ARCHIVED - Public Notice CRTC 1999-30
This page has been archived on the Web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.
Public Notice |
|
Ottawa, 18 February 1999
|
|
Public Notice CRTC 1999-30
|
Call for comments on a proposed new policy for campus radio |
|
Table of Contents
|
Summary |
|
Background
Objectives for the sector The consultation process Description of the campus radio sector |
|
The Proposed Policy
Programming commitments Canadian Content Canadian content level for category 2 music Distribution of Canadian category 2 selections Canadian content level for category 3 music New forms of expression Approach to French-language stations Structure of the board of directors Advertising Developmental stations Hours of broadcast Station-produced programming Local talent development Approach to instructional stations Regulatory Approach High school and carrier current stations |
|
Other matters
Harmonizing policy frameworks Ethnocultural programming Commission accessibility |
|
Procedural matters
|
|
Appendix 1 - Clarification of certain matters
|
|
Appendix 2 - Music categories and subcategories as defined in Public Notice CRTC 1991-19
|
|
Summary
|
|
This document sets out a proposed policy for campus radio and invites campus broadcasters and other interested parties to comment on it. The proposed policy represents the Commission's general direction on the issues raised, but not its final position. The Commission welcomes comments on any of its proposals and on any other topic relevant to campus radio. The deadline for the Commission to receive comments is 12 April 1999.
|
|
Campus stations are not-for-profit stations associated with institutions of post-secondary education. Their overall mandate is to offer programming that is different in style and substance from the programming offered by other types of radio stations.
|
|
The draft policy covers a number of areas that include:
|
|
various means to ensure that the programming provides an alternative from that provided by other types of stations;
|
|
Canadian music and local talent development;
|
|
the appropriate structure of the board of directors of campus stations;
|
|
policies on advertising on campus stations; and
|
|
specific approaches to French-language and instructional stations.
|
|
The Commission also proposes a streamlined approach for licensing very low-power "developmental" campus stations that would serve as a first step toward the establishment of higher power campus stations.
|
|
In a few cases, the Commission proposes specific questions. These cover areas where the Commission does not consider it has enough information yet to make policy proposals.
|
|
Finally, in appendix 1, the Commission sets out a number of clarifications intended to help campus stations to better understand the Commission's various requirements and procedures.
|
|
Background
|
|
1. In Public Notice CRTC 1997-105 dated 1 August 1997, An Agenda for Reviewing the Commission's Policies for Radio, the Commission set out its plans for reviewing all of its policies for radio in light of the evolving communications environment. As part of this overall agenda, the Commission indicated that it would launch a consultative process with campus broadcasters in the spring of 1998, with a revised policy for campus radio to be issued in the spring of 1999.
|
|
2. The consultation phase of the campus radio review was completed last fall. This notice sets out the Commission's proposals for a revised campus radio policy, based on the issues and concerns raised during the consultation process. All interested parties are invited to provide comments on the Commission's proposals or on any other topic relevant to campus radio.
|
|
3. The Commission has placed a number of relevant documents on the public file for this proceeding and, to the extent possible, on its website as well. This includes results of two research studies, the Music Availability Study for Campus Radio and the Campus Radio Music Use Study. Certain financial data for the campus radio sector have also been placed on the public file. Interested parties are encouraged to review this material.
|
|
4. During the consultation process, some participants asked questions about a number of Commission policies that affect campus stations but are not exclusive to them. These include matters related to the eligibility of organizations to receive money from commercial stations for Canadian talent development, and policies related to programming standards. In Appendix 1, the Commission provides clarifications of these topics. The Commission is not seeking comments on any of these matters. Since these issues do not relate exclusively to campus stations, they are not included as part of the campus radio policy but are covered by separate Commission policies or procedures.
|
|
Objectives for the sector
|
|
5. The Commission's primary objective for the campus radio sector is to provide programming that differs in style and substance from that provided by other elements of the broadcasting system, particularly commercial stations and the CBC. The Commission considers that campus stations add diversity to the broadcasting system by providing alternative programming in both music and spoken word.
|
|
6. The Commission is also interested in exploring ways of streamlining the regulation of campus stations. The Commission considers that the existing campus radio policy, and the application process to which campus stations are subject, may be unnecessarily complex. One of the key questions guiding this review is, therefore: How can the regulatory framework for campus stations be simplified while still ensuring that they provide programming that is different from that provided by other types of stations?
|
|
7. The Commission believes that a healthy and vibrant not-for-profit sector is essential to fulfil the goals of the Broadcasting Act (the Act). Campus stations play a unique and valuable role in the communities they serve. The proposals set out below are intended to ensure that they continue to do so.
|
|
The consultation process
|
|
8. To prepare for this review, consultations were held with campus radio broadcasters and other interested parties over the period from April to September 1998. These include:
|
|
A series of regional consultations with interested parties in April and May 1998 initiated by the National Campus Community Radio Association (NCRA). The NCRA provided a summary of issues raised in these consultations to the Commission.
|
|
Consultations at the NCRA's annual National Campus Radio Conference, held in Victoria, 8-13 June 1998.
|
|
Written consultations with licensed campus stations that did not attend the conference. They were invited to raise any additional issues or concerns.
|
|
A "cross-sectoral" meeting on 17 September 1998 that was attended by representatives of the NCRA, the Canadian Association of Broadcasters and the CBC.
|
|
An informal meeting held on 30 September 1998 between members of the NCRA executive and Commission staff.
|
|
9. Written reports or transcripts of each of these consultations are available on the public file and form part of the public record of this proceeding.
|
|
Description of the campus radio sector
|
|
10. The Commission has licensed 43 campus stations to date. Of these, 38 are English-language, four are French-language, and one is bilingual.
|
|
11. The existing campus radio policy identifies two kinds of campus stations: campus/community and instructional. The formal definitions of these two types of stations are set out in Public Notice CRTC 1992-38. In summary though, instructional stations are closely associated with formal broadcasting courses and are oriented to training professional broadcasters. Campus/community stations, on the other hand, are not closely associated with broadcasting courses and feature programming produced by volunteers who often have no interest in participating in the commercial radio industry.
|
|
12. Of the 43 licensed campus stations, seven are instructional stations, all of them operating in English.
|
|
13. Programming provided by campus stations is generally a mix of spoken word and "alternative" music (ranging from non-commercial rock and pop to specialized, emerging or experimental musical genres). The spoken word programming often addresses topics not covered by other media, including programming targeted to local ethnocultural communities and to minority groups within the community.
|
|
14. Campus stations, by definition, are owned or controlled by not-for-profit organizations. They are not driven by the necessity of making money, as are commercial stations. These stations operate with limited financial and other resources and generally achieve lower levels of listenership relative to other sectors of the radio industry.
|
|
15. Most campus radio stations derive revenues from up to three sources in various combinations: student levies, advertising and direct financial donations from the public. Lack of stable funding is often a concern to campus stations.
|
|
16. Campus radio stations rely almost exclusively on volunteers for programming and other station operations. Most stations have fewer than five full-time paid staff, and sometimes just one or two. There is often a high turnover in paid staff.
|
|
The Proposed Policy
|
|
17. This section of the document considers various elements of the Commission's campus radio policy. Each section includes:
|
|
the Commission's current approach;
|
|
a discussion of concerns raised either in the consultations or by the Commission; and
|
|
the Commission's proposed future approach.
|
|
18. In a few cases, where the Commission does not consider that it has enough information to make a proposal, questions are asked instead.
|
|
19. The existing campus radio policy is set out in Public Notice CRTC 1992-38, Policies for Community and Campus Radio, and amended in Public Notice CRTC 1992-72, A Review of the CRTC's Regulations and Policies for Radio, and Public Notice CRTC 1993-38, Policies for Local Programming on Commercial Radio Stations and Advertising on Campus Stations.
|
|
Programming commitments
|
|
20. Under the existing policy, campus stations are required to adhere to a set of commitments concerning the type of programming they will provide. These commitments are set out in the campus radio policy and are currently reflected in each station's promise of performance (PoP), to which adherence is required by condition of licence.
|
|
21. The programming requirements to which campus stations are currently subject are summarized below. Please note that all music categories and subcategories are defined in appendix 2 attached to this notice.
|
|
At least 25% of programming broadcast on campus stations should be spoken word. Specialized spoken word presentations, such as public and community affairs programs, should be included in the schedule.
|
|
At least 20% of music played on campus stations should come from subcategories other than "Pop, Rock and Dance" (subcategory 21). At least 5% of the music played should come from category 3 (Traditional and Special Interest Music). The remaining 15% may come from category 3 or from subcategories of category 2 other than "Pop, Rock and Dance."
|
|
The level of hits broadcast each week should not exceed 15% of all musical selections for campus/community stations or 30% for instructional stations. This limitation was not applied to French-language stations in view of the inadequacy, at the time the existing policy was developed, of the available French-language hit charts as a measuring tool.
|
|
Campus/community stations should not repeat any non-Canadian musical selection more than 10 times in a broadcast week. For instructional stations the limit is 18 times per broadcast week.
|
|
Campus/community stations are expected to devote at least 15% of each broadcast week to focused spoken word programs, specialized block programs that showcase particular types of music, or programs targeted to identifiable groups within the community.
|
|
22. Instructional and French-language campus stations are subject to specific requirements, in recognition of their particular contributions to the broadcasting system. These requirements are discussed separately in the relevant sections below.
|
|
23. In the consultation process, campus stations indicated they were generally satisfied with the programming requirements in the existing policy. Some campus radio representatives suggested that these requirements ensure that campus stations facing financial or other pressures do not adopt a more commercial sound in order to maximize revenues.
|
|
24. The NCRA proposed that the maximum percentage of hit selections that campus/community stations are permitted to broadcast could be reduced from 15% to 10%.
|
|
25. Many participants expressed concern about the Commission's music categories and their definitions. In particular, some parties questioned the extent to which the limitation on music from subcategory 21 (Pop, Rock and Dance) helps to ensure that campus stations provide musical diversity.
|
|
26. The Commission notes that some music played by campus stations may contribute significantly to the musical diversity of the broadcasting system, thereby fulfilling the spirit of campus radio's diversity mandate, but still fall within subcategory 21 (Pop, Rock and Dance). Subcategory 21 captures a wide range of music, from Top 40 hits to music in genres not played by commercial stations. Much of this music provides an alternative to the music provided by commercial stations and increases diversity in the radio industry. In this sense, the Commission notes that limiting the amount of music from subcategory 21 is not necessarily an effective means of ensuring that campus stations provide musical diversity.
|
|
27. With respect to music from category 3, the Commission notes that few commercial stations currently play music from this category. For this reason, the category 3 music broadcast by campus stations clearly adds to the musical diversity provided by campus radio in the broadcasting system.
|
|
28. More generally, the Commission considers that it may be appropriate to focus on key programming commitments that seem to be most important in defining the alternative sound of campus stations. These commitments should be reasonably simple to understand and apply, and should prevent, to the extent possible, campus stations from providing programming that resembles that of other broadcasters.
|
|
29. The Commission considers that a very low hit level, a high spoken word requirement, and a minimum amount of category 3 music, may best meet these criteria.
|
|
30.For these reasons, the Commission proposes the following approach to programming commitments in the revised campus radio policy:
|
|
At least 25% of programming broadcast on campus stations should be spoken word. Specialized spoken word presentations, such as public and community affairs programs, should be included in the schedule.
|
|
At least 5% of music played on campus stations should come from category 3 (Traditional and Special Interest Music).
|
|
The level of hits broadcast each week should not exceed 10% of all musical selections for campus/community stations or 30% for instructional stations.
|
|
The remaining requirements to which English-language campus/community stations are currently subject will be removed.
|
|
Canadian content
|
|
31. Campus stations raised a number of issues relating to Canadian content during the consultations. To learn more about these issues, the Commission commissioned a research study on the availability of Canadian music appropriate for campus stations. The Music Availability Study for Campus Radio has been placed on the public file of this proceeding. In addition, the Commission undertook a study of the current music use patterns of campus stations. Aggregated results of this study have also been added to the public file. Interested parties are invited to consult this material.
|
|
Canadian content level for category 2 music
|
|
32. Category 2 music refers to general music. The definition of category 2 music is set out in Appendix 2 attached to this notice.
|
|
33. Following the development of its new policy for commercial radio, the Commission amended the regulations that apply to commercial stations to increase the weekly level of Canadian content required for category 2 selections from 30% to 35%.
|
|
34. In the campus radio consultation process, campus stations confirmed their support for local and alternative Canadian musical artists but expressed concern that a lower amount of Canadian recorded music is available in certain new and emerging musical genres. Because of these concerns, campus stations suggested that the Canadian content level for category 2 music should remain at 30%.
|
|
35. The music availability study found, among other things, that:
|
|
The campus radio sector's mandate to play music not heard on other forms of media dictates that it devote programming to musical genres that are still new and relatively unknown to Canadian audiences and producers.
|
|
Campus stations appear to have difficulty finding Canadian material in certain genres, particularly the genres known as "urban", "electronica", and "international" or "world" music.
|
|
The limited availability of Canadian music in these genres appears to be due to two major factors: a lack of Canadian material being produced in them, and a general lack of national promotion and distribution of recordings. Campus stations therefore find it difficult to obtain new recordings or to know what recordings are available.
|
|
Campus stations rely predominantly on small, independent music sources that have insufficient resources to promote their artists and music nationally. These problems tend to affect stations in smaller markets the most.
|
|
36. The study explains how the terms "urban", "electronica" and "international" music were used and lists the styles of music that fall into each category for the purposes of the study. The Commission notes that some of these terms include certain genres of music that are played by commercial stations and are therefore less appropriate for broadcast by campus stations. The Commission is also aware that the use of the term "urban" music may be contentious and is therefore open to any suggestions for a more appropriate term.
|
|
37. It should be noted that the study also found a relatively high availability of Canadian music in certain genres appropriate for campus radio airplay, including "indie pop", "alternative rock" and "folk/acoustic" music.
|
|
38. The Commission considers that playing Canadian music, particularly Canadian music not played by other radio stations, is a vital part of campus radio's mandate to provide alternative programming. Moreover, the Commission is convinced that there is an adequate supply of Canadian recordings available in many established musical genres to support an increase in the required level of Canadian category 2 music on campus stations.
|
|
39. Campus stations help to introduce new musical genres, which may later be adopted by commercial stations. This, in turn, may result in more Canadian recordings in these genres. In this sense, the Commission considers that campus stations may have a special role to play in developing Canadian creative talent in new and emerging musical genres.
|
|
40. The Commission notes that some, but not all, campus stations, devote a significant proportion of their schedules to programs featuring music in these genres, and considers that this programming contributes to the diversity of music available in the broadcasting system.
|
|
41.Based on all of these factors, the Commission proposes to increase the minimum level of Canadian content in category 2 that campus stations are required to broadcast from 30% to 35% over the broadcast week.
|
|
42. In order to ensure that this increased level of Canadian content does not act as a disincentive for campus stations to broadcast music in new and emerging genres in which less Canadian music is available, the Commission proposes to establish a separate Canadian content level for periods of programming devoted to musical genres where the availability of Canadian music is low.
|
|
43. Under this proposal, campus stations would be permitted to exclude programming periods (generally specialty music shows) devoted to low-availability musical genres from the calculation of their compliance with the Canadian content regulations, provided that they meet the separate level of Canadian content specified for these programming periods.
|
|
44. The Commission expects that these low-availability musical genres will encompass the genres identified as such in the music availability study, particularly "urban", "electronica" and "international" music. The Commission invites comments from all interested parties on the following questions:
|
|
(1) Are there musical genres that fall under the definition of category 2 (general music) and that are appropriate for airplay by campus stations in which there is a low availability of Canadian music? If so, what are these genres?
