ARCHIVED -  Decision CRTC 86-347

This page has been archived on the Web

Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. Archived Decisions, Notices and Orders (DNOs) remain in effect except to the extent they are amended or reversed by the Commission, a court, or the government. The text of archived information has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Changes to DNOs are published as “dashes” to the original DNO number. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats by contacting us.

Decision

Ottawa, 31 March 1986
Decision CRTC 86-347
Vidéotron Ltée
Montreal, Laval, Châteauguay, Sainte-Thérèse, La Prairie, Beloeil, Saint-Jean and Saint-Jérôme, (Quebec) - 852171800 - 852172600 - 852173400 - 852174200 - 852176700 852178300 - 852181700 - 852175900 - 852177500 - 852179100 - 852180900
CF Cable TV Inc.Montreal and Laval, Quebec - 853368900 - 853267100
Télécâble des Milles-Iles Inc.Terrebonne, Quebec - 852455500
Transvision Rive-Sud Inc.Boucherville, Quebec - 852291400
Pursuant to Public Notice CRTC 1985-284 dated 31 December 1985 the Commission approves the applications submitted by the broadcasting receiving undertakings serving the communities mentioned above to amend the condition of licence prohibiting all types of advertising on special programming channels, in order to include video and/or audio sponsorship mention, including logo, name, address and type of business undertaking in program credits on the ethnic channels of these cable systems.
The Commission also approves the proposals to change the authorized distribution of the multicultural special programming service of these undertakings by adding the use of French- or English-language subtitles to feature films where these are an integral part of the original production.
The distribution of ethnic programs on special programming channels started in the Montreal area in 1980. This service has gradually expanded and is now being used by approximately thirty different ethnic groups.
In Public Notice CRTC 1985-175 dated 2 August 1985, entitled "Review of Non-Programming Services and Cable Advertising - 28 October 1985 Public Hearing - Hull, Quebec", the Commission stated in particular:
The Commission's policy with respect to advertising on cable-originated services is contained in its 26 March 1979 Review of Certain Cable Television Programming Issues. In it the Commission notes that "cable licensees should not expect to benefit from both subscriber revenue and commercial advertising in competition with broadcasters".
In the same notice, the Commission pointed out that cable advertising has been an issue of concern both to it and to the cable industry for many years, and that the Commission has consistently denied, with few exceptions, a variety of proposals for the distribution of cable advertising on community or special programming channels on the grounds that it was the Commission's determination that a general policy review would first be in order.
The Commission therefore invited interested parties to comment on a series of questions on cable advertising, which were examined in detail at the 29 October 1985 public hearing. Subsequently, on 13 February 1986, the Commission issued its "Proposed Regulations Respecting Cable Television Broadcasting Receiving Undertakings" (Public Notice CRTC 1986-27), in which it put forward specific proposals to allow the use of contra, credit and sponsorship messages on the community channel. The Commission added:
These proposals should give increased flexibility and enable cable licensees to meet their revenue requirements and, in the Commission's view, reduce the need to develop new sources of revenues via the community or other cable channels. The Commission is therefore proposing that the existing role of the community channel and special programming channels be maintained by prohibiting conventional advertising on the community channel or local inserts on specialty programming services.
In addition, in its Public Notice CRTC 1985-139 dated 4 July 1985, entitled "A Broadcasting Policy Reflecting Canada's Linguistic and Cultural Diversity", the Commission stated with regard to ethnic programming on specialty programming channels:
While the Commission believes that cable television systems should not compete with conventional commercial broadcasters for advertising revenues, the Commission has allowed a modification to its policy in exceptional circumstances, as was the case with Vancouver Cablevision Limited [now Rogers Cable TV, Vancouver] - (DecisIon CRTC 82-156).
The present applicants, following the example of Rogers Cable TV in Vancouver, are among the few cable undertakings in the country that have been authorized to offer special programming channels devoted to the ethnic communities that they are licensed to serve. These undertakings carry a large number of ethnic programs of special interest to these markets and thus fill a programming need that could not otherwise be met on their community channels.
The applicants also state that their proposals will facilitate access to the channel reserved for ethnic programming by the entire ethnic population of the Montreal area. They also propose to enhance programming quality by making more funds available.
Like Vancouver, the Montreal area, encompasses one of the richest, most significant cultural mosaics in Canada. Therefore, given the size and diversity of the ethnic communities in the Montreal area as well as the need to maintain such a service at the present time, the Commission has decided that an exception to its present policy with respect to the use of sponsorship credits on special programming channels is warranted in this case.
For the same reasons, the Commission considers that an exceptIon to its policy as stated in the 26 March 1979 review of cable television programming issues, which does not permit the carriage of feature films which have been produced in one language and dubbed or subtitled in another, is also warranted under the circumstances. The Commission reiterates, however, that French- or English-language subtitles in feature films may only be used where these are an integral part of the original production.
The Commission has taken note of the fact that the ethnic channel of these undertakings is presently shared with other services, and it expects that this channel will be used exclusively for ethnic programming. The Commission will review the authority herein granted when the licences for these undertakings come up for renewal.
Fernand Bélisle Secretary General

Date modified: