Canadian Communication and Cultural
Policies:
Coping with Globalization and
Digital Media
Stephen D. McDowell
Associate Professor
Dept. of Communication
Florida State University
Tallahassee, Florida
United States 32306-1531
smcdowel@mailer.fsu.edu
Note: This paper was initially prepared for the Second Colloquium
on Communication and Cultural Industries in NAFTA and MERCOSUR, University of
Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, June 1-2, 1999.
Canadian Communication and Cultural
Policies:
Coping with Globalization and
Digital Media
Abstract
The paper examines developments and debates in Canada's cultural
and communication policies. Firstly, it
situates this examination in the context of larger theoretic images and debates
over the appropriate and feasible role of the state and public policy in
shaping communication and cultural activities, especially in the context of
regional and multilateral trade agreements.
Secondly, the paper provides an overview of key issues and
developments in a number of policy areas in the 1990s. Policy developments in a variety of media
fields and cultural activities will be examined in the second part of the
paper. The communication and cultural
policies that are being developed attempt to pay attention to the development
and use of new technologies, domestic political and market dynamics, and global
and regional trade and investment patterns, and to work within these
constraints. At the same time, these
policies use minimal policy means to support nation building in the face of
global integration and U.S. cultural influences and exports.
Thirdly, the paper addresses key elements of debates over the
nature and effectiveness of Canada's communication and cultural policies. This discussion draws upon other
assessments of Canada's cultural and communication policies. The concluding
discussion draws upon analytic literature that assesses the orientation,
objectives, and outcomes of these policies, providing a set of questions and
challenges for Canada's policy formation, and for policy research in this
field.
Canada's
Cultural and Communication Policies:
Coping
with Globalization and Digital Media
I:
Introduction
National communications and cultural spheres, it has been argued,
are placed in jeopardy by a number of economic and technical developments over
the past decades, and especially in the context of the NAFTA and the WTO trade
in services agreements. The conditions
that are seen to underlie or characterize the new environment are most often
portrayed as a combination of economic and technical developments. Economic
capital -- finance, production facilities, or even managerial talent -- can increasingly be moved quickly to many
parts of the globe. Financial capital
is the most mobile, in that market institutions have been set up and supported
by states that encourage and almost ensure capital mobility, and rapid
mobility.
Some of the same technologies that have made capital mobility
possible and that have been used to coordinate production globally are being
used to distribute communications and cultural services on a global basis. These include two technologies that have
become the symbols of globalization; satellite broadcast technologies and
Internet protocol transmission networks. The quality, capacity and reliability
of these services based on high capacity communications networks have led many
to argue that geographical space is shrinking and becoming less important.
Small and medium sized states have long been concerned about the
influence of news and entertainment programming originating outside the country
on national cultural practices. And
although the terrestrially based services in the past – telephone lines,
cables, videos – required some physical connection, this is not necessary for
satellite broadcasting. Thus direct
broadcast satellites have become an image that represents some of the
challenges of mobile capital and new communication technology for the
nation-state.
With the development of the Internet and World Wide Web
applications, the new image of a global network -- although dominated in its
design, deployment, accessibility and content by U.S. sources, and increasingly
dominated by commercial sources -- has become one of the dominant icons of
globalization and communications.
Telephone bypass is another challenge for nation state policies: calls
can be routed through various places to take advantage of different rate
structures for services in different countries. Hence, the multimedia and multiple routing possibilities of
digital media also pose a threat to the conventional understandings of the
feasible goals and objectives of communications policies, or the natural barriers
to entry to national markets that might protect national communications firms.
The economic and technical dynamics of globalization mean that
states can’t assume certain communications flows, or they cannot control
communications flows in the same ways as in the past because of commitments to
liberalized trade agreements. While
tariffs may have controlled imports that might threaten book and magazine
publishing, and while ownership restrictions protected national
telecommunications facilities, and while rules could be set for broadcast
distribution in the domestic or national space, the tools and the efficacy of
these policies came under increasing question in the 1980s and 1990s. While Canada's situation is not entirely
unique, as a country geographically situated alongside the United States, with
three-quarters of the population sharing the same language, and both countries
sharing similar cultural origins (ethno-linguistic proximity, as Straubhaar
(1991) labels it), elements of certain issues and challenges that are being
addressed in debates over regionalization and globalization have been grappled
with in Canada over a long period of time and in a number of different ways in
Canadian communication and cultural policy debates. Over the 1990s the government in Canada has increasingly tried to
position Canadian industries and Canadian communications policies for the new
environment.
The paper reviews some recent developments in Canadian policy,
especially with regard to electronic media.
Firstly it considers differing theoretic perspectives on the nature of
technological, economic, and cultural developments in the 1980s and 1990s, and
the appropriate types of responses that states should take with communications
and cultural policies. Secondly, the
paper sets the context by outlining briefly the key legislation and public
institutions that shape communications and cultural policy in Canada. Thirdly, the paper discusses illustrative
examples of policy debates and decisions in a number of sectors, including
policies for television, magazine advertising, film distribution and exhibition,
new media, and telecommunications services.
The fourth section argues that these policies represent a transition
from policies promoting Canadian communication and cultural expression to the
strengthening of Canadian-based nationally and globally competitive
communications firms. The final section
looks ahead at the possible developments in communications and cultural
policies as regional trade and investment institutions become stronger and
globalization becomes more entrenched in national industries and policies.
II:
Theoretic Traditions, the Canadian State, and Communications and Cultural
Policies
There is no broad agreement on a single account or story, among
competing groups participating in the formation of Canadian communications
policy, about what is happening with globalization and new media, and how
Canada should respond. There are
significant divergences among theoretic and research perspectives on the
origins and nature of economic, technical, and social changes that result in a
need for a reformulation of communications and cultural policies. Three main approaches can be drawn from
traditions in international relations: liberal economic analysis, a nationalist
response to international trade and investment patterns, and a critical
perspective that follows from the tradition of neo-Marxist political economy
and democratic communications analysis.
In the neo-liberal view, which is more influenced by liberal
economics than by a pluralist political analysis, national economies can
benefit greatly through trading patterns determined by comparative
advantages. International investment or
financial flows represent free trade in factors of production, and also
contribute to greater efficiencies and global wealth creation. Rather than
distorting markets through monopoly control, the activities of transnational
corporations lead to more efficient dissemination of new technologies and
products, and a more rational allocation of resources among production units in
different parts of the world. The distortions
that national communications markets might have experienced in the past arose
primarily from legislation designed to protect strategic national or government
owned industries, but which reduced consumer choice and efficiency. States need to remove the limitations on
ownership and content that have been advocated by nationalist communications
and cultural policies. These state programs most often operate as market
distortions limiting consumer choice, and as ways for national groups to seek
protection from the competitive forces of global media and communications
industries. There will still be a role
for states in developing and enforcing competition policy, but state action
should be limited to providing the institutional and legal supports for the
fair and open operation of markets.
States should recognize the impossibility of creating national
communications industries or cultural spaces given the integration of world
political economy and the expanding networks making use of new digital media,
and limit state support of specific cultural preferences or practices.
A nationalist analysis points to the importance of communications
infrastructure and services for national security, governance, and economic
development and prosperity. Hence ownership restrictions on communications
infrastructure have been commonplace in most countries. As well, cultural expressions and activities
have often been central to efforts to build a national sense of identity or a
shared national culture.
However, as has been proposed by many analysts since the 1970s,
and as many countries have tried to renegotiate the relationship between
transnational enterprises and nation-states, a national development strategy
must try to derive as many benefits as possible from these relationships. Furthermore, as argued by Robinson,
Sauvant, and Govirtikar (1989), communications technologies and services serve
as core services that allow other goods and services to be produced more efficiently. To advance economic growth, national
economies have a need for advanced and rapidly changing technologies, the need
for access to pools of global capital, and the need for access to managerial
skills, technologies, and production and marketing networks which are
controlled by transnational firms. It
is not feasible to exclude leading global firms and promote economic
development.
A redesigned neo-nationalist or neo-corporatist strategy would
diverge from a neo-liberal strategy at this point. It would argue that states can continue to advance certain goals,
primarily by supporting national communications and cultural industries. This support must be done in ways that have
clearly directed and limited goals, and in ways that do not require significant
fiscal expenditures. Industries with a
comparative advantage or a potential to be competitive in global markets could
be supported, especially through state action in bilateral, regional, or
multilateral trade agreements. Support mechanisms for national communications
need to be very direct and specific, and must also be consistent with new rules
for free flow of capital and more open trade and investment in communications
services that make up agreements like the NAFTA or the WTO treaty.
A neo-nationalist perspective would not see global markets as
being open and free. Rather, global
cultural and media firms control creativity, production, distribution and
marketing, and in many countries, so that policy responses should not be simply
national in scope. Firms could be
allowed to develop the size and scope of operations that will enable them to
withstand incursions by global or regional media firms. Or, firms should be allowed to seek
arrangements with foreign partners, and should be supported by states in their
efforts to position themselves favorably in global alliances of media and
communications firms. Any significant
participation by national firms in communications and cultural industries, even
at the national level, may require some sort of partnership or joint ownership
agreement. Finally, states could
support national champions, firms that have a dominant position in a specific
communications sector, in seeking export and investment opportunities, and
design policies to support a nationally-based or global firm that can be
competitive globally, rather than spreading policy support across a wide range
of communications and cultural activities.
Nation-states are not just about economic policies and trade
policies and gross national product figures.
There is also the nation, the people that make up a modern
nation-state. In the traditional view,
a nation was a connected with an ethnic group, who through a shared history,
culture, and experience, and proximity in a geographic territory, developed a
sense of nation-hood and used state power to protect their uniqueness. States also have made efforts to build a
nation, both through immigration in the 19th and 20th
centuries, and through economic and industrial policies. These types of state actions have been
important for new states (in the South), for small states (especially alongside
larger states), and for multi-ethnic states.
In the Canadian nation-building story, public policy and choice overcame
the fact and challenge of a dispersed wide geography, first through using
waterways to establish trade routes and colonize; then through building
transportation networks to further occupy the land and tie together the
population, and then by using communication technologies to build a bilingual
and multicultural nation and hold it together against the ever-present and
immediate threat of a U.S. cultural domination. The national community and the national identity is not just
emergent from shared experience, but the state and communications and cultural
policies are essential for either creating that experience or allowing it to
happen.
Although much of the debate in Canada has been between
neo-liberals and nationalists, there is an alternative perspective, most often
being voiced by public interest groups or labor unions (McDowell and Buchwald,
1997). A democratic communications or
critical political economy analysis argues that globalization is not a natural
process, outside of the control of states or firms. Many states in fact are actively participating and accelerating
economic and technical processes of globalization, such as by participating in
the formation of liberal trade and investment agreements, in order to assist
firms or national economies in gaining competitive advantage for certain
sectors to rewrite social contracts within countries. The response to a
liberalization initiative from the United States is not to seek protectionist
measures, but to seek market openings in other sectors. These policies are presented as the only
possible alternative, but as part of the process of positioning economies for
integration into the global economy, states are redefining or abdicating some
of their responsibilities in social services, employment growth, worker health
and safety, or consumer protection.
The neo-nationalist response that pursues mainly the objectives of
supporting communication and cultural industries is also seen as faulted. Cultural commodification arose in part of
"cultural industries" justification of the economic importance of
cultural producers and the number of Canadians employed in cultural activities
or the "cultural sector." A
precondition of the policy direction that Canada took in the late 1980s and
early 1990s was firstly, a definition of cultural activities as being
essentially the same as the cultural industries, and, as a corollary, a
commodification of cultural products and services. Ironically, these efforts arose because the government in the
1970s wanted to support Canadian culture and nation-building. Rather than use only public agencies, the
state sought to support private sector cultural producers. They were initially viewed as the authors,
artists and creators, but then began to include firms. In order to understand the nature of the
cultural situation, and the effectiveness of programs to support cultural
production, sophisticated and detailed creation and collection programs for
cultural statistics were developed. The
state programs themselves created the preconditions by making extant and
operative cultural products and services, cultural producers, and cultural
markets. The Canadian role in these
markets -- whether magazine stands, television screens, radio air-time, book
publishing, or film screens -- became the site of struggle for Canadian
communications and cultural policy.
