TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE
THE CANADIAN RADIO‑TELEVISION AND
TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
TRANSCRIPTION DES AUDIENCES DEVANT
LE CONSEIL DE LA RADIODIFFUSION
ET DES TÉLÉCOMMUNICATIONS CANADIENNES
SUBJECT/SUJET:
THE BROADCASTING APPLICATION BY ROGERS MEDIA INC.,
ON BEHALF OF 1708487 ONTARIO INC., 1738700 ONTARIO INC.
AND CHUM TELEVISION VANCOUVER INC. /
LA DEMANDE EN RADIODIFFUSION PRÉSENTÉE PAR ROGERS MEDIA INC.,
AU NOM DE 1708487 ONTARIO INC., 1738700 ONTARIO INC.
ET CHUM TELEVISION VANCOUVER INC.
HELD AT: TENUE À:
Conference Centre Centre de conférences
Outaouais Room Salle Outaouais
Portage IV Portage IV
140 Promenade du Portage 140, promenade du Portage
Gatineau, Quebec Gatineau (Québec)
August 29, 2007 Le 29 août 2007
Transcripts
In order to meet the requirements of the Official Languages
Act, transcripts of proceedings before the Commission will be
bilingual as to their covers, the listing of the CRTC members
and staff attending the public hearings, and the Table of
Contents.
However, the aforementioned publication is the recorded
verbatim transcript and, as such, is taped and transcribed in
either of the official languages, depending on the language
spoken by the participant at the public hearing.
Transcription
Afin de rencontrer les exigences de la Loi sur les langues
officielles, les procès‑verbaux pour le Conseil seront
bilingues en ce qui a trait à la page couverture, la liste des
membres et du personnel du CRTC participant à l'audience
publique ainsi que la table des matières.
Toutefois, la publication susmentionnée est un compte rendu
textuel des délibérations et, en tant que tel, est enregistrée
et transcrite dans l'une ou l'autre des deux langues
officielles, compte tenu de la langue utilisée par le
participant à l'audience publique.
Canadian Radio‑television and
Telecommunications Commission
Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des
télécommunications canadiennes
Transcript / Transcription
THE BROADCASTING APPLICATION BY ROGERS MEDIA INC.,
ON BEHALF OF 1708487 ONTARIO INC., 1738700 ONTARIO INC.
AND CHUM TELEVISION VANCOUVER INC. /
LA DEMANDE EN RADIODIFFUSION PRÉSENTÉE PAR ROGERS MEDIA INC.,
AU NOM DE 1708487 ONTARIO INC., 1738700 ONTARIO INC.
ET CHUM TELEVISION VANCOUVER INC.
BEFORE / DEVANT:
Konrad von Finckenstein Chairperson / Président
Rita Cugini Commissioner / Conseillère
Helen del Val Commissioner / Conseillère
Elizabeth Duncan Commissioner / Conseillère
Stuart Langford Commissioner / Conseiller
ALSO PRESENT / AUSSI PRÉSENTS:
Jade Roy Secretary / Secrétaire
Stephen Millington Legal Counsel /
Conseiller juridique
HELD AT: TENUE À:
Conference Centre Centre de conférences
Outaouais Room Salle Outaouais
Portage IV Portage IV
140 Promenade du Portage 140, promenade du Portage
Gatineau, Quebec Gatineau (Québec)
August 29, 2007 Le 29 août 2007
- iv -
TABLE DES MATIÈRES / TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE / PARA
PHASE I
PRESENTATION BY / PRÉSENTATION PAR:
Rogers Media Inc. 3 / 25
PHASE II
INTERVENTION BY / INTERVENTION PAR:
Canadian Ethnocultural Council 156 / 972
Multicultural History Society of Ontario 164 / 1013
Brightlight Pictures Inc. 174 / 1075
David Brady Productions 181 / 1110
Stephen Hawkins 196 / 1171
Communications, Energy and Paperworkers 208 / 1244
Union of Canada
Canadian Association of Film Distributors 219 / 1309
and Exporters
Gatineau, Quebec / Gatineau (Québec)
‑‑‑ Upon commencing on Wednesday August 29, 2007
at 0930 / L'audience débute le mercredi
29 août 2007 à 0930
LISTNUM 1 \l 11 THE CHAIRPERSON: Good morning, everybody.
LISTNUM 1 \l 12 Would you please take your seats?
LISTNUM 1 \l 13 This is a follow‑up to the hearing that we had on Citytv. The panel is the same in that it is made up of commissioners, starting from right to left, Langford, del Val, von Finckenstein, Cugini and Duncan.
LISTNUM 1 \l 14 The Commission today is assisted by Lyne Renaud as hearing officer, Stephen Millington as legal counsel and Jade Roy as hearing secretary.
LISTNUM 1 \l 15 We are obviously going to examine the acquisition by Rogers of the Citytv network.
LISTNUM 1 \l 16 Madame Jade Roy, I believe you have some introductory remarks to make.
LISTNUM 1 \l 17 THE SECRETARY: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18 Nous aimerions souligner quelques points d'ordre pratique qui contribueront au bon déroulement de cette audience publique.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19 Firstly, simultaneous interpretation service is available during the hearing. Receivers are available from the commissionaire outside the hearing room.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110 The English interpretation is on channel seven, and French is on channel eight.
LISTNUM 1 \l 111 When you are in the hearing room, we would ask you to please turn off your cell phones, beepers and blackberries, as they are an unwelcome distraction and they cause interference on the internal communication systems used by our translators.
LISTNUM 1 \l 112 We would appreciate your cooperation in this regard throughout the hearing.
LISTNUM 1 \l 113 Pendant toute la durée de l'audience, vous pourrez consulter les documents qui font partie du dossier public pour cette audience dans la salle d'examen, qui se trouve dans la salle Papineau, située à l'extérieur de la salle d'audience, à votre droite.
LISTNUM 1 \l 114 For the record, the Commission sent a letter to Rogers asking them to be prepared to provide comments at today's proceeding on the Canadian Television Fund Task Report dated June 29, 2007, and Rogers submitted yesterday the purchase agreement between CTVGlobeMedia and Rogers Broadcasting Limited.
LISTNUM 1 \l 115 Stephen?
LISTNUM 1 \l 116 MR. MILLINGTON: When that document was submitted, there was a claim for confidentiality. I understand that is no longer required and I would just like to get confirmation on the record that, that is the case.
LISTNUM 1 \l 117 MR. STRATI: That is correct.
LISTNUM 1 \l 118 MR. MILLINGTON: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 119 THE SECRETARY: This letter, and the document, has been placed on the public file, and copies are available in the examination room.
LISTNUM 1 \l 120 And now, Mr. Chairman, we will proceed with the application filed by Rogers Media.
LISTNUM 1 \l 121 Appearing for the applicant is Tony Viner, who will introduce his colleagues.
LISTNUM 1 \l 122 You will then have 20 minutes to make your presentation.
LISTNUM 1 \l 123 Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 124 THE CHAIRPERSON: Mister Viner, welcome.
PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION
LISTNUM 1 \l 125 MR. VINER: Thank you, Sir.
LISTNUM 1 \l 126 Mr. Chair and members of the Commission, I am Tony Viner, President of Rogers Media.
LISTNUM 1 \l 127 It is a pleasure to be here this morning to present our application for the acquisition of the Citytv stations in Toronto, Winnipeg, Calgary, Edmonton and Vancouver.
LISTNUM 1 \l 128 Before we begin our presentation, I would like to first briefly introduce our panel.
LISTNUM 1 \l 129 To my immediate left is Rael Merson, President of Rogers Broadcasting. Rael and I will share the responsibility of leading the presentation, and responding to your questions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 130 To my right are Leslie Sole and Diane Boehme, available for programming and Canadian production issues at both City and OMNI stations.
LISTNUM 1 \l 131 To Rael's left is Alain Strati, our regulatory counsel.
LISTNUM 1 \l 132 Next to him is Madeline Ziniak, available for further insight about OMNI and cultural diversity, and then, Renato Zane and Stephen Hurlbut, responsible for news at ONMI and City, respectively.
LISTNUM 1 \l 133 In the row directly behind me, starting from my far left, is Malcolm Dunlop, programming, sales and audience research, as well as Melanie Farrell and Andrea Gagliardi, who can provide insight about marketing, public relations and community outreach.
LISTNUM 1 \l 134 Finally, we have Al Thorgierson and Brad Phillips, general managers for the Citytv stations in Western Canada.
LISTNUM 1 \l 135 Also in the audience is Mr. John McKellar, the trustee of the City stations.
LISTNUM 1 \l 136 Other members of the City and OMNI management teams are also here in the front row of the audience, available to answer questions, if required.
LISTNUM 1 \l 137 Rael ?
LISTNUM 1 \l 138 MR. MERSON: Good morning.
LISTNUM 1 \l 139 Our presentation this morning will consist of three parts.
LISTNUM 1 \l 140 I will briefly outline the rationale for our acquisition of the Citytv stations, and our vision for their future.
LISTNUM 1 \l 141 Leslie will then describe our overall programming strategy for these stations.
LISTNUM 1 \l 142 And Tony will conclude by addressing the regulatory and policy issues identified in the Notice of Public Hearing.
