Search

ARCHIVED -  Public Notice CRTC 1999-75

This page has been archived on the Web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.

Archived

This page has been archived on the Web.

Public Notice
CRTC 1999-75

Ottawa, 5 May 1999
A proposed policy for community radio
Table of Contents Par
Summary
Background1
Description of the community radio sector  4
Objectives for the sector  10
The consultation process  14
The Proposed Policy 16
Definition, role and mandate of  community stations 19
Types of stations 23
Programming commitments
Spoken word  31
Music categories 33
The maximum repeat factor and  level of hits  43
Canadian content
Canadian content level for category 2 music 50
Distribution of Canadian category 2 selections  65
Canadian content level for category 3 music   71
French-language vocal music 77
Distribution of French-language category 2 selections  82
New forms of expression  88
Approach to English-language stations 95
Advertising 100
Developmental stations 114
Local talent development 122
Network and acquired programming  126
Hours of broadcasting  129
Volunteer participation  131
Regulatory approach  135
Other matters
Harmonizing policy framerworks 141
Ethnocultural programming 143
Call for comments 145
Procedures for filing comments 147
Appendix 1 – Clarification of certain matters as set out in Public Notice CRTC 1999-30 A proposed policy for campus radio
Appendix 2 – Music categories and subcategories as defined in Public Notice CRTC 1991-19
Summary
This document sets out a proposed policy for community radio and invites comments from community broadcasters and other interested parties. The Commission welcomes comments on any of its proposals and on any other relevant topic. The deadline for the Commission to receive comments is Wednesday, 7 July 1999.
Community stations are own and controlled by not-for-profit organizations. Volunteers from the community participate in all aspects of the programming and operations of these stations. The programming they offer provides an alternative to that available from other types of radio stations.
The proposed policy covers a number of areas, including:
• the definition, role and mandate, and types of community radio stations;
• various means to ensure that the programming provides an alternative to that provided by other types of stations;
• requirements for Canadian music, French-language vocal music and local talent development; and
• advertising on community stations.
The Commission also proposes a streamlined approach for licensing very low-power "developmental" community stations that would serve as a first step toward the establishment of higher power community stations.
In a few cases, specific questions are proposed. These cover areas where the Commission does not yet consider that it has enough information to make policy proposals. For ease of reference all proposals and questions are set out in italics.
In appendix 1, the Commission sets out a number of clarifications on various matters that were first printed in Public Notice CRTC 1999-30 A proposed policy for campus radio. The Commission considers that a number of these clarification may also be relevant to community stations.
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. The consultation phase of the community radio review was completed in fall 1998.
2. The Commission has placed a number of relevant documents on the public file for this proceeding and, to the extent possible, on its website. These include:
• transcripts of the consultation meeting;
• submissions from the two major associations representing the majority of community stations in Canada;
• a submission from the Canadian Association of Broadcasters (CAB);
• a table summarizing issues and concerns;
• additional information on English-language community stations; and
• financial data on community radio.
3. During the consultation process for campus radio, the National Campus and Community Radio Association (NCRA), which also represents some English-language community stations, 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. The Commission responded to these questions in Appendix 1 of Public Notice 1999-30. Since some of this material may be relevant to community stations as well, the Commission has reprinted this material as Appendix 1 to this document. The Commission is not seeking comments on any of these matters.
Description of the community radio sector
4. The Commission has licensed 50 community radio stations to date, of which 49 are in operation. Of these, 9 are English-language, 35 are French-language, 3 are bilingual (French- and English-language), one operates primarily in French with a significant level of ethnic programming, and one provides French and native-language programming.
5. The existing community radio policy differentiates between Type A and Type B community stations. The formal definitions of these two types of stations are set out in Public Notice CRTC 1992-38.
6. A Type B community station is a station operating in a competitive market. It is a station in a market where, when its licence is issued, at least one other station other than a station owned by the CBC, is licensed to operate in the same language. A Type A community station, on the other hand, provides the only local radio service in one of the official languages in the market, other than that provided by the CBC. In many cases, a Type A community station provides the only local radio service in any language in a community. Of the 50 licensed community stations, 31 are Type A stations and 19 are Type B stations.
7. Community radio stations, by definition, are owned or controlled by not-for-profit organizations. They are not as driven by the necessity of showing profits as commercial stations. They operate with limited financial and other resources and generally achieve lower levels of listenership than other sectors of the radio industry.
8. Most community stations derive revenues from various sources: provincial government grants (for the moment, only in the province of Quebec), federal government grants (for the implementation of minority language community stations), advertising and fund-raising activities. Lack of stable funding is often a concern for them.