By pointing to the economic importance of cultural and heritage
activities, advocates could support the government programs that provided
essential support in these areas. What
is missed in this kind of approach is a recognition of the role of voluntary
activity, the role of Canadians as creators of cultural expression rather than
viewers or consumers, and a focus role of regional or local activities rather
than national markets. This strategy assumes that private sector actors will in
fact serve as an effective vehicle for achieving cultural objectives, more so
than public organizations, non-profit organizations, or groups based at the
local level. The pre-occupation with
building a financial strong and potentially globally competitive national
communications and cultural industries has meant that there is little attention
paid to the content produced by these industries and how that content relates
to a national culture. A focus on
productivity and exports de-emphasizes the variety of voices and expressions
that make up a national culture. Rather
than promoting cultural products that are viable in an advertising supported
media environment, communications and cultural policies should support the
inclusion of voices and perspectives that are not likely to emerge from marker
driven dynamics, and voices that will contribute to a vibrant democratic
process (see Winseck, 1998).
III:
Background: Canadian Legislation, Policy Objectives, Institutions, and
Programs:
Several public institutions have been central to the development
and implementation of communications and cultural policies in Canada. These include the Canadian Radio-television
and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), the federal government department
Communications Canada. Two pieces of
legislation have been important in re-shaping the Canadian communications
policy landscape; the Telecommunications Act and the Broadcasting Act.
The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission is
the regulator for broadcasting and telecommunications, but also plays an
important role in policy development.
Following the new telecommunications act of 1993, its decisions can be
appealed to the federal Cabinet. The regulator, the CRTC, acts both as a
quasi-judicial agency, but also as a supporter of the Canadian communications
industries, a protector of the Canadian public, and a tool to achieve
communications policy objectives:
In the area of broadcasting, the Commission is responsible for
implementing the policy outlined in Section 3 of the Broadcasting Act. This
policy calls for, among other things, a comprehensive national broadcasting
system owned and controlled by Canadians, offering a variety of programming of
high standard and opportunities for the public to be exposed to differing views
on matters of concern. It also states that Canadians are entitled to a range of
broadcasting services in English and French, as resources become available. ¼. In the area of
telecommunications, the Commission's role is to regulate telecommunications in
Canada with a view to implementing the policy set out in Section 7 of the
Telecommunications Act. This involves balancing the interests of consumers and
Canadian telecommunications carriers, ensuring that rates, where regulated, are
just and reasonable, and that carriers do not unjustly discriminate between
customers (CRTC, 1995a).
From the 1970s to the
early 1990s, the federal department Communications Canada was the leading
government department for broadcasting, telecommunications and cultural
policy. Its responsibility areas were
split into Canadian Heritage (broadcasting and culture) and Industry Canada
(telecommunications) in 1993.
Although a number of publicly owned organizations have been
vehicles for achieving public communications and cultural objectives, the
pre-eminent vehicle and symbol of Canadian culture since the 1930s has been the
publicly-owned broadcaster, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Its public support has been frozen or
declining since the late 1980s, leading many to question its ability to achieve
its objectives.
Alongside the re-organization of federal policy bodies, the
legislation orienting these agencies and the overall policy framework has also
been rewritten in the last decade.
These changes in national legislation have been introduced at the same
time as hotly contested international negotiations on trade and investment
telecommunications in the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement in the late
1980s. There was less public debate in
Canada on the North American Free Trade Agreement, which was seen by many
Canadians as including Mexico in a larger trilateral arrangement similar to the
Canada-U.S. agreement.
The Telecommunications Act of 1993 introduced the greater use of
market mechanisms in the provision of telecommunications services, while also
stating a continued commitment to the protection of sovereignty and access of
all Canadians to telecommunications services.
Section 7. (a) and (f), states that, "Canadian telecommunications
policy has as its objectives .. to facilitate the orderly development
throughout Canada of a telecommunications system that serves to safeguard,
enrich and strengthen the social and economic fabric of Canada and its regions
[and] to foster increased reliance on market forces for the provision of
telecommunications services and to ensure that regulation, where required, is
efficient and effective."
The Broadcasting Act was also rewritten in two phases, while
retaining a goal of promoting a Canadian broadcasting system. The Broadcasting Act of 1991, Section
3.(1)(d)(ii) and (g), states that,
"the Canadian broadcasting system should encourage the development
of Canadian expression by providing a wide range of programming that reflects
Canadian attitudes, opinions, ideas, values and artistic creativity, by
displaying Canadian talent in entertainment programming and by offering
information and analysis concerning Canada and other countries from a Canadian
point of view ....the programming originated by broadcasting undertakings should
be of a high standard..."
The Act was also designed to try to deal with technological
changes that might change the environment in which Canadian broadcasters of
Canadian policy was formed. The Broadcasting Act of 1991 goes on in Section
5.(2) to state, "The Canadian broadcasting system should be regulated and
supervised in a flexible manner that ¼is readily adaptable to scientific and technological change; [and]
does not inhibit the development of information technologies and their
application or the delivery of resultant services to Canadians." The
objective this tries to articulate is that, in the context of the dominance of
U.S. programming, Canadian broadcasting policy will try to make certain
Canadian programming choices available, rather than limiting Canadians' media
choices.
It is these institutions that serve as the main mechanisms for
policy formation, revision, and implementation in Canada. Given the long
tradition of communications policy in Canada, and the many activities which are
involved, a survey of this repositioning involves a large number of
programs. The discussion below focuses
on a number of recent policy reviews and contentious issues.
IV: How
Have Canadian Industries and the Canadian State Responded?
Two caveats should qualify discussion of the Canadian
communications and cultural industries.
While there will always be private firms willing to provide
communications and cultural services to Canadians, Canadian-owned industries
have always been dependent on public protection. This might come in the form of foreign ownership limitations, tax
incentives, or a variety of the programs listed below.
Secondly, although efforts to restructure firms and industries to
reflect technological convergence -- or what Dwayne Winseck (1998) calls
reconvergence efforts -- are being undertaken by communications firms, it is
still useful to consider telecommunications, broadcasting, and other cultural
activities separately. The policy and
institutional context for each of these areas varies, as do the particularities
of the production and consumption cycle.
The Canadian state has not stood idly by, and in fact has tried to
be aggressive and proactive in positioning the Canadian communications
industries for a specific version of the global and digital future. Efforts
have been made to the comparative advantages of Canadian firms and try to shape
trade and investment agreements accordingly. The focus on some state action has
been internal, and domestic programs to support communications and cultural
industries will be dealt with in more depth below. There have also been international actions that have an impact on
national communications and culture.
Canada has attempted to enter into international trade agreements
in order to ensure access and rule-based arrangement of trade and investment,
while at the same time trying to seek exemptions or continue to protect certain
national cultural and communications activities. Is this cultural policy or just a neo-mercantilist strategy to
build up a nationally based competitor?
Television Broadcasting
The role of the CBC as a central cultural institution and cuts to
its funding have been mentioned.
Private broadcasters also have an important role in this mixed
system. They derive much of their
revenue from the sale of advertising to viewers of programming imported from
the United States. They are expected to
recycle some of these revenues to support the production of Canadian programming. The specific arrangements, as well as the
structure of television broadcasting policies, have been under review for the
last year.
The overall television policy framework underwent a review
beginning in May 1998 (CRTC Public Notice 1998-44 - Canadian Television Policy
Review). In the public notice, the CRTC
stated that its goals for the proceeding were to:
further the development of a strong and viable programming
industry; ensure that Canadians receive a wide range of attractive and
distinctive Canadian program choices; facilitate the growth of strong
broadcasting undertakings; ensure that the Canadian broadcasting system meets
the needs of Canadian viewers and reflects their values; and, implement the
public interest objectives of the Broadcasting Act (the Act). In particular, the Commission wishes to
explore how all participants in the system can work effectively to strengthen
the Canadian presence on our television screens, and to support a healthy
broadcasting and production industry capable of competing successfully at home
and abroad. At the same time, the
Commission will wish to be assured that the public interest objectives of the
Act are well served.
The CRTC also indicated that greater regulatory flexibility would
be considered in designing a policy to encourage the production of high quality
programming. This high quality
programming was:
... [p]rogramming that reflects the views and values of Canadians,
strengthens cultural sovereignty and national identity, that is designed for a
competitive Canadian marketplace and is positioned for success in foreign
markets, will depend upon a flexible regulatory framework. A regulatory framework designed to ensure a
dynamic Canadian programming industry will acknowledge the roles and responsibilities
of conventional (over-the-air), specialty and pay television undertakings,
other broadcasters (both private and public), distributors, artists, creators,
producers, viewers and other participants in the Canadian broadcasting system. The Act states that English- and
French-language broadcasting, while sharing common aspects, operate under
different conditions and may have different requirements. The regulatory framework for the television
system must take into account the linguistic duality of Canada and the
different realities under which English- and French-language broadcasters
operate.
The CRTC noted that:
In the time since the Commission completed its last major review
of its television policies and regulations in the mid 1980s, the Canadian
television environment has undergone significant change. These changes, which
continue at a rapid pace, include ownership consolidation, the licensing of new
Canadian pay and specialty services, the availability of more non-Canadian
television and specialty services, the development of a strong independent
production sector and the increasing opportunities and challenges posed by the
globalization of television production and distribution. The forthcoming review will provide an
opportunity for the Commission and other participants to reassess the existing
framework in light of the changes identified, forecast the pressures and
possibilities that the evolving communications environment will bring, and
articulate challenging, but achievable goals for the system as a whole. The Commission encourages participants to
bring to the hearing imaginative and effective strategies for achieving such
goals and for ensuring that the system continues to fulfil the objectives of
the Act.
These statements are notable for the inclusion of export
objectives, such as "positioned for success on foreign markets," and
a "production industry capable of competing successfully at home and
abroad." The Television Policy
Review decision was released in June of
1999.
Magazines and Periodicals
The Canadian government has used the postal system and tax laws in
order to support the Canadian magazines industries. Specifically, the goal has been to provide a level of support for
magazine distribution through postal subsidies to lower the mailing costs for
Canadian publications, until this was held to be discriminatory under trade
agreements. A second strategy has been
to provide support from Canadian advertisers who are trying to reach Canadian
audiences. In the 1970s the border
broadcasting bill denied the deduction of expenses incurred by Canadian
advertisers trying to reach Canadian audiences if they placed advertisements on
U.S. stations. This was primarily
directed at television stations based in U.S. cities along the Canada-U.S.
border that were seeking to gain revenue from Canadian advertisers. The policy was further strengthened by the
growth of cable subscribership in the 1980s.
Although the major U.S. networks were carried on these systems, if a
Canadian broadcaster had purchased the right to broadcast a program from a U.S.
network, and if that program was being shown at the same time on Canadian and
U.S. stations, the cable operator would substitute the Canadian feed in place
of the U.S. feed for that time period.
This ensured that all advertising time purchased on Canadian networks
reached Canadian audiences. Given that
Canadian stations had purchased the right to distribute the programming to
Canadian audiences, there was little the U.S. broadcasters could do, in that
they would be invading the franchise of another broadcaster -- just as with the
division of regional audiences under distant network signal prohibitions under
U.S. cable regulations.
A similar type of policy was adopted with magazines as response to
the end of the postal subsidy. Early
efforts had also limited split run editions, magazines that had the same
editorial content as the U.S. edition, but included Canadian advertising. Time magazine and Reader's Digest
developed Canadian editions, and the situation was relatively stable until the
1990s. Sports Illustrated began
to send editorial content electronically to Canada to produce a Canadian
edition, with a minimum of Canadian content.