|
|
(2) How may these genres be defined so as to clearly distinguish them from other musical genres, including genres that are less appropriate for campus stations because they are commonly played by commercial stations?
|
|
(3) What would be the appropriate level of Canadian content for periods of programming devoted to music in the genres defined above?
|
|
Distribution of Canadian category 2 selections
|
|
45. The Canadian content regulations that currently apply to campus stations require that Canadian selections be scheduled "in a reasonable manner throughout each broadcast day."
|
|
46. Further, under the existing campus radio policy, reasonable distribution is defined as follows:
|
|
at least 25% of popular music selections broadcast between 6 a.m. and 7 p.m. Monday through Friday should be Canadian;
|
|
Canadian selections should receive reasonably even distribution throughout these dayparts and throughout the broadcast week; and
|
|
there should be a significant presence of Canadian music in high audience periods, these traditionally being the morning and afternoon drive periods.
|
|
47. Following the commercial radio review, the Commission amended the regulations applicable to commercial radio broadcasters to require that the minimum level of Canadian content for category 2 musical selections be met over the broadcast week as well as between 6:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
|
|
48. During the consultation process, campus stations suggested that there is no need to introduce more stringent distribution requirements, such as those that now apply to commercial stations. Participants noted that campus stations generally use a block programming format, in which shows on specific themes, subjects or musical genres are scheduled at specific times of the day. Further, they believed that campus radio listening patterns differ from those of other sectors of radio, with different groups of listeners tuning in to specific programs. The effect of these factors, they suggested, was that the level of Canadian musical selections varies depending on the nature of the programs rather than on the time of day. They also considered that periods of high and low listening are less clearly defined for campus stations than for other kinds of radio stations.
|
|
49. The Commission agrees that the use of block programming formats by campus stations probably has an effect on the distribution of Canadian musical selections. Further, the Commission notes that listenership data comparing campus radio listening to all radio listening tend to suggest that campus radio listenership patterns differ from those of other stations. Finally, the aggregated results of the campus radio music use study do not suggest that campus stations are generally broadcasting lower levels of Canadian content between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. from Monday to Friday.
|
|
50. Given all of these factors, the Commission does not propose to introduce a formal distribution requirement for campus radio. Further, the Commission proposes to amend its regulations to remove the requirements for campus stations that Canadian selections be distributed "in a reasonable manner throughout each broadcast day." Instead, the Commission proposes to indicate in its campus radio policy that it expects Canadian category 2 musical selections to be scheduled in a reasonable manner throughout the broadcast day, taking into consideration the unique programming and listenership patterns of campus radio.
|
|
Canadian content level for category 3 music
|
|
51. Category 3 music encompasses traditional and special interest music. The definition of category 3 music is set out in Appendix 2 attached to this notice.
|
|
52. As part of the new commercial radio policy set out in Public Notice CRTC 1998-41, the Commission now expects commercial radio licensees that broadcast significant amounts of category 3 music to propose, in the context of licence renewal applications, increases in the level of Canadian category 3 music they play.
|
|
53. Public Notice CRTC 1998-41 also notes that:
|
|
Most of the category 3 music that is programmed on Canadian radio is broadcast on stations owned and operated by the CBC and on not-for-profit stations. The appropriate level of Canadian music for these stations will be considered during the separate reviews for these sectors proposed by the Commission in Public Notice CRTC 1997-105.
|
|
54. There was little discussion of the appropriate level of Canadian content for category 3 musical selections during the campus radio consultation process.
|
|
55. The Commission continues to believe, however, that the level of Canadian content for category 3 music could be increased. It notes that the music use study undertaken as part of this review showed that many campus stations may already be exceeding the current required Canadian content level of 10% for category 3 music.
|
|
56. Accordingly, the Commission proposes to increase the required weekly minimum level for Canadian content in category 3 music to 12%.
|
|
New forms of expression
|
|
57. During the consultation process, campus stations raised questions about new forms of artistic expression, such as turntablism and radio art. In particular, campus stations suggested that they should be permitted to include such programming, when it is performed by a Canadian, for the purposes of calculating compliance with the Canadian content regulations.
|
|
58. The Commission understands that turntablism refers to the use of one or more turntables to alter (for example, by scratching, changing the speed, or adding effects) and combine parts of pre-recorded music to the extent that the turntable is used as a musical instrument. Some parties argue that turntablists are musicians who use turntables to create new and unique musical compositions.
|
|
59. The Commission understands that radio art refers to programming pieces in which fragments of recorded noise, speech, music and "found sounds" (that is, sounds produced by everyday machinery or technology or otherwise found in the ordinary environment) are arranged in original or unusual ways.
|
|
60. Both turntablism and radio art exist outside of the campus radio community. While turntablism has existed since the mid-1990s, radio art originated in the 1920s and 1930s. The Music Availability Study for Campus Radio provides more information about the definition and history of both of these forms of expression.
|
|
61. The Commission acknowledges that turntablism and radio art may be forms of artistic expression that are important parts of the programming of some campus stations. It may be argued that since this programming is not generally aired by other radio stations, its broadcast by campus stations adds to the diversity of the broadcasting system. In this sense, the provision of such programming may be seen as part of the role and mandate of campus stations.
|
|
62. However, the Commission does not consider that it has had sufficient input to determine, at this time, whether such programming should qualify as Canadian for the purposes of the Canadian content regulations. For example, in the case of radio art, it is not clear whether radio art comprised primarily of speech or "found sounds" could be considered as a "musical selection" for the purposes of the Canadian content regulations. The Commission notes that, currently, under the Radio Regulations, 1986 (the regulations), only Canadian musical selections are considered in calculating compliance with the Canadian content regulations.
|
|
63. In light of these concerns, the Commission invites responses from all interested parties on the questions set out below:
|
|
(4) Is the programming produced in periods of radio art music? Under what circumstances, if any, could a piece of radio art qualify as a Canadian musical selection? How can the difference between music and spoken word programming be defined?
|
|
(5) Should broadcasters be permitted to include a period of turntablism, performed live on the air by a Canadian, as a Canadian musical selection? If so, how should such periods be defined so as to distinguish them from other ways of presenting music on the air?
|
|
(6) Would the recognition of turntablism and radio art as Canadian musical selections for the purposes of the Canadian content regulations contribute to the objectives of the Act?
|
|
Approach to French-language stations
|
|
64. To date, the Commission has licensed four French-language campus stations as well as one bilingual campus station. All of these are campus/community stations. Issues specific to French-language campus stations were not widely discussed in the consultation process.
|
|
65. Under the existing campus radio policy, all aspects of the policy apply equally to English- and French-language campus stations, with two exceptions:
|
|
At least 65% of the vocal musical selections from category 2 broadcast by French-language campus stations must be in the French language, and these selections must be scheduled in a reasonable manner throughout the day.
|
|
French-language stations are not subject to any requirement concerning hits, because of the inadequacy of the available French-language hit charts as a measuring tool, at the time the existing policy was developed.
|
|
66. The Commission proposes to maintain the requirement for French-language campus stations that a minimum of 65% of the vocal music in category 2 be in the French language.
|
|
67. The Commission will continue to treat bilingual campus stations on a case-by-case basis.
|
|
68. The Commission notes that the distribution of French-language vocal music was raised as an issue during the commercial radio review. As part of its revised regulations for commercial radio licensees, the Commission now requires French-language commercial stations to broadcast a minimum of 55% French-language vocal music between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. from Monday to Friday.
|
|
69. Since this issue was not discussed during the consultation process, the Commission invites interested parties to provide comments on the following questions:
|
|
(7) Would it be appropriate to introduce a requirement concerning the distribution of French-language vocal music for French-language campus stations? If so, should French-language campus stations be subject to a requirement that 55% of selections broadcast between 6:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday be in the French language?