LISTNUM 1 \l 143 So why are we interested in Citytv, in an environment that has seen over‑the‑air television lose market share, and face real declines in profitability, one in which IPTV is looming, commercial skipping is a reality and the threat of disintermediation is very real, as studios begin selling their content directly to consumers, bypassing the broadcast system in its entirety?
LISTNUM 1 \l 144 We made the decision to first buy the A channels, and then Citytv, because of our fundamental belief that only free over‑the‑air television can draw the mass audiences that are necessary to support the production of the highest quality programming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 145 We recognize that over‑the‑air television will have to take on increasing risk in order to continue to add value, and to protect its position in the value chain that brings content to audiences. We believe that will take scale and investment, from large, committed Canadian players, to ensure that the system is not bypassed in its entirety.
LISTNUM 1 \l 146 Rogers is exactly that kind of long‑term investor. We have achieved success with other broadcast properties that needed commitment, ingenuity and patience.
LISTNUM 1 \l 147 CFMT, 680 News and the Shopping Channel are all examples of that philosophy.
LISTNUM 1 \l 148 And there is a natural fit between City and OMNI, and between City and Rogers.
LISTNUM 1 \l 149 City reflects the multicultural reality of our urban centres, while OMNI reflects the ethnocultural identity of new and existing ethnic communities in Canada.
LISTNUM 1 \l 150 City has produced new innovative programs that laid the foundation for the launch of a number of successful specialty services.
LISTNUM 1 \l 151 Rogers' very DNA is innovation, whether it be ethnic programming, FM radio, cable distribution, wireless communications or the marketing of those services.
LISTNUM 1 \l 152 The business of Citytv is, however, under threat. Faced with audience fragmentation and tough competition from other broadcasters, City has seen its revenue and profitability decline over the last couple of years, to the point where the stations are now losing money.
LISTNUM 1 \l 153 In this broadcast year, City is projecting operating losses of almost three million dollars, and preliminary budgets for 2008 are for higher operating losses.
LISTNUM 1 \l 154 We recognize that we need a new strategy for Citytv, one that will build upon its legacy and history.
LISTNUM 1 \l 155 Our plan is as follows:
LISTNUM 1 \l 156 First and foremost, for City to reaffirm its local, urban and diverse identity, and to re‑focus its operations on the development of that brand and core mandate.
LISTNUM 1 \l 157 Secondly, City must sort out its conflicted priorities. The stations must move away from specialty‑driven initiatives in programming genres like science‑fiction, and establish a more consistent programming approach, one that is more reflective of a re‑focused brand and a vision for Citytv.
LISTNUM 1 \l 158 And finally, City must be able to access the resources and expertise necessary to make a long‑term investment in television, helping it to become a significant, new player in the production of high‑quality programming, and re‑establishing its financial viability and future profitability.
LISTNUM 1 \l 159 I will now hand over to Leslie to expand on additional elements of our programming strategy, starting with local programming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 160 Leslie?
LISTNUM 1 \l 161 MR. SOLE: We believe that our local programming strategy currently being pursued by the City stations is fundamentally sound.
LISTNUM 1 \l 162 It is delivering benefits for local audiences and, over the longer term, should help them attract larger audiences, and shore up their financial position.
LISTNUM 1 \l 163 Throughout its long history in Toronto, City has been a pioneer in local reflection and local content, including such iconic shows and programming concepts as The NewMusic, CityLimits and Speaker's Corner, just to name a few.
LISTNUM 1 \l 164 We expect this proud tradition to continue.
LISTNUM 1 \l 165 The City stations in Western Canada recently expanded Breakfast Television, and introduced new local programs, such as YourCity, to enhance community reflection, and provide greater scope for local context and discussion.
LISTNUM 1 \l 166 We support their efforts to build a stronger and deeper relationship with viewers through distinctive local programming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 167 But City has to re‑think its approach to Canadian priority programming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 168 In the past, synergies with CHUM and the specialty services influenced the the programming direction for the entire group.
LISTNUM 1 \l 169 That may have helped to control costs, but it also narrowed the scope of priority programming projects that could have been considered specifically for the City stations.
LISTNUM 1 \l 170 Under our ownership, programming synergies with specialties will be significantly reduced but, at the same time, City will be better able to make programming decisions that are more consistent with its vision and the brand.
LISTNUM 1 \l 171 The benefits from both this application and the Craig Media acquisition will provide a unique opportunity to kick‑start this change of focus and direction.
LISTNUM 1 \l 172 They are an important component in the future development of Canadian priority programming on these stations.
LISTNUM 1 \l 173 And no strategy is complete without acquired American programming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 174 Here too, the loss of synergies with the CHUM specialties will provide us with new opportunities.
LISTNUM 1 \l 175 The City stations will have much greater freedom to acquire US programming that is supportive of their local, urban and diverse market positioning.
LISTNUM 1 \l 176 We think that it will make for a more compelling and consistent program schedule ‑ one that will help the stations generate more interest from viewers, more revenues from advertisers and ultimately more financial stability.
LISTNUM 1 \l 177 However, it will continue to be difficult to compete for the acquisition of the famous Top 20 simulcasts.
LISTNUM 1 \l 178 CTV and CanWest have significantly greater scale and significantly greater distribution, and City will have to carefully pick its spots, making strategic and opportunistic program buys that incrementally build audiences and revenues over the long term.
LISTNUM 1 \l 179 And we can't forget new media. There are few companies in Canada better able to help City and these stations than Rogers.
LISTNUM 1 \l 180 New media is a key strategic focus of ours, and we are investing in new projects and services, and experimenting with alternative distribution platforms and new media content on a daily basis.
LISTNUM 1 \l 181 To establish and maintain a powerful connection to local communities, the City stations must have a strong presence in Video on Demand, wireless, the Internet. City must continue to innovate itself and respond to new challenges of broadband and the new multi‑platform environment.
LISTNUM 1 \l 182 Reflection of cultural diversity has always been important at Rogers, beginning with our cable community channels in the 1970s, followed by our investment in CFMT in the 1980s, and it has certainly also been an important part of the City philosophy.
LISTNUM 1 \l 183 Under our ownership, the City and OMNI stations will be able to share their respective experiences, their expertise, and strengthen their approaches and contributions to cultural diversity.
LISTNUM 1 \l 184 We believe our programming strategy includes all of the fundamental elements required to rebuild and revitalize the Citytv stations, and that Rogers has the resources, the expertise and the long‑term perspective necessary to successfully undertake this challenge in the future.
LISTNUM 1 \l 185 Tony?
LISTNUM 1 \l 186 MR. VINER: I will address the three policy and regulatory issues identified by the Commission in the Notice of Public Hearing: First, common ownership; two, programming diversity; and three, the benefits test.
LISTNUM 1 \l 187 The Commission's policy generally permits the ownership of no more than one station, in one language, in a given market.
LISTNUM 1 \l 188 And in our submission, the common ownership of City and OMNI fits squarely within that policy.
LISTNUM 1 \l 189 These stations do operate in different languages. They have different audiences and mandates for their programming, and reflect the needs and demands of different communities.
LISTNUM 1 \l 190 The City stations are licensed as English‑language stations, competing directly with other English‑language stations like CTV, Global and the CBC.
LISTNUM 1 \l 191 On the other hand, the OMNI stations are specifically licensed as ethnic stations, devoting the majority of their schedule to programs produced in third languages.
LISTNUM 1 \l 192 With language as a distinction, the Commission's policy assures that audiences are offered a diversity of programming options from local broadcasters, and it is a distinction that has been consistently applied in a number of decisions:
LISTNUM 1 \l 193 In 2002, the Commission approved our application for a second ethnic television station in Toronto, because the stations committed to each offering programs in different languages.
LISTNUM 1 \l 194 In 2000, the Commission approved the acquisition by CanWest of CJNT‑TV, an ethnic station in Montreal, even though that purchase would essentially provide CanWest with a second station in that market.
LISTNUM 1 \l 195 In 1985, the Commission approved an application by TQS for a new French‑language television station in Montreal, even though TQS was owned by CFCF Inc., also the owner of an English‑language television station in that market.
LISTNUM 1 \l 196 We certainly recognize that ethnic stations also have the authority to carry American programming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 197 But that authority is no different than what is provided to other broadcasters.
LISTNUM 1 \l 198 It is simply a reality of the Canadian model for television, a model that uses American programming to generate the revenues needed to meet Canadian content and service obligations.
LISTNUM 1 \l 199 For an ethnic station, that authority has become a part of the Commission's Ethnic Broadcasting Policy. It has provided the financial foundation from which to launch, and sustain, free over‑the‑air stations in markets across Canada.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1100 But that authority is also restricted.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1101 By condition of licence, ethnic stations are requires to primarily serve ethnic audiences during the peak prime time period of 8 to 10 p.m.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1102 That restriction ensures a prime time focus for ethnic programming at OMNI. Ethnic audiences are assured they will have access to OMNI newscasts and programs during peak viewing periods.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1103 It also ensures that OMNI has a limited ability to generate significant audiences and revenues from American programming, minimizing its impact on other stations.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1104 We believe approval of our application will have no material impact on competition for advertising revenues.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1105 In fact, our application has been overwhelmingly endorsed and supported by advertisers and agencies.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1106 That is because a stronger, more viable Citytv will provide advertisers with another option for television advertising.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1107 The second issue is programming diversity and, in particular, editorial independence.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1108 Media properties such as OMNI, 680 News and Maclean's all pursue independent editorial policies, with separate news line‑ups that reflect their different positions in the market, and their different target audiences.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1109 Under our ownership, the City stations will continue to pursue their own editorial direction, contributing to diversity through an intensely urban and community‑reflective perspective, and by offering distinctive local points of view.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1110 The editorial and news presentations differences between the OMNI and City stations will be sharp and clear, just as they are now.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1111 Let me quickly show you an example from earlier this month.
‑‑‑ Présentation video / Video presentation
LISTNUM 1 \l 1112 MR. VINER: The third issue relates to the acceptability and incrementality of our proposed benefits.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1113 Based on the requirements established in the Television Policy, we proposed benefits equal to ten per cent of the total purchase price.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1114 Although we had initially set that amount as 37.5 million dollars in our application, we have since revised it to approximately 39.5 million, to reflect adjustments made as a result of the value of the real estate we are also proposing to acquire in this transaction.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1115 In our submission, these benefits are unequivocal and incremental. They will build on baseline spending at City, and generate high‑quality priority programming through significant involvement with independent producers.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1116 Our benefit proposals were very well received by interveners, including the major associations representing Canadian creative talent, producers and distributors.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1117 These interveners made a number of suggestions for modifications, many of which we have incorporated as revisions to our initial commitments.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1118 As they relate to Canadian production, 100 percent of our benefits will now go to priority programming with a minimum of 85 percent dedicated to independent production and 65 percent specifically to drama.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1119 Together with the remaining benefits from the Craig Media acquisition, these benefits will establish an important new source of funding totalling more than $50 million in incremental expenditures for the production of high‑quality Canadian programming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1120 Rael.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1121 MR. MERSON: Mr. Chair, members of the Commission, we believe that the approval of this application is in the public interest and represents the best possible proposal under the circumstances.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1122 Rogers is the logical buyer of Citytv stations. We have the skills and resources necessary to ensure the continued strong presence of the distinctive and diverse voice of the City stations in their local markets.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1123 We have made significant commitments to provide substantial new support for Canadian priority programming and independent production.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1124 Our application complies with established Commission policy on common ownership and will preserve editorial independence and program diversity.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1125 A plan for the future of the Citytv stations is not without challenge but we believe that we have an effective plan, one that with your approval we look forward to implementing.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1126 Thank you for your time and attention this morning. We await any questions you might have.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1127 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much and thank you for filing those documents and on time, it is very much appreciated, it makes our life easier.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1128 We are going to question you in five areas: ownership, program diversity, local programming, valuation and tangible benefits. We will proceed with that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1129 On ownership you say in your application that you are going to get rid of the two religious stations that you have by the end of the year and I would like you to tell me what is going to happen if that isn't the case at the end of the year.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1130 To be specific, I want to avoid that you come back to me here at the end of the year and say we have tried our best, we can't find a buyer and let us keep them.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1131 MR. VINER: Mr. Chairman, we unequivocally will not do that. We are close to finalizing a transaction to sell the religious stations, although close isn't there.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1132 We have proposed in our application to take up to 12 months to try to sell those religious stations and if we are unsuccessful to put them under some form of vendor trusteeship or separate management in a way that would satisfy the Commission that they would be operated independently.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1133 THE CHAIRPERSON: I would like you to go a bit further than some form of separate management or trusteeship. Can you commit that you will put it under trusteeship at the end of 12 months and that that trustee will have full authority to sell it by auction?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1134 MR. VINER: Absolutely.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1135 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1136 Secondly, on multiculturalism, you have a 60 and 40 language split in the OMNI stations and you know our Ethnic Broadcasting Policy says that in specific cases we can set different minima and maxima.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1137 Given you are now entering into the television network business, you are going to have five stations, et cetera, is this the proper time to revisit the 60‑40 split?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1138 MR. VINER: No, we don't think so.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1139 If I could just take a moment, Mr. Chairman, to give a bit of history.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1140 You know, when we bought CFMT in 1985 it was 100 percent ethnic programming and it was bankrupt, and the Commission at that time decided to afford us the same opportunity or ethnic stations the same opportunity to schedule up to 40 percent U.S. programming in order to subsidize the ethnic programming that was available over the air. They made that decision because they didn't want to lose the ethnic programming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1141 That provision is exactly the same, exactly the same as every other Canadian over‑the‑air television station except we have, as I referred to in the in chief, restrictions on scheduling U.S. programming between 8:00 and 10:00.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1142 When we bought that station, we invested heavily in the ethnic schedule. Those of us who were around at the time know that we completely retrofitted the plant, we introduced tougher journalistic and production standards, and we also invested in a successful U.S. programming schedule, and slowly we nurtured that back to profitability.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1143 But there is no question that we need that subsidy perhaps more than other Canadian television stations because we have smaller audiences and a broad service mandate. We have restrictions on the scheduling of that programming and we are unable to sort of, as other stations are, cross‑promote all of our programming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1144 So I would say that we absolutely would continue to need the subsidy that is provided by that U.S. programming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1145 THE CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but the U.S. programming that you are buying for that, you can now also show it on City, so you have got a greater outlet for it. So while before you paid for it dearly undoubtedly to show it only on OMNI, you have another window now in which to show it and try to recoup your costs.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1146 MR. VINER: Well, I will make a couple of comments.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1147 The first is that that is really not the way programs are bought and sold, U.S. programs. Generally, they are bought and sold on a national basis. So unless we have the ability to show programs nationally, we still have that issue of just buying for a single market, for CFMT.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1148 The other thing I would point out, Mr. Chairman, is that we have undertaken a commitment that no more than 10 percent of the programming will be shown on City and OMNI.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1149 So I think there is plenty of assurance that the programming won't be the same.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1150 And again, the scheduling, the prime time restriction certainly ‑‑ there isn't one on Citytv and there is one on OMNI.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1151 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1152 In terms of separate editorial newsrooms, and you just showed us that clip, et cetera, you know there is a statement of principles and practices at the CRTC. I assume you are willing to commit to that with regard to OMNI and City?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1153 MR. VINER: Yes, sir.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1154 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1155 And then thirdly, City was really part of CHUM, and City and the station, I understand, have met with the founder and with the creative partners. There was a real great integration between the specialty channels and City.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1156 They were in the same location and they used, if I understand it, the network to try out an idea. If it worked, they spun it off into a specialty channel and they would produce it and the production would be shown both on the specialty and on City as appropriate, et cetera.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1157 Now all of that is ending here but you are still on the same premises. I believe that you told me prior to filing the application that you intended to physically relocate but you also have to disentangle the people, you have to decide who is at City, who is at CHUM.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1158 How is this coming along? How long is it going to take? Basically, how long is City going to be part of Citytv and when is it going to stand on its own independent feet?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1159 MR. VINER: Well, I will ask Rael to comment but the transition services agreement allows for up to three years. I have a boss who would like to allow it up to three weeks ‑‑
‑‑‑ Laughter / Rires
LISTNUM 1 \l 1160 MR. VINER: ‑‑ and it will probably be somewhere in between.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1161 But Rael has been spearheading those discussions and I would ask him to comment.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1162 MR. MERSON: It hasn't been easy, I guess, is the short answer.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1163 One of the things we had thought about at the time of the acquisition was really just the difficulty in disentangling the businesses.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1164 You know, every once in a while you look at a business and you look at it with the potential that you might somehow be able to find synergies in the business when you integrate them with your own operations.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1165 These businesses have been absolutely built into the CHUM infrastructure and every synergy that could have been extracted was sort of extracted.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1166 They had a central backroom operation. As you described, they sort of moved the programming around between the specialties and the channels. So it has been a challenge.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1167 As of last week, we and the trustee and CTV agreed on a separation of employees and they have all been notified to that effect already. So that part of it has been done.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1168 The physical relocation, as Tony described, is something ‑‑ the whip has been cracked on us to sort of get it done as soon as possible.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1169 I think Stephen and Peter, who are in the audience, will tell you the City employees would like to get out. They feel like they are in alien territory and would like to move out at this point as quickly as they can and we are committed to doing that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1170 What is the bad news about the level of integration? The bad news about the level of integration is it is going to be very difficult for us to replicate the synergies that they managed to effect.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1171 The good news is that we think we will be able to give City a focus and a direction to their programming strategy that has gone a little awry in the last couple of years, that had these conflicted priorities in the sense that they had to develop programs that might work on the SciFi Channel, it might work on one of the Digis, and might therefore also run on Citytv.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1172 So when you look at their programming schedule now, it is difficult to identify sort of a core theme or a core structure and one of the things we think we will be able to do by separating them out is refocus on sort of a core brand and a core identity.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1173 So I think the synergies are going to be difficult to replicate but I think we will be able to give them sort of a focus and a direction that they have been lacking over the last couple of years.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1174 THE CHAIRPERSON: So you have separated the employees. The physical separation will take place when?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1175 MR. MERSON: Not until closing, obviously. We just ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 1176 THE CHAIRPERSON: I assume you get our approval before you close, yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1177 MR. MERSON: Yes, at closing. I mean what we have told them essentially is you are going to go with the City operations wherever they end up and the remainder will remain with CTV. This is something CTV did last week.