Talk:Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada and related WikiProjects, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canada-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project member page, to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
|
 |
I'm not sure why the section on the CRTC taking over Telecommunications was deleted. The edits are not clear - it is added (it was already there) and then deleted. None of the edits refer to it being deleted.
- I think it's fixed now. The article is bit of a dog's breakfast, but I guess it will get sorted out slowly.70.80.27.104 02:11, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
A small weirdness: I corrected Charles Dalfen's title from "Chairperson" to "Chairman" because, though it may sound strange, that,s the real deal. His predecessor was the "Chair". When he arrived, he had all the signs changed back.70.80.27.104 02:11, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] "Controversial decisions" section
I read somewhere on the MuchMusic article that "MTV itself was not permitted in Canada due to CRTC restrictions on format protection."
Can someone perhaps add this to the "Controversial decisions" section as well as expand on it a little bit more? I'd like to know more about this.
Thanks, --JT 14:16, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
- This isn't exactly a "controversial" decision, just long-standing CRTC policy. As I understand it, the CRTC's rationale is that a Canadian-based channel that airs Canadian programming would be preferable from a cultural standpoint, while genre protection ensures that the market isn't too crowded. AFAIK, MTV (U.S.) was never specifically denied access, but simply never attempted it as a result of the policy. I'll add a section on this to the article on specialty channels if I get a chance to research it further. — stickguy (:^›)— home - talk - 14:39, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
- That's a good idea; I was about to suggest the same thing. It's not a "controversial" decision, as such, but a separate section on CRTC policy around specialty channels would be a good idea. (Actually, cable licensing in general, come to think of it: it could touch on things like the 4 + 1 rule, community channels, simultaneous substitution.) To answer JT's question in the meantime, American cable channels can be added to Canadian cable lineups if an equivalent Canadian service isn't already in operation, but format protection comes into play if a Canadian channel is already offering equivalent programming. But it's not solely about American channels; the CRTC also wouldn't license a new Canadian channel to directly compete with MuchMusic. Bearcat 14:50, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
- And this is why Canadian TV sucks. 70.48.48.251 18:42, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
- That's a good idea; I was about to suggest the same thing. It's not a "controversial" decision, as such, but a separate section on CRTC policy around specialty channels would be a good idea. (Actually, cable licensing in general, come to think of it: it could touch on things like the 4 + 1 rule, community channels, simultaneous substitution.) To answer JT's question in the meantime, American cable channels can be added to Canadian cable lineups if an equivalent Canadian service isn't already in operation, but format protection comes into play if a Canadian channel is already offering equivalent programming. But it's not solely about American channels; the CRTC also wouldn't license a new Canadian channel to directly compete with MuchMusic. Bearcat 14:50, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
