Essay Sample on Transnational Growth of Canadian Media

Introduction

There is no doubt that Canadian society consists of people from different cultural, ethnic, and racial backgrounds. The Canadian media thus utilizes the labels of multiculturalism and diversity to create a Canadian content that is as distinct as its American counterpart by implementing various Canadian content rules. Content policy and regulation represent the primary objective of television broadcasting in Canada. Political theorists assert that internal communication represents the nation's norms and social values and the content policy rules are founded on these grounds (Johansen 465). The content policy that regulates the television industry was introduced in the year 1959 and has seen some changes effected by legislative initiatives, administrative decisions, and regulations over the past years (Acheson et al. 284). The issue of content regulation has however faced a lot of criticism on the impacts they have on advertising-based commercial broadcasts, consumption of external media, and acceptance of diversity (Acheson et al. 284). This paper will explore in detail the current Canadian content rules and how they play a role in creating a distinct Canadian content.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The objective criteria of the Canadian Content Policy are based on the number of Canadians performing critical roles in the program production and the percentage of expenditures advanced by Canadians (Acheson et al. 285). The policy provides that a Canadian director or writer should produce the program; the two protagonists should be of Canadian origin and allocates at least 75% of its expenditure on Canadian citizens (Acheson et al. 285). This content policy applies to other categories such as sports events, animation, and music video shows (Acheson et al. 285). For instance, sports will qualify as a Canadian content if it is produced and broadcast by Canadian. Transactional corporations in the media sector are now turning to the sport as a means of promoting their strategic plans. Through games, citizens of a nation are convinced that they belong to a unique community and that they watch the same television programs (Mason 146). The rules further provide that all programs produced with the consent of an official co-production agreement qualify as Canadian content.

The subjective criteria are regulated by the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CTRC) as it determines and dictates how to categorize the programs and the expenditures (Acheson et al. 286). According to CTRC, classifications of some programs are clear cut while others are not because these rules always create inconsistency (Acheson et al. 286). For instance, all the news covered by Canadian stations regardless of who is running the cameras or the microphones is classified as Canadian content. Reporting Presidential elections results as news is considered Canadian content, while an interpretation of the prior American elections is regarded as a documentary and thus non-Canadian content (Acheson et al. 286).

Several studies indicate that the current content policy regulations are useful as they protect domestic program producers. The content policy receives great political support as it associated incidental benefits (Acheson et al. 293). However, the content policy is not efficient as there are better regulations that have been recommended. The Canadian content policy indirectly provides for a diversity of programming. The content policy should be revised to prevent the impact of the financing incentives received from CBC that dictates advertising provisions on Canadian programs (Acheson et al. 293). The content policy should also be revised to cover the externalities rationale. The content policy has however been praised for encouraging Canadian producers to develop better institutional means of serving viewers hence creating more wealth in the nation. More suppliers are capitalizing on the local opportunity, and less reliance is placed on the public treasury for the financing of Canadian based programs.

The Canadian content policy should enhance the realization of this opportunity for local producers instead of creating barriers. For instance, the content policy prohibits pay television services and commercial advertising, while cable companies are restricted from introducing pay-per-view programs (Acheson et al. 293). These restrictions are preventing the Canadian media from reaching the heights of its American counterpart. Viewers are also affected by these restrictions because they are not allowed to pay or choose more foreign services such as Disney Channel and Home Box Office that have less advertising (Acheson et al. 293). The current content policy should be relaxed to allow reciprocal access to international markets.

The American Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the CRTC play different roles in the regulation of their broadcasting ecosystem. The CRTC created in 1976 is tasked to regulate broadcasting and telecommunications in Canada. The CRTC is also mandated with the responsibilities of implementing rules specified by the Canadian content rules. The commission reports to the Parliament through the office of Minister of Canadian heritage who oversees all the broadcasts under the Broadcasting Act. The CRTC regulates the pricing and sets standards for cable television. The commission also controls the channels distributed and offers priority to Canadian content and operates on a simultaneous substitution between the Canadian broadcasts and American broadcasts. The CRTC also regulates radio and provides that at least 15% of the content aired in radio must be Canadian content. However, there are several concerns about the application of the Canadian content regulations on commercial radio (Henderson 307). Despite the public plea to relax the content policy, there have been significant responses on the general outcome in the music industry, with research indicating that Canadian listening habits are showing that more Canadian tracks are listened to more. The commercial sector however claims that they are prevented from competing fairly because of the advancement of technology because the official charts only depict the older modes of tracking music such as in-store purchases (Henderson 310). The CRTC also oversees the internet media and has control over the local landline services in Canada.