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1178 THE CHAIRPERSON: All right. And then they are sort of using each other's facilities?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1179 MR. MERSON: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1180 THE CHAIRPERSON: So give me a time frame of what time ‑‑ you say you have an agreement for three years. Obviously, Mr. Rogers would wish to have it done in three weeks, you said.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1181 What is the likely reasonable point at which time we can say the divorce is complete, you now have City here and you have CTV there?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1182 MR. MERSON: Eighteen months would be the answer. We have a plan. We have an idea of what it is we would like to do. As always with these things that require multiple things to happen at the same time, we think 18 months is the shortest amount of time and probably a reasonable period that we will have it done by.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1183 MR. VINER: But that is a touch timetable. I heard the sharp intake of breath from our engineering folks. We have to find a place, we have to build it out, order the equipment, figure out who is going to move where.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1184 I am on Rael's side and I think 18 months will be aggressive but I think we can do it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1185 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1186 Any questions from my fellow commissioners on the ownership issues?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1187 Rita?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1188 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: No.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1189 THE CHAIRPERSON: No?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1190 Then let us go on to issue number 2, which is program diversity.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1191 I think, Rita, you take the lead on that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1192 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1193 I think our Chairman has provided rather successfully an overture to this hearing and then allowing us to drill down a little further into some of the issues that he talked to you about.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1194 So I am going to start with foreign programming and its scheduling and selection because when I look at the program schedules that you have included in your application, I see that currently there is very little overlap in terms of titles on both the OMNI station and the Citytv stations.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1195 OMNI seems to rely more on syndicated programming while the City stations make more use of first‑run U.S. programming with some of it being simulcast.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1196 So I am just wondering, going forward, is this the model upon which you will continue to program both the OMNI and City stations?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1197 MR. MERSON: Yes is the short answer. As Tony mentioned, OMNI has no ability to program into primetime and you can only afford to compete for the best first‑run programming if you can afford to exhibit it in primetime. If you can't afford to exhibit it in primetime, there is no potential for recovery and there is no possibility of competing in the first place.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1198 OMNI is restricted to the shoulder period. Its restriction inhibits its potential audience and therefore limits what it can reasonably hope to achieve with its primetime programming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1199 So I can't see a framework that would allow either station to do much differently. It is the way the market works. If you can't possibly draw the audiences necessary to sustain the programming you can't compete for it in the first place and, you know, it has that sort of cycle and you are boxed into certain areas. So I believe there is no potential change.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1200 Let me ask Leslie if he wants to add anything.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1201 MR. SOLE: Commissioner Cugini, I think that if you are asking the question are these strategies going to stay the same, the answer is yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1202 When OMNI makes a commitment to a U.S. programming it is for years, it is reruns and it has to work over a number of years, as Rael said, in off‑prime periods. City's major investments are in day to day or week to week programming that, pardon the inside baseball or the jargon, it is perishable. We are going to have to together, if this is approved, come up with a strategy that makes more events happen and that City's going to be more current and more directed towards what I would call week to week TV, where OMNI is more of an ongoing, dependable, consistent, well‑known and, and I am not afraid to say it, repeat channel.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1203 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: And make more events happen is applicable to the foreign programming, and how will you choose what are the events that will make things happen for City?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1204 MR. SOLE: I think I have overstated it. I am basically talking about ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 1205 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: They are your words.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1206 MR. SOLE: I appreciate that. I think I am talking about week to week U.S. currently‑released television programs. How will we make that work? We think there's a number of strategies. There's a great deal of programming, as I said in the in‑chief, above and beyond the top 20.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1207 There are new ways to look at this. These are five major cities in this country, they are deserving of local and priority programming that suits their markets. At the same time, I think there is an alternative way to program foreign and U.S. programming and it doesn't necessarily have to come from the foreign networks, there is many sources in these days.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1208 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Because, currently, Toronto is the only market in which there exists a city and an OMNI station ‑‑ we know of two more where that will happen, Calgary and Edmonton ‑‑ is it safe to assume that the Toronto model will be the template going forward as you roll out into both Calgary and Edmonton?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1209 MR. SOLE: Absolutely.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1210 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Okay, just so I have a visual framework.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1211 In your oral presentation you said that the City stations will have much greater freedom to acquire U.S. programming that is supportive of their local urban and diverse market positioning. So you started to talk a little bit about it in my previous question, but how will you determine the criteria? What foreign programming will go on the OMNI stations and what foreign programming will go on the City stations?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1212 MR. MERSON: We really don't see much difference in the nature of the programming that currently runs on both stations. As Leslie mentioned, we do think, you know, what will remain on the OMNI ‑‑ OMNI is fundamentally a station that is horizontally programmed in the sense that we program the same shows every single night at the same time.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1213 Because when you speak to an audience and you try to build a habit in them you have got a couple of choices. One of the choices is to say, look, come to us every night, we are going to have something new and exciting and here is what you can expect to find. But if you don't have that, because your schedule is a broad service mandate and you have multiple languages and multiple different pockets on the schedule, what you need to try to do with the English schedule is build predictable habits in the English schedule and that is what we have tried to do.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1214 So we have built English programming with the same program that is programmed every night at the same time, and I can't see another strategy that would work. It would be very difficult to explain to a viewer why it was between 6:00 and 8:00 at night or between 6:00 and 7:00 at night they should come to you in a time where it is not planned viewing. So you need to build that habit. So somehow I believe the OMNI habits will remain the same, will program horizontally across the given week.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1215 City is different, City is a first‑run station, so it has an ability to acquire good U.S. programming, to speak to the consumers in a way that sort of like CTV or Global might in that sense come to us with the best new programming out there. Where City is handicapped relative to CTV and Global is in the scale of distribution. Global and CTV have national distribution, they are always going to be able to aspire to be the first at the table when programming becomes available for sale.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1216 And we, to some degree, are going to have to pick our spots and define a strategy for City that is consistent with its brand, that is explicable to the audience that it seeks to serve and ultimately is profitable. You know, one of the things we do believe that handicapped City over the last couple of years was the sort of toe‑in‑the‑water philosophy with acquired U.S. programming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1217 It is one of these businesses that isn't a game for sissies anymore. You know, either you go in and you make a commitment to building a first‑run schedule that hangs together, that speaks to the audience in a way that they can understand or you are better off doing something completely different and building a low‑cost schedule that delivers you margins, that doesn't compete for first‑run programming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1218 I can't tell you at this point, and I don't think Leslie can either, exactly what we might do and where we would end up. But we understand the parameters, we understand there is no point being half pregnant, either we do it or we don't do it. We know it has to tie into a brand. We are sort of relieved from the constraints that City had in the sense that they were trying to share programming among all the various family members. We will have a single‑minded focus on the City stations and we will come up with an acquired strategy that fits for City and fits within the marketplace itself.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1219 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Are the demographics different for these two station groups or is your target demographic different for these two station groups?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1220 MR. MERSON: Well, fundamentally the bulk of OMNI's primetime programming, as you know, is in language, so it is a completely and utterly different audience.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1221 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: But just for the foreign programming segment.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1222 MR. MERSON: For the foreign programming, not too different. You know, there is a sense that we all have that City has appealed to a more youthful demographic than some of the other television stations and the evidence doesn't suggest that. The evidence suggests they are a station that sort of programs to 18 to 49‑year‑old people and they have been successful doing that. And you look at OMNI's demographics in its shoulder periods and you find a very similar demographic.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1223 But I think when you look at the population as a whole those are the people watching television in those time periods and you naturally gravitate towards them.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1224 Leslie, I don't know if you want to add anything?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1225 MR. SOLE: Commissioner Cugini, I think that with the evolution of hundreds of channels that narrow demographic over‑the‑air television may have been from another era. What Rael is alluding to is that when you are completely and entirely supported by advertisers your demographic automatically broadens.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1226 The reason that OMNI and City and CTV and Global have very similar demographics and the reason that the advertising trades on demographics like 25 to 54, 18 to 34. I think in a channel like City you want a range of programs that appeal to those different sectors. It is very competitive, but at the same time there also is an opportunity to reach a broader audience from an urban point of view, from a diverse point of view and from a local point of view.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1227 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Thank you for that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1228 THE CHAIRPERSON: Can I just interject?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1229 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Please.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1230 THE CHAIRPERSON: When we had the CTV hearing we heard for two days about the edginess of City and people tried to define it, etc. and it seems there was a whole gamut of witnesses who all thought how that edginess was what made City different and what sold City and it had to be recreated and they thought CTV would be the best person. We happened to be disagreed.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1231 But are you trying to pursue the recreation of that edginess that you..? You were here and you heard about it that time?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1232 MR. MERSON: We were well advised. No, you know, we thought long and hard about what City was as an identity and we batted it around, not only amongst ourselves, but with all the City people, and ultimately the definition we have come up with for City is localness, urban reflection and a reflection of the diverseness of the population that it serves. You know, edginess might refer to the style of photography or how the presentation is.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1233 But ultimately, for us, it is a question of the audience that we seek to target and the audience we seek to target is localness. Because we really fundamentally believe there will be two elements to successful television operation in the 21st century; the one will be its local connection to its audiences and the other will be the quality of the first‑run programming it is able to commission and acquire. Because those are the only things that will differentiate it from what might otherwise be available in the 500‑channel universe or in the IPTV world.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1234 So localness was the first element we wanted to hang onto. Urbaneness, we do believe the City stations, the name says it, the way they have been built is they only operate in major urban centres, and the focus should be urban and on urban communities. And diversity is a hallmark of what City has done and one, given our backgrounds, we are completely comfortable with and would seek to endorse.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1235 So edginess has never been part of our vocabulary to us, it is a question of the target audiences and who we seek to serve and how it is we will design the operation around those kinds of principles.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1236 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Back to you, Rita.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1237 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Thank you. Mr. Sole, earlier you said that there are many sources for foreign programming. Are the specialty services that Rogers currently operates one of those sources?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1238 MR. SOLE: Yes, they are, but they represent a very narrow opportunity at this point. We are in the sports business, we have Rogers Sportsnet in four regions of the country, we have a technology channel that is naturally aimed at younger people that understand it, gaming and the internet and things like that, and we have a factual channel called the Biography Channel.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1239 There will, from time to time, be synergies that relate to our over‑the‑air channels and those speciality channels. It doesn't represent anywhere the magnitude that the CHUM group had with music and science fiction, their cultural arts channel and more than one music channel and so on. But I think when I said specialty and cable channels I meant around the world. I think there is an opportunity in acquiring programming that isn't necessarily from NBC, CBS, FOX or ‑‑ I don't know, which one I miss ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 1240 MR. VINER: ABC.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1241 MR. SOLE: ‑‑ ABC. Thank you, Tony. But there is a plethora of interesting suitable programming that we think we will investigate and maybe take some risks and change City's nature in primetime in the acquired area.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1242 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: And so the inclusion possibly of programming from the specialty services, that would be included in the 10 per cent overlap limitation that you have offered?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1243 MR. SOLE: Our offering was related to our over‑the‑air channels. No more than 10 per cent ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 1244 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Between the over‑the‑air channels?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1245 MR. SOLE: ‑‑ duplication between CityTV over‑the‑air and OMNI over‑the‑air.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1246 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Right. So there is no limit on how much programming from your specialty channels could be on the CityTV channels?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1247 MR. VINER: No, I never thought about it, and if you gave me sometime I would think about it. But I am sure I could say yes and someone will correct me, but there is really relatively little ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 1248 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Yes to what percentage?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1249 MR. VINER: Ten per cent, just keeping the 10 per cent.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1250 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Ten per cent.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1251 MR. VINER: Can I just..? I will do the math at the break.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1252 THE CHAIRPERSON: Why don't you reflect on that and then at the end some of you can revisit that point?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1253 MR. VINER: Always accuse me of just saying yes, so I will wait.
‑‑‑ Laughter / Rires
LISTNUM 1 \l 1254 THE CHAIRPERSON: I want an affirmative yes, not a tentative yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1255 MR. VINER: Yes, sir.
‑‑‑ Laughter / Rires
LISTNUM 1 \l 1256 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: As stated in your application, one of your long‑term objectives is to amortize programming production and acquisition costs over the widest possible audience base. We will get to production in a minute. But what do you include in the term "widest possible audience base" that would allow you, in fact, to amortize your acquisition costs?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1257 MR. MERSON: I am quickly thinking about exactly what it related to. But I think it was just a restatement of the basic economics. There is this concept of a virtual cycle where you need to have ‑‑ it is sort of a restatement of our belief in how free over‑the‑air television works and what its role will be in the 500‑channel universe. You need to aspire to the largest possible audience to allow you to commission the best possible programming to allow you to deliver the ratings that deliver the revenue that gives you the audience.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1258 You know what I mean? It is this cycle that you need to get into. And if you can't in advance believe that you can aspire to the largest possible audience, it reduces the pool within which you swim and so I think it was just a reflection of that notion.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1259 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: So it doesn't include your role as an integrated Canadian media company in a broadband multi‑screen environment? I guess that is really my question. Is that what you meant by widest possible audience base?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1260 MR. MERSON: I am not sure if we specifically meant at that time. But clearly, you know, as a concept we are committed to an evolving television universe. You know, we know that the universe will evolve from a single screen to multiple screens. You know, you hear discussion about three screens, the television the broadband and perhaps wireless and the recreation of the programming that you do for each one of the environments in the other environment and it is something that we absolutely believe we will need to have access to, as will every other Canadian broadcaster.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1261 Because our competitors in the U.S. will be doing it and, to some degree, this is a business that requires you to exploit the rights that you have over the largest possible number of platforms. And, you know, we spoke a little bit about how the world might look in the future.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1262 And what we tried to convey in the in‑chief really was the notion that simply buying programming and exhibiting it on television in a world in which people skip commercials, the studios can go direct to the consumers, isn't going to be enough. You are going to have to sort of get involved and take on risk at a much higher level to ensure that you protect your position in whatever way those rights get exploited.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1263 If it might be by product placement within a program, you know, you are going to have to get involved at a much earlier stage in the development of a concept to ensure that you have the rights to place that product within a show and that you have the rights to exploit the exhibition of that program on the multiple different media.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1264 So, absolutely, we believe multimedia and we believe multiple screens are going to be a key feature of how this business evolves in the future.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1265 If the question is: do we have a privileged position because of our sister companies, we think we are sensitive to it. We think we are probably more sensitive to it than anybody else because they are so focused on how their businesses will evolve. But I don't think there's any privileged access. You know, it's the Internet we are talking about, largely coming to consumers through multiple media, and it is the most open system ever devised by man.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1266 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Well, thank you. That's a rather complete answer and we will move on to the area of priority programming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1267 So we will start with an easy one. You say in your application you are prepared to commit to increase the weekly commitment of priority programming from seven to eight hours for Citytv Toronto. Will you accept this as a condition of license?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1268 MR. VINER: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1269 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: That's when you get to say the affirmative "yes", right? Okay.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1270 In your application, you use phrases such as "television trailblazer", "source for innovation" and "distinct" when describing Citytv. Given that you have now made a commitment that 100 per cent of the funding from the Allan Waters Canadian Content Initiative will go to priority programming and that 85 per cent of that will go to independent producers, how will you work with these independent producers to ensure that your vision for these stations will translate into shows that Canadians will want to watch?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1271 MR. MERSON: We have sort of a long history, particularly from the OMNI 2 Fund, of how it is we have managed ‑‑ the process we have gone through of distributing benefit funds to independent producers through the OMNI 2 Fund.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1272 Madeleine can perhaps speak to that, but we are also very fortunate to have Diane Boehme here, who is City's resident expert on production and the commissioning of funds. So if you don't mind, if I could ask Diane to speak quickly about sort of City and its process, and if you have any further questions on OMNI and its process Madeleine will be happy to answer those.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1273 MS BOEHME: Thank you, Rael. I am happy to answer the question.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1274 One of the good things that comes with this application is a renewed commitment to development support for Canadian production. It's a very substantial one and it's one of those things that will help us find and identify those producers who have the ideas that dovetail with our local, urban and diverse plans.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1275 I think it takes time to develop those projects, it takes time to develop those concepts, but to really look at, through a dramatic narrative form, something that is about the essences of the cities where these Citytvs will inhabit, and that, typically, hasn't been done, whether it's drama or comedy.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1276 I think to find the right kinds of stories, the right sorts of narratives and to find ways to reach people in different platforms it's going to be a challenge, but I think we have the resources to do it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1277 You know, it's been 23 years in the business for me now, and 12 years doing this kind of work, and there is an absolute hunger for the independent production community to take up these sorts of challenges. I think there's going to be a number of people that are going to want to be inventive with us about that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1278 As far as our process goes, it's really an open door. We don't have a formal funding system. We don't have a system where there's deadlines to meet. There's a lot of application forms. It really sits very informally, where we sit down and chat with the producer about their idea.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1279 That's the first thing: do we think it fits, do we think it's a diamond in the rough that can require a little bit of honing and be a little bit more suited to what we have in mind, and then we work with them to do that, through the development phase, obviously, and then once we hit production, obviously ensuring that the casting reflects local, urban and diverse, that our storytelling reflects local, urban and diverse and that the budget is going to be something our audience is going to find attractive when it hits their screens.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1280 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: How does that compare or complement the process that OMNI has with its independent producers currently?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1281 MS ZINIAK: I think as far as OMNI is concerned, we are very proud to be able to have a benefit fund such as this where we are actually introducing new producers to the industry, not only a chance for new producers, but also new content.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1282 I think certainly if you take a look at the Task Force on Diversity, this completes the push.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1283 Finally, we have an opportunity to really platform the story of Canada, the story of Canadians, and, really, sharing diversity with the rest of the country.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1284 As you all know, this is the first‑ever fund in Canada that is third language, that actually accesses that kind of expertise and content to Canadians. So I think we have seen that we have given new opportunities to new producers. I think that this is something that is very Canadian.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1285 Also, we have had the opportunity, not only in the area of diversity, but also to partner in the aboriginal realm.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1286 So we have been able to really push forward, clearly, the history of Canada in third language, and also taking a look at what it really means to be Canadian.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1287 So we find, and I think our independent producers find, that this is also an opportunity to work with an alternative broadcaster, but one that perhaps has been longer in the so‑called mainstream. As you know, I always have a difficulty with the word "mainstream", but we know what we mean.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1288 So I think we are both alternative, we both unleash opportunities to new and also sometimes those independent producers who have expertise.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1289 THE CHAIRPERSON: In this case, whether it's City or whether it's OMNI, what happens to the rights, especially to the rights for other platforms, such as new media, et cetera? When you work with independent producers who usually get ‑‑ I mean, is there a standard form with which you deal with the rights: who has the rights to television, who has the rights to wireless, new media or whatever?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1290 I mean, nowadays, as we all know, this is becoming more and more an issue, so I would like to know what is the practice of Rogers in this regard.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1291 MR. STRATI: It's a very good question and insight into why one of the funds that we are proposing has a 10 per cent allocation for new media rights.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1292 There's a good example. There's a sort of significant documentary series on the Canadian Charter that was produced in eight different languages. At the time there was no new‑media component or new media budget, if you will, that came from it after that. The producer then said, "You know, I really want to have a web site platform, additional content, additional..." and she went to the Bell New Media Fund and got funding for that and used that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1293 So, certainly for us, we want to have the ability, first, to be able to fund that, and also to have the capacity to, if there are other platforms and other opportunities in new media, for example, that the funding has the capacity to provide for it, for that kind of content, whether it's an extension or a new content.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1294 THE CHAIRPERSON: Well, that didn't exactly answer my question, which is: what's the standard formula? When you hire an independent producer to produce something or you work with him, who winds up with the rights, both television rights and the new media rights, and whatever rights ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 1295 MR. SOLE: Mr. Chair, we end up with a licence fee. The copyright and the perpetuity rights belong to the independent producer right from the very beginning right to the very end.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1296 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: This is great because sometimes your interjections allow me to cross off questions and sometimes they provide a great segue into the next.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1297 MR. VINER: Mr. Chairman, did we answer your question, though? Did we answer it?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1298 THE CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1299 I mean, as you all know, CTF is very much on my mind these days, and so are producer rights, et cetera, and so I wanted to know what the practice is for a large outfit like yours when you work with producers, and I think you answered it, thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1300 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: And trust me, the day you don't answer his questions, you will know.