|
|
70. As discussed above, the Commission proposes to remove the requirement that a minimum of 20% of the musical selections broadcast by campus stations be from categories other than subcategory 21 (Pop, Rock and Dance). Instead, the Commission proposes to rely largely on the 10% level of hits for English-language stations, in combination with the requirement for at least 5% category 3 music for all campus stations, to ensure that these stations provide musical diversity.
|
|
71. The hit level does not currently apply to French-language campus stations. The hit restriction was eliminated for all FM French-language stations in 1990 when the Commission released its FM Policy for the Nineties (Public Notice CRTC 1990-111).
|
|
72. Today, commercial French-language stations are not subject to any limitations on the number of hits they may broadcast. Further, the magazine "Palmarès" publishes a list of French-language selections most played by commercial stations.
|
|
73. Given that the role of campus stations is to provide alternative programming, the Commission wishes to consider whether it may be appropriate to establish a limit on the number of French-language "hits" that may be broadcast by French-language campus stations. This could ensure that these stations continue to play alternative French-language musical selections not generally heard on other stations.
|
|
74. The Commission invites interested parties to provide comments on the following questions:
|
|
(8) Should French-language campus stations be subject to a limit on the number of French-language "hits" that may be broadcast, similar to the hit limit for English-language campus stations? If so, how should French-language "hits" be defined? What would the appropriate limit be? If not, is there another regulatory tool that may be used to ensure that French-language stations continue to provide musical diversity?
|
|
75. Finally, the Commission welcomes comments in response to the following general question relating to the development of an appropriate approach to French-language campus stations:
|
|
(9) Should any other elements of the proposed campus radio policy apply differently to French-language campus stations than to English-language campus stations?
|
|
Structure of the board of directors
|
|
76. Under the existing campus radio policy, representatives of the student body, faculty, alumni or administration of the university or college with which a campus station is associated, considered together, are expected to form the majority of the board of directors of the station.
|
|
77. The current policy does not address the representation of members of student government organizations or members of the community at large on campus radio boards of directors.
|
|
78. In the consultations, campus radio representatives asked that the Commission not grant campus radio licences directly to student government organizations, but rather to separate organizations set up specifically for the purpose of holding a licence. These parties expressed concern about the extent to which student government representatives may influence programming in ways that are not consistent with the mandate of campus radio.
|
|
79. The Commission considers that the issues raised by participants in the consultation process appear to relate to balance and continuity in the boards of directors of campus stations. Most campus stations tend to direct their programming to the community at large rather than only to the campus population. The existing policy recognizes the role played by students and institutions in campus stations, but does not address the relationship between these stations and the broader community.
|
|
80. The Commission therefore proposes to replace its current approach to the structure of campus radio boards of directors with the following:
|
|
The Commission will expect the board of directors of a campus radio station to include balanced representation from the student body, other representatives of the associated college or university (for example, faculty or administration), and the community at large. The Commission also encourages campus stations to establish positions on their boards of directors with terms longer than one year.
|
|
81. The Commission proposes to ask each licensee at licence renewal time whether it complies with this policy. Licensees that do not conform to the policy would be asked to explain either why the new policy should not apply to them (for example, because their programming is targeted exclusively to the campus population) or how they are bringing their board structure into line with the policy.
|
|
Advertising
|
|
82. Under the existing campus radio policy, campus stations are permitted to broadcast up to 504 minutes of advertising per week, with a maximum of 4 minutes in any one hour. Of this weekly total, 126 minutes, or 25% of total weekly advertising, may be conventional advertising. The remainder must be restricted advertising.
|
|
83. Restricted advertising is defined in Public Notice CRTC 1993-38 as simple statements of sponsorship that identify the sponsors of a program or of the station. Such statements may incorporate the names of the sponsor, the business address, hours of business and a brief general description of the types of services or products that the sponsor provides, including the price, name and brand name of the product. Such statements must not contain references to convenience, durability or desirability or contain other comparative or competitive reference.
|
|
84. The existing campus radio policy notes that advertising in Canadian programming acquired from other campus or community stations or from not-for-profit syndicators will not be counted in the assessment of compliance with the four minute per hour advertising limit, provided it is restricted advertising.
|
|
85. The existing policy also provides some flexibility for additional advertising on a case-by-case basis in exceptional circumstances, such as where a campus station provides the only private local service in one of the official languages.
|
|
86. In the consultation process, the NCRA suggested that the limit on conventional advertising be removed or reduced, but that the quantitative limits on advertising remain unchanged. The NCRA noted that very few campus stations sell all of the advertising they are permitted to broadcast under the current quantitative limits. It suggested that removing the requirement for restricted advertising would eliminate the administrative burden associated with tracking the number of minutes of unrestricted advertising stations broadcast.
|
|
87. The Commission considers that the NCRA's proposal would provide campus stations with additional flexibility and a simplified regulatory approach, while ensuring that these stations do not increase their overall reliance on advertising revenue.
|
|
88. The Commission therefore proposes to eliminate all requirements concerning "restricted" advertising in the campus radio policy. The policy would permit campus stations to broadcast 504 minutes of conventional advertising each broadcast week with a maximum of 4 minutes in any one hour. All other aspects of the approach to advertising on campus stations would remain unchanged.
|
|
Developmental stations
|
|
89. The current campus radio policy sets out the Commission's approach to applications for low power campus radio stations as follows:
|
|
The campus radio policy will generally apply to all campus stations regardless of their power. On a case-by-case basis, however, the Commission is willing to exercise flexibility when dealing with applications for stations of low power whose signals would only serve the campus of the associated university or college.
|
|
90. To date, very few requests for such flexibility have been received.
|
|
91. In 1993, the Commission introduced its exemption order for carrier current stations that are not distributed by cable. This exemption order was intended to allow carrier current stations to be used as an introductory step toward full-fledged campus FM operations. However, most participants at the consultations indicated that carrier current is not a viable option due to the inherent limitations of the technology.
|
|
92. In the consultations, the NCRA and several other participants proposed the introduction of a simplified regulatory approach to applicants for new campus radio stations who wish to begin broadcasting for a temporary period using a very low power signal that would cover only a university campus or other restricted area.
|
|
93. In effect, this would provide a "developmental" period for potential licensees, in which they could learn how to meet all of their obligations under the Act as well as the Commission's regulations and policies, while simultaneously generating sufficient interest and support from the community to develop a viable permanent operation.
|
|
94. Participants in the consultation made a strong case for the difficulty faced by potential licensees in applying for new campus radio licences. In particular, they noted that for not-for-profit stations, financial, volunteer and other resources tend to become available once a station has increased its profile by broadcasting a signal over the air.
|
|
95. Given that so few stations have requested the flexibility provided by the Commission's current policy on applications for low power campus stations, the Commission considers that there may be advantages to developing a more specific approach for "developmental" campus stations.
|
|
96. The Commission therefore proposes to introduce a streamlined regulatory framework for low-power developmental stations. The objective of this approach would be to allow new stations to begin broadcasting expeditiously, primarily for training purposes.
|
|
97. The regulatory framework for developmental campus stations would include the following components:
|
|
The framework will apply only to stations using a transmitter power of 5 watts or less.
|
|
The Commission will develop a streamlined application form designed specifically for applicants for developmental campus radio licences.
|
|
Applications for developmental campus radio licences will be considered in an expedited public process, where appropriate.
|
|
Applicants for developmental campus radio licences will not be required to show evidence of the availability of funds.
|
|
The presence of paid staff will not be a criterion used in the assessment of applications for developmental campus radio licences.
|
|
Licensed developmental campus stations will be expected to conform to the portions of the campus radio policy setting out the role of campus stations, the structure of the board of directors, the Canadian content requirements and (for French-language stations) the French vocal music requirements. Developmental campus stations will generally not be expected to comply with other elements of the policy, such as programming requirements or hours of operation.
|
|
Developmental campus stations will be permitted to broadcast sponsorship advertising only. Sponsorship advertising will be defined as "commercial messages that mention no more than the name of a person, the goods, services or activities that are being sold or promoted by the person and their address and telephone number."
|
|
Developmental campus stations will generally be licensed for three years. At the end of this term, licensees will be expected to have filed an application with the Commission for a regular campus radio licence or to cease operations. Short-term licence renewals may be granted where appropriate.
|
|
98. Licensed developmental campus stations will be subject to fundamental requirements such as those concerning Canadian ownership, technical certification by the Department of Industry, and adherence to standard industry self-regulatory codes.
|
|
99. The Commission considers that its proposed framework provides a significantly streamlined and simplified regulatory approach, while at the same time providing these stations with an incentive to apply for a full-fledged campus radio licence within a relatively short time.
|
|
Hours of broadcast
|
|
100. In Public Notice CRTC 1992-38, the Commission announced that campus stations would have the flexibility to reduce or increase broadcast hours by up to 20% without application to the Commission provided they met the minimum percentage commitments set out in their PoPs. Later, the Commission adopted an approach whereby campus stations could increase or decrease their hours of programming as they chose, again subject to the requirement that they meet all of the programming commitments set out in their PoPs.
|
|
101. Hours of broadcast were not widely discussed during the consultation process.
|
|
102. Given that campus stations use public frequencies that may be in demand, the Commission considers that these stations have an obligation to provide a consistent level of service to their listeners. The Commission therefore proposes to adopt the following approach to hours of broadcast by campus stations:
|
|
Campus stations will be expected to broadcast full time (126 hours per week). The Commission acknowledges that flexibility may be required in certain circumstances. In such cases, stations would be expected to advise the Commission of this in writing.
|
|
Station-produced programming
|
|
103. The existing campus radio policy does not set out requirements or guidelines regarding the amount of local programming campus stations are expected to broadcast. The current PoP includes a question asking how much station-produced programming the station will broadcast. Adherence to this commitment is required by condition of licence.
|
|
104. During the consultations, the NCRA suggested that the vast majority of campus radio programming is locally produced. The NCRA proposed that the campus radio policy specify that, at a minimum, two-thirds of all programming broadcast by each campus station should be produced by the station.
|
|
105. The Commission agrees that the amount of station-produced programming provided by campus stations is not currently an issue. Many campus stations include only a small amount of syndicated, network or other acquired programming in their schedules.
|
|
106. At the same time, since campus stations may solicit local advertising, the Commission considers that it may be appropriate to establish a minimum level of locally-produced programming to be provided by these stations.
|
|
107. The Commission proposes the following requirement with respect to station-produced programming:
|
|
At least two-thirds of the programming broadcast weekly by each campus station must be produced by the station.
|
|
Local talent development
|
|
108. Under the existing campus radio policy, campus stations are not asked to make monetary contributions to the development of Canadian talent. Instead, they are expected to outline plans to promote and feature Canadian music, with an emphasis on new artists, local artists or artists whose music is seldom heard on other stations. In addition, campus stations must indicate the role that their stations will play in training students and other volunteers, as well as the approximate percentage of programming that will be produced by students to fulfil course requirements.
|
|
109. While this issue was not discussed extensively during the consultation process, campus radio participants clearly considered that they have a significant role to play in supporting and developing local talent. The Commission agrees, and expects campus stations to continue to fulfil this role.
|
|
110. The Commission proposes to revise its policy on local talent development to the following:
|
|
Campus stations (both campus/community and instructional) are not asked to make monetary contributions to the development of Canadian talent. The Commission considers, however, that campus stations have an important role to play in the development, support and exposure of local talent. Campus stations will continue to be expected to undertake initiatives to promote and feature music by new Canadian artists, local artists and artists whose music is seldom heard on other stations. These initiatives should be described in applications for new licences and in licence renewal applications.
|
|
Approach to instructional stations
|
|
111. Instructional stations are campus stations that have the training of professional broadcasters as their primary objective.
|
|
112. Public Notice CRTC 1992-38 sets out the role of instructional stations as follows:
|
|
to provide a training ground for students in broadcasting courses. These stations must also provide their audiences with alternative programming. Alternative programming should include music, especially Canadian music, not generally heard on commercial stations (including traditional and special interest music, as well as styles of popular music seldom broadcast), in-depth spoken word programming, and some formal educational programming.
|
|
113. The Commission considers that existing instructional stations have a clear understanding of their mandate and role in the broadcasting system. However, the Commission wishes to provide further clarification for the benefit of parties who may wish to apply for licences for instructional stations in the future.
|
|
114. The Commission therefore notes the following with respect to instructional stations:
|
|
Instructional stations, like campus/community stations, must provide programming that is different in style and substance from that provided by other elements of the broadcasting system.
|
|
Broadcasting syndicated programming produced by or for commercial stations would not meet this objective.
|
|
As part of their mandate to provide a training ground for students in broadcasting courses, as well as their mandate to provide alternative programming, campus instructional stations are expected to use volunteer programmers on the air.
|
|
115. Under the current campus radio policy, instructional stations are generally subject to the same requirements and expectations as campus/community stations. The current policy does, however, include certain special provisions for instructional stations that reflect their circumstances. These provisions can be summarized as follows:
|
|
Instructional stations are currently allowed to broadcast up to a 30% level of hits and to repeat individual musical selections more often than campus/community stations.
|
|
Instructional stations are expected to devote at least 4% of the broadcast week to news, with an emphasis on the coverage of local events. This is considered part of the 25% spoken word commitment that all campus stations must meet.
|
|
Instructional stations must devote at least two hours per week to formal educational programming that provides academic instruction.
|
|
116. During the consultation process, some instructional stations suggested that the special provisions of the current policy allow instructional stations to approach the programming style of commercial stations at certain times while still adding diversity to the broadcasting system. Instructional stations considered that any reduction in the hit level that may apply to campus/community stations should not apply to them; one licensee suggested that the hit level for instructional stations should be increased. Instructional stations also suggested that any additional flexibility that may be provided in terms of Canadian content or advertising levels should apply to them.
|
|
117. The Commission therefore proposes that all elements of the proposed campus radio policy set out above will apply to instructional stations, with the exception that instructional stations will continue to be permitted a maximum 30% level of hits.
|
|
118. The Commission further proposes to maintain the current requirement that instructional stations broadcast a minimum of two hours per week of formal educational programming, and the expectation that instructional stations broadcast a minimum of 4% news programming, with a particular emphasis on local news. As is currently the case, the expectation regarding news programming would not be in effect during vacation periods.
|
|
119. Finally, the Commission notes a suggestion made during the consultation process that instructional stations should qualify as eligible recipients of Canadian talent development contributions. The Commission acknowledges the role of instructional stations in providing training in radio skills. However, the Commission reminds its licensees of its statement in Public Notice CRTC 1995-196 that "grants to those organizations offering courses in broadcasting or devoted to the continuing education of radio station staff will not qualify" as eligible recipients of Canadian talent development contributions. This matter is addressed in greater detail in Appendix 1.
|
|
Regulatory approach
|
|
120. When applying for new licences or licence renewals, campus stations currently complete a detailed PoP, to which they must adhere by condition of licence.
|
|
121. The PoP includes questions about the programming commitments set out in the existing campus radio policy, as well as about Canadian content and ethnic programming levels, which are set out in the regulations. In effect, campus stations are required to fill out a PoP so that it reflects applicable policy and regulations.
|
|
122. The PoP also contains questions about the amount of station-produced programming to be broadcast and the language of spoken word programming and vocal music selections. Other questions relate to station policies that are standard conditions of licence for all stations or are included in the regulations.
|
|
123. In addition to the PoP, current campus radio application forms include a number of supplementary questions. Commitments made in response to these supplementary questions do not constitute conditions of licence for campus stations.
|
|
124. The supplementary questions include details about the language of ethnic programming to be provided, the source of non-local programming, the hours of broadcast, the break-down of music from different categories, news, other spoken word programming, local talent development initiatives, training of volunteers, and other programming details.