The Canadian government responded by restricting this activity. Bill C-103, passed by the House of Commons
in November of 1995, placed an excise tax of 80 percent of the value of all
advertising in "split-run" magazines. These were magazines that contained more that 20 percent
"recycled" editorial material. The Income Tax Act, which already
allowed advertising expense deductions for magazines that were at least 75
percent Canadian owned, was also augmented to add an "anti-avoidance
rule" for accurate reporting of Canadian ownership. The U.S. government
took the case to the WTO. When the U.S.
position was upheld, in 1998 the Canadian government introduced a legislative
measure aimed directly at advertising.
The Foreign Publishers Advertising Services Act was tabled in the House
of Commons in October 1998, which restricted the sale of advertising services
aimed at the Canadian market to Canadian periodicals. The Act provided
"investigative powers and procedures and provides for fines for foreign
publishers who break our law." By
May of 1999, this issues had become a major trade irritant in Canada-U.S.
relations, which were resolved only by an agreement negotiated at high-levels
in which Canada agreed to modify some of the strongest provisions of the bill.
Film Production and Distribution
The government has also supported the creation and production of
films in Canada. This was done
initially by a public corporation, the National Film Board of Canada. The NFB was noted for producing high quality
documentaries, but over the past decades, the policy has shifted away from
support of public organization toward funding independent film-makers. As with television program support, these
programs have moved far in the 1990s toward tax incentives to support private
investors who fund film production.
Despite this level of support, the access of Canadians to Canadian films
exhibited in theatres has been low. The
record is stronger for cable television, where specialty channels have
emphasized Canadian films. The high
level of cable subscribership in Canada, and the placement of such channels in
basic service tiers, has provided greater access to these films for Canadian
audiences. Since the 1980s, policy
discussions have focused on film distribution.
Film distribution is controlled by distributors based in the United
States, firms that view North America as one market. Hence, screen time is booked centrally, with little room for
national films.
A review of film policy review was initiated in 1998, with the
issuance of a discussion paper and a call for public comments (Canadian
Heritage, 1998). The Feature Film
Advisory Committee considered these comments, and reported back to the Heritage
Minister in 1999 (Canadian Heritage, 1999).
The Committee noted:
Simply put, by the year 2004 our goal is to see, at minimum,
achievement of the following eight objectives:
an increase in Canadian films’ share of screen time from 2% to
10%;
an increase in the number of Canadian feature films produced each
year;
an increase in Canadian films’ share of box-office revenues;
an increase in the quality of the Canadian films produced;
an increase in the average budget of Canadian films;
an increase in support by the public sector for Canadian feature
films;
an increase in investment by the private sector in Canadian
feature films, and;
an increase in the strength and quality of Canadian distribution
and marketing efforts.
The achievement of these reasonable and time-bound goals will
ensure that we will have Canadian entertainment choices throughout the year in
theatres and video stores, on pay-TV, conventional television channels and
appropriate specialty services, and within new technologies, well into the new
millennium (Canadian Heritage, 1999).
New Media
The CRTC has also undertaken a policy review to examine the
potential impact of new media on regulation in the telecommunications and
broadcasting sector. The CRTC issued a
public notice to examine broad questions related to new media in July
1998. It provided a working
description of new media as,
"encompassing, singly or in combination, and whether interactive or
not, services and products that make use of video, audio, graphics and
alphanumeric text; and involving, along with other, more traditional means of
distribution, digital delivery over networks interconnected on a local or
global scale" (Broadcasting PN CRTC 1998-82, Telecom PN CRTC 98-20). The Commission showed its broad policy role
in defining its objectives for the hearings:
The Commission
wishes to underscore the fact that it brings to this proceeding no preliminary
views with respect either to how new media should be defined, or to what role,
if any, the Commission should play in their regulation or supervision. In this proceeding, the Commission intends
to develop a comprehensive record in order to assist it in answering the
following questions:
In what ways, and to what extent, do new media affect, or are they
likely to affect, the broadcasting and telecommunications undertakings now
regulated by the Commission?
In what ways, and to what extent, are some or any of the new media
either broadcasting or telecommunications services?
To the extent that any of the new media are broadcasting or
telecommunications, to what extent should the Commission regulate and supervise
them pursuant to the Broadcasting Act and the
Telecommunications Act?
Do the new media raise any other broad policy issues of national
interest?
In its report (Broadcasting Public Notice CRTC 1999-84, Telecom
Public Notice CRTC 99-14) issued on 17 May 1999, the CRTC decided that since
"the majority of services now available on the Internet consist
predominantly of alphanumeric text, and, therefore, do not fall within the
scope of the Broadcasting Act and are thus outside the Commission's
jurisdiction." As well,
programming where the possibility of customization was significant would also
not fall within the jurisdiction of the Broadcasting Act, which digital audio
services and audio/visual signals did fall under the definition of
broadcasting. However, even for those
services, "the Commission has concluded that regulation is not necessary
to achieve the objectives of the Broadcasting Act." Regarding Canadian content, the CRTC found
that" there is no apparent shortage of Canadian content on the Internet
today. Rather, market forces are
providing a Canadian Internet presence that is also supported by a strong
demand for Canadian product. For these reasons, the Commission concurs with the
majority of participants that there is no reason for it to impose regulatory
measures to stimulate the production and development of new media content."
These examples are intended to demonstrate ways in which global
processes have become an essential part of a variety of communications and
cultural policy discussions. The policy
discussion is much broader that this, and includes consideration of the
provision in the Canada-U.S. FTA and NAFTA for cultural exemptions, but in
language of the agreement does allow for retaliation in another sector if a
foreign firm is able to claim and sustain the claim that it was harmed (Mosco,
1990). Canada also has signed
international agreements on copyright which protect national producers, but
also enhance the protection and revenue generation of international media
firms. Culture is now a pillar of
Canada's foreign policy objectives, and the promotion of a cultural diversity
instrument initiative is a component of international trade policy
objectives. Canada has also been active
in discussions of International traded telecommunication based network
services, and in the field of telecommunications equipment design and
manufacture, the Canadian-based firm Northern Telecom is strong. This export strength, and the positioning of
its foreign direct investment and alliances are important shapers of Canadian
policy.
V:
Discussion: From Canadian Culture to Globally Competitive Communication Firms
Several characteristics typify the strategy or strategies
developed in the late 1980s and mid-1990s, and a number of implications arise
as a result. This section argues that the characteristics of this strategy,
although drawing images from the neo-liberal vision and a nationalist approach,
fit most directly with a revised nationalist strategy that is attempting to
position Canadian communication and cultural firms in a regional and global
market. The discussion below considers
the role of cultural exemptions in trade agreements, the effort to build strong
national firms, the promotion of Canadian "voices and choices" while
not restricting foreign services, the role of electronic distribution networks
in policy formation, the increased dependence on the private sector as the
agents of policy (versus the public sector or non-profit organizations), and an
export orientation that demands a "piece of the action" more than
that Canadian communication and cultural expressions are shared among
Canadians.
In trade agreements there were efforts to introduce cultural
exemptions for otherwise open or opening communications services markets. These exemptions represented efforts to
mollify political opponents of the agreements by retaining protections for
cultural activities. However, they have
had, as predicted by critics (Mosco, 1990; Comor, 1991) limited
effectiveness. The magazine industry
case shows the broadening application of trade law to include cultural products
and services, rather than any exemption for a small magazine market already
dominated by foreign titles. The case
of the Westinghouse Country Music Television and the CRTC also showed that even
open access to cable channels, something that is not guaranteed tin the United
States, becomes an issue for a trade dispute.
Film policy also showed the difficulty of gaining access to markets
within ones own country, if the distribution system is controlled elsewhere.
Building strong or large national firms has been another element
of the policy that has emerged in the 1990s.
This seemingly would allow the creation of at least one national
champion to be a global scale competitor, or at least hold its own in the
national space. In telecommunications,
Nortel has defined and fulfilled this role in the 1980s and 1990s, expanding
into the United States market until around two-thirds of its revenues were
generated there. The conditions of its
success almost required some form of continental integration, and allowances to
be made in other areas so as not to allow trade disputes and irritants to annoy
this paramount relationship. In
broadcasting, Rogers has emerged as the nationally dominant firm, while
Hollinger has been allowed to grow by acquisitions in the newspaper industry.
Rather than closing off the Canadian communications space, public
policy attempted to open choices while at the same time retaining access to
Canadian produced and created cultural expressions. This required that some Canadian product be available in a
variety of settings.
Related to this effort of ensuring that Canadian choices were
available was a development of a policy analysis that focused on the creation,
financing, production, marketing, distribution, retailing, and use or
"consumption" of communications and cultural products and
services. This was a policy approach
that tried to address specific blocks or bottlenecks that prevented Canadian
cultural producers from reaching Canadian readers or viewers. This arose as much by necessity as by
rational policy virtue: by the 1980s active cultural policy and producers had
fallen out of favor with the government of the day. With smaller and smaller amounts of money available, more pointed
allocation of funds could potentially achieve more significant results.
The focus on electronic distribution networks for broadcasting,
telecommunications, and new media is consistent with this form of policy
analysis, but adds in a dimension of detailed examination of the role of
technologies in achieving communications and cultural policy objectives. For instance, the cable television
distribution network has been seen as the most important component of the
success of Canadian broadcasting policy in the past two decades. While private firms can own and operate the network,
regulatory fiat can determine the services that are carried, the pricing of
those services, and the specific content such as advertising can be
controlled. This introduced an element
of technological determinism into policy debate: if control over terrestrial
cable television was such a success,
what will happen with direct to home satellite broadcasting or distribution of
audiovisual programming via the internet?
There is also an increasing dependence of the Canadian private
sector for cultural production, and a declining support for public agencies and
institutions. In fact, many public
institutions serve primarily as funding agencies for private production or
publishing firms. Alongside direct
support, the use of tax incentives to promote private sector investment in
cultural production has grown more important.
An export or balance of payments orientation follows easily in the
era of globalization from the national cultural statistics and markets of the
more national era. But the export and
balance of payments orientation can be contradictory with other communications
policy objectives. There is no doubt
that there have been significant success stories: actors, comedians, writers,
musical performers, and athletes from Canada have achieved significant stature
and popularity in the United States and on a global scale. Canadian cities have become popular film
production locations, so that the size of the Canadian film production industry
has grown and provided employment opportunities. What is lost in these success stories is direct national
connection between Canadian creators and Canadian audiences. Stories that fit into other experiences are
told, rather than stories that reflect on and contribute to the Canadian
experience.
In the case of telecommunications equipment, as mentioned
above, Northern Telecom does a majority
of its business in the United States.
Sid Schnaid and Andrew Reddick have argued that this export agenda has
not served workers at home very well, and there is a continued weakness in
gaining access to Canadian voices in Canadian media.
Vincent Mosco (1997) also points to the contradictions inherent in
this dual policy approach – seeking access to the communications and cultural
markets of other countries while trying to protect the market at home. Mosco also argues that there has been
increasing liberalization and privatization of the domestic communications and
cultural activities:
The Liberals
did not deliver on their promise to provide stable multiyear funding for the
CBC and other national cultural institutions.
They did provide financial support for video and film production,
advanced copyright legislation, and promoted cultural exports. Promise and performance aside, the Liberal
years have seen a growing division between a domestic policy of treating
culture, communication and information as market commodities like any other
products and an international policy that justifies protections because of
their special status for Canadian identity and sovereignty. Growing domestic and international pressures
make this division unsustainable and call for a fundamental rethinking of
national communication and cultural policy.
Associated with these changes are implications for Canadian
identity. Canadian identity is
constantly under question and discussion, with programs to promote
bilingualism, multiculturalism, and a
struggle over the rights of aboriginal Canadians. The role of Quebec and other regional issues have constantly been
a part of Canadian culture and politics.
The extent to which the neo-nationalist strategy will either not
contribute to these goals, or perhaps undermine these goals, is also an
essential part of the critique of this strategy.
