R.I.P. Canadian Media

I miss CBC

noreply@blogger.com (Paul Di Meglio) — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 21:32:00 +0000

It has been a good long month since I've last posted anything here. The main reason? Dispair.

I really miss the old CBC. You know, the one where people who enjoyed their brains would listen to/watch to get them exercised. While CBC Radio still has the occasional oasis of brain-food (Ideas is still on the air, magically) it is quickly becoming a hopeless audio stream of the new and "improved" (much worse actually) CBC TV News. There lies the whole crux of the problem. There is only one CBC News now. It has a focus on creating a TV product that is just as insulting and dumb as what privately owned news media is creating. I'm not a happy man.

I wrote a long rant on the InsideTheCBC blog comment that has get to get past the moderation. If it does, I'll link to it. If not, well, I'll post it here.

Until then, do yourself a favour and listen to the BBC World Service and think back to when Canada had a radio station of such quality. And drink lots of water. It's good for you.

UPDATE: They accepted my lengthy (and I mean long, realllllly long) comment on the InsideTheCBC Blog. Read it here: http://www.insidethecbc.com/critical-cbc-survey-leaked/#comments

Link: CTV and Global get what they want; CBC outraged over exclusion

noreply@blogger.com (Paul Di Meglio) — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 19:35:00 +0000

CTV and Global are getting their fee-for-carriage wishes granted by the CRTC. The CBC is not. While the CBC is inclined to get all whiny over this decision, I'd like to offer some words of reconciliation. None of this is going to make a difference in the long run.

As I stated previously, cable profits are on the rise due to price gouging and questionable business practices (see how Rogers and Bell handle their cell phone monopolies for prime example). TV networks are still in a state of financial dispair. Cable companies will be forced to help them out (unless they're the CBC) and that will make a difference in the short term. However, long term, the whole industry is doomed to fail. The US is making a big push to improve internet speeds and unless Canada wants to be left in the dust, we'll have to do the same.

William Houston, former sports media colomnist for the Globe and Mail has all the facts. Please read:

CTV and Global get what they want; CBC outraged over exclusion | Truth & Rumours | William Houston | On Sports And The Media: "�The CBC has strongly denounced the CRTC’s ruling today that will allow CTV and Global Television to negotiate distribution fees with the cable and satellite operators — but deny the CBC the same opportunity."

Found Link: In case you didn't hear, Canada did well at Games

noreply@blogger.com (Paul Di Meglio) — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 20:12:00 +0000

I'm still going to hold off a few more days before summing up my feelings on CTV/Roger's Olympic coverage. (Hint: They're trying to ruin the country in order to make a profit)

In the mean time, here's a link to The Globe and Mail's former sports media columnist William Houston. (He took the early retirement package, cause, ya know, newspapers are dying) Writing now for Yahoo Canada, his final assessment isn't far off my own, although he is far too forgiving and positive. I see an evil plot behind all the chest pumping and flag waving produced by CTV's Olympic coverage. I'm not going to give it all away, but it has something to do with Stephen Harper, the Conservative party and a desperate and dying industry looking for salvation from the grave.

In case you didn't hear, Canada did well at Games - 2010 Olympics - Yahoo! Canada Sports:

"For the rest of the day, it was wall-to-wall Canada, with video after video after video of Canadian athletes winning their events. It was great to see the clips, accompanied by the “I Believe” theme song, the first time, the second, third and fourth, and in the days previously. But it never stopped."

We shouldn't worry about how much kids consume media, but how they understand what they consume.

noreply@blogger.com (Paul Di Meglio) — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 19:48:00 +0000

The Olympics are over. Thank the heavens. I have some pretty angry and spite-filled things to say about how horribly CTV/Rogers coverage of the games have affected this country's psyche, but I'll wait a few days for things to cool down. Most Canadians have worked themselves into such a tizzy that I don't think anything I say will get passed their delusional excitement.

I want to focus on a concept that has been one of the main subjects consuming CBC News so far today. (How they can spend so much time on this and post-Olympic foo-ey while people are dying in Chile is beyond me, but I don't understand much of what the CBC does anymore.) It appears that an American pediatric study shows that kids consume too much media. The result of the study is hardly surprising and not anything new. It makes the following conclusions on how saturated media consumption can affect children:

Violence — the impact of media violence on real-life aggressive behavior is 0.31 times higher, compared with 0.39 times for the link between smoking and lung cancer.
Early and unprotected sexual activity, particularly if exposed to pornography.
Alcohol and tobacco consumption, with exposure to smoking in movies in Grades 5 to 8 predicting the likelihood of starting smoking within eight years.
Obesity, with possible culprits including the marketing of junk food and fast food and the tendency to eat while watching media.
Heavy television-viewing — that is, two to three hours a day in early childhood has been linked with attention-deficit disorder during the early school years, though experts disagree about the nature of the connection.

I can't help but wonder how these studies get commissioned. How much money is spent on research to draw these obvious conclusions? You can't help but wonder if there are more productive areas in which the resources needed to complete such a study could be put to use. Nevertheless, I want to approach this topic from a slightly different angle than the CBC has been covering it with.

Instead of worrying about how much time kids spend in front of the TV or computer, perhaps we should be more concerned with how they perceive what they consume. If a child is presented with what's offered on Television or Radio and accept it as the true reality of how the world works, they sure as heck may turn into violent, sex-crazed obese jerks. If they were informed that the true nature of what they watch is often nothing more than a cheap form of entertainment cooked up in focus groups and meant to sell advertisements, they may approach media with a healthy dose of skepticism that will help them steer clear of side effects of contemporary media. They need education into the working of media, the art of persuasion and the commercial/economic needs that drive the media they consume. If they understood these principles then they could watch all the TV they want without turning into the sociopaths that this study suggests.

The problem as I see it is hardly that of the amount of exposure that children receive to media of any sort. Quite the opposite. Young impressional children need an explanation into what they watch. The problem as I see it lies mainly in the child's parent who may be equally susceptible to the same negative impression as their children. The society as a whole has become far too trusting in the media. Parents, who may not consume as much media as their children, are just as able to believe what they see. The danger for children is the emulation of what they see. While those of a more advanced age may be wise enough to know not to practice what the tube preaches, they still may find themselves having the world view skewed by the whims of the broadcaster. Therein lies the most important part of being able to be an intelligent consumer of media.

A viewer, whether that viewer be a child or adult, must ask these very important questions: Who is behind this programming and why have they created it? The answer is typically as follows: a private organization intent on making a profit. Once this piece of knowledge has been taken into account, then it becomes easy for anyone, young or old, to identify where the representative programming ends and the sensational marketing begins. Everyone you see on TV, no matter how friendly they may appear, has an agenda of profit making. They will do or say anything it takes to earn their dollars. So when the friendly face appears on the screen telling you to buy something, or do something, or believe something is true, the immediate reaction must be skepticism. That seems to be a skill lacking in most adults of the world today. How can we expect their kids to cope with this?

This is the most shocking part of the study for me. And I quote:

"...parents should play a role in their children's media consumption by:

Limiting the amount of time spent using media, particularly for children under two years old, to less than one or two hours per day."

