It's hard to meet anyone on the street that does not suggest that the debate on local TV has gone over-the-top. It's getting hard to disagree, even as a participant in the CRTC debate. When you think of it in terms of time and energy spent as well as resources wasted, this debate is missing the point. Big time.
This has become much like a battle of dinosaurs to see who controls Jurassic Park. The big question now is who cares? Some people very much, but I think most Canadians are ready to hit the off button.
Here is a radical thought. The whole issue about local TV is a red herring and a waste of our time. I grew up in an era when local TV was, well, really local. Local TV was not defined by the news hours but by hours of homegrown local programs, hosted by local personalities.
Most local TV has not been local for ages. Local TV died when big broadcasting consolidated and created national networks. Rational economics drove those decisions at the time but its a little late to pretend to save it now.
That said, local content is alive and well in papers, magazines, radio, community TV and the Internet. On those platforms we are incredibly well served and well connected.
The local TV fight between distributors, yes TELUS is a distributor, and big broadcasters has become a sideshow. Forget this debate for a minute and test the waters.
We should be talking about how all our media systems can be engaged to benefit creators and consumers. About how we can invest in ever improved digital platforms to connect creators and consumers. About how we can leverage the internet to create new market opportunities.
After all the content value chain starts at creation and ends at consumption. It does not work unless those elements are engaged.
So how do we engage? Engagement means developing consensus about building a national digital strategy rather than errecting a protected enclosure to preserve dinosaurs.
A key element of a digital media strategy is resolving creator rights disputes for new media so creators are incented to dedicate resources to new platform development.
Its about digital training so that our creative resources can exploit new technologies.
It means putting more content on-demand so it’s available to consumers anywhere, anytime and on any platform.
And it’s about giving consumers more opportunities to select the channels they want to watch and drop what they don’t value. That's a tough economic debate given the financial realities of the Canadian market but it does not help to ignore the issue. Discretionary consumption is what defines our markets today.
We think value for service should be defined by consumers not regulators.
And everyone should wake up from this noisy debate and start thinking “Internet “ before the next ice age.
I remember local TV and believe me local TV ain't local anymore. But local content is all around us.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Well said. It occured to me that "Local TV Matters" defines local as being produced in Canada by the broadcasters - not local news and events in my city of Red Deer Alberta (pop, 89,000)that lost a 50 plus year old local station when Global turned out the lights this past summer. The web is where the future of distributing local content lies.
ReplyDeleteBTW: wasn't the fence in Jurassic Park more to protect the viewers from the dinosaurs? Hmmmm...
Could there be a place for truly local TV in the mix of other local content? Could a creative group of local TV folks find their niche? Or is the process of making TV just too expensive to amortize over a local viewership? Could there be the equivalent of Tyee TV ... where you could watch it on any kind of screen??
ReplyDeleteThe Canadian broadcasting system is not Jurassic Park. Do you think allowing TV distributors to distribute Detroit news in digital is part of getting ready for the digital transition?
ReplyDelete