9. Community stations rely primarily on volunteers for programming and other operations. While some community stations have several paid staff members, the primary function of these staff is to train and facilitate the work of volunteers. Therefore, stations with a higher number of paid staff often also involve a higher number of volunteers.
Objectives for the sector
10. The Commission’s primary objective for the community radio sector is that it provide an alternative, local programming service that differs in style and substance from that provided by commercial stations and the CBC. The programming should be relevant to the communities served, including minority language communities. The Commission considers that community stations add diversity to the broadcasting system by providing alternative programming in both music and spoken word. They should contribute to diversity at three levels:
• Community stations should offer programming that is different from and complements that of other stations in their market.
• Community stations should be different from the other elements of the broadcasting system, that is, commercial stations and stations operated by the CBC. Their not-for-profit nature and community access policies contribute to the achievement of this objective.
• The programming broadcast by individual community stations should be varied, providing a diversity of music and spoken word.
11. The Commission recognizes the different roles played by first service, or Type A community stations and community stations operating in competitive markets. The Commission, however, identifies elements of the role and mandate that are common to all community stations.
12. The Commission is also interested in exploring ways of streamlining the regulation of community stations. It considers that the existing community radio policy and the application process to which community stations are subject may be unnecessarily complex. One of the key questions guiding this review is, therefore: How can the regulatory framework for community stations be simplified while still ensuring that they provide programming that is different from that provided by other types of stations?
13. The Commission believes that a healthy and vibrant not-for-profit sector is essential to fulfil the goals of the Broadcasting Act (the Act). Community 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
14. To prepare for this review, the Commission held consultations with community radio broadcasters’ associations, individual English-language community radio broadcasters and other interested parties over the period from April 1998 to January 1999. These included:
• informal meetings in the spring of 1998 held individually with l’Association des radiodiffuseurs communautaires (ARC) du Québec, l’Alliance des radiodiffuseurs communautaires (ARC) du Canada and the CAB;
• a formal consultation meeting held on 22 October 1998 that was attended by representatives of ARC du Québec, ARC du Canada, the NCRA, the CAB, the CBC and the ministère de la Culture et des Communications du Québec; and
• written consultations with licensed English-language community stations not officially represented by any of the community radio associations and that did not attend the formal consultation meeting.
15. Interested parties may find transcripts or a summary of these consultations on the public file. They form part of the public record of this proceeding.
The proposed policy
16. This section sets out the Commission’s proposed community radio policy.
17. In a few instances, where the Commission does not consider that it has enough information to make a proposal, questions are asked instead.
18. The existing community 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.
Definition, role and mandate of community stations
19. The Commission proposes to adopt the following definition of a community station:
A community station is a station owned and controlled by a not-for-profit organization. Membership, management and operation are provided by members of the community at large. Programming is provided primarily by volunteers and should reflect the diversity of the market that the station is licensed to serve.
20. The Commission proposes the following description of the role and mandate of community stations:
The primary focus of a community station is to provide community access to the airwaves and to offer diverse programming that reflects the needs and interests of the community that the station is licensed to serve, including:
• music not generally broadcast by commercial stations;
• music by new and local talent;
• spoken word programming; and
• local information.
Discussion
21. During consultations, ARC du Canada and ARC du Québec expressed concern that the current definition of a community station set out in PN 1992-38 implies that community stations must reflect all of the interests of their respective communities. The proposed definition attempts to clarify that community stations do not need to reflect all needs and interests of community members but rather reflect the overall diversity of the community.
22. The other revisions are designed to clarify the essential elements of the definition of a community station, as well as the role and mandate of such stations.
Types of stations
23. The Commission proposes to continue to distinguish between Type A and Type B community stations. The definitions of each type are as follows:
Type A
A community station is a Type A station if, at the time of licensing, no other radio station, other than one owned by the CBC, is operating in the same language in all or part of its market.
If one or more stations are licensed to operate in the same language in all or any part of the same market at the time of the licence renewal, the station will retain its Type A status. In all other cases, including applications to increase power, the Commission will assess the continuation of Type A status on a case-by-case basis.
Type B
A community station is a Type B station if, when the licence is issued, at least one other station other than a station owned by the CBC, is licensed to operate in the same language in all or any part of the same market.
24. Under these proposed definitions, the existence of a campus radio station in the same market will be considered in the determination of whether to issue a Type A or Type B licence in the same market. CBC originating stations, however, will not.
Discussion
25. Currently, Type A community stations have fewer programming requirements than Type B stations. Type B stations are also subject to limits on the amount of advertising they broadcast while Type A stations are not.
26. ARC du Canada and ARC du Québec's major concern about dividing community stations into two types related to the fact that Type B stations have restrictions on the amount of advertising they broadcast. The issue of advertising is addressed later in this document.
