ARCHIVED - Broadcasting Procedural Letter Addressed to Various Parties

Ottawa, 15 June 2016

By E-mail: sylvie.courtemanche@corusent.com, susan.wheeler@rci.rogers.com, kevin.goldstein@bellmedia.ca, Tabet.Peggy@Quebecor.com, ldoyon@groupevmedia.ca,  

Re: Additional information in regard to the new Policy framework for local and community television (Applications 2016-0020-6, 2016-0022-1, 2016-0017-2, 2016-0019-8, 2016-0012-2, 2016-0015-6, 2016-0009-9, 2016-0018-0, 2016-0405-9)

This is in reference to your applications to renew the broadcasting licences for your various conventional television stations, which will expire on 31 August 2017. These questions pertain to the Commission’s new policy on local and community television programming, as outlined in Broadcasting Regulatory Policy CRTC-2016-224, Policy framework for local and community television, issued today.

In order to complete your application, please provide the following information:

Questions applicable to all groups:

1. English language stations: In light of the Commission’s new policy framework on local programming and community television outlined in Broadcasting Regulatory Policy CRTC-2016-224 (the new policy), please confirm that you will adhere to the standard conditions of licence that require stations to broadcast at least 7 hours of locally relevant programming per week in non-metropolitan markets and at least 14 hours per week in metropolitan markets.

2. All of the groups: Please report on historical expenditures and exhibition levels of local news programming for your group by completing Appendix 1 (Historical expenditures and exhibition levels of locally reflective and relevant news). In addition, provide projections for local news programming the 2015-2016 broadcasting year for your television stations, and submit a revised final 2015-2016 broadcasting year report by 14 October 2016.

   1. In the new policy, the Commission stated that it considers it appropriate to require that a minimum level of local programming be devoted to local news. Specifically, all licensees will be required to broadcast a minimum level of local news and to allocate a minimum percentage of their previous year’s revenues to such programming, with the exhibition and expenditure levels to be determined at licence renewal based on historical levels. Please provide the levels of expenditures and exhibition on locally reflective news that would be imposed as conditions of licence based on the data requested in the appendix 1.

3. Please provide estimates by station on how much you expect to receive from associated or affiliated Broadcasting Distribution Undertakings (BDUs), as per the policy’s new spending flexibility over the next licence term, if the situation applies. Submit revised financial projections for the affected stations.

Questions to the specific groups

Groupe TVA

4. In the new policy, the Commission announced that it considers that it would be appropriate to maintain distinct local programming requirements for licensees, and that this requirement could be met by showing programming that met the definition of “locally relevant programming” as set out in the new policy.

   1. Please confirm that you will maintain these levels for each of your stations over the next licence term as conditions of licence. If you propose any amendments, please provide a detailed rationale, including financial evidence and analysis, to support your proposal.

   2. Please propose an exhibition requirement in the form of a condition of licence for local programming, as defined in the new policy, for CFTM-DT Montréal. Please provide a detailed rationale, including financial evidence and analysis, to support your proposal.

5. In light of the new policy, please explain how Canadian Programming Expenditures (CPE) on news programming will be allocated between your television stations and your discretionary services. Specifically, please elaborate on the synergies between television stations and discretionary news services in terms of shared news programming and how these synergies affect or contribute to the fulfilment of local news programming requirements as defined in the new policy.

   1. In addition, please elaborate on how local news programming, as defined in the new policy,that is shared between television stations and discretionary news services will be counted in terms of exhibition hours towards meeting conditions of licences.

Groupe V (Remstar):

6. In Change in the effective control of TQS inc. programming undertakings CFJP-TV Montréal, CFJP-DT Montréal, CFAP-TV Québec, CFKM-TV Trois-Rivières, CFKS-TV Sherbrooke, CFRS-TV Saguenay and of the TQS network, Broadcasting decision CRTC 2008-129, 26 June 2008, the Commission approved the change of the effective control of TQS inc (TQS) to Remstar Diffusion inc. Given TQS’ technical bankruptcy situation at the time, the Commission exceptionally imposed conditions of licence with reduced requirements with respect to the broadcast of local programming, including local news, as follows:

   Minimum exhibition hours of local programming required (per broadcast week) per station

