ARCHIVED - Broadcasting Commission Letter addressed to Slava Levin (Ethnic Channels Group Limited (OBCI))
This page has been archived on the Web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.
Ottawa, 11 January 2019
Our reference: 1011-NOC2018-0127
Chief Executive Officer
RE: Broadcasting Notice of Consultation 2018-127 - Procedural Request – Application # 2017-1043-4
In a procedural request filed on 19 December 2018, Ethnic Channels Group Limited (ECGL) requested that the confidential information submitted by Rogers Media Inc. (Rogers) and Shaw Communications Inc. (Shaw) on 6 December 2018 be placed on the public file of the above noted process.
Both Rogers and Shaw objected to the full disclosure of the information provided in their respective submissions. While Rogers has since decided to disclose certain information related to network capacity and the description of its commercial properties to ECGL, it has nevertheless refused to disclose this information more broadly and refused to disclose any of the other information over which it claims confidentiality. Shaw opposed disclosure of any of the information contained in its filing for the following reasons:
- denying disclosure would not harm ECGL’s procedural fairness rights as there is sufficient information on the public record for ECGL to assess BDUs’ technical and bandwidth constraints.
- disclosure would harm Shaw and such harm cannot be reasonably managed by restricting disclosure to ECGL alone or through redaction.
- ECGL’s request reflects attempts to shift its own evidentiary burden as applicant onto BDUs.
In the Commission’s view, the redacted information regarding the costs of implementing this service as well as specific details about respective network capacities, would not normally be made public. The Commission considers that its disclosure would likely cause direct and specific commercial harm to these companies. Moreover, the Commission is not convinced that this likely harm could be negated through selective disclosure of the information to ECGL.
Finally, the Commission considers that the significant amount of evidence already on the public record provides ECGL with sufficient information to provide an informed reply to the various issues identified by BDUs that may affect its proposal. Therefore, Commission finds that the public interest in this case does not outweigh the potential commercial harm to Shaw and Rogers should the information for which they have requested confidentiality be divulged.
Consequently, the Commission denies EGCL’s procedural request.
Original signed by
c.c.: Rogers Media Inc. – email@example.com
Shaw Communications Inc. – firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date modified: