Category Archives: Funding

Canadian Media Policy – Is There Any Fun Left?

1 Reply

Recently one of my wonks said over cocktails that all the big tv policy issues had been dealt with and now there was nothing to do but get the work done.  I’ve been thinking about this and I have to disagree.  After years of fighting a decline in Canadian television programming and particularly Canadian drama there is now the Group Licence policy, expenditure requirements and Programs of National Interest (PNI).  Once Bell-Astral is done, it is unlikely that there will be any more large acquisitions.  Or so they say (I’ve heard that one before).  There is a lot of benefits money in the system, there are PNI expenditure requirements and the BDU contributions to the CMF are still going strong.  So what is there to worry about?  Promotion?  No – I’m not going there.

We have a really big challenge that few seem to be considering.  We should be thinking now about how to fix the system that is going to be broken in a few years.  The Bell-CTV and Shaw-Global big pots of benefits monies will be spent by 2017.  By that point, BDU subscriber erosion will likely be very real as more and more cut the cord, buy their iTunes series subscriptions, watch Netflix or catch up the next day on broadcaster digital players.  [Update:  Yes, I did notice that the CRTC released 2012 financial results for BDUs right after I first posted this, and that demonstrates that erosion hasn’t happened yet as subscribers have grown by 2% for cable, though dropped by 1.8% for satellite.  But revenue growth is slowing, most likely due to subscribers cord shaving, ie paying for fewer services though staying in the system.  CMF contributions have grown but that growth has slowed down as well – and note that contributions to Canadian programming are just CMF, LPIF, independent funds and other BDU mandated contributions, not benefits or CPE as they are reported at the broadcaster level.  I stand by my worries for the future.]  BDU contributions to CMF will go down and this government is unlikely to make up the difference.  So how are we going to finance Canadian television?

I can hear the voices saying ‘why do we need to’ and that is an exhausting argument to deal with but I’ll say this quickly.  Canadians want Canadian television.  Look at the audience numbers for “Murdoch Mysteries”, “Motive”, “Cracked” and “Bomb Girls” just to mention a few on the air right now.  I do not believe that Canadians watch those shows just because they are Canadian but because they are good tv that tells stories that Canadians want to watch and reflect values that Canadians share.  So it is important as a society that we continue to be able to offer Canadians the choice to watch quality Canadian television.

How are we going to fund it?  I have not yet heard a viable proposal for how we are going to continue to offer Canadians choice in 2018.  The ISP levy is the cleanest but since the case was lost at the Supreme Court of Canada it will most likely require legislative change.  There is so much resistance to the idea though, particularly from the BDUs who are also ISPs, that an ISP levy is not likely to be an easy solution.  At Prime Time, the Chair of the CRTC told producers to look outside Canada for financing and explore co-ventures.  The problem with relying on foreign financing is that the resulting programs are overly influenced by the creative interests of that foreign financing and we end up with “Sue Thomas F.B. Eye” rather than “Flashpoint”.

It worries me that I’m not hearing conversations about how to solve the problem.  I am reading about the imminent death of Can Con regulation so those on the other side are gleefully anticipating the future.  For those who understand that the system has to change but there still needs to be a system, there aren’t any round table discussions, working groups, calls for papers or one-day symposiums so that we can try to figure this out.  Everyone seems to be taking a breather after a very hectic five or six year period and I get that.  However, if we’re not careful we are going to wake up in a few years with a broken system and no way to fix it.  No amount of promotion is going to help if there are no Canadian shows available to watch – on any platform.

Prime Time 2013

Leave a reply

I won’t go through the whole two days – that’s what the tweets are for (search #PTiO).  I just want to share some impressions of the CMPA Prime Time 2013 conference with you.

First, I think this was the most tweeted Prime Time.  Sure, I was tweeting up a storm and so were a number of the usual suspects but there were a lot more newbies including, I was pleased to see, a number of producers.  (Self-promotion aside – if you would like to become active in social media yourself, I have developed a Social Media for Media Executives workshop that I am currently making available to companies.  Contact me if you are interested.) So you may be thinking – is it possible to just stay home and read the tweets?  In my opinion, no.

Tweets are good if you can’t make it to Prime Time but you miss out on a lot if you’re not there.  Prime Time is half panel discussions and half networking.  There is no facilitation of the networking (see my earlier CrossmediaTO post) but it is a great place to build relationships with most of the top television producers, broadcast executives, funders, guilds and associations and a smattering of government people in attendance.  And of course a number of independent consultants such as myself.  There also seems to be a growing number of digital producers.  One year soon, there will be no such distinction and we’ll be talking only about screens.  (And on a personal note, if you’re going through another transition in a fairly long career, Prime Time is a great place to spread the word and feel the love.)

There were two big buzzwords from this year’s conference – disruption and destruction.  Disruption of business models (is international licensing dead?) and outright destruction of markets (video game rental certainly is).  Panelists sometimes disagreed (is it a disruption or just a challenge – does that distinction matter?) but the theme of the conference was that the world has changed and we all – from cable companies to broadcasters to producers to talent – better start thinking creatively if we hope to ride the wave.  Some in attendance already know this and are out in front but there were plenty in the room who need to hear this message oh, a few more times probably, before it sinks in.

Jean-Pierre Blais, Chair of the CRTC, continued the theme with his keynote speech.  It was quite a surprising speech.  Blais told producers that they need to be creative  in their business approach.  He told them to be discontented with the status quo in order to be truly entrepreneurial.  Find new partners and new markets.  He coined a new word when he told the room that under his watch the CRTC would not be ‘protectionist but promotionist’.

There were some key messages here that I think we all should keep in mind over the next little while.  The Canadian independent production industry is very well funded right now with the BDU contribution to the CMF,  the hard won CPE (Canadian Programming Expenditure) requirement and a rather large amount of benefits money.  Benefits will expire and the walled garden that is regulated broadcasting is being disrupted.  I think Blais is telling us here that we need to find new business models and new partners or five years from now we will wake up and find ourselves without CPE or CMF or benefits and there will be no way to finance Canadian television.

The other key message revolved around another buzzword of the conference – discoverability.  In a regulated world with scheduled programs and a TV guide, the audience can find our programs, if they aren’t moved around too much.  But when content is available on multiple platforms without regulation to protect and ensure access then ways to enable the audience to discover Canadian content becomes key.  I am not sure what tools are at the CRTC’s disposal to allow it to be ‘promotionist’ but the message is an important one, and one that carried through to several other panels that day.

‘So think big.  Give us WOW.  Help us discover what we want to watch.’ – Jean-Pierre Blais

P.S. I’ve been asked to finish my Bell-Astral2 post now that the PNI is out and I will get on that shortly.  There’s also a request for a post on the new co-pro policy framework and I’ll get on that one too soon.  But first – some work that pays the bills!!

Crossmedia TO 2013

1 Reply

This event inspired me to start a blog because after tweeting the day (and being recognized as one of the top tweeters of the day), friends asked me what I thought of the event.  I think my tweets communicated what was presented more than what I thought of what was presented. If you’d like to get caught up with the tweets, I Storify’d a selection here.

Crossmedia TO 2013 is produced by Jumpwire Media.  It took place February 21, 2013 at the Appel Salon of the Toronto Reference Library.  The idea is to bring together people from film and tv, mobile, gaming, publishing and marketing into one room to learn from each other and meet each other.  The format is a few keynotes but mostly presenters who have 7 minutes to present what they’re working on to the room.  There was a wide variety of projects but they were all somehow linked to digital media.

The best part of the day perhaps were the moments when Gavin McGarry (host and founder of Jumpwire Media) forced the audience to turn to the people around them and meet new people).  No one else does that and it is SO useful.  I met people whose name I knew but had never met and someone I hadn’t done business with in years.  Honestly – I wish every conference did that but particularly those who bill themselves as networking events.  Meeting people is hard.  We need help!

But back to the content.

There were technology pieces, such as the bendable tablet from Queen’s U. Media Lab and the 3D printer from 3dphacktory, which were cool but unlikely to have immediate impact on most of us.  A lot of apps and plugins that will help us understand our digital activity and learn from it were either presented or mentioned:  Chartbeat (realtime site analytics), bit.ly+ (analytics of bit.ly links), If This Then That (automation of online tasks), Rapportive (plugin for Gmail and Chrome inboxes), and Openslate (valuation of YouTube video audience) were ones that caught my attention.

I’ve written up a few highlights of the presentations that I found the most useful or interesting.  You might have enjoyed others.

I was intrigued by Vodo, which is exploring the business and distribution model of creating a film or television series on the cheap and then distributing it through BitTorrent and requesting donations.  They are making enough money to pursue this model on an increasingly larger scale.  The big problem with the model for most film and tv people is that financing generally is dependent on exclusivity of a territory or two so that the financier has some assurance that they’ll get their money back.  If you are able to finance production on your own (angel investors or ultra cheap and with your credit card) then this might be a model to consider.  It is likely to be of more value to you if you are after a well-defined niche audience who can be more easily found and interested than a general interest audience.  A key takeaway from this was that content creators should not be afraid of ‘free’.

As an aside, when users rights advocates would tell me that content creators should give their content away for free and make money other ways I would point out that it’s not as easy for film and tv people as it is for say music.  No tshirts.  But perhaps they weren’t completely wrong – for some people.

Most of you have probably heard Corey Vidal, YouTube star, speak on a panel.  He was at Digital Dialogue a few weeks ago and at Prime Time a few years ago and many other places in between.  His work has matured and so has his presentation.  He quickly glossed over the a capella Star Wars theme video which went viral and launched his business and started talking about how brands have reached out to him now that he has an established audience that he (and his team) feed daily with videos.  The case study that I was most intrigued by was the Contiki travel company.  On behalf of Contiki, Vidal invited a number of successful vloggers to go on a Contiki tour for free.  They went, they had fun and they vlogged about it to their audience, telling them all how great Contiki was.  It was organic and honest and likely more successful with the target youth audience than standard brand marketing.  So, think about who your audience is and think outside the box as you try to reach them.

Get Set Games talked about what they had learned to stay in the Top Ten mobile apps.  It isn’t enough to build a good game that people like.  You have to create new content, more levels, new features, to bring them back.  Cross-promote with other game studios and access ‘free game of the day’ profiles to gain new customers.  Even successful games need to be regularly supported to stay successful.

Trendrr talked about measuring social media to get a better picture of the engagement that an audience with a television program.  You can then go beyond that to use social media to influence the television program.  This works best with factual or competition programs but there may be applications with fiction.  Don’t rule anything out.  Related to that was the planned new versions of the Personal People Meter (PPM) that BBM will be releasing.  They will be able to passively measure content where ever the user is and on whatever platform.  As it does not rely on the user recording their activity in a journal it is much more reliable.  Broadcasters and producers will have a much better picture of viewing (and engagement).

Location-based marketing to date has been based on Foursquare check-in coupons for the most part.  But now marketers and content creators are moving to providing entertainment content when users are identified to be in a location based on their GPS co-ordinates or they check-in.  One of the examples that I found most intriguing was opening up exclusive levels to Angry Birds when checking in at McDonalds.  The line between entertainment and marketing is very unclear.

I know that I was not the only one who really appreciated the presentation of Rhonda McEwen, U of T prof, on how technology is helping autistic kids.  She has learned that these kids are just as social as other kids but harder to reach.  She has successfully used iPads to help them play games, learn, interact and communicate.  The iPad use has improved their intellectual and social abilities.  It felt really good to learn how technology could be used as a force for good and not just to make money.

My key takeaways from the day are these:

  • Creators and consumers are moving away from content silos.  Funders and producers have to stop thinking in silos or they will be creating insurmountable barriers.  Breaking down the funding silos is most likely to be the hardest task.
  • The internet might be global but people engage on a local level.  Create ways for communities to develop locally.  They probably like their stories to be local too.
  • Success measurement is much more than page views.  What matters now is engagement measured by length of visit, shares, likes and return visits.
  • “Don’t think you know, know you know”.  This quote from Adam Clarkson of Chartbeat may have been the most tweeted.  There are a lot of tools out there to help you know what is going on with your digital content.  Use them.

It was a good day, though a very full day.  I learned a lot though I think most of it will sit in the back of my brain and come out at unknown times.  I met people both in the room and virtually – my fellow tweeters.  I’m really glad that I attended.