually wean itself off of ad revenue with such a fee in place. By not having commercials every five minutes, we could have more informative newscasts, higher-quality dramas and more in-depth documentaries.
The CBC provides us with more than just hockey and news, it provides us with culture too, thanks to its focus on Canadian content. So instead of contributing your time and, indirectly, money, to greedy and directionless private networks, consider giving a little love to the Mother Corp.


full story...

The second, while generally positive about the CBC is a little less than positive about downloading.

The 'man' in this case is the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), who I normally have no beef with. Their flagship news show, The National, is one of the best sources for national and international news in North America. However, unsurprisingly their online division is run by a bunch of frigtards, hopelessly behind the times.

full story...

The article goes on to tell you how to use Quicktime Pro and flip4mac to turn streaming video into a format that you can download, edit and redistribute. Handy information after the recent announcement that on demand hockey is coming.

note to content creators, distributors and broadcasters: I hate to keep pointing out the obvious but if you don't let people have your content the way they want it, they will do it themselves and then get mad at you for making them work harder. In other words, you are not 'protecting your content' but rather 'pissing off segments of your audience'.

CRTC review of the state of Television

Basically nothing everyone didn't already know - revenues are steady but expenses are going up. This does not seem to address though spending on Canadian programming (it says how much was spent in 06 but doesn't compare it to past years and there is no mention of the effects of more channels or online media.

OTTAWA-GATINEAU, March 28 /CNW Telbec/ - The Canadian Radio-television
and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) today released its statistical and
financial summaries for private conventional television, reporting on the
industry's revenues, expenditures and profitability from 2002 to 2006. While
television station revenues held steady across Canada, expenditures rose by
7.8%, which reduced profits before interest and taxes (PBIT) from
$242.2 million in 2005 to $91 million in 2006. The PBIT margin also decreased
from 11.02% in 2005 to 4.14% in 2006.

Still if you want to have a look its here http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/BrAnalysis/tv2006/Cover.htm

Stromboulopouless?

If anyone missed this post on the Stomboulopouli it's worth a read. Two of the shows most loyal (obviously) viewers have given up and departed over the new format.

My decision to leave has been in the making for quite some time. Unlike most, The Hour's new schedule was not a problem for me, I can still turn on the television at a variety of times to catch the show. However, what has changed, as Barbara has so eloquently outlined, is the format and the content being showcased on the show, and I no longer feel a passion to discuss the what is being represented.

Welcome Back Teamakers

In case you've missed it (I know I did for a few days) - the longest serving CBC Blogger Oimet has returned from Hiatus. The CBC will surely be better off for it.

Hockey Night in Canada Forever - Or at least the next 6 Years

Richard Stursburg, VP of English Television annouced today that a new deal has been reached with the NHL to continue Hockey Night in Canada on CBC for the next 6 years. The new contract also includes internet rights including "on-demand video streaming of all CBC broadcasts at CBC.ca, game coverage and content on mobile phones and via Video-on-Demand."

From Stursburg's Memo:
"It is with great pride and pleasure that I can tell you that at this moment, we are announcing a new six-year broadcast agreement for national English-language broadcast and multi-media rights to NHL games in Canada, beginning with the 2008/09 season.

This is tremendous news for the CBC, for hockey fans, for Canadians, for our sponsors and the NHL. Hockey is part of the Canadian fabric, and todays announcement marks what is the oldest sports rights partnership in the world--one that dates back to the very beginning of the CBC."

According to the Toronto Star the new deal is worth $85 million a year, a significant bump over the previous contract which was worth $60 million a year, but with the new internet rights the CBC's potential audience for this is now worldwide.

For the last year there has been wide spread speculation that CTV would attempt to outbid the CBC for rights to HNIC.

the CBC Design Department

While the source of this video prefers to remain anonymous, you can contact the CBC with your reaction here and/or your Member of Parliament or the Heritage Committee at chpc@parl.gc.ca this video can be found on Google video

Passing this along from Friends of Canadian Broadcasting

FRIENDS is very concerned to note that Prime Minister Harper has allowed the position of Chair of the CBC Board of Directors to remain vacant for six months since the resignation of the previous Chair, Guy Fournier. In the absence of a new Chair, CBC's lame-duck President Robert Rabinovitch has been serving as interim Chair, as well as CEO - keeping an eye on himself!
http://www.friends.ca/Reform-CBC-appointments
The Chair of CBC's Board of Directors is an extremely important position. We believe that Harper's failure to set in motion a procedure to find a suitable replacement - an eminent Canadian who can oversee Rabinovitch and CBC's management - is a troubling and dangerous sign.
FRIENDS has called on the government to follow the advice of its Heritage Committee and set up a procedure so that nominations for CBC's Board leadership no longer come through prime ministerial patronage but instead from a variety of sources to ensure that the best and brightest Canadians direct our national public broadcaster. That Board should have the authority to hire and if necessary, fire the President.
Please take a moment to send a message to your Member of Parliament asking him or her to take this up with the Prime Minister. You can do so easily by visiting FRIENDS' Web Site Action Centre, where we have prepared a draft message. You can personalize it in a matter of seconds, and doing so will add to the force of your message.
When you visit our Action Centre, you will first be invited to identify yourself and supply your postal code. This information will enable our system to direct your message automatically to your MP:
http://www.friends.ca/Reform-CBC-appointments
Thanks for taking this action. I will keep you updated on the results of this campaign.
Best regards!

Ian Morrison
Spokesperson
FRIENDS of Canadian Broadcasting

Rabinovich asks for a mandate.

The CBC's President, Robert Rabinovich asked the Heritage Committee for a 10 year mandate today.

Quoted from CBC.ca:

"CBC is at a turning point that no one-year plan will address," he said, urging MPs to adopt a long-term charter for the CBC similar to the one enjoyed by the British Broadcasting Corp.

CBC president Robert Rabinovitch says a long-term mandate is needed for the public broadcaster.
(CBC) "Anything less is to pay lip service to public broadcasting while watching it wither," he said.

Yesterday, the Heritage Committee approved an additional $60 million in funding for each of the next two years for original programming on the CBC. This is not really additional funding though. It is a standard amount of "additional funding" that Parliament has been providing for several years, but that the CBC has to return and beg for annually.

After years of benign neglect by the Liberals and, at times, outright hositility to the CBC by the Conservatives it is time that parliament stepped up to the plate, gave the Corp appropriate funding and a mandate that speaks to a truly, uniquely Canadian public broadcaster.

Back Again

Ok, sorry for the long delay. After blogging here for what seemed a very long time - it seemed that I was saying alot of the same things over and over again. With the departure of Teamakers it seemed a good time to take a break. But, there is enough going on that I think it's time for a revival.

It is not that I've been wholly absent. Publicbroadcasting.ca is continuing to grow and draw more traffic - for the CBC and for Canadian arts and media in general. There is a CBC Support page on the site, the petition to double the CBC's funding is still going and the Friends of the CBC on MySpace now has 3,870 'friends' as of 4:00 pm today.

Questionable 2.0yness

I have heard it said often that the CBC is now in the 'business of content'. That is true, it always has been true. If you are in TV or Radio don't worry about that, making content is what you've always done. Now, some people may be doing new things with that content; formatting it for different platforms, watching and listening on new devices. However, if you make radio or make television, it really doesn't change your job description that much.

Back to the point of this: Tod Maffin's post on Inside the CBC leaves me with some questions. According to the post, the CBC is revamping it's website so that people can

comment on items

rate them

link to them from their blog or website

subscribe to specific types of content

search for specific video content

submit user-generated content.

So, is the CBC getting into the content business, or the software business?

There are already many sites that allow you to do these things. Sites such as del.icio.us, digg.com, not to mention Google and YouTube already allow you to comment on items, rathe them, link them to your blog or website, subscribe to them, search for specific video content and submit user generated content.

They allow you to do this with any and all content, including that produced by the CBC. So, if you wanted the latest information on say Afghanistan it's a fairly simple matter to get all of the latest info from a number of sources. You can then get that content delivered to you on your cell phone, via email, or on your myYahoo, myGoogle, myAOL etc.,

I think it's great that the CBC can get feedback on items, and it should allow for comments, questions and differing opinions and respond to them. What I don't understand is why the CBC would, in effect, challenge companies like Google/Youtube and Digg.com on their own turf? Why spend the money to reinvent technology that's already out there and what is the incentive for people to use the CBC proprietary site to do these things when they actually have access to less content than they do using the preexisting services?