The FCC, on the other hand, acts as a separate and an independent body that regulates the communications by television, radio, cable, satellite, and wire. The FCC regulates all the interstate communications enhances fair competition through the use of media. The regulatory fees fund the commission and its mission is to ensure that all the citizens of America regardless of their diversity receive and enjoy media services at a reasonable and affordable price. The FCC restricts against media content that is indecent and provides content regulation on indecency. The FCC limits the national share of broadcast and radio channels ownership to ensure different opinions and views based on diversity.

The regulation of cultural context of these governing bodies the FCC and the CRTC determines the ease of production and the freedom of small scale and corporately supported projects. For instance, in Canada, the CRTC provides that the content produced and displayed on the TV and radio must be aimed at a Canadian audience and must be of Canadian content. However, Canada has been criticized for lack of shared beliefs, values, and symbols regarding the "Canadian Way" (Kim 257). The civil religion in Canada has been primarily affected by the political and sociocultural development. Several studies indicate that lack of civil religion has been affected by the policies on economic and political regionalism characterized with Canada, the American cultural impact, cultural and language diversity, the English and the French Canadians, and lack of unifying symbols (Kim 260). The commission provides that the shows need not depict Canadian culture but they must illustrate Canadian talent such as actors, Canadian creativity, and produced by Canadian owned media companies. The CRTC also stipulates that the TV networks must fill their daily schedule with at least 50% to 60% with Canadian programs and content.

However, opponents of these rules argue that with the advancement of technology the rules are a bit redundant because they were only useful when there were limited TV shows and the government enacted these rules to protect local market from foreign competition. To this end, the CRTC infringes the freedom of local and corporately supported projects to the extent of what they should produce and display on the television. The FCC, on the other hand, does not regulate and impose harsh rules on TV broadcasters on what they should create or who they should employ. Cultural and content regulations are not needed in the United States. On the contrary, the 1948 Smith-Mundt act provides that to promote international relations the media should aim to develop and sell the American way abroad. The FCC gives freedom to the local and corporately sponsored projects to expand and grow their broadcasts unlike the restrictions imposed by the CRTC.

The CRTC in partnership with the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC) is known for their strict guidelines on censorship and they prohibit programs that feature nudity, sex, violence, and coarse language. In the United States, the instructions on censorship are not very strict because of the freedom of speech against censorship. However, there are guidelines for indecency. The difference experienced in censorship rules provides American investors with the freedom to produce what they want, unlike the Canadian market. The freedom and ease of production are projected on how the audience receives and perceives information. For instance, the political frame, the art's frame, the economic frame, and the ideological frames between Canada and United States largely vary because of the cultural differences and the national policies on cultural content (Hall 233). It is, however, worth noting that both states assist the TV industry financially and encourage the industry to promote culture and educative programs to its citizens.

Canada has however faced a lot of pressure from globalization which impacts on its national media systems. The regulators of cultural content in the Canadian media are concerned about the effects the imported press may have on the nation's politics and culture (Fletcher). Canada is significantly affected by its proximity to the United States which is considered the biggest exporter of cultural values and products. The country also faces internal diversity caused by two different audiences of its media content. The audiences consist of the French majorly based in Quebec and the English (Fletcher). The public broadcasting faces an internal division which depends on the language group that comprises of the largest audience (Attallah 177). The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is quickly losing its audience on cultural erosion while the SRC is regarded as active with a loyal audience (Attallah 178). The emergence of globalization presents significant challenges to Canada's strict policies on the content policy that seeks to protect the domestic production and promote cultural norms especially for the minority groups (Fletcher).

Conclusion

In conclusion, the Canadian content policy has played and continues to play an essential role in protecting domestic production from foreign competition. The content policy that requires the TV programs to produce and air Canadian content helps the Canadian media to create a distinct content from its American counterpart. However, when the two media ecosystems between America and Canada are compared, the Canadian policy on cultural content has stricter rules th...