|
|
125. Several participants commented, during the consultation process, that the current application process for campus stations is complex and time-consuming. The Commission further notes that standard radio licence terms are for seven years. Campus stations may face many changes in the communities they serve and in the volunteer programming resources from which they may draw over the course of seven years. These changes may well affect the programming these stations are able to provide or may wish to provide in order to best serve their communities. Currently, in order to respond to these changing circumstances by altering their programming in any of the areas covered by their PoPs, campus stations must apply to the Commission for licence amendments. In areas covered by the supplementary questions, the information provided in the application forms may rapidly become outdated.
|
|
126. For all of these reasons, the Commission considers that a detailed PoP and supplementary questions may not be appropriate elements of the campus radio application process. The Commission therefore proposes to implement its new approach to campus radio through the following steps:
|
|
Campus stations will no longer be required to complete a Promise of Performance or supplementary questions (currently Parts 2 and 3 of the campus radio application form) as part of the application process for either new licences or licence renewals.
|
|
Certain programming and other requirements set out in the final campus radio policy will be listed in the campus radio application form with a question asking whether applicants are willing to accept each as a condition of licence. Applicants will also be given the opportunity to explain why a particular condition should not apply to them, if they choose.
|
|
Conditions of licence will be listed on each campus radio station's licence. Any exceptions to these conditions of licence will be noted in the station's licensing or renewal decision.
|
|
Other programming questions may be added to the standard application form but the commitments made would generally not be imposed as conditions of licence.
|
|
As part of the application for either a new campus radio licence or a licence renewal, applicants will be asked to submit their proposed program schedule as a sample of the kind of programming they would provide.
|
|
High school and carrier current stations
|
|
127. The Commission does not propose to alter its approaches to high school or carrier current stations at this time.
|
|
Other matters
|
|
Harmonizing policy frameworks
|
|
128. As part of its review of radio the Commission wishes to consider the extent to which its policy frameworks for the various components of the community element of the broadcasting system may be harmonized. This matter will be considered not only in the campus radio review but in the context of the Commission's reviews of other sectors of the community element of the broadcasting system. This will allow the Commission to identify policy areas where all types of not-for-profit radio stations can be dealt with in a similar way.
|
|
129. The Commission invites comments from interested parties on the following questions:
|
|
(10) Would it be appropriate for the Commission to develop a more harmonized framework for campus and community stations? If so, what specific policy elements should be harmonized?
|
|
Ethnocultural programming
|
|
130. The Commission acknowledges the significant role played by campus stations in providing programming for the ethnocultural communities they serve. This programming contributes to the diversity of the broadcasting system and addresses the needs of some minority communities that may otherwise not be offered relevant programming. The Commission encourages the campus radio sector to continue its efforts in this area.
|
|
131. During the consultations, some campus stations expressed concerns about certain aspects of the Commission's existing Policy Reflecting Canada's Linguistic and Cultural Diversity (set out in Public Notice CRTC 1985-139 and generally known as the ethnic broadcasting policy). The Commission notes that this policy is currently under review as part of a separate process. In Public Notice CRTC 1998-135 dated 22 December 1998, the Commission called for comments on a number of issues and questions relating to its current policy on ethnocultural programming. The Commission strongly encourages campus stations to provide their comments and views on ethnocultural programming in response to that public notice. The deadline for comments on issues raised in that proceeding is 4 March 1999.
|
|
132. Sub-paragraph 3(1)(d)(iii) of the Act states, in part, that the broadcasting system should reflect the multicultural and multiracial nature of Canadian society. The mandate of campus stations is to provide alternative programming that serves and reflects the diverse elements of the communities in which they operate. This places these stations in a position to make a strong contribution to the reflection of Canada's cultural diversity. The Commission encourages campus stations to maintain and strengthen their efforts in this regard, both in their programming and in their employment practices.
|
|
Commission accessibility
|
|
133. As a result of the consultation process undertaken as part of this review, the Commission has learned that campus stations do not always feel well informed about Commission policies, practices and procedures. The Commission also understands that the limited financial resources of campus stations and the reliance on volunteer staff and programmers may increase the difficulties faced by these licensees in understanding the Commission's operations, as well as the licensee's own obligations and responsibilities. In light of these concerns, the Commission notes the following initiatives it has either already undertaken or will undertake in the near future.
|
|
134. The Commission:
|
|
has made a commitment to continue to be more open and transparent to its clients, including licensees and members of the public;
|
|
has adopted a more accessible writing style in its decisions and notices;
|
|
has begun a major re-examination of its website with a view to improving its accessibility and ease of use;
|
|
will introduce an electronic mailing list service, through which interested parties may register to receive Commission information by electronic mail;
|
|
will encourage senior staff and/or commissioners to attend the NCRA's annual general meetings;
|
|
will produce a handbook for licensees that describes the complaints process as well as licensees' responsibilities in responding to complaints;
|
|
will provide an annual summary of complaints received by the Commission and how they were resolved;
|
|
will simplify its application forms for new campus radio licences and for campus radio licence renewals (as discussed earlier in this notice);
|
|
will release the final campus radio policy as part of a comprehensive package, to be updated as necessary. It will set out all elements of the new campus radio policy along with a glossary of relevant terms, clarifications of certain issues (similar to those provided in Appendix 1), and a bibliography of other documents relevant to campus stations;
|
|
will create a section of its website linking Commission documents and other information relevant to campus stations, including an annually-updated list of names, phone numbers and email addresses for key Commission staff in all areas that are relevant to campus radio (which may be mailed to individual stations on request); and
|
|
is willing to host, if requested, annual teleconferences with staff from various areas of the Commission that will be open to any campus radio staff interested in learning more about Commission procedures, policies and processes.
|
|
Procedural matters
|
|
135. The Commission invites written comments on the proposals, issues and questions set out in this document as well as on any other matter related to the Commission's approach to campus radio. The deadline for filing written comments is 12 April 1999.
|
|
136. Parties interested in providing comments are encouraged to consult the material and research relating to campus radio that has been placed on the public file for this proceeding.
|
|
137. The Commission will only accept submissions that it receives on or before that date. While submissions will not otherwise be acknowledged, they will be considered by the Commission and will form part of the public record of the proceeding, provided the procedures set out herein have been followed.
|
|
138. Parties filing submissions that are over five pages in length are asked to include a summary.
|
|
139. Submissions filed in response to this notice must be addressed to the Secretary General, CRTC, Ottawa, K1A 0N2.
|
|
140. All submissions must be filed in hard copy format. The Commission, however, also encourages parties to file electronic versions of their submissions (email and/or diskette). Such submissions should be in the HTML format; as an alternate choice, "Microsoft Word" may be used for text and "Microsoft Excel" for spreadsheets. Each paragraph of the document should be numbered. In addition, as an indication that the document has not been damaged during electronic transmission, the line ***End of Document*** should be entered following the last paragraph of each document. The Commission's Internet e-mail address for electronically filed documents is public.broadcasting@crtc.gc.ca
|
|
141. In order to facilitate access by the public, relevant Commission documents and data will, to the extent possible, be made available on the Commission's website at www.crtc.gc.ca Submissions filed in electronic form will also be available on that site, in the format and official language in which they are submitted.
|
|
Examination of public comments and related documents at the following Commission offices during normal business hours
|
|
Central Building
Les Terrasses de la Chaudière 1 Promenade du Portage, Room G-5 Hull, Quebec K1A ON2 Tel: (819) 997-2429 - TDD: 994-0423 Telecopier: (819) 994-0218 |
|
Bank of Commerce Building
Suite 1007 1809 Barrington Street Halifax, Nova Scotia B3J 3K8 Tel: (902) 426-7997 - TDD: 426-6997 Telecopier: (902) 426-2721 |
|
Place Montréal Trust
1800 McGill College Avenue Suite 1920 Montréal, Quebec H3A 3J6 Tel: (514) 283-6607 - TDD: 283-8316 Telecopier: (514) 283-3689 |
|
CRTC Documentation Centre
55 St. Clair Avenue East Suite 624 Toronto, Ontario Telephone: (416) 952-9096 |
|
Kensington Building
Suite 1810 275 Portage Avenue Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 2B3 Tel: (204) 983-6306 - TDD: 983-8274 Telecopier: (204) 983-6317 |
|
530-580 Hornby Street
Vancouver, British Columbia V6C 3B6 Tel: (604) 666-2111 - TDD: 666-0778 Telecopier: (604) 666-8322 |
|
Related CRTC documents:
Review of the Broadcasting Policy Reflecting Canada's Linguistic and Cultural Diversity - Call for Comments (PN 1998-135 dated 22 December 1998) Commercial Radio Policy 1998 (PN 1998-41 dated 30 April 1998) An Agenda For Reviewing the Commission's Policies for Radio (PN 1997-105 dated 1 August 1997) Contributions by Radio Stations to Canadian Talent Development - A New Approach (PN 1995-196 dated 17 November 1995) Policies for Local Programming on Commercial Radio Stations and Advertising on Campus Stations (PN 1993-38 dated 19 April 1993) A Review of the CRTC's Regulations and Policies for Radio (PN 1992-72 dated 2 November 1992) Policies for Community and Campus Radio (PN 1992-38 dated 29 May 1992) An FM Policy for the Nineties (PN 1990-111 dated 17 December 1990) Balance in Programming on Community Access Media (PN 1988-161 dated 29 September 1988) A Broadcasting Policy Reflecting Canada's Linguistic and Cultural Diversity (PN 1985-139 dated 4 July 1985) |
|
Secretary General
|
|
This document is available in alternative format upon request, and may also be viewed at the following Internet site:http://www.crtc.gc.ca
|
|
Appendix 1 to Public Notice CRTC 1999-30
|
|
Clarification of certain matters
|
|
During the consultation process, some participants asked questions about a number of Commission policies that affect campus stations but are not exclusive to them. These include matters related to the eligibility of organizations to receive money from commercial stations for Canadian talent development, and policies related to programming standards. In this appendix, the Commission provides clarifications of these topics. The Commission is not seeking comments on any of these matters. Since these issues do not relate exclusively to campus stations, they are not included as part of the campus radio policy but are covered by separate Commission policies or procedures.
|
|
Eligibility for benefits and Canadian talent development initiatives
|
|
At the cross-sectoral meeting, the NCRA asked the Commission to indicate whether campus stations would be eligible recipients of contributions made by commercial broadcasters as part of the Commission's policy on Canadian talent development or as part of the significant benefits test associated with transfers of ownership. Representatives of commercial broadcasters indicated that they may be interested in exploring such options with campus stations, should the Commission indicate that such stations are eligible to receive these funds. The NCRA also raised the possibility of establishing its own third-party funding agency for this purpose.
|
|
Canadian talent development
|
|
The Commission's approach to Canadian talent development (CTD) for commercial radio stations is set out in Public Notice CRTC 1995-196 dated 17 November 1995 and entitled Contributions by Radio Stations to Canadian Talent Development - A New Approach. This policy provides commercial radio stations with the option of applying for a condition of licence that requires them to make payments to eligible third parties associated with Canadian talent development at levels identified for them in the Canadian Association of Broadcasters (CAB) Distribution Guidelines for Canadian talent Development. Most commercial stations now discharge their CTD obligations in this manner.
|
|
Under the definition of eligible third parties found in PN 1995-196, all CTD contributions must go to third parties that are at arm's length from the station and that are directly connected to the development of Canadian musical and other artistic talent.
|
|
Initiatives related directly to individual stations, such as the sponsorship of talent contests, production of programming featuring live performances, local production of recordings or videos and the sponsorship of concerts by stations, do not qualify as contributions to eligible third parties.
|
|
Benefits test
|
|
The Commission's current benefits policy is set out in PN 1998-41, the new commercial radio policy.
|
|
Under the revised approach to benefits, all transfers of ownership involving profitable stations must generally include:
|
|
clear and unequivocal benefits representing a minimum direct financial contribution to Canadian talent development of 6% of the value of the transaction
|
|
The Commission will expect financial contributions to be distributed as follows:
|
|
3% to be allocated to a new Canadian music marketing and promotion fund;
|
|
2% to be allocated, at the discretion of the purchaser, to FACTOR or MusicAction; and
|
|
1% to be allocated, at the discretion of the purchaser, to either of the above initiatives, to other Canadian talent development initiatives, or to other eligible third parties directly involved in the development of Canadian musical and other artistic talent, in accordance with Public Notice CRTC 1995-196, as may be amended from time to time.
|
|
The Commission wishes to clarify the circumstances under which campus stations may qualify as eligible recipients for contributions from commercial stations made under either the CTD or the benefits policy by making the following observations:
|
|
Specific Canadian talent development initiatives undertaken by individual campus stations or by the NCRA could qualify under the category referred to as "other Canadian talent development initiatives" in the new benefits policy set out in PN 1998-41.
|
|
Grants to a campus station to offset general operating or capital expenses, such as a new transmitter, would not qualify for contributions under either the CTD or benefits policy. Such grants would not be directly connected to the development of Canadian musical or other artistic talent.
|
|
Canadian talent development initiatives undertaken by individual campus stations are unlikely to qualify for CTD contributions. Under the CTD policy, money used to fund a station's own project does not qualify. It would therefore be counterproductive to allow money used to fund another station's projects to qualify.
|
|
The campus radio sector, through the NCRA or some other association, could establish its own third-party agency. Such an organization may qualify as an eligible third party for the purposes of the Commission's CTD policy if it is concerned explicitly with Canadian talent development projects and guarantees that all money given to it by commercial broadcasters would be used for the development of Canadian music and artistic talent.
|
|
If the campus sector is interested in pursuing this approach to CTD contributions, the NCRA is encouraged to submit a proposal for the development of such an eligible third-party funding agency to the Commission for assessment.
|
|
Policy on balance in programming
|
|
The NCRA, along with other participants in the consultation process, expressed concerns about the application of the Commission's balance policy to campus stations. The Commission notes that this policy, set out in Public Notice CRTC 1988-161, Balance in Programming on Community Access Media, applies not only to campus radio but to other forms of community access media, including community radio and the community channels offered by many cable systems. For this reason, it would be inappropriate to review the balance policy in the context of the campus radio policy.
|
|
The balance policy notes that community access media, like all other licensees, have an obligation to provide balance on matters of public concern. It states that the balance requirement of the Act is satisfied in the following manner:
|
|
a) Each undertaking must comply with the requirement of the Act regarding balance in its own programming.
|
|
b) Only programming that relates to matters of public concern needs to be balanced.
|
|
c) Balance need not be attained in each program or series of programs but rather in the overall programming offered by each undertaking over a reasonable period of time.
|
|
d) To attain balance, equal time need not necessarily be given for each point of view. Rather, it is expected that a variety of points of view will be made available in the programming offered by the undertaking to a reasonably consistent viewer or listener over a reasonable period of time.
|
|
The policy sets out a number of mechanisms that might be used to help achieve balance. These include:
|
|
Broadcasting announcements indicating how listeners wishing to express their views can participate in programming.
|
|
Broadcasting a "soap box" or "listener reaction" program where listeners could comment on views expressed in station programming.
|
|
Providing access for complainants to express their viewpoint.
|
|
Searching out individuals to express an alternative point of view.
|
|
The policy further states that, in the few cases where the provision of access under the mechanisms listed above does not result in balance on a particular issue, the licensee is obligated to use its own resources to produce or acquire programming in order to satisfy the balance requirement.
|
|
The Commission notes that:
|
|
Matters of public concern would include programming on inherently controversial topics, such as abortion or religion, but not necessarily all programming that presents a specific point of view or addresses a social concern, such as a show on women's issues or sexual abuse.