Perhaps I simply don't know the whole plan? Perhaps I am missing something? But I run a small website set up to promote and encourage Canadian content but in creating it I didn't try to reinvent the wheel. I used technology that is already there, and largely free to use.

It seems to me that the CBC's first priority should be removing restrictions from it's content. In setting up the previously mentioned website I usually could not directly promote CBC content. I had to wait for it to show up on Google, YouTube or del.icio.us and then get the content from one of those companies (for free). CBC's restrictions on the use of it's feeds made it impossible to do otherwise.

Personally I think the priorities for the CBC web site should be to allow feedback and commentary. Beyond that the CBC should loosen restrictions on it's content, and then create a small team of people to make sure that the content gets out there using existing technology - in other words to make sure that it gets tagged for del.icio.us and digg, to help and encourage people to get it on their blogs and websites, etc., - this creates an automatic viral kind of marketing that ultimately draws a wider audience.

I have said before that one of the problems the CBC has is that the only place you hear about CBC programming is on the CBC's air, or its website. So people who don't watch or listen to CBC tend to continue not watching or listening. In setting up the Friends of the CBC Myspace I have this confirmed on a regular basis. I talk to people almost daily who only found out about a program or a special that was coming up, or even a podcast through that MySpace page. Now the CBC seems prepared to expend a great deal of resources (financial and otherwise) to perpetuate that problem - to build a closed environment for it's content which is actually contrary to the Web 2.0 ideal. Web 2.0 is not just about technology, applications, and web sites - it is about open doors and the free flow of information.

If I'm missing something here someone please tell me what it is.

Little Mosque

This is exactly the kind of thing the CBC should be doing and not just because it's a hit (so far). Don't get me wrong, the CBC certainly needs a hit, any hit. As I've said before the primary place people find out about CBC programming is by watching or listening to the CBC, so anything on CBC that gets alot of people to watch or listen is good for the whole.

That said, I am very pleased that the CBC has scored it's hit by doing what it does best - inform and entertain. For many years Muslims were not portrayed on television at all (unless it was about the middle east) more recently there have been some Muslims portrayed on television, but in virtually every case they were portrayed as terrorists.

Hopefully this show will succeed in breaking down some stereotypes and easing some of the tension and fear that many seem to feel toward the Muslim community. I have known, worked with and spoken to many Muslims over the years and have never found them to be anything like the standard portrayal on television and in film.

In closing I hope that those who watched the show because they were curious liked it enough to come back for more and I still don't think that it belongs on the National. =)
http://www.publicbroadcasting.ca/pbl/hype/2007/01/thoughts-on-little-mosque.html

More commentary on the show can be found here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here, or hell just Google it for 292,000 (ish) more.

How not to build buzz

The National is sometimes criticized for doing little or no arts and entertainment or sports news. This criticism doesn't come from me, I like the National that way - 60 minutes of important national and international news largely without fluff. If you want sports news there are 24 hour networks devoted to just that. If you want arts and entertainment news there are several entire programs (on TV and radio) devoted to that. So, for a show that doesn't really do arts and entertainment news, it was surprising to say the least to see a lengthy 'story' about Little Mosque on the Prairie.

This is, if you will, anti-buzz. It is one of the more cynical forms of advertising - advertising pretending to be news. Plays like this do not build buzz - quite the opposite, it is more like anti-buzz. The audience, or most of it, sees right through this and many, like myself, are insulted by it. It makes people less likely to talk about it to their friends (the kind of thing that builds legitimate buzz) because it makes them feel like they are only participating in a marketing ploy. I know that the CBC badly needs a prime time hit, but I had thought and hoped that the CBC was above something like this.

Running ads for your own programs (or for your advertisers products) in the middle of a newscast and pretending that the 'buzz around Little Mosque on the Prairie' is actually national news skirts the edges of journalistic credibility. It is plays like this that helped turn CNN from a fairly accurate and reliable news source into the sensationalized semi-tabloid that it is today. CBC has it's ups and downs. It has successful and less successful programming. Curling, the Olympics and the CFL may come and go. But, beyond hockey, the one thing that virtually all Canadians (and many around the world) agree on is that CBC News is one of the last remaining reliable, credible, and journalistically ethical news sources remaining on television. That credibility should not, and must not be for sale; not even for the price of a prime time hit.