27. These two organizations also requested that, if a distinction is maintained, the Commission should issue a Type A licence when the only other station operating in the market is a campus station. Thus a community station would fall into Type B only when another commercial station is licensed to operate in the same language in all or any part of the same market.
28. This suggestion appears to address the situation in Moncton. This market is served by community station CJSE-FM. The only other French-language private station serving Moncton is CKUM-FM, which is a campus station. As a result, CJSE-FM is a Type B station. The Commission approved, in Decision CRTC 99-81, an application to amend the licence for CJSE-FM so that it would not be subject to the advertising limits generally placed on Type B stations. The Commission will continue to use a case-by-case approach in these cases.
29. The CAB noted that the Commission's current policy distinguishes between two types of community radio stations and imposes different regulatory requirements because they serve fundamentally different markets.
30. The Commission notes that the distinction between Type A and Type B community stations recognizes the different environment in which these stations operate and considers that it is appropriate to maintain this distinction.
Programming commitments
Spoken word
31. The Commission proposes to continue its current approach to spoken word programming on community stations. This means that:
• For Type A stations, the Commission will continue to expect that at least 15% of programming each broadcast week be spoken word. Specific commitments by individual stations will be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
• For Type B stations, the Commission will require that at least 25% of the programming broadcast each week be spoken word, with an emphasis on community-oriented programming.
Discussion
32. During the consultation process, all parties agreed that the 25% spoken word requirement should be maintained for Type B community stations. No concerns were raised with respect to the requirements for Type A stations.
Music categories
33. The current definitions of the Commission’s music categories and subcategories are set out in Appendix 2.
34. The Commission proposes to adopt the following approach to programming from different music categories by community stations:
• Both Type A and Type B community stations will be required to ensure that at least 20% of musical selections played each broadcast week do not fall under the definition of "Pop, Rock and Dance" (currently subcategory 21).
• Both Type A and Type B community stations will be required to ensure that at least 5% of musical selections played each broadcast week are from category 3 (Traditional and Special Interest music).
35. The Commission may, however, revise this approach following the reception of comments submitted in response to this Notice and to Public Notice CRTC 1999-xx issued today. In the following section, the Commission suggests a number of questions for interested parties to address when commenting on this proposal.
Discussion
36. Both ARC du Canada and ARC du Québec requested that the Commission eliminate minimum requirements for music from category 3. Instead, it should continue only with the requirement that a minimum of 20% of all musical selections played each broadcast week be music from subcategories other than Pop, Rock and Dance.
37. The CAB, however, expressed concern that eliminating requirements for category 3 music would decrease programming diversity and also have a negative effect on Canadian talent development.
38. The NCRA questioned the extent to which the limitation on Pop, Rock and Dance music helps to ensure that community stations provide musical diversity.
39. All participants in the consultations, however, expressed concerns about the current definitions of the Commission’s music categories and subcategories. They suggested that the current categories and their definitions are outdated and do not provide an appropriate measure of musical diversity.
40. The proposed revisions set out in Public Notice 1999-76, also released today, are designed to broaden somewhat the musical genres that would fall into category 3, as well as to simplify and clarify the definitions so that they will be easier for licensees to understand and apply. The Commission urges community stations to participate in this process and to submit comments by 7 July 1999.
41. The Commission considers that the primary objective for community radio is to provide an alternative, local programming service that differs in style and substance from that provided by other elements of the broadcasting system. The requirement that at least 20% of music played not be "Pop, Rock and Dance" adds to this diversity. Few commercial stations play music from category 3. As a result, community stations contribute significantly to the diversity of programming available when they play such selections. The Commission therefore proposes to establish a requirement that at least 5% of musical selections broadcast each week be selections from category 3. In the past, the Commission has asked each community station to make a category 3 commitment but did not specify a minimum level that would be satisfactory.
42. In order to clarify this matter, the Commission seeks comments on the following questions:
(1) Is the proposed requirement that 5% of musical selections played each broadcast week be from category 3 appropriate given the existing definitions of the music categories?
(2) What level of category 3 music would be appropriate if the Commission were to adopt the proposed new definitions of music categories proposed in Public Notice 1999-76.
The maximum repeat factor and level of hits
43. The Commission proposes to no longer place restrictions on the use of hit musical selections or the number of times individual musical selections may be repeated during a broadcast week.
44. The Commission may, however, impose restrictions in particular circumstances. In the next section, the Commission suggests a number of questions that interested parties may wish to address when commenting on this proposal. They relate to the types of restrictions that may be appropriate and the circumstances under which such restrictions might be imposed.
Discussion
45. Under the current policy, Type B community stations may not repeat any non-Canadian musical selection more than 10 times in a broadcast week. This is referred to as the "maximum repeat factor."
46. English-language community stations must also make a commitment with respect to the maximum percentage of musical selections each broadcast week that will be "hits." For community stations, a "hit" is defined as a musical selection that has reached a top 40 position on one or more specific charts. The names of these charts are set out in Public Notice CRTC 1997-42. The Commission evaluates commitments relating to the use of  hits by English-language community stations on a case-by-case basis.
47. Limitations on the use of hits do not currently apply to French-language community stations or commercial stations. The Commission eliminated such limitations for all FM French-language stations in 1990 when the Commission released its FM Policy for the Nineties (Public Notice CRTC 1990-111). The magazine Palmarès, however, publishes a list of French-language selections most played by commercial stations.
48. The Commission considers that, for the majority of community stations, it is not necessary to limit the number of times musical selections may be repeated or the level of hits that they play. However, it considers that it might be necessary to impose limits in these areas in some circumstances.
49. The Commission suggests the following questions for those wishing to comment on this issue:
(3) Under what circumstances would it be appropriate for the Commission to place limits on English-language Type B community stations regarding the use of hit musical selections?
(4) Should French-language Type B community stations be subject to a limit on the level of French-language hits that may be broadcast? If so:
• Under what circumstances?
• How should French-language hits be defined?
• What would the appropriate limit be?
If not, is there another regulatory tool that might be used to ensure that French-language community stations continue to provide musical diversity?
Canadian content
Canadian content level for category 2 music
50. The Commission proposes to increase from 30% to 35%, the minimum level of Canadian content in category 2 that all community stations must broadcast, measured over the broadcast week.
51. The Commission, however, wishes to ensure that this increased level does not act as a disincentive for community stations to broadcast music in new and emerging genres in which less Canadian music is available. The Commission therefore proposes to establish a separate Canadian content level for periods of programming devoted to musical genres where the availability of Canadian music is low.
52. In the next section, the Commission raises a number of questions for interested parties designed to help it determine the type of musical genres for which a lower level of Canadian content would be appropriate, and what the level should be.
Discussion
53. 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%.
54. All parties except the NCRA considered that a 35% level of Canadian content would be appropriate for community stations.
55. The NCRA argued that the Canadian content level should remain at 30% for category 2 music. It claimed that little Canadian music is available in certain new and emerging musical genres its member stations play.
56. In the context of the campus radio policy review, the CRTC 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 for the campus radio review.
57. The music availability study found, among other things, that:
• 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, 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.
• There is a relatively high availability of Canadian music in certain genres appropriate for campus radio airplay, including "indie pop", "alternative rock" and "folk/acoustic" music.
58. Although a similar music use study was not commissioned for the community radio sector, a number of these findings may apply to some community stations, such as Type B French- and English-language stations operating in urban centres.
59. The Commission considers that playing Canadian music, particularly Canadian music not played by other radio stations, is a vital part of community radio’s mandate to provide alternative programming, especially for those stations operating in competitive markets (Type B stations). Moreover, the Commission is of the view 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 French and English-language community stations.
60. Community 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 community stations may have a special role to play in developing Canadian creative talent in new and emerging musical genres.
61. The Commission therefore wishes to ensure that an increased level of Canadian content does not act as a disincentive for community stations to broadcast music in new and emerging genres in which less Canadian music is available. It therefore proposes to establish a separate Canadian content level for periods of programming devoted to musical genres where the availability of Canadian music is low.
62. Under this proposal, community stations would be permitted to exclude programming periods (generally specialty music programs) 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.
63. 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.
64. The Commission invites comments from all interested parties on the following questions:
(5) Are there musical genres that fall under the definition of category 2 (general music) and that are appropriate for airplay by community stations in which there is a low availability of Canadian music? If so, what are these genres?
(6) How may these genres be defined so as to clearly distinguish them from other musical genres, excluding genres that are commonly played by commercial stations?
(7) 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
65. The Commission does not propose to introduce a formal requirement related to the distribution of Canadian selections by community radio stations. Further, the Commission proposes to amend its regulations to remove the requirement, for community stations, that Canadian selections be distributed "in a reasonable manner throughout the broadcast day."
66. Instead, the Commission would indicate, in its community radio policy, that it expects community stations to schedule Canadian category 2 musical selections in a reasonable manner throughout the broadcast day.
Discussion
67. The Canadian content regulations that currently apply to community stations require that Canadian selections be scheduled "in a reasonable manner throughout each broadcast day."
68. Under the existing community 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.
69. Following the commercial radio review, the Commission amended the regulations for commercial stations to set out new requirements regarding the distribution of Canadian content in category 2. The regulations now require that at least 35% of category 2 musical selections broadcast between 6:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. from Monday through Friday be Canadian selections.
70. The Commission notes, however, that no parties raised concerns regarding the inappropriate distribution of Canadian content on community radio stations under the existing system. It therefore considers that distribution requirements relating to Canadian selections are not necessary for community stations.
Canadian content level for category 3 music
71. The Commission proposes to increase from 10% to 12%, the minimum weekly level of Canadian content in category 3.
Discussion
72. Category 3 music encompasses traditional and special interest music. The definition of category 3 music is set out in Appendix 2 of this notice.
73. 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.
74. Public Notice CRTC 1998-41 also noted 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.
75. During informal consultations, ARC du Canada and ARC du Québec suggested that the Commission consider replacing the current requirement with an overall Canadian content percentage that includes both category 2 and category 3 music. They considered that this would help community stations to avoid compliance problems related to the Canadian content level in category 3. ARC du Canada proposed an overall level of Canadian content of 30% but agreed, in principle, to a 35% level that would be evenly distributed over the entire broadcast day. However this proposal was not reiterated at the formal consultation meeting where both associations agreed, in principle, to be subject to the same requirement as commercial stations.
76. The Commission considers that there is sufficient Canadian music available in category 3 to justify an increase to 12%. It also notes that the proposed revisions to the music categories set out in Public Notice CRTC 1999-76 somewhat expand the types of music that would fall into category 3. This may make it easier for stations to achieve a higher level of Canadian content.
French-language vocal music
77. The Commission proposes to maintain the current requirement for French-language community stations that a minimum of 65% of the vocal music selections in category 2 played each broadcast week be in the French language.
Discussion
78. As part of its new policy for commercial radio, the Commission indicated that French-language commercial stations would continue to be required to ensure that at least 65% of the category 2 vocal music selections played each broadcast week are in the French-language.
80. The CAB recommended that the new commercial radio regulations apply to community radio stations with respect to French-language vocal music.
81.   The Commission agrees that the 65% minimum requirement remains appropriate.
Distribution of French-language
category 2 selections
82.   The Commission does not propose to introduce a formal requirement relating to the distribution of French-language music on community radio.
83.   Further, the Commission proposes to amend its regulations to remove the requirements for French-language community stations that French-language vocal music selections be distributed "in a reasonable manner throughout the broadcast day."
   84.    Instead, in its policy, the Commission proposes to indicate that it expects French-language category 2 musical selections to be scheduled in a reasonable manner throughout the broadcast day.
Discussion
85.   The regulations relating to French-language vocal music that currently apply to French-language community stations require that category 2 French-language musical selections be scheduled "in a reasonable manner throughout each broadcast day."
86. The Commission notes that the distribution of French-language vocal music was considered during the commercial radio review. As part of its revised regulations for commercial radio licensees, the Commission now requires that French-language commercial stations ensure that a minimum of 55% of category 2 vocal music selections broadcast between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. from Monday to Friday be in the French-language.
87. The Commission notes that no concern were raised regarding the distribution of French-language vocal music on community radio stations under the current regime. It considers that it is not necessary to introduce more stringent requirements at this time.
New forms of expression
88. The Commission does not consider that it yet has enough information to develop a proposal in the areas of turntablism and radio art.
89. Therefore, in the next section, the Commission poses a number of questions to interested parties concerning how it should deal with these new forms of expression.
Discussion
90. During the consultation process, the NCRA raised questions about new forms of artistic expression, such as turntablism and radio art, broadcast on some urban Type B English-language community stations. In particular, the NCRA suggested that such stations 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.
91. 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.
92. 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.
93. The Commission does not consider it has enough information on the extent to which these new forms of expression are broadcast on English and French-language community radio stations. It also considers that it needs further input from interested parties before deciding whether these new forms of expression should qualify as Canadian for purposes of the Canadian content regulations.
94.  In light of these concerns, the Commission invites responses on the questions set out below:
(8) How much programming involving turntablism and radio art do community stations currently broadcast?
(9) Is radio art music programming or spoken word programming?
(10) On what basis should pieces involving turntablism and radio art be recognized as Canadian musical selections for the purpose of the Canadian content regulations?
(11) How would the recognition of pieces involving turntablism and radio art as Canadian musical selections contribute to the objectives of the Act?
Approach to English-language stations
95. The Commission has no indication that certain elements of the community radio policy other than French-language vocal music, should apply differently to English-language community stations than to French-language stations. However, in the next section, it poses a number of questions to clarify this issue. It would welcome comments from interested parties.
Discussion
96. To date, the Commission has licensed nine English-language community stations; four Type A and five Type B.
97. Under the existing community radio policy, all aspects of the policy apply equally to English- and French-language community stations, with two exceptions:
• Only French-language community stations are subject to the requirement that at least 65% of the vocal musical selections from category 2 broadcast be in the French-language; and
• English-language stations are required to make specific commitments on the level of hits they plan to broadcast at the issuance or renewal of their licences.
98. Earlier in this document, the Commission indicated that it proposed to no longer restrict the level of hits that community stations may broadcast, except in exceptional circumstances.
99. In order that it might further clarify this matter, the Commission welcomes comments in response to the following questions:
(12) Should any elements of the proposed community radio policy other than French-language vocal music, apply differently to English-language community stations than to French-language community stations?
(13) If so, what elements should the Commission treat differently and how should it treat them?
Advertising
100. The Commission proposes to eliminate all restrictions on the amount of advertising broadcast by Type B stations, as is currently the case for Type A stations.
Discussion
101. Under the existing community radio policy, Type B community stations are permitted to broadcast up to 504 minutes of advertising per week, with an average of 4 minutes per hour and a maximum of 6 minutes in any single hour.
102. The existing policy also notes that community stations may exclude up to 60 minutes per week of advertising material contained in Canadian syndicated programs when calculating the amount of advertising they broadcast. This provided an incentive to broadcast Canadian syndicated programs.
103. During the consultation process, ARC du Canada and ARC du Québec argued that there should be no difference between the amount of advertising permitted on Type A and Type B stations. In effect, they requested that all limits on the amount of advertising be removed from Type B stations.
104. The NCRA, on the other hand, opposed the elimination of advertising limits. They contended that such a policy would be an incentive for community stations to cultivate a more commercial sound in order to attract more advertising dollars. In its view, this would be contrary to the mandate of community stations.
105. The CAB considered that, when the Commission reviewed the advertising levels on community station in 1992, one of the key elements that set community radio apart from commercial stations was that its revenues were to come from diverse sources. Such diverse funding allowed community stations to retain a distinctive character. In the CAB’s view, this reasoning is even more appropriate in today’s economy. The CAB also considered that the community radio sector should have the opportunity to tap into other sources of financing so it can continue to offer alternative services as part of the broadcasting system.
106. According to the 1997 CRTC Financial Database, aggregate total advertising revenue accounted for 52.9% of the total aggregate revenue generated by 37 community stations (Type A and B combined).
107. In the case of Type A stations, advertising accounted for 43% of total revenues, while in the case of Type B stations, advertising accounted for 57% of total revenues.
108. The total revenues generated by community stations represent only 0.6% of all Canadian radio advertising revenues. In volume, the advertising revenue of community radio stations amounted to $5.4 million. On the other hand, total Canadian radio advertising revenue reaches close to $850 million.
109. The Commission’s priority is to ensure that community stations provide an alternative programming service that is different in style and substance from that provided by other types of stations. It believes that limiting or restricting advertising is not the most effective way of fulfilling this objective. The Commission considers that its proposed approach to programming, which focuses on a set of clear and simplified commitments, will provide assurance that this objective is met.
110. In Public Notice CRTC 1997-105, an Agenda for Reviewing the Commission’s Policies for Radio, the Commission notes, in paragraph 12, that:
In the past, community stations have benefited from funding from government sources but such funding has been reduced in recent years, and many community stations have found it increasingly difficult to raise private funding.
111. The Commission also indicated its plans to consider additional innovative methods that might be proposed to increase the financial resources available to community stations.
112. No alternative and innovative methods to increase community stations’ financial resources were proposed during the consultations.
113. The Commission considers that, in order for Type B community stations to fulfil their proposed role and mandate, they need an adequate and greater range of financial tools. Government funding is limited for the majority of community stations. Such funding is often unstable since it is subject to cuts depending on the economic environment and the government that is in place. However, the government of Quebec provides funding for community stations operating in that province.
Developmental stations
114. The Commission 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.
115. The regulatory framework for developmental community 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.
• Applications will be considered in an expedited public process, except in extraordinary circumstances.
• Applicants for developmental community 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 these applications.
• Developmental stations will be expected to conform to the portions of the community radio policy setting out the role of community stations, the Canadian content requirements and, for French-language community stations, the French vocal music requirements. Such stations would generally not be expected to comply with other elements of the policy, such as programming requirements.
• Developmental community stations will be subject to fundamental licensing requirements such as those concerning Canadian ownership, technical certification by the Department of Industry, and adherence to standard industry self-regulatory codes.
Discussion
116. The NCRA, representing a number of English-language community stations, advocated the introduction of special licences for new community radio stations that wished to begin broadcasting using a very low power signal. They made the same request for campus stations during consultations for the campus radio review.
117. In effect, this would provide a "developmental" period for potential licensees. During this period 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.
118. The NCRA also mentioned the difficulty faced by potential licensees in applying for new community radio licences. In particular, it 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.
119. ARC du Canada opposed this approach. It considered that the Commission’s analysis of an applicant's financial viability forces those proposing to develop a community station to make sure that their project is viable and serious before they receive a licence from the Commission.
120. ARC du Québec also had reservations regarding NCRA’s proposal. Their concern was that applicants might not take their project seriously enough if they did not have to prove financial viability.
121. While acknowledging the concerns of ARC du Canada and ARC du Québec, the Commission considers that there may be advantages to implementing a specific approach for "developmental" community stations as it has proposed for campus stations. It believes that its proposed framework outlined above will provide a significantly streamlined and simplified regulatory approach, while at the same time providing these stations with an incentive to apply for a full-fledged community radio licence within a relatively short time.
Local talent development
122. Community stations would be asked to promote and feature music by new Canadian artists, local artists and artists whose music is seldom heard on other stations.
Discussion
123. Under the existing policy, community stations do not make monetary contributions to the development of Canadian talent. Instead, they are expected to outline plans to promote and feature music by new Canadian artists, local artists and artists whose music is seldom heard on other stations.
124. This element of the policy was not discussed extensively during the consultation process. However, the CAB indicated that community stations should be encouraged to do more to promote young Canadian artists within their communities.
125. The Commission considers that local talent development remains an important part of community radio’s role. While not-for-profit stations generally have limited financial resources and cannot be expected to make monetary contributions to the development of Canadian artists, the Commission considers that community stations make significant contributions in this area through other initiatives such as providing on air exposure for local artists.
Network and acquired programming
126. The Commission proposes to continue its existing policy relating to the use of network and acquired programming. This policy is as follows:
• Type A stations may affiliate with networks or acquire programming from other radio stations so that they do not have to sign off at the end of their local programming periods.
• Type B station applicants and licensees will be required to demonstrate that the network or acquired programs they wish to broadcast will complement, but not replace, their local programs.
Discussion
127. During consultations, the CAB expressed concern that allowing community stations to form networks is incompatible with the definition of community radio.
128. The Commission notes that it licensed ARC du Canada to provide a network for community stations in Decision CRTC 98-23. This network will be called le Réseau francophone d’Amérique (RFA). The Commission wishes to remind ARC du Canada and community radio licensees that, under the community radio policy, the programming provided by ARC du Canada’s network to Type B community stations must complement but not replace the station’s local programming.
Hours of broadcasting
129. The Commission proposes to continue to permit community radio stations to increase or decrease their weekly hours of broadcasting by up to 20% without application to the Commission.
Discussion
130. None of the participants in the consultations raised concerns regarding the current level of flexibility given to community stations in this area. The Commission considers that this element of the policy remains appropriate.
Volunteer participation
131. All community radio licensees will be expected to facilitate community access to their programming by clearly informing the public of opportunities for community participation. The Commission would further expect community radio applicants to describe, in their applications for new licenses or licence renewal, their current and/or proposed measures to:
• facilitate community access to their programming;
• promote volunteer training; and
• train and supervise volunteers.
Discussion
132. The existing community radio policy addresses the issue of volunteer participation as follows:
The Commission will not require community broadcasters to maintain any specific minimum level of volunteer involvement. At the same time, all community radio licensees will be expected to facilitate community access to their programming by clearly informing the public of the opportunities for community participation. The Commission further expects community radio applicants and licensees to describe in their licence applications or renewal applications the measures to be taken to promote volunteer training and the mechanisms put in place to train and supervise volunteer workers.
133. None of the participants in the consultations raised any concern regarding this matter.
134. The Commission notes, however, that, earlier in this document, it proposed to amend the definition of a community station to indicate that programming must be produced primarily by volunteers. The policy proposal on volunteer participation reflects the importance of having a very high level of volunteer involvement in programming.
Regulatory approach
135. The Commission proposes to implement its new approach to community radio through the following steps:
• Community stations will no longer be required to complete a Promise of Performance or supplementary questions (currently Parts 2 and 3 of the community 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 community radio policy will be listed in the community radio application form, with a question asking whether applicants are willing to accept each as a condition of licence. The Commission will give applicants an opportunity to explain why a particular condition should not apply to them, if they choose.
• Conditions of licence will be listed on each community radio station’s licence. The Commission will note any exceptions to these conditions of licence 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.
136. As part of the application for either a new community 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 will provide.
Discussion
137. When applying for new licences or licence renewals, community stations currently complete a detailed Promise of Performance (PoP), to which they must adhere by condition of licence.
138. In addition to the PoP, current community radio application forms include a number of supplementary questions. Commitments made in response to these supplementary questions do not constitute conditions of licence for community stations.
139. The Commission considers that many of the questions contained in the detailed PoP and supplementary questions may no longer be appropriate for community radio.
140. Accordingly, conditions of licence will appear on the licence or in the accompanying decision.
Other matters
Harmonizing policy frameworks
141. As part of its review of radio, the Commission wishes to consider the extent to which its policy frameworks for the various types of not-for-profit radio may be harmonized. This matter will be considered not only in the community radio review, but in the context of the Commission’s review of the other community elements 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.
142. The Commission invites comments from interested parties on the following questions:
(16) 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? How should this be accomplished?
Ethnocultural programming
143. The Commission acknowledges the significant role played by community stations in providing programming to 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 community radio sector to continue its efforts in this area.
144. Section 3(1)(d)(ii) of the Act states, in part, that the broadcasting system should reflect the multicultural and multiracial nature of Canadian society. The mandate of community stations is to provide community access to the airwaves and to offer diversified programming that reflects the needs and interests of the community it is licensed to serve. This places some of the community stations in a position to make a strong contribution to the reflection of Canada’s cultural diversity, especially in reflecting new and developing artists from minority cultural groups. This is consistent with the mandate of community stations to expose music not often played by commercial stations. As well, community stations may provide spoken word programming that reflects the perspectives and concerns of minority cultural groups for the benefit of all listeners. The Commission expects these community stations to maintain and strengthen their efforts in this regard, both in their programming and in their employment practices.
Call for comments
145. The Commission invites written comments that address the issues and questions set out in this notice. The Commission will accept comments that it receives on or before Wednesday, 7 July 1999.
146. The Commission will not formally acknowledge written comments. It will, however, fully consider all comments and they will form part of the public record of the proceeding, provided that the procedures for filing set out below have been followed.
Procedures for filing comments
147. Interested parties should send their comments to the Secretary General, CRTC, Ottawa, K1A ON2.
• Parties must file all submissions in "hard copy format" (i.e. on paper).
• Comments longer than five pages should include a summary.
148. The Commission also encourages parties to file electronic versions of their comments by e-mail or on diskette. The Commission’s e-mail address for electronically filed documents is procedure@crtc.gc.ca
• Electronic submissions should be in the HTML format. As an alternative, those making submissions may use "Microsoft Word" for text and "Microsoft Excel" for spreadsheets.
• Please number each paragraph of the comment. In addition, please enter the line ***End of Document*** following the last paragraph. This will help the Commission verify that the document has not been damaged during transmission.
149. The Commission will make comments filed in electronic form available on its web site at www.crtc.gc.ca in the official language and format in which they are submitted. This will make it easier for members of the public to consult the documents.
150. The Commission also encourages interested parties to monitor the public examination file for additional information that they may find useful when preparing their comments
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
1809 Barrington Street
Suite 1007
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
Kensington Building
275 Portage Avenue
Suite 1810
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
CRTC Documentation Centre
55 St. Clair Avenue East
Suite 624
Toronto, Ontario
M4T 1M2
Telephone: (416) 952-9096
Telecopier: (416) 954-6343
CRTC Documentation Centre
Cornwall Professional Building
2125, 11th Avenue
Room 103
Regina, Saskatchewan
S4P 3X3
Telephone: (306) 780-3422
Telecopier: (306) 780-3319
Related CRTC documents
•Public Notice 1999-76: Call for comments on proposed revised music categories
•Public Notice 1999-30: Call for comments on a proposed policy for campus radio
•Public Notice 1998-135: Review of the broadcasting policy reflecting Canada's linguistic and cultural diversity – Call for Comments
• Public Notice 1998-132: Regulations amending the Radio Regulations, 1986 – Commercial Radio Policy
•Public Notice 1998-41: Commercial radio policy 1998
•Public Notice 1997-105: An agenda for reviewing the Commission's policies for radio
•Public Notice 1997-42: Revised policy on the use of hits by English-language FM radio stations
•Public Notice 1995-196: Contributions by radio stations to Canadian talent development - A new approach
•Public Notice 1992-72: A review of the Commission's regulations and policies for radio
•Public Notice 1992-38: Policies for community and campus radio
•Public Notice 1990-111: An FM policy for the nineties
•Public Notice 1988-161: Balance in programming on community access media
Secretary General
This notice 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 1999-75
Clarification of certain matters as set out in Public Notice CRTC 1999-30 A proposed policy for campus radio
During the consultation process for campus radio, the National Campus and Community Radio Association (NCRA), which also represents some English-language community stations, 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. The Commission responded to these questions in Appendix 1 of Public Notice 1999-30. Since some of this material may be relevant to community stations as well, the Commission has reprinted it as Appendix 1 to this document. The Commission is not seeking comments on any of these matters.
Eligibility for benefits and Canadian talent development initiatives
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 not-for-profit 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 canpus 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 one of its 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, it 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 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 campus 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 1999-75
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: