FCC Considers Whether To Let Canadian Company Buy U.S. Radio Station.

[awsherrill]

Careful there, eh. Or there won't be any more hockey. No more Molsons. And Anne Murray? Her songs will no longer be heard. No Nickelback either.

What aboot Robin Sparkles ? (Soory, eh)

 

[Theater of My Mind]

Radio stations are not in the artist development business. So it might help Canadian artists, but it doesn't help radio.

Actually, radio stations in Canada are in the artist development business. They must make mandatory contributions to a national artist development fund called FACTOR, or its French language counterpart, MusicAction.

The Canadian government takes its national cultural development initiatives very seriously. Broadcasters are a major part of its effort to nurture and develop homegrown talent, preserve a national identity and prevent Canada from becoming an extension of the United States. This is why I think the CRTC will take a very dim view of a Canadian taking ownership of a U.S. station and beaming its signal back into Canada without the CanCon or artist development contributions, in an obvious attempt to evade those regulations and their purpose.

I don't have a dog in this fight but if there is a way for the CRTC to stop it, I'm sure they will try. The question is whether the Canadian party is out of their legal reach with this scheme, assuming the FCC approves it to begin with.

Broadcaster Contributions – FACTOR

Private Radio Broadcaster CCD contributions to FACTOR The Foundation Assisting Canadian Talent on Recordings

www.factor.ca

 

[KeithE4]

Careful there, eh. Or there won't be any more hockey. No more Molsons. And Anne Murray? Her songs will no longer be heard. No Nickelback either.

As long as there's no more Bieber, Men Without Hats, Celine Deon, and The DeFranco Family, I can live with that. We can bootleg the good Canadian acts (such as the Guess Who, BTO, and Rush).

 

[davideduardo]

Actually, radio stations in Canada are in the artist development business. They must make mandatory contributions to a national artist development fund called FACTOR, or its French language counterpart, MusicAction./URL]

That is like saying that a convict serving a sentence is in the criminal justice business.

 

[Theater of My Mind]

That is like saying that a convict serving a sentence is in the criminal justice business.

Well, a convict doesn't make financial contributions to the criminal justice system, so not really.

The Canadian system is more of a symbiotic relationship that exists between radio and the Canadian music business, and more broadly between TV broadcasters (and now video content streaming companies) and the Canadian TV, film and video industry. It may seem heavy-handed and onerous to Americans who are not accustomed to those kinds of regulations -- and to be fair, it is. But it serves a purpose in Canada, and all the broadcasters and related parties have signed onto it.

For a historian such as yourself, David, you might actually find it interesting to read up on the history of Canadian Content regulations and the Canadian Broadcasting Act. Whatever your opinion of them, it's hard to argue that they haven't had a major impact on Canada's identity and the strength of its music and entertainment industries. That's a testament in part to the power of radio.

 

[TheBigA]

Actually, radio stations in Canada are in the artist development business. They must make mandatory contributions to a national artist development fund called FACTOR, or its French language counterpart, MusicAction.

That's interesting. I wasn't aware of that. It sounds very much like a royalty. I wonder if it's in place of other royalties stations pay for music licensing. Because in my view, the problem I have with the US system is that the rich get richer, and nothing is devoted to development. I hear the RIAA talk about poor artists, but most of the royalties generally go to the rich ones. Makes no sense to me.

I also like that a percentage goes to the Community Radio Fund. That also sounds like a good idea.

 

[boombox4]

What aboot Robin Sparkles ? (Soory, eh)

Wow, I hadn't been previously exposed to that bit of Canadian culture, and being half-Canadian, I've seen a fair bit.

 

[davideduardo]

Well, a convict doesn't make financial contributions to the criminal justice system, so not really.

Actually, they do. Most prisons for long-term sentences have some form of work program. It's the old "they make the license plates for your car" thing...

The Canadian system is more of a symbiotic relationship that exists between radio and the Canadian music business, and more broadly between TV broadcasters (and now video content streaming companies) and the Canadian TV, film and video industry. It may seem heavy-handed and onerous to Americans who are not accustomed to those kinds of regulations -- and to be fair, it is. But it serves a purpose in Canada, and all the broadcasters and related parties have signed onto it.

Because they had no choice.

For a historian such as yourself, David, you might actually find it interesting to read up on the history of Canadian Content regulations and the Canadian Broadcasting Act. Whatever your opinion of them, it's hard to argue that they haven't had a major impact on Canada's identity and the strength of its music and entertainment industries. That's a testament in part to the power of radio.

I was even a subscriber to the Canadian Talent Library, an industry group formed to create music under Can-Con early requirements. In particular, they did a lot of standards and instrumentals so that those formats, back in the 80's, could meet the new quotas.

In the several decades I was a member of the International Broadcasters Idea Bank ( a monthly newsletter exchange society where stations described their promotions for sales and audience), I met and became friends with a group of Canadian managers. Even back then, they lamented how Can-Con negatively affected their time spent listening and made programming very difficult without playing the small set of core artists twice an hour in some formats.

While Can-Con may have some benefits in creating Canadian recording studios and TV production centers, it really limits stations because a lot of secondary songs get played for years, and the big hits get played way too often.

 

[Kelly A]

Actually, they do. Most prisons for long-term sentences have some form of work program. It's the old "they make the license plates for your car" thing...

And many prisons are now run by private or publicly traded businesses. Without prisoners, no business model exists.

In the several decades I was a member of the International Broadcasters Idea Bank ( a monthly newsletter exchange society where stations described their promotions for sales and audience), I met and became friends with a group of Canadian managers. Even back then, they lamented how Can-Con negatively affected their time spent listening and made programming very difficult without playing the small set of core artists twice an hour in some formats.

Exactly, and why most Canadians preferred listening to U.S. based stations where possible, and why now web streaming via VPN is so popular in Canada. There are only so many relevant Canadian artists around and those who don't fit within a format.
Canadian broadcasters have been frustrated for years trying to negotiate Can-Con, because it puts them at a competitive disadvantage.

 

[tall_guy1]

And many prisons are now run by private or publicly traded businesses. Without prisoners, no business model exists.

Exactly, and why most Canadians preferred listening to U.S. based stations where possible, and why now web streaming via VPN is so popular in Canada. There are only so many relevant Canadian artists around and those who don't fit within a format.
Canadian broadcasters have been frustrated for years trying to negotiate Can-Con, because it puts them at a competitive disadvantage.

Don't they compete with other stations with Cancon though?

 

[Kelly A]

Don't they compete with other stations with Cancon though?

They do, but depending on the format, some are more at a competitive disadvantage by being forced to play Canadian-sourced music potentially outside the eras and station marketing. In other words; needing to play Canadian music even if it's not that popular still presents a tune-out factor.

 

[Kent]

Don't they compete with other stations with Cancon though?

As Kelly mentions, they do. The problem is listeners still tune out when they hear songs they don't like. If the alternative is more songs they don't like, they're probably just going to turn off the radio.

Here's a personal anecdote: Not quite 20 years ago, I was driving on I-40, and, between Amarillo and Tucumcari, I could get exactly one FM station, which was airing religion. I couldn't find anything but more religion and political talk on AM. My solution was to turn the radio off until I got closer to Tucumcari!

 

[davideduardo]

Don't they compete with other stations with Cancon though?

Yes, but the effect is lower overall listening to OTA radio. Today, many Canadians listen to foreign streams. And if streams are regulated, then people will find VPN solutions and other alternatives.

 

[tall_guy1]

Yes, but the effect is lower overall listening to OTA radio. Today, many Canadians listen to foreign streams. And if streams are regulated, then people will find VPN solutions and other alternatives.

A lot of times, cars don't have access to streaming though, so most people listen to the radio. I am unsure about the fact that Canadians consume radio differently than Americans (who use radio less often, but without a doubt still listen.)

 

[Kelly A]

Yes, but the effect is lower overall listening to OTA radio. Today, many Canadians listen to foreign streams. And if streams are regulated, then people will find VPN solutions and other alternatives.

And that's a great point that some of us here have made many times when it comes to music and artist variety. When it comes to Can-Con, there is a government mandate to play a percentage of potential stiffs and call it variety. Anymore, that usually means the listener isn't going to another station up or down the dial, but away to streaming, which doesn't require playing of stiffs.

 

[Kelly A]

A lot of times, cars don't have access to streaming though, so most people listen to the radio. I am unsure about the fact that Canadians consume radio differently than Americans (who use radio less often, but without a doubt still listen.)

Ever hear of Apple Carplay? Most newer cars have either that built in, or at least Bluetooth(tm) connectivity to their phone.

 

[Kent]

A lot of times, cars don't have access to streaming though, so most people listen to the radio. I am unsure about the fact that Canadians consume radio differently than Americans (who use radio less often, but without a doubt still listen.)

I realize this might've changed since I'd last seen the numbers, but, last I'd heard, the car was only 30-35% of radio listening. So, even assuming people will sit through songs they don't want to hear rather than just turn off the radio when in the car, that's not going to affect total listening as much as you might think it would.

I also understand everything tends to be a little more expensive in Canada, but Bluetooth adapters are still cheap. I have two cars, only one of which has CarPlay, and I have a $20 Bluetooth to FM adapter in the other one. So long as I have my iPhone, I'm always in a connected car!

 

[SomeRadioGuy]

Car listening with streaming on a smartphone will never be a thing here.. mainly because most commutes are ... 5 minutes, if that

And our cell network is 2G, with mobile data slower than dial up internet and a few villages have no cell service, neither of that is changing anytime soon.

So I do my damnest to make sure people get what they need from us at KSKO

 

[tall_guy1]

I realize this might've changed since I'd last seen the numbers, but, last I'd heard, the car was only 30-35% of radio listening. So, even assuming people will sit through songs they don't want to hear rather than just turn off the radio when in the car, that's not going to affect total listening as much as you might think it would.

I also understand everything tends to be a little more expensive in Canada, but Bluetooth adapters are still cheap. I have two cars, only one of which has CarPlay, and I have a $20 Bluetooth to FM adapter in the other one. So long as I have my iPhone, I'm always in a connected car!

But are people really satisfied with radio in the US? It seems to be on a slow decline and too much repetition is a reason, through a Google search. People in tge US find ways to avoid listening to things they don't want either.

 

[TheBigA]

But are people really satisfied with radio in the US? It seems to be on a slow decline and too much repetition is a reason, through a Google search. People in tge US find ways to avoid listening to things they don't want either.

It depends on the station. You're looking at national numbers. But some stations manage to hold listeners regardless of trends.

I never see 'too much repetition' as a reason. If I did, I would show you streaming charts that show how people, when able to make their own playlists have more repetition than any radio station. But it's repetition of their personal favorites. People want to avoid commercials.

If people really want to avoid repetition, they can simply change the station. There are lots of stations in every city that play songs you've never heard before. But they may not be in a genre or language you prefer.