This bothers me. This is terrible advice. How in the world is a child under the age of two years supposed to consume media with any form of skepticism? I'm shocked that anyone would suggest that children under the age of two consume ANY media whatsoever. At such a young age they barely understand how the world works, let alone be able to understand the twisted message of the kind that evil empires such as Disney put out. I'm pretty shocked at this so-called 'advice'. If I was in a position to offer advice to parents on child raising (I'm not, not at all) I would advise them to keep their kids as far away from any media whatsoever until they are fully aware of the world and their own surroundings first. A young mind is far too sponge like, willing to absorb anything it sees and take it to heart. I really worry for the current generation of newborns who are being exposed to brainwashing rubbish like Disney's Baby Einstein.

The bottom line in my opinion is as follows: traditional media has truly become such a cesspool that I wouldn't want anyone, regardless of age, to take anything they see too seriously. Newer forms of 'media' such as the internet (and I think to count internet as just another media platform underlies one of the fundamental misunderstandings of its true nature) is such a wide open terrain that it's currently too hard to condem it fully and completely. Needless to say that as we transition away from old broadcasting models, we're going to have to adjust our expectations.

Portable People Meters make Canadians seem like delusional idiots

noreply@blogger.com (Paul Di Meglio) — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 02:59:00 +0000

There are plenty of filthy rich CTV executives who are rubbing their genitalia even more vigorously than usual today. It seems as though the Canada-USA hockey game was the most watched single piece of television in this country's history. Wooooo. Better sushi! Higher class hookers! Ivan Fecan probably thinks that at this rate he can buy every hooker in the country. If Canada gets into the hockey finals, Fecan will have every hooker on the planet sucking on his Globemedia (if you know what I mean). What exactly is happening here? Did more Canadians actually watch the men's national hockey getting their bucks whipped by The States (note: capital T capital S, mucho importantes) than watched the gold medal game in 2002? Methinks not. Methinks you have all been lied to. Bamboozled. Deceived. Misguided. Swindled. Robbed. Here's an obscure movie quote for ya:

"Beans, Jake! Magic beans!"

Don't believe what you read in the paper. Don't buy into the hype. The whole broadcasting community is rallying behind the Portable People Meters (hence forth PPMs) and suddenly the number of people watching sports in this country has gone through the roof. Did everyone suddenly find their remote controls at the exact same time these things were introduce. Again, methinks not. Why would so many Canadians watch a preliminary hockey game in which the home teamed was blowing chunks all over the ice? Are they crazy? Stupid? Delusional? Well, it's possible, but I surely hope that isn't the reason. In fact, with some simple logic the truth behind these silly numbers can be easily understood.

When CBC aired the 2002 mens hockey final at the Salt Lake City Olympics, the old way of measuring audiences was in effect. Numbers, particularly for sporting events, were much lower under this system. When the ratings were broken back them, it was quite a feat. Since the PPMs were introduced, we've had records broken for World Junior Hockey, The Grey Cup and the Super Bowl. The Vancouver Olympics, much as I predicted before starting, are also breaking records across the board. When CTVglobemedia puts out a press release taking all the credit for breaking the ratings record, (outside the usual PR spin) they're giving themselves too much credit. For the record, let's get this right: they broke the record UNDER THE NEW SYSTEM. They did not have the largest audience in Canadian sports history.

If they did actually break all records, I'd have to say this country is in serious need of a mental checkup. How stupid and desperate do we have to be to watch ourselves get humiliated in what hardly was a do-or-die game? I'm going to refuse to believe that we're that delusional as a country. It's possible, but I doubt it. I think this is really just the last dying attempt of a dying industry trying to save their jobs. PPMs aren't going to change the fact that TV is dead.

The dumb just keep getting dumber, and the dying just get deader. In the end of the day, let's hope that a future sans-TV might mean Canada can get its brain back. If 2 in every 3 Canadians were actually watching that pathetic game, then I say we should just throw in the towel and call our country expired. We're done. Finished. 10 feet under and sinking. Give me a break people.

Let's get this straight...CTV's coverage stinks and CBC would have also broken records

noreply@blogger.com (Paul Di Meglio) — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:19:00 +0000

CTV is sending out daily press releases claiming that the quality of their coverage is the reason for the record breaking ratings. Give me a break. CBC would have had the exact same ratings and have done so without all the fluffy gimmicky tricks that CTV keeps ramming down our throats. The real reason people are watching is because these are high-stakes Olympics on home soil. They want to see how the "own the podium" program has worked out and are looking for a return on the country's large investment. (p.s. it's been a waste of money) They are largely putting up with CTV's American style because they spent $90 Million to make sure Canada has no better choice. Thanks a lot.

What bothers me the most about CTV's presentation is how American it makes Canada seem. Thankfully I'm not alone with this assessment. The Toronto Star* has an excellent article that sums up my thoughts almost perfectly. Am I the only one who felt slightly uncomfortable when CTV hyped the heck out of Charles and Francois Hamelin only to have them fail completely. Sure, CBC probably would have done a feature on their history, but to have the amount of flag waving and hype that proceeded their disappointing run was enough to make me question if this was actually NBC's coverage all along. It might as well have been. I worry that this is going to set a dangerous precedent for Canadian sports broadcasting in the long term.

If anyone has followed CBC's recent news makeover it should be painfully obvious to see that our public broadcaster is very willing to take the American style approach to broadcasting that they've long stayed far away from. I'm worried that if they get the rights to the Olympics back, they might see CTV's style as the one that Canadians actually want because of all the high ratings (which I've explained are not really a product of how great their coverage has been). These Olympics might spell the end of Canada's world class coverage. The CBC has spent the last few decades covering the Olympics in a down-to-earth style. The focus has always been on the events and the athletes, and they were never afraid to focus on every other country in the world as much as they did Canada. With CTV's style, the focus is on Canadians and singing O Canada as much as possible. I thought Canada was supposed to be a quiet polite country, not a bunch of flag waving Americans. What's going on here? If CBC gets the rights back they might feel the need to employ this chest thumping style because CTV is breaking every record in the ratings book. As I posted previously, some American's are upset with the quality of CTV's broadcast, not just because it's harder to get south of the border, but the straight and clear CBC coverage is completely gone.

* I've been quoting The Star's media analyst frequently because there has scarcely been an alternative. According to The Globe And Mail's former - now retired - columnist, CTVGlobemedia has put a muzzle on their media critic who has not written any analysis of CTV's coverage thus far. This is pretty clearly an example of corporate censorship. CTV is worried that their own employee might critique their coverage. What ever happend to freedom of the press? Another reason I'll be glad to see the newspapers all go out of business. It's all corporate controlled lies and propaganda.

Found Link: Americans hate CTV's Olympic coverage too!

noreply@blogger.com (Paul Di Meglio) — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:06:00 +0000

To possibly prove that I'm not the only one who is very upset with the style of CTV's coverage during winter games, here's a link to The Toronto Star's spots media columnist. He write of a group of American viewers who have started a Facebook page calling for the CBC to take the rights back from the private network. Apparently, despite being south of the border, there are many who rather enjoyed CBC's no baloney focus on sports better than the fluffy NBC style that CTV has presented us with. Sure, the ratings are through the roof and CTV is taking all the blame, but in reality the numbers would be the same if CBC carried the games. As I've explained, the fact that these are highly hyped games on Canadian soil in tandem with the new (evil) portable people meters that are used to measure audience, these games were rating in the bag before they began.

Chris Zelkovich's Sports Media Watch:

"But some aren't happy because they don't like CTV's way of doing things. A Detroit lawyer has started a Facebook page calling for CBC to return to Olympic broadcasting. Kurt O'Keefe says he misses CBC. ``They covered the Games as if they were about the athletes and the competition and not self-promotion of network personalities,' he writes. Others have decried what they see as un-Canadian flash."

The economics of Olympic broadcasting, or: how to throw money down the drain

noreply@blogger.com (Paul Di Meglio) — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 19:13:00 +0000

I'm going to need some help in formulating a complete understanding of the economics behind broadcasting the Olympic games. Despite their best efforts to earn some sort of profit from the Vancouver games (which, as I've already mentioned, include means that are quite distracting and evil) it appears as though the CTV/Rogers consortium are on track to lose millions of dollars. In fact, NBC in the states have already said that they are on track to lose two hundred million dollars.

This boggles the mind considering that they are doing outstandingly well in the ratings. In fact, the Olympics actually got a bigger audience than American Idol in the states for the first time in something like 6 years. (I really think that is a pathetic occurrence and just goes to show how empty headed most American TV viewers are. But I digress...) What motivates these networks to pay so much money for the rights to broadcast the games in the first place? I know a network like NBC, who hasn't been doing too well in the ratings south of the border (if I understand correctly), use the ratings boost to promote other shows on their network and hope that the numbers stick around after the closing ceremony. Even with this reasoning, I'm still not convinced that the money spent makes any sense (clearly doesn't make cents).

CTV's motivations are even harder to decipher. CTV is hardly a starving network. They seem to be in relative decent financial standing. They aren't anywhere near the trouble that Canwest Global's currently dealing with. They teamed up with a theoretical competitor in the form of Rogers to be able to summon up the cash needed to outbid CBC by the amount they did. They must see some long term benefit to the cost, which goes far beyond simply acquiring the rights. The staff on hand, the camera men and equipment, the sleepy sound engineer; all these things cost a heck of a lot of loonies. Not to mention that they are the host broadcaster for the Canadian games and have an additional responsibility of helping out with the world feed of the games. Why spend all this money with the knowledge that you are probably going to end up in the red?

You can't say they are not ceasing upon every opportunity to earn an extra buck. The high ratings will probably mean a bit more profit per-ad aired. If you're lucky you might actually see some sports in between the commercial breaks. That doesn't diminish the fact that ads still aren't going for nearly as much as they used to even a few years ago. The recession did plenty of damage there. Is it all for the glory of just having the bragging rights that come with having the rights to the games? When CTV/Rogers got the rights from CBC, it came at a time when it seemed that CTV was doing everything they could to get all the sports on their own networks and away from the public broadcaster. They got the CFL and curling rights away from the ceeb along with those costly Olympics. Don't forget that they also stole the rights to CBC's famous Hockey Night In Canada song not too long after, which really had everything to do with bragging rights.

Maybe I'm missing something here. It's very likely. I'm hardly an expert when it comes to these matters of finance. I know that when the rights were acquired, ad rates were going through the roof. Maybe CTV mistakenly believed that the good times would keep on rolling and could actually make back on their investment. It's possible. Profit driven corporations tend to be miserable at looking into the future.

It also looks like the number of people watching the games online is sky rocketing. If you have a good enough computer, the experience online often surpasses what you experience on TV in terms of quality and content. While on the surface more viewers are generally better, this trend has to worry Rogers and all cable and satellite providers. Technology is finally at a point where streaming content is just as good as what you get on traditional TV. It's a mere triviality to hook up a computer to an HDTV and all of a sudden the need for cable vanishes in thin air.

I can't help but think that these Olympic games are a bit of a turning point for broadcasters. If the economics of broadcasting sports continually end with negative profits, why would any private organization invest in such obscure things like amateur sports? One thing is for certain, things are changing one way or the other. Which way they go depends on how the wind blows.

"I Believe" Probably the worst song in the history of terrible songs

noreply@blogger.com (Paul Di Meglio) — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 22:49:00 +0000

I want to be happy whenever Canada wins a medal, but CTV has put too much of an investment in their garbage 'I Believe' song and just can't quit. As terrible as the song is, (and really it's pure trashy fluff) it's the motives behind using the song that disturbs me to the very core of my soul. (no exaggeration, I can't sleep at night)

I've already mentioned why it's a manipulative song. The composition is recycled from every corporate-made piece of music ever. There is nothing to it beyond reliance on a formula. The formula has been grown in a test tube, squashed through a focus-group and checked versus charts and graphs. It's artificial and designed to manipulate and control you. The arrangement features cheesy orchestral chords and way-too-corny-to-be-believed children's choir. If you have ever been caught feeling for the piece, you are a victim of CTV/Roger's corporate grip. They are trying to own you. Now, many would argue that this is hardly a new tactic. Jingles have been used in advertising since the inception of radio. This, while true, doesn't make the practice not evil. It is evil. Let me explain...

CTV/Rogers has moved in to the Olympic broadcasting game after a lengthy absence. They have only returned because the corporate bosses (picture old white men in suits sitting around a boardroom table) have deemed that Olympics on home soil in the year 2010 would amount to huge profits. There has also been a tremendous push to actually provide Canadian athletes with sufficient funding and training possibilities for what may be the first time in this country's history. Canada winning medals + Olympics at home = HUGE MONEY (and higher grade sushi at boardroom meetings on the CTV private jet (yeah, very rich very white men))

By punctuating every half decent moment that a Canadian athlete has with their terribly evil music, they are subliminally associating your joy of victory with "I Believe" (in what? Jesus? Buddha? This is sport, not a religion). Suddenly they start playing the same music to sell you additional merchandise: DVD boxsets, clothing and of course the song itself. It really is no more than a cheap marketing ploy and part of the consortium's greedy plan on making gigantic profits on the back of our athletes. Please, do yourself a favour and don't fall for these tricks. Show some dignity and resist the mind control of Canada's biggest broadcasting corporations. It's evil and just plain wrong.

What we're learning from CTV's online Olympic streams

noreply@blogger.com (Paul Di Meglio) — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 17:54:00 +0000

I've long been a fan of ditching traditional ways of receiving television and moving to a completely online method of media distribution. CTV's Olympic website is busting a few myths that the networks themselves have been spreading as gospel.

One really dumb excuse for sticking with the cable and satellite monopolies in Canada is the notion that the quality of web streams cannot equal that of what you get with High Definition TV broadcasts. The simply amazing HD quality of the Olympic streams is showing that the networks are more than capable of delivering great quality online. Throw that excuse out of the window.

Secondly, there has always been a question of if the networks can monetize online programming. With the blankets of banner ads, pre-roll ads and interupting mid-stream ads, I think we can see that the web is ripe with profit to be had. All we're waiting for are the arcane conservative ad agencies that are holding us all back. They continue to spend an insane amount of money for broadcast commercials even though I'd question how effective those ads really are. Personally speaking, I find pretty much each and every ad aired during the Olympics to be stupid and insulting and if anything are causing me to hate the products they represent. I was going to plan a trip to BC, but those damn ads that play at least 30 times an hour are causing me to second guess that with fear of running into those scary people who keep telling me how big and laid back they are. Creepy.

One thing that I hate the most about cable and satellite is just how closed they are. The networks that can afford a place on the dial are mostly huge corporations. Independant producers of content have to go through these rich and conservative companies to get something aired. The result is we have a dial full of brain dead lowest common denominator programming that tends to be largely insulting and possibly brain damaging. It's pretty much all formulaic and bland. The networks stick to these formulas because they know it's easy money in the bag. Since viewers are only exposed to this crud, they are often confused and bewildered when anything new and ground breaking comes along.

It's not like CTV and Global and the like wouldn't be allowed to continue airing programing if we scraped cable and satellite, they'd just have to compete against the whole internet. Newspapers are already having to compete with bloggers like me who can write an editorial without fear of censorship. I can say whatever I want and that's how it should be. Canadian TV networks have grown accustomed to having complete control over what we can see. This, in my mind, is a monopoly. It has allowed CTV to become Canada's 'most watched network' by simply buying rights to American shows. They don't produce much themselves and are on cruise control. It has created a culture of stupidity in Canada that effects us all. Let's break this monopoly.

The big thing that the internet has done for the Olympic games is allow for perfect choice. Being able to watch the raw streams of events has been an amazing revelation. You realize just how much those nauseating play-by-play guys get in the way. Does anyone in Canada really need descriptions of what's happening during a hockey game? We all know the sport inside and out. We're not stupid. I personally have been enjoying the raw feeds of the curling. I know how curling works. I don't need Vic Rauter making jokes about Norwegian fashion. I can do that myself. In curling it has become the norm to mic up all the competitors. The raw streams just feature the sounds of the players planning their shots and the roar of the crowd. If you don't know the sport too well and need some explanation you have the option of switching to the regular broadcast feed, Vic Rauter and all. While this kind of choice could technically be presented on digital cable, it isn't.

The fact of the matter is the need for cable and satellite is simply gone. (Up in smoke...poof) Take one look at your monthly bill and tell me honestly that you aren't fed up with being raped by Rogers, Shaw and Bell on regular basis. The monopolies that exist in this country have created oversized profit-eating corporations that have too much control on what we see and hear. The internet is the free and open alternative that can and will make these dirty jackasses obsolete. The sooner the better.

More Olympic Thoughts

noreply@blogger.com (Paul Di Meglio) — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 20:59:00 +0000

I know this is hardly a problem unique to CTV, but I'm already entirely sick and tired of the same bloody terrible commercials over-and-over and over-and-over. It's not just the advertisers, but CTV is recycling the same features and promos at least a dozen times an hour. I know CBC did the same thing, but the tone of CTV's features are just phony enough to make me sick every time I see them. (btw, I needed a second puke bucket) I want to watch sports, not fake emotional drivel. Really sickening. Like I said in my previous post, these things may seem innocent and sweet enough, but the sinister motives behind them must be pointed out: these features are meant to manipulate you into caring about things that CTV/TSN/Sportsnet ignore on any other day. It's pure evil. Here are some more thoughts:

- I'll give them a bit of credit, they are doing a slightly better job at pointing out what's on where, but you still need the website if you want to plan your Olympic viewing properly. The choice of what to watch is nice, but good luck figuring out where the event you care about actually is. CBC did a better job of getting all the Canadian action live on the main network. Couple that with the fact that CTV's anchors keep telling us we're going to see one event only to cut to another, and the whole thing is a giant mess. I know it's mainly a crew of rookies working the games, but they snatched the rights away from the pros, so they have no excuse.

- Sure they are breaking viewing records left, right and centre but they really shouldn't take too much credit for it. These Olympics were going to break records even if they were shown in black and white. Don't forget the living lie that is the 'portable people meters' and you have money in the bank for CTV/Rogers. They knew this of course, that's why they broke the bank in the first place to steal the rights away from CBC. Would it kill them to have coverage that doesn't suck?

- Do people really behave like the idiots in the Bell commercials? I know we are living in a dark age of humanity, but these stupid jerks slobbering over the speed of their network connections while shopping for shoes really makes me sad to be living in a country where a marketing agency figured these ads would be effective. Maybe this is actually a sign of the upcoming death of television marketing. The sooner the better, cause this is painful to sit through. They don't mention the fact that they have caps on how much you can actually use that so called amazing 'high speed' internet. What a bunch of lying assholes.

- Talking about commercials, all the ads from the Ontario, BC, Quebec and Newfoundland government tourism agencies have me thinking. Could all the money that the provinces are pouring into the CTV/Rogers coverage count as a government bailout of private broadcasting? How about those 'economic recovery' spots? The federal government is also lending a hand.

- The ads on the internet streams are really getting to me. I would barely understand their purpose if the revenue was needed to pay for the bandwidth, but since Rogers and Bell have such a large hand in these games and own all the pipes in this country, they essentially are streaming this stuff to your computer at zero cost for themselves. These intrusive ads are nothing more than a blatant cash grab and a one of the biggest downfalls of having private corporations as the broadcast rights holders. Take me back to Beijing in 2008. Those were the days.

- Having CTV news anchors co-hosting the daytime coverage is proving to be a terrible awkward idea. Lisa Laflamme doesn't have a clue what she's talking about. She doesn't belong. What purpose does she serve? So that people who don't know anything either don't feel left out? That's the most patronizing and insulting idea I've ever heard. What are we playing at here?

- Speaking of stupid, what's with all that etalk crap? All these thinly disguised promos for the crappy shallow programming that CTV typically lives off is enough to make anyone with a brain hurl. Give me a break and stop this shit. Who cares where Wayne Gretzkey and his wife is eating dinner? Really? If you amongst those who care, you are scum and represent everything wrong with our stupid shallow society. The feature with the judge from some crappy reality show (dance something?) on the zip line was probably the most embarrassing annoying thing I've ever seen on TV in my entire life. I would like to punch the person who thought that was a good idea - in the face. You jerk! You ruined my entire day!

- Canada won their first hockey game. It was a blowout. Yawn. CTV decided to do their own TSN style coverage and ignore the world feed altogether. You can watch the raw feed online. Hint: it's much less annoying. Shutup Pierre Mcguire.

- Does watching Mcdonalds staff juggling eggs distract from the horrible side-effects that come with eating the food? I doubt it.

So my tone continues to get increasingly negative. I really can't help myself. I have grown to really love watching the Olympics and I don't doubt the quality of CBC's coverage had something to do with that. I decided to give CTV/Rogers a shot before the games started. My patience has completely run out. While the ratings would tell the consortium that they're doing a fine job, I really want to make sure my opinion is perfectly clear: You are killing the Olympics for me.

Hey CTV, NBC wants their shitty American style Olympic coverage back!

noreply@blogger.com (Paul Di Meglio) — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 03:12:00 +0000

The Vancouver Olympics are well underway. People across the country are tuning into the various networks that make up the CTV/Rogers Canadian Olympic Media Consortium in what are apparently record breaking numbers. Again, with the new "people meters" used to measure the audiences I'll take these numbers with a grain of salt (and a heap of scepticism). I might be the only person who thinks that this new system is even more crooked and evil than the old fashioned way (which was very crooked and evil).

My title for this post may seem a bit overstated, and perhaps it is. Let's face it, NBC has set such a high standard in making the Olympics completely unwatchable that it would have taken a real miracle for CTV to stink it up to such an extent. The purposeful tape delaying that NBC thrives on would simply not be accepted in a country that has been spoiled with all the live coverage CBC has been offering in the past few Olympics. What CTV has taken from NBC is the over-emotional super-saccharine over-hyped breathless over emphasis on every little potential moment for more ratings. CTV seems intent on making back their insane investment on the Olympic rights. Promos and replays, replays and promos. Apparently those who actually watch CTV on a regular basis (I try to avoid it like I avoid a rabid squirrel) were subject to months and months of the same terrible promos leading up to the games. Sure, CBC also over-promoted the games in their own way, but I'll bet a loonie that CTV wins in the nausea inducing game. It's in this regard that they really are taking a page from NBC.

There are those in marketing that will tell you that emotion sells. What they really mean to say is that emotion manipulates. There is no more effective way to manipulate and swindle and cheat and rob your fellow human beings then going right for their primitive fragile heartstrings. Not only are the plethora of sponsors using this evil tactic, but CTV itself seems to be praying on your animal-self in order to ensure that it does the near impossible and make back its stupid investment to get the rights to the Olympics in the first place. Do yourself a favour and don't fall for these cheap tricks.

I have plenty of other observations on the coverage at this year's Olympics thus far. Here they are in no particular order:

- An obvious highlight of the coverage so far has to be Michael Landsberg assaulting US vice president Joe Biden in a rare Olympic event: Who is the more obnoxious loud mouth who doesn't know when to shut his trap. Landsberg won.

-I was going to make an obvious joke about Loyd Robertson and Brian Williams making out during the commercial breaks during Friday's opening ceremony. Then I remembered that it's just a slight variation on my usual Peter Mansbridge/Brian Williams make out joke. I think I'll pass this year.

- I really miss CBC's Olympic theme. You know the one: duh duh duh daaa duhduh...yadda yadda. CTV seems to have done everything they could have done to drive me into a state of pure nausea. Their Olympic "song", I Believe, is one of the most terrible pieces of generic muzak I've ever heard in my entire life. A boring unoriginal melody coupled with a generic sounding 'singer' drive home the over-the-top arrangement with sappy strings and cheesy children's choir is one of the biggest insults I've heard on Canadian TV in years (and boy-oh-boy have there been plenty of insulting moments on Canadian TV in the last few years). If you are one of the "millions" of Canadians who actually bought this song on iTunes, well, frankly, you should be ashamed of yourself. Talking about manipulations, this piece of propaganda is designed to trigger your tear ducts with age-old tricks. Don't fall for it friends. You've heard it here first. I Believe is an evil piece of propaganda. Period.

- CTV ripped off NBC's terribly awkward/cheesy Fireplace set, complete with a why-would-anyone-sit-on-this-during-live-national-TV couches. Of all the myriad of things that CTV leafed from NBC booked, this may be the most insulting. Nothing more to say here. Puke, Vomit. Puke Puke Puke.

-I haven't watched much Sportsnet in recent years, but from what dark alley did they drag these anchors from? They're stupid, awkward and unafraid to make themselves and all of Canada ashamed to be Canadian. Go back to the gutter Don Taylor.

- Brian Williams rules. The guy is the man. CBC's Beijing coverage was lacking due to his absence and CTV is lucky to have him. He's pure class and a master at turning awkward into a charm. Kudos Mr. Williams. A real Canadian broadcasting legend.

- Jamie Campbell has come a long way. When he started calling Blue Jays games for Sportsnet he was a real stinker. In the last year or so he has come into his own. His play-by-play of skiing and snowboarding has been the pleasant surprise of the game's coverage so far.

- I can't say the same for Rod Smith. The lead anchor for TSN's SportsCentre is out of his element in the speed skating oval. His calls have been clumsy and mistake-ridden. He has the rhythm of the sport completely wrong and if it wasn't for the legendary Catriona Le May Doan by his side explaining what's actually happening he would be completely lost in the woods. I have no doubt the guy's a pro and did his research, but it hasn't helped him so far. Steve Armitage is sorely missing from these Olympics.

- CTV's Olympic website is a pretty impressive hub for all things Vancouver 2010. The quality of the video streams if often very impressive. It's also an essential tool for following the games on Television. While CTV/Rogers are getting almost everything live on the tube, you need to have the website by your side as a guide to what's on where. The various channels are not doing a great job of letting you know what's airing elsewhere. This is pretty mind-boggling. The consortium is lumping in all the various ratings into one giant sum so its not like they have any reason to keep viewers in the dark. Very very strange indeed.

- The quality of the online streams comes with some negative side-effects. Firstly, CTV's deal with Microsoft's Silverlight means that viewers may need to download an additional plug-in to view the streams. Also, if there is any video protocol that turns my CPU to mush more than flash, it's Silverlight.
Also, watching the raw feeds without play-by-play is great for someone like me who tends to hate most of CTV's announcers. However, unlike CBC's use of the raw feed on their Beijing Olympic site, CTV is continuously interrupting the peace and quiet with loud annoying ads every few minutes. It's enough to drive you to insanity.

- It was one of the all time great Olympic moments. Alexandre Bilodeau wins the gold medal. Great shots of him celebrating, his brother's glowing smile from the stands, hundreds of maple leafs jumping for joy. A real glory moment for the whole country. And then, CTV turns up their crappy I Believe piece of shit music and completely kills the moment, sending me diving for my puke bucket. Damn you CTV. Damn you to hell!

- While I focus on the Canadian coverage, I occasionally flip over to NBC for a few laughs. You Americans sure are completely ignorant about us toque wearing folk. I can't say I blame you. As you continuously point out on NBC (over and over again) there are only ten people who live in the entire country. I'm citizen number 6 if you wanted to know. All hail our dictator Steven Harper and his rolls of fat! We're all going to timmies tonight! You know Tim Hortons locations outnumber the amount of people in Canada by the sum of 20,000 to one. That's alot of Double-Doubles eh? There are also more moose than people on the island of Newfoundland. (I didn't make up that last point)

- CTV seems intent on outdoing CBC in just about every aspect of their Olympic coverage. CBC has long been world champion in live technical glitches during their live sports, but CTV is making a strong run for the crown. The audio guy seems to be particularly at fault, being asleep at the fader most of the time. I know live TV ain't easy, but seriously, with all that money you think they could have done better then some intern working the sound board.

- Another great Canadian moment: The Bilodeau family joins Brian Williams on CTV's set. Darren Dutchyshen, TSN anchor (and probably hardcore alcoholic), brings out a bottle of champaign to celebrate the gold medal win. It's sweet, cute and all sorts of warm fuzzies. Then, of course, CTV cuts to a sappy minor key piano version of their I Believe disgrace of a song. Keep in mind that this is the same arrangement they played for the tragic death of luger Nodar Kumaritashvili. Canada's first gold medal on home soil and the unbelievably sad death of a young athlete in his prime backed with the same piece of music. Nice touch CTV. Kudos. Hope you made a decent profit there.

Don't be stupid. You can't fight the internet. It's here, it's free and it's open. Get used to it.

noreply@blogger.com (Paul Di Meglio) — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 18:28:00 +0000

I read a plethora of stupid articles while I travel the vast area of information that is the world wide web. When looking for inspiration for this here blog-thing, I scarcely run into more folly and wrongheadedness then I do from scanning the headlines that are accumulated at the Friends Of Canadian Broadcasting's website. Take for example this fine piece of work assembled by the Hollywood Reporter. There are those out there in this fine country of ours that really lament the fact that the CRTC doesn't impose the same silly Canadian Content regulations that have been saddled on radio and television broadcasters. Wow. Even if the CRTC felt the urge to do such thing, the fact of the matter is they simply cannot. You can't regulate content on the internet. By its very nature, the internet is completely open. If you need evidence of this, simply look to China.

It's known as "The Great Firewall of China". The communist Chinese government takes just about every measure in its power to try and censer information that it deems 'inappropriate' for its citizens to see. Heck, this blog is probably going to be 'blocked' just because I mentioned this. However, any technologist knows that even the so called "Great Firewall" is really more of a mesh screen door. It's a rather elementary procedure to circumvent its restriction and access any site your heart desires. The very fabric of the underlying technology of the internet allows for such things to be done. Regardless of what efforts the CRTC may take to impose restrictions on what Canadians have access to (which they won't cause they can't) will be just as symbolic and useless. The fact of the matter is, Canadians are going to be able to see what they want when they want it, even it's coming from south of the border. Canadian content be damned.

The real way to preserve 'Canadian culture' is to produce things that Canadians want to see. You can't force it down our throats anymore. Not that this matters, it really isn't about our so-called 'culture'. The concern here is for an industry in decline. The privately owned media companies of Canada have spent the last few decades taking advantage of the simultaneous substitution law to earn their giant profits. They simply bought Canadian rights to an American made show and aired it at the same time, replacing the American advertisements with their own. Now with the internet, Canadians can watch these same programs without having to turn on their cable or satellite systems. In other words, the cash cow has left the building.

The great thing about the internet is, it doesn't care a fig for who owns what and where it's coming from. Canadian culture now has free reign to infect the rest of the world without needing distribution agreements with foreign media empires. Take Canada's National Film Board. The NFB has gone to great lengths to take advantage of the internet to make its content freely available to anyone with an internet connection. They stream full films for free on their website and even have an excellent iPhone application that allows anybody to watch a documentary or animated film wherever they happen to be. The result? The NFB online effort has resulted in people all over the world watching and enjoying Canadian content. It hasn't just encouraged Canadians to discover some quality home-grown content that they wouldn't see on CTV or Global (ever in a million years), but it has also had some great success worldwide. These obscure Canadian films now have a global audience. What does that tell you? We aren't going to be overthrown by the vast quantity of American content now available to us. As long as we continue to produce content that is actually 'good' and not merely a filler to meet a CRTC Can-Con law then people will watch it.

I highly recommend Michael Geist's review on the success on NFB's free and open approach to distribution. It goes to show that just because the CEO of CTV might not be able to afford fresh sushi in his private jet anymore, it doesn't mean that Canadian culture is going to die. All of you old rich people who see their millions starting to dry up: Get Over It!

TV may not be dead, but it's dumb

noreply@blogger.com (Paul Di Meglio) — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 20:43:00 +0000

I just read the dumbest thing I've seen in a long while.

TV Is Not Dead

Clearly this article was written by an old fogey senile bat. The three arguments made here are things that social and interactive mediums (like "the internets") can accomplish in a much more affective manner then the boob-tube ever could. The author (who refers to technology as "new fandangled") tries to paint those who don't watch television as pretentious intellectuals. I couldn't disagree more. Those who aren't watching TV are young. That is the most important factor to understand. Using technology relates to familiarity. Old people watch TV because they have been doing it their whole lives and still haven't figured out how to program their VCRs. Younger folks who have been using these things since day one have no problems finding the vast array of content available online and are better and smarter off for it.

TV is dumb. TV is controlled by oppressive forces. At the end of the day the high cost of broadcasting television means that only governments and big corporations are able to afford a voice. The governments are clearly interested in self promoting propaganda for the most part. The big corporations are only interested in pleasing advertisers. Advertisers want large numbers of viewers. In order to draw these large audiences private broadcasters create programs that are broad and incredibly dumb. I'm not an ageing intellectual. I'm young. I can't stand television. Whenever I'm in a room with the television on, I feel my brain melting. It's really that stupid. The stupidity of what I see and hear being broadcast on TV here in North America is simply atrocious. The worst thing is that it is having a tremendous impact on society. Never before has there been less interest in socio-political affairs in Canada. The last election had the lowest voter turnout in the history of this country. I blame TV. More people vote for the generic voices on American Idol.

The argument presented by the article above strikes me as being incredibly misguided. Has this person ever tried using "the internets"? There is so much independent thought, so much free speech and creativity that it puts the derivative crap on television to shame. There is no control. People are free to say what they want and create whatever they believe in without having to answer to a higher power. Look at me! They wouldn't dare let me on TV because they're afraid I might actually make viewers think. Advertisers don't want people who think. If they were thinking they may realize that the shoddy products they're hawking are actually garbage.

One more thing. I really don't buy this rise in TV ratings that all broadcasting apologist keep quoting. As I've stated previously on this blog, the way broadcasters measure audiences has changed. The new system has put the rating numbers threw the roof. It's really unlikely that the boost in ratings coinciding with the introduction new "people meters " is a coincidence. TV networks know that these are the end-days and are fighting it anyway they can. If that means fudging the numbers to mislead advertisers, then so be it. Another big advantage of the internet is you can't lie about the ratings.

Bottom line: you are going to see TV in its present form die with the baby boomers.

The Olympic Dilemma - How Canada's Olympic Broadcast Media Consortium are banking on the Vancouver games.

noreply@blogger.com (Paul Di Meglio) — Sun, 24 Jan 2010 21:10:00 +0000

You've probably seen endless promotions for the upcoming Vancouver Olympic Games. Part of the record breaking deal to out-bid the CBC for rights to be the host broadcaster of this year's games, CTV teamed up with Rogers to form the Canadian Olympic Broadcast Media Consortium. With an almost seemingly endless amount of funds behind them, this broadcasting juggernaut set sail on a sea of cash with a mission to make sure these games are the most watched sporting events in Canadian history. Given the amount of money they spent to get the rights to the games, $153-million (US) for the next two games : $90-million for Vancouver, they really have no choice but to use every medium at their disposal to ensure that they make their money back. The list of channels owned by the combination of CTV and Rogers that will be broadcasting the games is impressive. They include:

· Television (English) – CTV, TSN, Rogers Sportsnet, OLN, APTN, MuchMusic
· Television (French) – V, RDS, RIS Info Sports, APTN
· Television (Multilingual) – OMNI.1, OMNI.2, ATN, APTN
· Online – CTVOlympics.ca, RDSolympiques.ca
· Radio (English) – Rogers Radio: THE FAN 590 Toronto, THE FAN 960 Calgary, Mountain FM Whistler, News 1130 Vancouver, 680 News Toronto, 660 News Calgary, News 95.7 Halifax, News 88.9 St. John, News 91.9 Moncton, 570 News Kitchener
· Radio (French) – Corus Québec: CKAC Sports, 96.9 CKOI, 98.5 FM and Info690 Montreal, 102.9 Souvenirs garantis Québec, 102.1 CKOI Québec, 104.7 Souvenirs garantis Outaouais, 98.3 Souvenirs garantis Saguenay, 104.5 CKOI Estrie, 106.9 Souvenirs garantis Mauricie
· Print – The Globe and Mail
· Theatre – live coverage available in 64 Cineplex theatres throughout Canada during the Games, with CTV Olympic Games Broadcast at Cineplex
· Mobile – exclusive live video streaming on Bell Mobility, live coverage of men’s and women’s hockey, recaps, highlights and unique mobile features

And if this list, found in this press release, doesn't give you the idea, you will scarcely be able to turn around without having the olympics shoved into your face. Combine this insane amount of coverage with the fact that Canada is expected to do very well in the upcoming games, and you have what essentially amounts to ratings gold and easy money for the consortium.

But wait, that's not all. In what seems to be almost far too convenient timing, the way ratings are measured for broadcasting in Canada was changed last year. This new system has generated an almost endless streak of record beating ratings since its implementation. While this may seem on the surface as more people watching TV than ever before, it is in fact a false boost. By changing the way ratings are measured in Canada, the broadcasting industry has begun misleading advertisers to what they might think is more eyeballs glued to the tube. Combined with the wall to wall coverage, this new rating system will easily guarantee the highest ratings that Canada has ever seen.

While the numbers will be insanely high, how will the real decline of television audiences affect advertising revenue? Those ad agencies that used to spend insanely huge amounts of money for prime television time have been less than keen to open their wallets recently. The recession of a year ago is still hanging around and it has clearly only helped to increase the decline in the average price paid per advertisement. There has been some recovery over the last few months, but by and large advertisers are learning how to leverage the internet to save money and reach more targeted audiences.

So while next month's olympic coverage is going to break rating records, the real dilemma rests in whether advertisers be willing to spend enough to help the media consortium make back the insane amount of money they spent so far. Don't forget that acquiring the rights is only part of the cost. Being the host broadcaster, they will be required to provide all the infrastructure for all the world's coverage. The cost in equipment and man power alone has to be astronomical.

Six months ago I was predicting a financial disaster. While I'm not quite as pessimistic today, these games could predict the future for private broadcasters in Canada. With Canwest in bankruptcy, there are really no other big players in the game outside of CTV and Rogers. If they accumulate enough debt after all is said and done, what remains of the industry in Canada? Needless the say, the next month will be a telling one.

Think the end of the dark times for Canadian media are here? Think again: CityTV cuts 60 jobs

noreply@blogger.com (Paul Di Meglio) — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 21:43:00 +0000

Here is the latest in what is mounting to be the beginning of the end of broadcasting in Canada. The following is from today's National Post (ironically in pretty dire straights itself):

Toronto's television airwaves have lost some familiar faces after Rogers Communications Inc. slashed dozens of jobs across the Citytv chain, including Anne Mroczkowski, a veteran news anchor who cohosted the city's prime time news hour for more than two decades.

Her fate was shared by about 60 other workers, including producers, editors and camera operators at the conventional TV network as Rogers eliminated "underperforming" programming consisting mainly of its newscasts at stations in Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton and Toronto.

The rationale for the job cuts, a Rogers spokesperson said, was simple economics. Conventional television stations have been bleeding advertising revenue since the inception of the recession in 2008 as advertisers drastically trimmed budgets.

While many keep claiming the end of the dark times are fast approaching and that a sense of normalcy is on the horizen, they are pretty clearly lying to themselves. These sort of stories are going to be the norm over the next few years, as traditional forms of broadcasting will cut themselves into oblivion.

Read the gory details here.

Frank Zappa on the state of radio in the 1980s - It has only gone downhill

noreply@blogger.com (Paul Di Meglio) — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 21:32:00 +0000

The radio is a medium that no longer serves a purpose. Really. I know many people are still stuck with this old and pointless way of hearing news and music, but if we were to take advantage of the technology currently available, we'd see past the limited control that the few corporations who own the stations have put on the radio dial.

Frank Zappa was always aware of the descent of broadcast radio and television in the 1980s and was never afraid of speaking out on just how money driven and bland radio was quickly becoming. While many mourn the loss in profitability that seems to be fast approaching traditional radio stations, I for one cannot wait until they all bite the dust. Radio, music radio specifically, was a bland and generic venue for pumping out more of the same as early as when Zappa was interviewed in this video. While things got seemingly worse for Radio in the 1990s, we now have the internet to take control away from the big businesses who have long had a tight grip on what we were able to hear. Sadly Zappa past away long before the dawn of the internet as a broadcasting medium, but I would imagine that he would welcome it with open arms.

As advertisers move online where do TV and Radio stations earn their profits?

noreply@blogger.com (Paul Di Meglio) — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 20:58:00 +0000

There seems to be little doubt that the flow of advertising dollars has begun to move away from traditional media (Newspapers, Television and Radio) and towards the world of online 'new' media. Chris Anderson famously talked about The Long Tail. While many seemed to dismiss the thesis of his book, they overlooked how much of an impact it would have on the way business works. There is no field of work that is being more profoundly affected by the this theory than media. In a small market like Canada, the fracturing of audience to niche areas of interest via the internet can have devastating effects on the bottom line.

There is nothing more important to the growth of Canadian network television during the 1990s than the CRTC mandated 'Simultaneous Substitution' law. This law forced cable and satellite in Canada to replace the American advertisements with the Canadian broadcast of a program that was airing on both stations at the same time. For example, Global TV generated enormous amount of profit by airing the Simpsons at the same time as Fox aired it in the states. Canadian viewers were forced to watch Global's advertisements even if they tuned into Fox on their television. Canadian viewers have always been relegated to watch Canadian ads during the Super Bowl, often missing the much talked about pricey advertisements that aired south of the border. Canwest Global built an empire by taking advantage of this law, filling its prime time TV schedule with much publicized American programming. As Canadians start flocking to viewing these programmes via online means, the ratings on Global have begun to dry up. The Canwest bankruptcy can be seen as a company banking on one form of generating profits and hoping that the stream of cash would never dry up. Now that it has...they are screwed. But that's only half the story...

Read this article: More Targeted Ad Dollars Less Profitable

What is missed by this article is that while online content creators will never make the super gigantic huge profits that network television has in the passed, that much money is no longer needed to sustain an online business. Why would a company invest thousands of dollars to get an ad on prime time television when it can spend a fraction of the price by targeting an enthusiast web site and directly reaching an audience that they know are very likely to be interested in their product. The internet creates a direct conduit for advertiser to reach the exact consumer it wants to. Prime time television may have the largest audience watching at one time, but how many of those people are really paying attention? Spending that much money with the hopes that your ad will be seen by the small fraction of the audience who actually wants to buy the product in question is a gamble that no longer needs to exist.

We'll talk more about how this shift will eventually benefit the economy in future posts.

What do you think? Is the ultimate death of Canadian media the end of our culture? We have so much to cover on this blog, and I hope that you join in the discussion.

2010 - The Year -traditional- Canadian Media Bites The Dust

noreply@blogger.com (Paul Di Meglio) — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 20:54:00 +0000

It has been a simply awful year for the Canadian broadcasting industry. 2009 saw cut backs almost across the board as advertising money started drying up throughout this great land of ours. The predominant belief is that this was primarily a product of the global recession that saw decline in almost every industry from construction to catering. While I'm sure that this was indeed a direct cause for this dynamic drop in advertising revenue, I think that the broader picture was missed by most in the media game. Now, a year after the first big blow to the pocket books of big media in Canada took place, we are seeing that despite some turn in the overall economic picture there is little improvement in the key source of cash for Canadian media. Advertising is still well on its way to drying up almost completely. What is actually happening here.

There is little question as to the disruptive force of the internet. The music industry was the first to witness its effect as consumers began abandoning physical media purchases (ie. CDs etc...) in favour of online digital downloads. The method in which it decided to counteract this sea-change in consumer tastes proved to cause even more devastation. Instead of adapting its business model and find new sources of income outside of selling CDs, the music industry lead by America's Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) began filing lawsuits against those who downloaded music and began lobbying government to institute new laws to make the exchange of music a criminal activity. All these varying efforts actually proved to be even more disastrous and today the industry is in a state of decline and disarray.

The world wide web is causing similar shifts throughout various industries. Television, Radio and Newspapers are in a similar sate of transition as the old revenue models, the same models that turned them into multi-billion dollar industries, prove to be no longer profitable. Canadians are just not watching television in the same large numbers as they did a decade ago. The media industries of Canada have taken some small steps to fight this change in the way they get their money. They have started offering content (reluctantly) online to be viewed free and on demand. They have even gone as far as to change the way they meter audience numbers in order to artificially boost rating numbers and give the false impression that more people are actually watching television then ever before. While this has given networks a temporary raise in revenue, this is a short term solution at best. The writing is on the wall and despite the denial the end for these big media corporations is fast approaching.

While many see this as a very dark time for radio, television and newspapers in this country, I actually see a very bright side to all of this. Once again using the music industry as example, while the billions of dollars are gone and there are fewer and fewer 'gigantic' musical groups and artists, there has never been more music available in all of human history. Record company CEOs who fly around in private jets and drink thousand dollar bottles of champaign for breakfast are becoming an endangered species. The great thing is that this is no big loss at all. We no longer need big companies to finance the recording and distribution of music. It has never been simpler for independent musicians to record and distribute music using cheap and accessible technologies like personal computers and the internet. The selection has never been broader, the talent has never been freer and in the end everybody wins. (Except the rich CEOs of course)

You'll begin to see similar things happening with audio and visual media over the next year. Take, for example, the efforts of Leo Laporte's TWiT network. This tech journalist has seen the decline in mainstream media's ability to adequately cover technology news in a way that wasn't insulting or void of integrity. He took the technology that was available to him thanks to the descending price and ascending quality of consumer-grade electronics began producing his own audio and video programming. As of today he is the chief of a million dollar a year podcasting company that produces smart, entertaining and informative programming that far surpasses the type of technology coverage one can find in traditional media. His programming is ad-supported and while he doesn't pull in nearly as much money as his former employing cable network used to make, it simply doesn't matter. He can make far more engaging programming at a fraction of what it would cost a television or radio station to operate. In fact, his coverage of the Consumer Electronic Show (CES) in Las Vegas last week was far superior to what the big networks were able to offer at a fraction of the cost. This year's CES unvailed a whole slew of products that will make it simple and affordable for viewers to get TWiT's programming on their televisions. Cable and satellite companies no longer control your TV. While it makes sense that a technology enthusiast was the first to the game, it is only a matter of time before you see similar quality of coverage popping up in every niche area of interest that there is.

The future is bright. Don't view the bankruptcy of Canwest Global as the end of Canadian media. It is in fact the dawning of a new era. An era in which independent producers in Canada can make far better programming. Look at me! This blog is the type of opinion based journalism that really couldn't be found in traditional newspapers even before their present decline. The death of newspapers is in no ways the death of journalism. Journalism has a new face, an online face. I don't have to answer to an editor who informs we what I can and can't write. I do as I please. Sure my opinions may seem a bit strong, but why water down anything? I'm not worried about investors getting offended. We live in a great time for content producers. Sure the heads of the big corporations may view this as the end of all humanity, but just because the cash cow has left the building doesn't mean that the world is about to end. It is just getting started.

Stop Paying For Cable!

noreply@blogger.com (Paul Di Meglio) — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 17:32:00 +0000

We're seeing the dying days for broadcasters in Canada. Old revenue models are quickly drying up and the big bloated corporations are way too fat and slow to cope with making the changes needed to keep afloat. Whether you want to admit it or not, the notion of 'television' watching as we know is going to change.

There is one exception to the overall decline. Cable and Satellite companies are raking in billions of dollars left right and centre. Profits are soaring. How can these old fashioned distribution models continue to pull in so much money? The answer is actually quite obvious. You're being ripped off. Plain and simple. While you believe to be getting more quality each time Shaw or Rogers hikes up your monthly bill, you are actually simply forking out more cash for the same meandering crud. The fee-for-carriage debate is a complete waste of time. The networks are going belly up one way or the other and it is just a matter of time until the cable and satellite monopolies of Canada are brought down once consumers become aware of the fact that they are throwing their money out the window.

Are you already aware of the fact that you are being gouged? Then what are you waiting for? Call up your local cable or satellite provider and say "SCREW YOU!" Stop wasting your money. Afraid of missing out on your favourite local news cast? Fear not, all you need is an internet connection. CTV and CBC already have all their newscasts online free and on demand. What about your favourite shows? While I do question the quality of the television available today in North America (which will be a topic explored in future posts) you can still watch a great number of CBC/CTV/Global etc... shows via their websites. In fact, putting the programming online is just about the only smart thing the networks in Canada have done to preserve their future.

Once you connect a computer or web-enabled set-top box to your television, (and it is really simple to do if you have a fairly recent HDTV) then you can really start taking advantage of the (in my opinion) far superior selection of visual entertainment available through the world wide web. Youtube has recently started to offer full 1080p video content. For those who don't understand what the numbers mean, you can actually get higher quality High Definition programming from Youtube then you can and ever will be able to from broadcast television. The future of online video is here, today! You can cut off the greedy corporations that rape every last penny they can from you and simply get all the entertainment you need via a simple broadband internet connection. Spain and Finland have already made internet access a basic human right. This means that every citizen will have access to high speed internet at a regulated fair price. These countries are ahead of the game, but as the web continues to become the platform for all human interaction, expect to see the rest of the civilized world to follow suit.

The future of "television" (a meaningless word actually) is here, and it is beautiful.

Out with the old...seriously...get out! Local TV is dying and the Cable Satellite giants are in for troubled days ahead

noreply@blogger.com (Paul Di Meglio) — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 04:58:00 +0000

There is a battle happening in Canada. Yes, you heard right. Us Canadians have dropped our double-doubles and our tuques and replaced them with fists of anger.

On one side of the debate we have our local TV stations. This endangered species is seeing the light. Its days are numbered. With Canwest, owner of the Global TV local stations amongst others, going bankrupt and then some, the other players in the game are beginning seeing their end days ahead.

On the other end of the spectrum we have Canada's cable and satellite companies. These greedy bastards are raking in the millions left, right and centre. They are sitting pretty at the moment, milking their monopolistic powers over Canadians with an indifference to customer service that contradicts their bloating profits. They too, however, see the warning signs ahead. A flurry of technological innovation has left their stranglehold of control on Canadian media in ruins. It's only a matter of time before the technology becomes simple enough and they too see their revenues quickly decline.

What's at stake? The networks want to charge cable companies for pulling in their over-the-air signals and broadcasting them on their services. The cable companies simply want to keep their profit margins in the stratosphere. Who's right in this argument? Neither of them. They are both clueless and greedy. They have ridden out the last few decades on their control over the scarcity of media in this country and have built huge unstoppable businesses that have done little to adapt or change or innovate in all this time. They all deserve to die. Period.

Canadians have to take their media back from the monopolies. Individuals have the power to create their own outlets for content at the cost of practically nothing. (Look at me!) Thanks to the internet, communities across Canada can create their own local programming without having to trust a greedy company to cater to their small town needs. Let's face it, local TV has been terrible in this country and is only getting worse. Why put up with it? Internet access limited in certain remote areas? Let's lobby our government to invest in the infrastructure needed to service these areas. The answer isn't to bail out the dying newspaper companies, but instead to spend that money on getting everyone in this country online. The need for newspapers will vanish very quickly.

This blog will chronicle the death of traditional media in Canada and watch the rise of local online media as the future of how we broadcast ourselves. I know many people will be outraged by the opinions I post here. Good! TV is dumb and getting dumber, radio has become an outlet of filth and bland-sameness. If you don't agree, then let me know. Let's change the topic from the fee-for-carriage debate. We should be asking whether we need TV stations and cable companies at all anymore.