‑‑‑ Laughter/ Rires
LISTNUM 1 \l 1301 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: We are giving him Rookie of the Year. He doesn't know yet.
‑‑‑ Laughter / Rires
LISTNUM 1 \l 1302 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Further to that, with more opportunity to work with independent producers, some have argued, comes more responsibility in the form of advocating that this company now enter into a Terms of Trade Agreement with the CFTPA.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1303 I was wondering if you had an opportunity to reflect upon that and give us your progress, opinion or recommendations to that suggestion.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1304 MR. STRATI: In terms of progress, we are new to it. Certainly, we were here when Citytv discussed it. It's sort of an industry initiative where different broadcasters are talking with different associations going forward on terms of trade, and certainly we would participate in that as we move forward.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1305 So certainly we are committed to working with the associations to develop, as other broadcasters are.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1306 MR. MERSON: But this is a very fluid marketplace. You know, every deal is a little bit different. We have been markedly unsuccessful in acquiring video‑on‑demand rights on certain occasions and sort of third‑screen rights, and things like that. So the marketplace is going to have to find its own level.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1307 You know, ultimately, philosophically, is there a value attached to new media rights? Yes, there is. You know, will we respect that value attached to the media rights? Absolutely.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1308 We do believe, over time, things will find a level. You know, ultimately, what the shows generate is what you can afford to pay for them, and we will find that level. But, absolutely, we believe there's a value to the right, and it's a value we will pay for.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1309 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: On to your commitment to comply with conditions of license for both Vancouver and Toronto to exhibit 100 hours of Canadian long‑form features on those two City stations, you have made a request to increase the number of documentaries from a maximum of 10 to 20.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1310 Movies always seem to be at the top of any viewer survey as being the most popular genre of programming, so what is your rationale for requesting this increase in documentaries?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1311 MR. MERSON: We think Canada produces great documentaries. You know, we think there's a demand for high quality documentaries.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1312 Perhaps I will ask Diane just to expand on the notion, but as we looked through the availability of new, good Canadian feature films and the supply of documentaries, it occurred to us that there might be a little bit of a rebalancing required between feature films and documentaries. The fact is good documentaries are being produced. We know there's an appetite for them out there.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1313 Again, it's a request for the opportunity to move up to 20 per cent, if the supply actually exists and if the demand actually exists. So it was largely the rationale behind the request.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1314 I would ask Diane just to add in more colour, if she could.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1315 MS BOEHME: Sure. Thank you very much, Rael.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1316 I think one of the things that we believe is not just documentaries, but the value and the interest that the audience holds for theatrically released documentaries, as well, and they fit within the same two‑hour slot. It's a little bit of a bigger examination table for whatever the subject of the documentary is and we have had a great deal of success on the Citytv side with long‑form documentary material.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1317 Everything from Go Further, Ron Mann's Grass, Metal: A Headbanger's History, recently, Manufacturing Dissent, the theatrically released about Michael Moore and how he makes documentaries, have demonstrated to us a very clear interest on the audience part for more of these.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1318 So we are committed to seeing if we can, obviously, expand the theatrical audience by providing a free television window for them.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1319 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: So if we were to allow this amendment, would these 10 hours be 10 hours of new programming to the system or would they be comprised of documentaries that are currently on OMNI or currently on any of the Rogers specialty channels?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1320 MR. SOLE: I didn't write all those down.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1321 Let's go backwards. OMNI doesn't generally deal in a two‑hour theatrical format. Would they be new to the system? Only if we are involved in the development through other processes could we guarantee that they would be new to the system.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1322 One of the points I would make, from an operating point of view, is the low level of impact that five documentaries would make in a broadcast year, because it would be less than one very two months, in terms of our overall commitment.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1323 I think, Commissioner Cugini, that they are going to come from every single source that Canadian documentaries come from. Rogers has been involved with documentaries for years. We would be supportive of the NFB.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1324 There are some great young documentary producers, and, quite frankly, we can see a blur happening. We can see a popularization of ‑‑ I'm not going to say any particular ‑‑ Super Size Me, you know, Sicko.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1325 We think that's a growing, interesting, engaging, factual point‑of‑view format that suits Canadian feature filmmakers.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1326 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Excuse me, one of the concerns raised by intervenors is that if we allow this amendment, there will be an impact on the financing of Canadian feature films.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1327 I'm wondering, again, if you have had an opportunity to assess those interventions, and whether or not you agree that this would, in fact, have an impact on the Canadian feature film business.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1328 MR. MERSON: I am going to ask Diane again to speak from her experience, but we obviously don't. We think, as Leslie mentioned, I mean, this would amount to the exhibition of five more documentaries during the course of a year. It isn't that significant of a commitment.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1329 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Right, but their ‑‑ sorry to interrupt, but their point is that means five fewer Canadian feature films will be ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 1330 MR. MERSON: Absolutely.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1331 THE CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1332 MR. MERSON: So, again, this is all a question for us of sort of supply and demand and just a rebalancing of what the priorities are, and Diane can speak a little bit more knowledge to the situation, itself.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1333 MS BOEHME: Sure.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1334 No, we don't think it's going to have that much of an impact. The exhibition doesn't have the same thing to do as the financing.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1335 Obviously, you are financing, in the case of feature films, many years in advance of your window, particularly when you have got a theatrical window, you have a small DVD window, in most cases there's a Canadian pay television window that's usually 18 months. So the theatrical feature film activity that we've typically done usually is three, six to 48 months out of our exhibition period.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1336 Documentaries shouldn't impact on that and with the benefit package that we have here, our plan is that we're really probably going to as much as double our support for Canadian feature films within the benefit package that we have.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1337 So, I don't think it will change the financing of Canadian feature films, that's certainly not our intent. It's really just a matter of exhibition as opposed to financing, if that helps you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1338 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Okay. Thank you. And within the priority programming, you have ‑‑ you've said in your application you're prepared to accept the condition of licence that will require that the eight hours of priority programming to be broadcast on average each week by the City stations be distinct from English language priority programming broadcast on OMNI stations each week, correct.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1339 Safe to assume you mean this on a perm market basis?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1340 MR. VINER: That's correct.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1341 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Do you have intentions to show in Edmonton and Calgary, for example, priority programming that has been previously aired on OMNI? In Toronto, I can think of a couple of titles that would be appropriate? Metropia comes to mind.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1342 MR. VINER: As you know, we don't have an obligation to do priority programming on OMNI, but certain of ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 1343 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: But, by definition, sure Metropia fits.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1344 MR. VINER: Absolutely. Absolutely. Rail or Leslie?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1345 MR. MERSON: I'll ask Leslie too to speak to it. On the odd occasion, yes. You know, as we think through in this table of programming that only has, Metropia would be the only sort of feature produced, first run produced program that might fit the bill, a few of the documentaries that we have might fit the bill as well.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1346 But again, and these are fundamentally different businesses that focus on different audiences, the notion that you could run Canada people's history on Citytv in its prime schedule, that in effect prime schedule is a bit of a stretch.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1347 So, we don't think there is much opportunity for it at all, but we would like to have a flexibility if the opportunity arises.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1348 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Anything to add?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1349 MR SOLE: I don't want to just add things for the sake of adding them, but everything that's running on in Ontario is new to all of Western Canada and opportunities being what they might be, we will have choices on where they might be exhibited in Alberta, for example, if this process is approved.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1350 We think the more people that see the type of documentaries that Madeline described, the better this system is served.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1351 We think that the more Canadians that see the products that Canadians make, the better the system is served.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1352 And that's what where we were talking about maximising our opportunity to put Canadian content on multiple platforms, markets, formats and so on.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1353 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Thank you. My final line of questioning is in regards to third language programming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1354 Is all of the third language programming that is currently on City bordered?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1355 Mr. MERSON: We believe so.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1356 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: I believe that in your application you've said you'd accept a condition of licence that would see no overlap of third language that's currently on City with the third language programming that is on the ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 1357 MR. VINER: Yes.
‑‑‑ Laughter / Rires
LISTNUM 1 \l 1358 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: You have to have a role here, Mr. Viner.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1359 Those are all my questions, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1360 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. I would like to come back to your opening statement, Mr. Viner, where you say that, you know, the fundamental beliefs that only free over‑the‑air television can draw the mass audiences that are necessary to support the production of the highest quality program.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1361 And Mr. Merson, when he was talking about the future City, reiterated certainly. He said two factors: localness and the ability to produce quality programming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1362 Can you give me the rationale for this because it, at first blush, given the success on some specialty channels which have attracted huge audiences as in supposition that you can only produce quality program fairly and over‑the‑air television , it doesn't seem to be there?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1363 MR. MERSON: I'm happy to take it since I sort of said it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1364 You know, there is always quite a little bit of crystal ball and a gaze of the future and, you know, there is a model that has been developed for specialty television over the last 20 years where specialty TV services, you know, gained widespread distribution because there were parts of packages that people might have wanted to pay for.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1365 But if you look at the world of the future and the ability of sort of consume as to pick and pay, you might result ‑‑ you know, the specialty world might sort of have it all differently.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1366 You might find a specialty world and you're going to have a review of the specialty regulations coming up soon, but you might find a specialty world where people picked and paid on an individual basis and they might pay a little bit more, but they get the right to pick what's individual.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1367 But as we look at the world of the future, it's hard to believe that the specialty channels have not maximized their distribution, that their actual number of subscribers that they have over the next 20 years might very well decline, as people choose more to pick and pay.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1368 Now, the revenues might stay the same because they probably will be able to charge those devoted followers of the channels more, but ultimately we believe that the model will be fewer subscribers per channel for the specialties, but probably the same revenue as they charge a little bit more to those devoted subscribers.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1369 So, we expect their distribution over the years will probably shrink a little bit, whereas we think free over‑the‑air will always be the ‑‑ you pick with us mass medium.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1370 MR. VINER: If I could just add, Mr. Chairman. The facts are now that although the share of specialty channels themselves has actually grown and outstripped over‑the‑air in many cases. Actual specialty services themselves, taken individually, none have the audience of a CTV or Global or City.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1371 In the individual markets, there is nobody that does as well as those stations. So, I just point that out.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1372 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1373 On programming, Stuart, any questions? Helen? Elizabeth?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1374 Okay then, let's go onto the next thing, local programming and synergies and maybe Stuart you have taken the lead.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1375 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: See? Having said I have no questions on programming, I am now going to ask questions on programming. That's what we do when we regulate.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1376 I want to start with Mr. Sole's opening statement this morning on page 5 where he said ‑‑ page 5 of your Opening Statement :
"We believe the local programming strategy currently being pursued by the City station is fundamentally sound."
LISTNUM 1 \l 1377 So, business as usual it seemed to me.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1378 And then, if edginess was the mantra of the Citytv folks trying to maintain control of City, the City stations, localness seems to be today's mantra from Rogers. So, of course, we want to turn our attention to this if this is fundamentally sound and if it's business as usual.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1379 But, it's incredibly important, more important than edginess, which sometime ago we were told was absolutely the most important thing in the world and at that time I was looking forward to the return of the Baby Blue movie, but apparently that's not to be.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1380 I then want to go in this bit of an introduction, to paragraph 58 of your Supplementary Brief, because I'm trying to figure out what this localness will mean. And in paragraph 58, you say:
"Each City station provides a wide range of local news and information programming.+
LISTNUM 1 \l 1381 And it's there that I begin to detect the possibility of a disconnect because, in my review of the hundreds of interventions, I found many from people who would disagree with that statement, who believe that in the last year City has abandoned true local news in all of its stations and all of the cities, except Toronto.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1382 And I would like you to respond to that and I would like us to try to examine it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1383 And I suppose the first place to start may be for you to help me by looking at some of the schedules you provided, the multi‑coloured schedules, and telling me in cities other than Toronto, you can pick one as typical if you like, or look at all of them, where do I find the local news that 30 or so interveners say is gone from their cities?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1384 Is that a fair question?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1385 MR. MERSON: Thank you, Commissioner Langford. I'm going to ask ‑‑ fortunately I have Brad Phillips here who is the Station Manager in Vancouver. He is somewhere, right there. But I thought just by way of introduction I would just address the issue, you know.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1386 To me, the first question is localness and how is it you reflect your local communities and what is it you stand for and we sort of love what the City stations are doing. I mean, they have innovated their ‑‑ they have responded to the marketplace realities wherever they had to, the shows have changed over time.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1387 They have managed to evolve themselves and really coved out a significant local niche in each one of the markets in which they are in.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1388 There is something about the way they look and they feel and they speak to their audience that really says they're in touch with their band and they're in touch with the markets in which they're in.
And it's that connection that we seek to maintain.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1389 And as we look at the stations and you compare them to competitors, it's tough to argue that they haven't probably been more successful in building that local connection with their various communities. It's something to be frank. We have aspired to, over the years you know, to own broadcast properties and have found it difficult to replicate.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1390 The second part of the question about news is what is news in a modern world and I recall sort of a interaction we had at a hearing in Kitchener. We're on Kitchener radio, and there was a discussion on sort of what news sounds like on radio in a HipHop station and it sounds completely different to what it does on a conventional radio station.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1391 And so too news in television has evolved from the straight hard goods into something that might be a little bit more softer on the one case or a little magazine, more magazine like in the other case, but ultimately it's an attempt to reflect local communities and what's going on in those local communities to the communities themselves.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1392 So, with that as a quick introduction, I'm going to ask Brad just to speak to Vancouver in particular and take you through the program schedule in Vancouver.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1393 MR. PHILLIPS: Thank you Rael. I guess I would start my comment to the question by saying that we do do news. We do not do a news show at six p.m. in Vancouver, but we do do news.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1394 We do a four hour morning show breakfast television, the back bone of that show is news. We have news anchors, we have reporters. Every important story that is on the cover of that morning paper is on our morning show.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1395 We have live trucks reporting from news events that are happening or where a news is about to happen that day and we like to think that if it's happening in our city or if it's happened in the last 24 hours, we have it covered on our morning show.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1396 I suppose I should take the time to just comment on the fact that why we have moved away from six p.m. as the place where we do it, and we've ran news at that time for a long time, for many years, and tried very hard to find an audience there.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1397 In the end, we faced the reality that we weren't attracting an audience, that the market was, and we believe is well‑served at six o'clock by the other stations and we made a decision, business decision that we thought was well fought out, well researched and we said, you know, morning is a growth area.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1398 It is widely accepted as a place where morning news is growing and where audiences are growing and that's a place where we should go and that's where we should put our flag ship shell. And so, we moved our efforts into that area and we're proud of the show that we have on the air.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1399 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Let's dig a little deeper if you don't mind.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1400 Why is the situation so different in Toronto? Why can you obviously offer a diverse voice, a third voice if I can call it that, in Toronto, to Toronto people at 6h00, obviously make some kind of a go of it, make a financial case of it, but not in Vancouver and not in Calgary?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1401 Why is that? Why does the breakfast television go from 6h00 to 8h30 in Toronto, but from 6h00 to 9h30 in Vancouver is perhaps another way to ask the question?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1402 I mean, people driving to work, unless they have incredible powers of concentration, simply will have a little trouble catching some of the news in the morning but probably would be home in the bower of their family to enjoy it over dinner or while they are preparing dinner.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1403 I am trying to find here why you would ‑‑ I don't want to use the word "abandon," I think that is a loaded word, but why you would make a decision to say, well, we are going to move away from I think what is arguably in the public interest, to give people a diverse choice of sources of news in Vancouver and other places but not in Toronto.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1404 Why isn't the same business model working?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1405 MR. MERSON: You know, the beauty of the City stations is that they are not a network. As you look across their schedule, there is no consistency throughout the schedule and it is a decision made by the previous management to sort of try to not cookie‑cutter the stations to get them to be as reflective and as responsive to the local markets as possible.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1406 So it isn't CTV that has a Canada AM that runs across the country of a national news show that runs across the country. It is these designed to be local businesses that are managed locally that make decisions based on the realities of the local marketplace.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1407 As Brad said, they, at 6:00 at night, beat their heads against a wall with no success at developing an audience at 6:00 at night.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1408 Why didn't that work in Vancouver but work in Toronto?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1409 Toronto has 25 years of heritage and as the market developed and as the city grew it was able to sort of carve a niche for itself and build a news program at 6:00 at night.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1410 In Vancouver it has been much more difficult. It has been difficult to do. It has been a ‑‑ and the response to it has been logical, which is to say, look, the market at 6:00 is closed up, nobody is doing local Breakfast Television and nobody is doing local morning television. It makes perfect sense to go back in and refocus our efforts on the mornings that no one else is serving.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1411 So for better or for worse, what you don't get by having individual markets is synergy and efficiency. What you do get is local responsiveness.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1412 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Okay. So just tell me then how much news we are getting. We don't have an hour of news. You folks are obviously committed to news. You chose news to show us here in your one clip, your one visual display today.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1413 Perhaps ‑‑ is it Brad? I have forgotten the last name, sorry.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1414 MR. PHILLIPS: Brad Phillips.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1415 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Phillips.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1416 Mr. Phillips, perhaps we could go back to you and give me some idea of how much news is to be found in the Breakfast Television show in Vancouver ‑‑ sorry, the Chairman has something he wants to ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 1417 THE CHAIRPERSON: Just before you do that, your answer just now was all focused on City previous management, et cetera. You are taking over. You say our focus is localness and quality production.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1418 Are you going to change this? I mean you said that they didn't have a cookie‑cutter approach, they didn't run it as a network. Are you going to run it as a network? Are you going to try to have a uniform program and how are you going to bring out your greater emphasis on news?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1419 MR. MERSON: It is really a good question and I apologize for sort of mentioning prior management. We think they have made an appropriate ‑‑ found an appropriate balance in the level of central coordination versus local responsiveness in what it is they have done.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1420 We do think one of the bits of magic of City is the fact that it is not a cookie‑cutter approach, that it has been adapted to each one of the local markets, and we would not change that at all.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1421 If you look at their current structure, there is the sort of loose‑tight philosophy that they have where they acquire the American programs centrally and they try to find the right spots for them in each of the markets but their local programming is fundamentally run by local management and is responsive to whatever the local needs are.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1422 So no, we would not change that at all.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1423 THE CHAIRPERSON: (Off microphone)
LISTNUM 1 \l 1424 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: No problem. No problem. Apparently, we are a team up here. I like it. Bat it around, it gives me time to think.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1425 So we were going to take a look, Mr. Phillips, at the sort of content, and I don't expect you to come down to seconds here or even minutes but just sort of a sense of how big the news hunk is of this ‑‑ what is it ‑‑ about three‑hour window that you have got here in the morning.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1426 MR. PHILLIPS: Right. It is a four hour show. It runs from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1427 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Right.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1428 MR. PHILLIPS: And throughout those four hours we have news coverage.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1429 I will just give you a small example of last week on one of our shows on ‑‑ I think it was Thursday morning.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1430 We had a news item that Vancouver was voted the most livable city in the world and we had our reporter live at Granville Island talking to people about their reaction to that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1431 The seawall around Stanley Park was supposed to reopen. It wasn't open. We had visuals of that and coverage of that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1432 THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Phillips, my colleague can't understand you. Can you either speak up or put your mouth closer to the microphone?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1433 MR. PHILLIPS: Certainly.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1434 Shall I repeat that or was that
LISTNUM 1 \l 1435 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: I just didn't get what Vancouver was the most what in the world, wonderful city or horrible city?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1436 MR. PHILLIPS: Sorry.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1437 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: I just didn't hear the word.
‑‑‑ Laughter / Rires
LISTNUM 1 \l 1438 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: I mean with the garbage strike it is a fair question, isn't it?
‑‑‑ Laughter / Rires
LISTNUM 1 \l 1439 MR. PHILLIPS: I wasn't inspired by the Mayor to bring that particular story forward but that was just an example of a story that we had that was a news item that day and we were down talking to people about their reaction to that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1440 So we are live on location every morning for breaking news activities.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1441 Out of our four hours, two and a half hours of that is news coverage.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1442 The remainder of the show is a variety of things: performances by local artists, contests, all kinds of things that we think will be appealing to people as they wake up.
‑‑‑ Pause
LISTNUM 1 \l 1443 MR. PHILLIPS: And Rael is reminding me that we run City News International at 6:30 at night.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1444 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Okay.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1445 Let me then go to paragraph ‑‑ to try to understand what this means and I don't think I will be much longer ‑‑ paragraph, I think it is 30 ‑‑ let me have a look.
‑‑‑ Pause
LISTNUM 1 \l 1446 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Excuse me, I have just ‑‑ I have lost it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1447 Yes, paragraph 32, sorry, of your supplementary brief, the second bullet or the second point where you talk about your long‑term objectives.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1448 One of them is :
"...to deepen and enhance service to local communities..." (As read)
LISTNUM 1 \l 1449 If you had stopped there, I think I would have had no problem with it.
"...through broader interregional perspectives." (As read)
LISTNUM 1 \l 1450 For some reason that sounds like a contradiction in terms to me because isn't interregional suspiciously like national?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1451 So I just don't think I understand that. Can you tell me how that approach works? How do you broaden what you are calling today local by going into something that is interregional?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1452 MR. SOLE: Commissioner Langford, it is historic. I think when you look at Citytv you will see rebroadcasters in Ottawa and in London. We do not intentionally ignore those interregional stories when they co‑relate or when they reflect on a broader expression.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1453 And the same thing is true with the former Craig stations with Lethbridge and Red Deer.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1454 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: So it is context, is that what you are saying?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1455 MR. SOLE: It is acknowledging something beyond the metropolitan area of these cities and connectivity to them.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1456 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Even in Toronto that happens?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1457 MR. SOLE: Well, there is Ottawa and London coverage from the Woodstock transmitter. There is coverage of ‑‑ I don't like this distinction ‑‑ between 416 and 905, between east and west, the Golden Horseshoe, Cottage Country ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 1458 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: So it is regional at that level?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1459 MR. SOLE: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1460 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: We are not talking about Ontario and ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 1461 MR. SOLE: No.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1462 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: ‑‑ the western provinces or something.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1463 MR. SOLE: It is contiguous.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1464 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Ah! Okay.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1465 THE CHAIRPERSON: Intraregional.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1466 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Intraregional as opposed to interregional.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1467 We both had the same Latin teacher 40 years ago but he did better at it than I did actually.
‑‑‑ Laughter / Rires
LISTNUM 1 \l 1468 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Moving right along, I was struck, when I watched the television show that you gave us here this morning, by the pictures because I couldn't decipher the words. I didn't understand some of them but I am going to have a chat later with commissioners Cugini and del Val.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1469 And I realized ‑‑ even I realized that there were common links between this coverage. There seemed to be something going on at City Hall and a lot of people in their own ways were interested in it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1470 I wondered to myself whether I could borrow some of the kind of overlap questioning that Commissioner Cugini was talking about on a national level, if I can call it that, on a big priority programming level and bring that down to the local level and I wondered whether there might not be a lot more room for programming synergies there.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1471 You might have to dub some of the language but have you given that any thought?
LISTNUM 1 \l 1472 MR. MERSON: We have given it a lot of thought and we are really fortunate to have Stephen Hurlbut who is in charge of City news here today and Renato Zane who is in charge of OMNI's news here today.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1473 The thing about City is every aspect of the business was as synergized as it possibly could get. I mean there was sort of a multiplicity of uses of a particular piece of footage or programming and it is a level of synergy that is just not attainable to us.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1474 As we look at the news operations you could see ‑‑ and we wanted to demonstrate by that clip just how completely and utterly different the news as it is presented on the stations is.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1475 Firstly, they are in different languages. Secondly, the editorial voice is completely different, they are speaking to different communities with different concerns. And thirdly, the way it is commissioned and the way you send people out to do these kinds of things is so completely different.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1476 Within our own operations we have a number of news operations. We have 680 News in radio and we have OMNI in television and we have Maclean's as a magazine.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1477 If you looked at the level to which there is any sort of cross‑utilization of product or commissioning of footage or stories from those businesses, you would argue that we had failed miserably if there was any attempt.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1478 They are utterly different. They speak to different audiences. It would be catastrophic if we were to try to change or dilute their focus because it is a very competitive world out there and the audience sees right through it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1479 I want just to hand off to Stephen first to talk a little bit about City and its focus.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1480 Over to you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1481 MR. HURLBUT: Thanks, Rael.
LISTNUM 1 \l 1482 Mr. Commissioner, City sees itself as the unconventional conventional station but, by and large, we play in the mainstream and for 25 years every night at 6:00 we will watch CTV, CBC, Global, NCH and Citytv at the same time. We do not monitor OMNI.