   Stations	Minimum exhibition hours of local programming required (per broadcast week)
   CFAP-DT Québec	10 hours
   CFRS-DT Saguenay	1.5 hours
   CFKS-DT Sherbrooke	1.5 hours
   CFKM-DT Trois-Rivières	1.5 hours

   In Broadcasting Decision 2012-243, the Commission re-examined the conditions of licence imposed on Groupe V and noted the commitments made by the licensee regarding the broadcast of segments of local news per broadcast week, as shown in the table below :

   Proposed commitments (2012-2014) per station

   Stations	Quantity of newcast programming to be required by condition of licence and commitment (per broadcast week)	Projected quantity of local news segments (per broadcast week)
   CFJP-DT Montréal	2.5 hours	60 minutes
   CFAP-DT Québec	2.5 hours	60 minutes
   CFRS-DT Saguenay	1.5 hours	36 minutes
   CFKS-DT Sherbrooke	1.5 hours	36 minutes
   CFKM-DT Trois-Rivières	1.5 hours	36 minutes

   In the new policy, the Commission determined that local programming requirements for commercial French-language stations will continue to be assessed on a case-by-case basis, using a benchmark minimum of five hours of local programming per week, and that this requirement could be met by showing programming that met the definition of “locally relevant programming” as set out in the new policy.

   1. Please comment on the imposition of a condition of licence that would require a minimum of five hours of local programming per broadcast week by each of your stations, considering that further to the new policy, these stations are now eligible to the Independent Local News Fund (ILNF).

   2. If you are of the view that a different requirement should be imposed on your stations, including if you are proposing to maintain the temporary measures exceptionally granted to Groupe V with regard to local programming, please provide a detailed rationale, including financial evidence and analysis, to support your proposal.

Corus

7. In light of the new policy, please explain how Canadian Programming Expenditures (CPE) on news programming will be allocated between your television stations and your discretionary services. Specifically, please elaborate on the synergies between television services and discretionary news services in terms of shared news programming and how these synergies affect or contribute to the fulfilment of local news programming requirements, as defined in the new policy.

   1. In addition, please elaborate on how local news programming, as defined in the new policy, that is shared between television stations and discretionary news services will be counted in terms of exhibition hours towards meeting conditions of licences.

Split-feed programming

8. CIHF-DT Halifax and its transmitters, as well as CHNB-DT Saint John and its transmitters, currently have a commitment to broadcast 2.5 hours a week of distinct local programming for the respective markets.

   In its licence renewal letter dated 8 February 2016, it was requested that Corus describe how its stations serving the Halifax and Saint John markets have fulfilled the above-noted commitment.

   In its response to this request, Corus raised concerns with respect to the application of the requirement for 2.5 hours per broadcast week of distinct local programming. However, Corus’ description regarding how it has met this requirement appears to be incomplete. In light of the above, please describe:

   Whether the distinct programming would meet the requirement that states that stations must broadcast at least 7 hours of local programming, as defined in the new policy, per week in non-metropolitan markets and at least 14 hours per week in metropolitan markets.

9. In its application, Corus stated that its station located in Kingston (CKWS-DT) ceased all split-feed programming prior to 2011, meaning that the programming is identical in Prescott (CKWS-TV-2). However, both of the Corus’ station mentioned above operate under distinct licences. 

   In light of this, please:

   1. Provide a rational as to why the stations serving Kingston and Prescott should have two separate licences, rather than a single licence.

   2. Confirm whether Corus’ station in Prescott broadcasts distinct commercial advertisements from those broadcast on CKWS-DT, Kingston.

   3. Comment on the Commissions determination stating that all licensees will be required to broadcast a minimum level of local news programming, as defined in the policy.

Commercial availabilities

10. Corus’ stations CKWS-DT-1 Brighton and CHEX-TV-2 Oshawa are permitted to broadcast a maximum of 6.5% of the commercial availabilities for each hour of original, station-produced programming broadcast exclusively on both stations each week separately from those broadcast on CKWS-TV Kingston and CHEX-TV Peterborough, respectively. In light of this, please:

    1. Describe how Corus has availed itself of this opportunity;

    2. Demonstrate how Corus has been in compliance over the period of the current licence term with respect to the above-mentioned COL; and

    3. Indicate whether the original, station-produced programming broadcast is locally reflective or locally relevant programming.

Cover over commercials

11. As per condition of licence (COL) 1 of Appendix 2 to Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2011-445, set out in Additional condition of licence for CHAN-DT Vancouver and its transmitters, Corus is required to permit the licensees of television stations CFJC-TV Kamloops, CKPG-TV Prince George, CJDC-TV Dawson Creek, CFTK-TV Terrace, and any other privately owned conventional television station operating in the interior of British Columbia, to cover over those commercials that are not carried on all Global-branded television stations owned or controlled by Shaw Media Inc., with commercials sold by the above-noted stations. This COL further requires that such covering over shall be at the above-noted stations’ expense.

    As described in the new policy, for the most part, independent stations are now distributed by DTH BDUs, and the degree of program duplication in the markets they serve has been reduced. As a result, privately owned television stations are less at risk of the potential harm caused by audience fragmentation.

    Furthermore, the Commission will replace the SMLPF with the Independent Local News Fund or ILNF as of 1 September 2017, with the objective of supporting the production of locally reflective news and information by private independent television stations.

    Moreover, as stated in that same policy, as an interim measure, effective 1 September 2016, the Commission will make all stations belonging to vertically integrated ownership groups (VI) ineligible to receive funding from the SMLPF and require the fund to redistribute the funding currently received by those stations among the remaining recipients, according to the SMLPF’s current allocation method.

    In light of the above, please comment on the amendment of this condition of license to delete the reference to CJDC-TV Dawson Creek and CFTK-TV Terrace.

12. In the new policy, the Commission states that all licensees will be required to broadcast a minimum level of local news and to allocate a percentage of their previous year’s revenues to such programming, with the exhibition and expenditure levels to be determined at licence renewal based on historical levels. The Commission further states that it will only count the program segments that meet the definition of local news programming, as defined in the new policy, that it has set out in that policy for the purposes of meeting requirements respecting the broadcast of locally reflective news.

    In its application, Corus proposes to amend its requirement with respect to the number of hours dedicated to the broadcast of distinct local programming on its stations serving Saint John, Lethbridge and Kelowna. Specifically, Corus proposes that the licensees serving the above noted markets would commit to air 3.5 hours of distinct local programming. According to this proposal, there would be an increased commitment from 2.5 hours to 3.5 hours for CHNB-TV serving Saint John, and a reduced commitment from 7 hours to 3.5 hours for CHBC-TV and CISA-TV located in Lethbridge and Kelowna, respectively.

    In light of the above, please answer the following questions:

    1. What proportion of local programming, as defined in the new policy, originating from Corus’ stations in Lethbridge and Kelowna is locally reflective news programming;

    2. In light of the new policy, do you wish to amend your proposal above?

       1. If not, please describe how your proposals are consistent with the new policy

       2. If you determine that your proposals are exceptions to the new policy, please justify why the Commission should grant an exception.

    3. In its renewal application, Corus proposes that CKMI Global Montréal broadcast 7 hours instead of the required 14 hours of local programming. In light of the Commission’s new policy on local programming, as defined in the new policy, which maintains the requirement that no less of 14 hours of Canadian local programming must be broadcast in each broadcast week, does Corus still maintain its proposal as well as its rationale or do you wish to amend your proposal?

       1. If you do not wish to amend your proposal, please describe how it is consistent with the new policy

       2. If you determine that your proposal is an exception to the new policy, please justify why the Commission should grant an exception.

Bell

14. In light of the new policy, please elaborate on how Canadian Programming Expenditures (CPE) on news programming will be allocated between your television stations and your discretionary services. Specifically, please elaborate on the synergies between television services and discretionary news services in terms of shared news programming and how these synergies affect or contribute to the fulfilment of local news programming requirements, as defined in the new policy.

    1. In addition, please elaborate on how local news programming, as defined in the new policy, that is shared between television stations and discretionary news services will be counted in terms of exhibition hours towards meeting conditions of licences.

15. Bell’s licence renewal applications indicate that it intends to shut down 42 conventional television transmitters across the country.

    1. Please confirm whether all of these transmitters are currently operating.

    2. Please elaborate on how many Canadians will be affected by these changes and if these Canadians will still have access to over-the-air television

    3. Please elaborate on how Bell’s ability to  support the production of local news and how the  new policy affects Bell’s plans for the next licence term.

16. In its application, Bell proposes to maintain the following COL for CKCO-TV-3 Oil Springs:

    The licensee may broadcast no more than 6.5% of the commercial availabilities on this station separately from those broadcast on CKCO-DT Kitchener for each hour of station-produced programming broadcast exclusively on the Oil Springs station each week.

    1. Describe how Bell has availed itself of this opportunity;

    2. Demonstrate how Bell has been in compliance over the period of the current licence term with respect to the above-mentioned COL; and

    3. Indicate whether the original, station-produced programming broadcast is locally reflective or locally relevant programming.

17. In its application, Bell proposes to maintain the following COL for CKNY-TV-11 Huntsville:

    The licensee may broadcast no more than 6.5% of the commercial availabilities on this station separately from those broadcast on CKNY-TV North Bay for each hour of station-produced programming broadcast exclusively on the Huntsville station each week.

    1. Describe how Bell has availed itself of this opportunity;

    2. Demonstrate how Bell has been in compliance over the period of the current licence term with respect to the above-mentioned COL; and

    3. Indicate whether the original, station-produced programming broadcast is locally reflective or locally relevant programming.

18. For the service CIVT-DT Vancouver, Bell proposes to maintain COLs 18 and 19:

    18. The licensee shall alter, at its own expense, the signal of CIVT-TV that it provides to the licensees of the cable distribution undertakings serving Terrace, Kamloops, Kelowna, Prince George and Dawson Creek, or their successors, by covering over those commercials that are not carried on all conventional television stations owned or controlled by Bell Media Inc. with program promotions and/or public service announcements.

    19. The licensee shall permit the licensees of television stations CFJC-TV Kamloops, CKPG-TV Prince George, CJDC-TV Dawson Creek and CFTK-TV Terrace to cover over, at their expense, the above-noted program promotions and public service announcements with commercials sold by these four local television stations, provided that the licensees of the cable distribution undertakings serving the four communities concerned have received the necessary regulatory permission to alter the CIVT-TV signal.

    1. Please provide justification for maintaining the condition of licence to support the Bell owned stations in light of the support measures set out in the Commission’s new policy.

19. Currently the services CFRN-TV-4 Ashmont; CFRN-TV-6 and its transmitter CFRN-TV-10 Rocky Mountain House; CFRN-TV-3 Whitecourt are subject to the following COL.

    17.  The licensee may substitute on CFRN-TV-4 Ashmont, CFRN-TV-6 Red Deer and CFRN-TV-3 Whitecourt, for each hour of original station-produced programming broadcast exclusively on the undertaking each week, separate commercial messages in that hour, on each undertaking, for those broadcast by CFRN-TV Edmonton, up to a maximum of 6.5% of the commercial availabilities. 

    Bell proposes to change the COL to only apply to apply to CFRN-TV 6 Red Deer.

    1. Describe how Bell has availed itself of this opportunity;

    2. Demonstrate how Bell has been in compliance over the period of the current licence term with respect to the above-mentioned COL; and

    3. Indicate whether the original, station-produced programming broadcast is locally reflective or locally relevant programming.

    4. Provide justification for this COL to apply only to CFRN-TV-6 Red Deer.

Rogers

20. In light of the new policy, please explain how Canadian Programming Expenditures (CPE) on news programming will be allocated between your television stations and your discretionary services. Specifically, please elaborate on the synergies between television services and discretionary news services in terms of shared news programming and how these synergies affect or contribute to the fulfilment of local news programming requirements, as defined in the new policy.

    1. In addition, please elaborate on how local news programming, as defined in the new policy, that is shared between television stations and discretionary news services will be counted in terms of exhibition hours towards meeting conditions of licences.

21. In your 13 May 2016 submission (Rogers Media Inc. – Licence renewal applications – Second Response to Deficiency Questions (Application no. 2016-0009-9), you provided the number of hours allocated to specific activities in response to questions 5 and 7. Please provide the expenditures associated with the number of hours devoted to these activities

City stations

22. In Section B – Group issues of its licence renewal application, Rogers Media indicates that it is proposing to harmonize its Canadian programming expenditure (CPE) levels at 30% for each service in order to ensure that it achieves a group-level CPE of 30%.  By doing so, Rogers Media has proposed an increase in CPE from 25% to 30% for its City conventional television stations.  Moreover, Rogers Media also proposes to amend the conditions of licence regarding the exhibition of original, local programming for its City stations in Montréal, Winnipeg, Calgary and Edmonton markets.  More specifically, Rogers Media proposes to maintain an original hours requirement but to reduce the number of local hours it is required to produce in certain markets.  Accordingly, Rogers Media proposes to reduce the amount of original, local programming as follows:

    • Montréal: from 15.5 hours per broadcast week to 10 hours;

    • Winnipeg: from 7 hours per broadcast week to 5 hours;

    • Calgary: from 14 hours per broadcast week to 10 hours; and

    • Edmonton: from 14 hours per broadcast week to 10 hours.

    1. In the event the Commission were to deny Rogers Media’s proposal regarding the decrease in exhibition requirements for its City stations, please comment on how this would affect Rogers Media’s programming strategy for these services and if Rogers Media wishes to proceed with the increase in CPE for these services.

    2. In addition, please comment on how the Commission’s new policy with respect to spending flexibility on local programming, as defined in the new policy, affects this proposal.

23. In light of the proposed changes noted above regarding the broadcast of original, local programming on its City stations in Montréal, Winnipeg, Calgary and Edmonton, as well as Rogers Media’s proposal to remove the requirement that its Montréal City station provide an English-language morning program and a weekly half-hour sports program, please respond to the following questions:

    1. Are the proposed changes necessary to ensure the viability of these stations?

    2. Should the Commission approve these proposals, what impact would this have on the stations’ revenues and expenses?  Please provide estimates of the impacts on each station.

OMNI stations

24. In its licence renewal application and in its application for a new discretionary service with mandatory distribution pursuant to section 9(1)(h) of the Broadcasting Act, Rogers Media states that, for its OMNI stations, “local current affairs programming would offer a more viable cost structure than newscasts” and that “these changes have helped OMNI’s financial circumstances to improve to a small degree over the past six months”. 

    1. Please quantify the impacts that these programming changes have had on revenues and expenses, by station.

    2. Please provide the cost of operating news bureaus specific to OMNI in Victoria and Ottawa, by city.

    3. We note the following proposals relating to the OMNI stations’ conditions of licence:

       • Removal of the obligation to provide two hours of original described video programming per broadcast week;

       • Reduction in OMNI’s broad service mandate from 20 to 15 distinct ethnic groups and 15 distinct languages;

       • Removal of the COL that requires the licensees to devote no more than 16% of programming to programs in any one foreign language during each broadcast month.

       For each of these proposed changes, please indicate whether or not the changes are necessary for the financial viability of the concerned stations.  If so, describe the impacts on the stations.

25. We note the following proposals relating to the OMNI stations’ conditions of licence:

    • Amendment to the local programming requirements for the OMNI Alberta stations to allow the 3.5 (Calgary) and 1.5 (Edmonton) local programming hours per broadcast week to be measured annually to provide some programming flexibility; and

      1. Please indicate whether or not this change is necessary for the financial viability of the concerned stations.  If so, describe the impacts on the stations.

      2. In addition, please comment on the impact of these proposed amendments with respect to the Commission’s new policy on local news programming, as defined in the new policy.

      3. While such an amendment would allow for programming flexibility for these stations, please describe how Rogers Media intends to ensure that each service will continue to meet the needs of its viewers regarding the broadcast of local programming, as defined in the new policy, on a weekly basis in these markets.

You are required to provide the information/document(s) noted above on the public record by 27 June 2016. Please repeat each question in your answer.

The Commission requires that you submit your documents electronically using the secured service “My CRTC Account” (Partner Log In or GCKey) and fill in the “Broadcasting and Telecom Cover page” located on this web page. On this web page, you will also find a link to information on the submission of applications to the Commission “Submitting applications and other documents to the CRTC using My CRTC Account.” 

A copy of this letter and all related correspondence will be added to the public record of the proceeding.

Yours sincerely,

Julie St-Pierre,
Senior Policy Analyst, French-language Television Applications
Broadcasting
Julie.st-pierre@crtc.gc.ca

Pierre-Marc Perreault
Manager, English-language Television Applications
Broadcasting
Pierre-marc.perreault@crtc.gc.ca

Cc: karen.clout@sjrb.ca , david.bennett@bell.ca, Alain.Strati@bellmedia.ca, serge.bellerose55@gmail.com , louma.haffar@quebecor.com

Appendix 1

Historical expenditures and exhibition levels of locally reflective and relevant news^{Footnote 1}

Date modified:

2016-06-15