VI:
Looking Ahead: Regionalization and Entrenched Globalization
The discussion to this point has focused on developments over the
past decade or so. What does this set
of policy directions and industry restructuring suggest for the next decade,
and specifically in a period where certain regional and global patterns will
become more institutionalized and commonplace?
One trend that might be considered is expanded trade and
investment linkages in the whole Americas region. If these developments are accompanied by institution building to
facilitate these economic and cultural transactions, Canadian foreign policy
and communications policy would be well-positioned to participate. Although Canada had stayed outside the
Organization of American States through-out most of the 20th century
to show its resistance to the U.S.-dominated institution, in the late 1980s it
officially joined. In part, this
decision was to allow greater Canadian participation in organizations like
CITEL, the telecommunications body of the OAS.
Canada had been an observer, but not a full member at CITEL
meetings. By joining the organization
and participating in its planning and development, Canadian officials and business
representatives would be able to build relationships with telecommunications
policy makers and operating firms in the Americas, and support the expansion of
sales opportunities for Nortel and other equipment firms. This could also be seen as being consistent
with long term efforts in Canadian foreign policy to reduce bilateral
dependence on the United States by building a web of relationships (or an
abandonment of this strategy by seeking similar goals that orient U.S.
participation in the organization).
While a reduction of dependency may seem desirable as a national
policy goal, questions may be raised about the extent to which it will actually
be pursued by the private actors that are making the investment and marketing
decisions. With unique access to the
largest market in the world for telecommunications equipment, services, and cultural
products and services, efforts to build market share or at least alliances and
partnerships with firms from these countries may be a more important use of
resources than spreading investment to other parts of the world.
The Americas region is also seen as a significantly more risky
investment than in any investments in the United States. Currency and investment insecurity has
spread to many economies outside the United States in the last number of years,
with many countries repeating the patterns of liberalization, upswings and
financial crises that Mexico went through in January 1995. Even the Canadian currency was undervalued
through-out much of 1998 and early 1999, based, in view of Canadian analysts,
on the fear of any currency but the U.S. currency.
What also seems to be missing is a strong effort at social and
cultural linkage building. As a country
with a continuing inflow of migrants, Canada does have cultural connections
with countries through-out the Americas.
However, it does not have a strong Spanish-speaking population, which
limits the ability to develop a nexus of cultural ties to other countries in
the Americas.
Globalization could be argued to be entering a new phase, where
many of the conflicts over restructuring of international organizations and the
development of trade agreements that were a preoccupation in the 1980s have now
been resolved. Liberal trade and
investment rules have now been institutionalized, and the key conflicts are
over management and reform rather than fundamental review. This is despite the fact that the emerging
institutional order is unable to deliver economic security or prosperity
for significant number of the world's
inhabitants, delivering security and certainty to holders financial capital and
technical expertise.
In this new order, the bilateral issues that have been irritants
in the Canada-U.S. relation are now being routed to the WTO for decisions,
rather than to the dispute boards struck by the FTA as in the early 1990s. This, as Robert Cox argued (1991), is a new
phase of internationalism, where national policies and institutions must be
reworked to conform with international trade agreements and institutions. Aggressive groups of U.S. cultural and entertainment
producers also seek out export opportunities, and these have become a more integral part of production and
marketing strategies. The U.S. state
has been responsive to these groups, and willing to use a variety of bilateral,
regional and multilateral institutions to push this agenda. Hence, the focus in Canadian communications
and cultural policy on U.S. incursions into Canadian cultural and economic
space remained a central focus as the 20th century closed, even as
when it opened.
Bibliography:
Amesse, F., Seguin-Dulude,
L., & Stanley, G. (1994). Northern Telecom: A Case Study in the Management
of Technology. In S. Globerman (Ed.), Canadian-Based
Multinationals (pp.). Calgary: University of Calgary Press.
Babe, R. E. (1990). Telecommunications in Canada: Technology,
Industry and Government. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Buchwald, Cheryl Cowan. (1997), Canadian Universality Policy and
the Information Infrastructure: Past
Lessons, Future Directions. Canadian Journal of Communication. 22-2, 161-194.
Canada, Industry Canada & Heritage Canada (1996). Convergence
Policy Statement. Ottawa: Industry Canada/ Heritage Canada.
Canada, Info Export (1992), "NAFTA -
Telecommunications," (Ottawa: EAITC, August).
Canada, Information Highway Advisory Council (1995), Connection
Community Content: The Challenge of the Information Highway Final Report of
the Information Highway Advisory Council (Ottawa: Supply and Services,
September).
Canadian Association of Broadcasters. (1998, October 30).
“Canadian Private Broadcasters on the Internet: A Report on Current
Interactivities.” [Online] Available: www.cab-acr.ca/new/appendix3_nov298.htm.
Canadian Association of Broadcasters. (1998, November 23). “A Submission to the Canadian
Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission with Respect to Public
Notice CRTC 1998-44: Call for Comments-Canadian Television Policy Review”,
[online] Available:
www.cab-acr.ca/new/sub1_nov2398.htm.
Canadian Heritage (1995, November 3). House of Commons passes BillC-103 [online]. Available: www.pch.gc.ca/bin/Newsd11/View?Lang=E&Code=5NR146E.
Canadian Heritage (1997, December 18). “Canada Commits to Sign International Copyright Treaties”,
[online]. Available:www.pch.gc.ca/bin/Newsd11/View?Lang=E&Code=7NR13E.
Canadian Heritage (1997).
“Canadian Television in the Digital Era.” (Ottawa, January 1997.
Canadian Heritage (1998, February). “A Review of Canadian Feature Film Policy”.
Canadian Heritage (1999).
“A Report of the Feature Film Advisory Committee”.
Canadian Heritage (1998, July 29). “New Advertising Services Measure to Promote Canadian Culture”
[online]. Available:
www.pch.gc.ca/bin/Newsd11/View?Lang=E&Code=8NRE.
Canadian Heritage (1998, October 8). New Advertising Services Legislation Tabled [online]. Available: www.pch.gc.ca/bin/Newsd11/View?Lang=E&Code=8NR098E.
Canadian Heritage (1999, March 20). House of Commons Passes Copyright Reforms [online]. Available:
http://www.pch.gc.ca/bin/News.dll/View?Lang=E&Code=7NR257E
Castells, M. (1996). The Rise of the Network Society.
Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Canadian Heritage (1999, March 31). Revamped Sound Recording Program to Improve Marketing of Canadian
Artists [online]. Available:
http://www.pch.gc.ca/bin/News.dll/View?Lang=E&Code=7NR243E.
Communications Canada (1992a). The Information Society: New Media,
New Choices. Ottawa: Supply and Services.
Communications Canada (1992b). Convergence, Competition and
Cooperation: Policy and Regulation Affecting Local Telephone and Cable
Networks. Ottawa: Supply and Services.
Comor, E. (1991). The DOC under Free Trade. Canadian Journal of
Communication,16, 239-262.
Cox, Robert (1991), in Daniel Drache and Meric S. Gertler (eds.)
(1991), The New Era of Global Competition: State Power and Market Policy
(Kingston: McGill-Queen's).
CRTC (1994c, February 10). The Production Fund (Public Notice CRTC
1994-10). Ottawa: CRTC.
CRTC (1995a, May 19). Competition and Culture on Canada's
Information Highway: Managing the Realities of Transition. Ottawa: Public Works
and Government Services.
CRTC (1995b, March 24). Introduction to Decisions Renewing the
License of Privately-Owned English-Language Television Stations 9Public Notice
CRTC 1995-48). Ottawa: CRTC.
Direct-to-Home Satellite Policy Review Panel (1995, April).
Direct-to- Home Satellite Broadcasting: Report of the Policy Review Panel.
Ottawa: Heritage Canada and Industry Canada.
Dorland, Micheal. (1996). The Cultural Industries in Canada:
Problems, Policies, and Prospects.
Toronto, James Lorimer & Company Ltd., Publishers.
Ellis, D. (1992). Split Screen: Home Entertainment and the New
Technologies. Toronto: Friends of Canadian Broadcasting.
Friends of Canadian Broadcasting, Ottawa. (1998 November). “PN CRTC 1998-82 New Media”. [online] Available:
http://friendsb.org/pn_crtc_1998.htm.
Friends of Canadian Broadcasting, Ottawa. (1998, May 6). “Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunication Commission
Public Notice CRTC 1988-44, Canadian Television Policy Review-Call for
Comments.” [Online] Available:
www.crtc.gc.ca/ENG/BCASTING/NTICE/1998/P9844_0.TXT.
Friends of Canadian Broadcasting, Ottawa. (1998, July 31). “Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunication Commission
Public Notice CRTC 98-20, New Media-Call for Comment.” [online]
Available: www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/bcasing/ntice/1998/p9882_0.txt.
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (1994). Final Act Embodying
the Results of the Uruguay Round of Mulitlateral Trade Negotiations. Geneva,
GATT, May 3.
Globerman, Stephen and Peter Booth (1990), "The Canada-US
Free Trade Agreement and the telecommunications industry," Telecommunications
Policy (December 1989): 319-328.
IHAC (1995a). Canadian Content and Culture Working Group, Ensuring
a Strong Canadian Presence in the Information Highway. Ottawa: Industry Canada.
IHAC (1995b, September). Connection Community Content: The
Challenge of the Information Highway Final Report of the Information Highway
Advisory Council. Ottawa: Supply and Services.
Maule, Christopher J., Keith Acheson. (1994), International
Regimes for Trade, Investment, and Labour Mobility in the Cultural Industries.
Canadian Journal of Communication.
19-3, 401-422.
McDowell, Stephen D. and Cheryl C. Buchwald
(1997), "Public Interest Groups and the Canadian Information
Highway," Telecommunications Policy Volume 21 Number 8 (October),
pp. 709-719.
McDowell, Stephen D. (199), "From Communications Policy to
Trade and Industrial Policy: The Canadian State and Telecommunications
Technology," Canadian Journal of Communication Volume 18 Number 4
(Autumn), pp. 507-514.
Mosco, V. (1990). Toward a Transnational World Information Order:
The Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement. Canadian Journal of Communication,15 (2),
46-65.
Mosco, Vincent.(1997),
“Marketable Commodity or Public Good: The Conflict between Canadian
Domestic and Foreign Communication Policy,” in Gene Swimmer (ed.), How Ottawa
Spends (Ottawa: Carleton University Press).
Ostiguy, Elizabeth M. (1995), The Benefits of More Choice in
Distribution Channels for Cultural Programming. Canadian Journal of Communication. 20, 329-334.
Raboy, M. (1990). Missed
Opportunities: The Story of Canada’s Broadcasting Policy. Montreal:
McGill-Queen’s.
Robinson, Peter, Karl P. Sauvant and Vishwas P. Govitrikar (1989)
(eds), Electronic Highways for World Trade: Issues in Telecommunications and
Data Services (Boulder: Westview Press).
Straubhaar, J. (1991). Beyond Media Imperialism: Assymetrical
Interdependence and Cultural Proximity. Critical Studies in Mass Communication,
8, 39-59.
Tremblay,Gaetan. (1995), The Information Society: From Fordism to
Gatesism.. Canadian Journal of Communication.
20-4, 461-482.
United States (1996), Telecommunication Act of 1996 (Public Law
104-104) (February 8, 1996).
Wasko, J. and Mosco, V. (1992) Democratic Communications in an
Information Age (Toronto: Garamond).
Webster, D. (1984). Direct Broadcast Satellites: Proximity,
Sovereignty and National Identity.
Foreign Affairs (Summer 1984), 1161-1174.
Who's Afraid of Satellite TV? (1996, February 18) The Globe and
Mail, D-6.
Wilson, K. G. (1988). Technologies of Control: The New Interactive
Media for the Home. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Wilson, Kevin G. (1996). Canada's new regulatory framework:
convergence, competition and the Information Highway. Telecommunications Policy. 20-8, 607-621.
Winseck, Dwayne (1998), Reconvergence: A Political Economy of
Telecommunications in Canada (Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press).