|
|
While campus radio stations are subject to the same balance policy as other community access media, campus stations' mandate to provide programming targeted to specialized communities provides a specific context that may be appropriate for the Commission to consider in assessing complaints about balance.
|
|
Sexually explicit programming
|
|
Some campus stations have expressed concerns about the Commission's approach to the broadcast of sexually explicit material by campus stations.
|
|
Since the Commission has not set out its policies regarding explicit programming in a public notice, licensees may have difficulty in understanding what the Commission expects in this area. Again, the Commission considers that greater clarity may assist campus stations. It therefore makes the following observations relating to the broadcast of sexually explicit material by campus stations:
|
|
All broadcasters are required under the Act to provide programming of "high standard". High standard cannot be defined differently for different sectors of the broadcasting system.
|
|
In assessing complaints involving explicit programming, the Commission considers a number of criteria. These include:
|
|
the time the program aired and whether children might be listening;
|
|
the context of the material;
|
|
whether warning messages or advisories were provided;
|
|
the amount (if any) of editing to remove objectionable material;
|
|
the licensee's own guidelines and whether it conformed to them; and,
|
|
the level of discretion of the programming service in question (for example, pay television services are more discretionary than over-the-air broadcasting services).
|
|
The time of day is only one factor among others to be considered. While children may generally be considered as more likely to be listening before 9 p.m., this is not the only or the determinative factor the Commission considers in assessing complaints. Depending on the other factors described above, explicit programming broadcast before 9 p.m. does not necessarily violate the "high standard" requirement of the Act.
|
|
While a licensee's mandate and the target audience of a particular program are not criteria used in considering complaints, these factors may form part of the context of the programming in question, which is one of the criteria used to assess complaints.
|
|
The Commission recognizes that the mandate of campus stations to provide alternative programming and programming targeted to specialized groups may mean that these stations are more likely than others to broadcast controversial programming. While each complaint will be assessed against the criteria set out above, the Commission emphasizes that a station's propensity to generate complaints is not in itself problematic. At licence renewal time, the Commission will consider only those complaints that were substantiated or where the Commission was not satisfied with the licensee's response.
|
|
Warning messages or advisories need not be negative in tone. They may be positive factual statements describing the nature of the programming, provided that they clearly provide listeners with the opportunity to make an informed choice as to whether the programming is suitable for them or their children.
|
|
The Commission encourages licensees to develop their own guidelines and policies in this area. Licensees are welcome to submit these guidelines or policies to the Commission at any time, if they wish to receive the Commission's comments on their effectiveness and appropriateness.
|
|
In response to questions raised during the consultation process, the Commission reminds its licensees that the determinations of complaints made in the context of the 1994 CKDU-FM short-term licence renewal decision (Decision CRTC 94-106) applied only to CKDU-FM and were made in response to the unique circumstances of that station at that time. The same determinations would not necessarily be made in response to the same programming on other stations or in other circumstances.
|
|
The complaints process
|
|
This is another area in which participants in the consultation process appeared to have a less than full understanding of the Commission's procedures. The Commission therefore provides the following explanation of how it deals with complaints about programming broadcast by its licensees:
|
|
When complaints are received, the licensee involved is always asked to respond to the complainant directly, as a first step. The licensee is also asked to hold its logger tapes for the programming in question.
|
|
The Commission encourages individual licensees to develop their own policies or guidelines regarding appropriate programming, and may, in some cases, ask a licensee to explain, in responding to a complaint, how the programming in question conformed to the licensee's guidelines or policies.
|
|
If the licensee's reply is satisfactory, the licensee has no further obligation. For campus radio stations, the Commission sends a formal "outcome" letter in every case, including cases where it is satisfied with the licensee's response.
|
|
Where further investigation is required, the licensee will generally be asked to submit its logger tapes. A determination will be made based on the information obtained. The outcome of this determination is always communicated to the licensee and the complainant.
|
|
All complaints are placed on the public file of the licensee and may be examined, by either the Commission or members of the public, at any time.
|
|
At licence renewal time, the letters that are on a public complaints file may form the basis of questions by the Commission.
|
|
Broadcasting licensees are not asked to respond to telephone complaints. Telephone complaints will not be added to the public file and will not be used against licensees.
|
|
Anonymous complaints are not accepted and licensees are not asked to respond to them.
|
|
Appendix 2 to Public Notice CRTC 1999-30
|
|
Music categories and subcategories as defined in Public Notice CRTC 1991-19
|
|
Category 2
|
|
Music-General: Live or recorded entertainment music of one minute in length or more, broadcast uninterrupted, extending from the advent of mass-produced recordings to the latest hits as defined in charts of recognized trade publications, including popular songs and compositions that fall under the headings "pop", "country-and-western", "rhythm and blues"; "dance"; "rock", "easy listening", "middle-of-the- road", "beautiful music", "mood", and "mainly for dancing"; popularized arrangements of classical music, jazz or authentic folksongs, music written and performed in a folk idiom by present-day artists;which may include songs of protest and/or political and/or social comment, humorous and satirical songs, chansonniers and chansonnettes, English music hall and North American vaudeville; individual excerpts from works from the musical stage, non-religious Christmas songs, popular music for films and television; and popularizations of folk idioms, such as Latin American, Hawaiian and Calypso. For greater particularity the category includes the following four subcategories:
|
|
Subcategory 21: Pop, Rock and Dance: This subcategory includes music from the entire pop, rock and dance music spectrum. This music includes styles generally described as "easy listening", "beautiful music", "pop adult", "soft rock", "dance", "rock and roll", "rhythm and blues", "jazz rock", "folk rock" and "heavy metal", as well as all other forms of music generally referred to as either MOR (middle-of-the-road) or rock. This subcategory includes musical selections listed in recognized trade publications as AC (Adult Contemporary), AOR (Album-Oriented Rock) or Dance.
|
|
Subcategory 22: Country and Country-Oriented: This subcategory ranges from "country and western" and "bluegrass" to "Nashville" and "country-pop" styles and other music forms generally characterized as country, including musical selections listed in recognized trade publications as Country.
|
|
Subcategory 23: Folk-Oriented: This subcategory includes music in a folk style composed by the troubadours and chansonniers of our time, popular arrangements of authentic folksongs, and popularizations of folk idioms.
|
|
Subcategory 24: Jazz-Oriented: Music sung or played in a popular style by performers with a jazz background, including "cocktail" jazz and jazz improvisation when presented against a popularized orchestral background, but not including jazz-rock, falling under subcategory 21.
|
|
Category 3
|
|
Music-Traditional and Special Interest: Music of one minute or more in length, broadcast uninterrupted, characterized as traditional authentic songs and dances of the people, institutionalized music of religious faiths, "classical" music, authentic improvised jazz, and extended excerpts from popular musical theatre. For greater particularity, this category includes the following four subcategories:
|
|
Subcategory 31: Concert Music: This subcategory includes: "classical", music which embodies standards of form, structure and taste, established by artists through the centuries, as a means to communicate complex thoughts in the most coherent way, including music by a contemporary composer when it utilizes entirely or in modified form those established standards, but not including orchestrations of the entertainment music of our time, however classical in form; "opera, operetta and musical", including grand opera, comic opera, music drama, narrative musical plays, operettas and extended dramatic excerpts of popular musical theatre, when performed in a full-cast version.
|
|
Subcategory 32: Folk: Authentic traditional folk songs and dances.
|
|
Subcategory 33: Jazz: Authentic jazz containing a large element of improvisation, including early blues and gospel shouts, ragtime, Dixieland, authentic early swing including early golden age (late 30's-40"s) and modern, bebop and "cool" jazz, Modern, Avant-Garde, Contemporary Jazz Fusion, New European, Afro/New World and contemporary jazz experiments, but not including jazz-rock, falling under subcategory 21.
|
|
Subcategory 34: Non-Classic Religious: Music of the church or of religious faiths, other than in a classical form, or occurring in the course of a ritual service or other form of public worship, or having a jazz character.
|
- Date modified: