TVO Wants Out of Broadcasting

... and why it's a bad move for everyone.

An editorial from your Average Joe

In a recent declaration, TVO (the public broadcaster of Ontario) seems to no longer be interested in, well,  … broadcasting … outside of Toronto. The publicly-funded organization has decided to close down eight transmitters, including the one in our nation’s capital Ottawa, leaving only it's only over-the-air broadcasting station operational in the 6ix.  What does this mean?

Well for starters, Ontarians are getting a raw deal as something that was available for free over-the-air to anyone with a TV and an antenna is now only available through a pay service (either TV or internet). So to get TVO, Ontarians outside Toronto are essentially being asked to pay a third party to provide them with something they already fund with their taxes.

The only good news here is the deal isn’t done: shutdown would be at the end of July and there is still time to intervene. In fact, here are a few reasons below on why you should pressure TVO, the Ontario government, the CRTC, consumer protection boards and anyone else who will listen to take a long hard look at this plan before it goes through and screens start going dark in ON: 

 

First of all, where did they get the numbers?

The aforementioned article states “this decision will impact less than 1% of Ontario households” with no citation or mention on how this number was derived. Does TVO actually know how many viewers watch their programming via an antenna? For example, a 2015 report shows about 8% of Canadians do not subscribe to a TV service (cable or streaming) and Ottawa as the 7^th largest TV market in Canada. I've combed whatever data I could find and could not reach this figure. Soooo TVO...  1%? Are you sure?

 

Also, what defines a “household” and why limit it only to that? How many cable households have secondary TVs attached to antennas on kitchen counters, kids’ playrooms? How about businesses like hair salons and waiting rooms at dentist offices? Daycares? Community centers?

 

Another question is whether any due diligence was done to assess the impact on the so-called “1%”? Did TVO survey or talk to any of the viewers that would be impacted? What about the elderly who aren’t technically savvy enough to use streaming internet options or those on fixed incomes that cannot afford a pay TV subscription?

The numbers just don’t add up. The 1% number is meaningless ... and faceless.

It sets a dangerous precedent for other broadcasting networks

Allowing TVO to close all but one transmitter (Toronto) and still allowing it to retain “must carry” status in cable packages has definitely raised eyebrows. If the CRTC allows this to go through (especially in a major urban area such as the Ottawa region) this could set jurisprudence that many Canadian broadcasters owned by cable / satellite parents may soon look to copy. What would prevent another broadcaster from closing all but one “symbolic” transmitter?

Sure TVO, it's big but I'm not sure the signal will reach the 7th largest TV market in Canada from there.

 

The shutdown hits the people who depend on it the most

With perhaps the exception of Ottawa, most of these transmitters serve areas like small communities and rural areas where there are actually little or few options for broadband internet. So you can understand the confusion when people see that “prevalent access to TVO’s high-quality educational video content either through … access to a broadband internet connection” is a reason for shutting down the transmitters.

Also, TV by antenna is free from recurring monthly charges and is most popular amongst people in socio-financial situations that do not allow them to pay a monthly cable bill full of service fees and equipment rental charges. The cost of cable has skyrocketed, whereas over-the-air TV programming has remained free of charge to the public.

TVO is leaving Canadians at the mercy of pay TV mega conglomerates to get their content

TVO states “TVO’s audiences overwhelmingly receive our content through cable, direct-to-home satellite … platforms”. Oh those guys. Yes, well that makes everything better.

 

So TVO is telling us to get their programming from the likes of corporate entities who just decided to raise prices on TV and broadband packages because ... you know ... that's life? The same companies who were mandated by the CRTC with the task of providing Canadians with a basic service at a reasonable price and instead decided to spit in the eye of the Canadian public? Well, I mean that’s when they weren’t trying to bamboozle potential customers out of picking said basic package ). So thank you TVO for leaving us in the capable, well-meaning hands of companies that garnered a thousand complaints in a six week period.

I can already hear the service rep at the Cable Co. now: “Yes sir, but if you cancel our service you won’t have access to our many channels of quality programming ... like TVO”  Oh, the irony.

So you say we can still get TVO from our friendly, reputable cable and satellite providers? Yeah, about that ...

 

Were any other options explored to maintain service?

Ok, so there is a budget crunch. Fine. Besides a complete shutdown of transmitters, were other options explored by TVO? How about joining forces with the federal government and using infrastructure funding to have TVO/CBC/SRC broadcast from the same transmitter using digital multicasting to serve communities that were already shunned by CBC and now TVO?  Again, very disappointing to see this lack of effort from a public broadcaster.

Why get out of broadcasting now?

The latest trends show that over-the-air TV is making a comeback. First of all, antenna-friendly devices have popped up everywhere in new tech from Xbox to Canada’s very own uber-hip antenna-friendly DVR TabloTV (which BTW is from a Canadian innovation company based in Ottawa employing many Ontarians … and ironically is also where TVO is shutting off its transmitter). In fact, TV antenna products were all the rage at CES last month.

Second, the future is bright with the advent of ATSC 3.0, the new over-the-air broadcasting standard that will allow OTA broadcasters to reach everything from rabbit ears to mobile phones and integrate content with the very same interactive platforms TVO is mentioning in its digital shift. If anything, why not hang on a bit longer and upgrade straight to ATSC3? Opportunity: missed.

Recent Canadian data shows traditional pay TV service is the medium in stagnation / decline. Graphic courtesy @MontrealOTA

Finally, the numbers show that pay TV is past its glory days: ratings for pay-only networks are tanking, cable companies are bleeding subscribers and conversely, over-the-air TV use is rising as antenna sales surge and a new generation of Canadians leaves pay TV to fade away with the era of baby boomers. Oh and those up-and-coming millennials? Well, they love antennas as can be seen from growing social media communities and on popular reddit threads.

 

So what can you do?

Well, for starters you can help TVO come to its senses by writing them directly via email at asktvo@tvo.org .

If you want to add your voice to the rest of the crowd, sign this online petition to ask for due diligence from the Ontario government (who funds TVO with your tax dollars) before this decision goes through in July 2017.

If you want to put your eggs in other baskets, contact the CRTC and file a complaint under TV accessibility if you will be losing TVO’s broadcast service. Feel free to ask some of the questions mentioned above.

Finally, you can also contact the Ontario Consumer Protection Board and file a complaint … but this one is a long shot.

Make your voice heard, and stay tuned…

600 MHz Band Auction – What’s in it for me besides disrupting my TV service?

Hard to see what’s in it for the Canadian consumer in the latest repurposing exercise of the upper UHF band.

An Editorial from your Average Joe

More efficient use of our spectrum? OK, I guess.

Allow new mobile carriers to appear? Maybe.

Better, faster connection speeds for mobile devices? Not so sure but ... OK.

Whichever way you slice it, it’s somewhat hard to see what the regular Canadian consumer will get out of the upcoming Industry Canada spectrum auction that targets the upper band of the current UHF (ultra-high frequency) over-the-air (OTA) TV spectrum. Industry Canada is investigating contracting and compressing the allotment of spectrum for OTA channels in order to auction the said spectrum to mobile carriers.

How deep will the cuts go? There were various scenarios proposed in Industry Canada’s consultation, and the OTA TV spectrum could lose spectrum equivalent to anywhere from 7 to 24 channels as seen in the graphic below.

 

So what’s motivating this consultation and what’s in it for the average Canadian? Let’s go over some of the points and see the facts.

We’re currently running out of spectrum and need to act now!

Well, not really. Canada completed its digital transition of OTA TV less than four years ago and used the opportunity to give up several blocks of spectrum, including the whole lower VHF band and the (then) upper UHF band which was channels 52 and higher. Most of the upper band was sold off to mobile carriers for about 68 MHz of spectrum divided into seven licence blocks in 14 service areas, for a total of 98 licences. As part of the transition, OTA TV broadcasters changed frequencies to accommodate this change as part of their analog-to-digital equipment upgrade.

Despite the increase in demand for wireless devices, no, we haven’t run out of spectrum within the span of less than four years and unless we’re planning for a population surge, we probably have enough to cover us for several more to come. Proponents for spectrum auctions in the USA had originally predicted a spectrum shortage of apocalyptic proportions in 2013, two years ago, which of course never happened (below).

Oh no! We ran out spectrum! HOW AM IZ GOING TO DOWNLOADZ ALL THE GB'S OF THE INTERNETS AND WIFIS???!!! 

On top of that, in North America market growth is beginning to slow as almost everyone is already mobile-device enabled, including the next generation of consumers (currently under the age of 18).

Everyone out there appears to have a tablet or smartphone, including the up and coming younger generation - and that's probably why we're starting to see sales and demand beginning to plateau in North America.

Also don’t forget as time progresses, analog mobile networks are being shut down and re-purposed as well as technological advances are making mobile protocols more efficient when it comes to crunching and compressing data. 

But wouldn’t more spectrum mean more players in the mobile industry for Canadians to choose from?

Perhaps. But reality is there are already major companies that have cornered the mobile market in Canada. As the recent Target retreat from Canada has shown us, it is very hard for a new player (even a well-established foreign one with deep pockets) to get in on a market already dominated by established giants. Verizon already balked at expansion into Canada during the last auction, so the chance they would re-think a venture north this time is highly doubtful.

 

Verizon probably avoided a similar fate as Target by staying out of Canadian mobile market during the first auctions. It’s hard to believe another auction would make them change their minds.

 

Wouldn’t smaller, home-grown carriers pop up in the mobile market with more spectrum available?

At first: perhaps. In fact, to encourage diversity, the CRTC and Industry Canada would actually only allow new carriers to buy the newly available spectrum. However the reality is that in the market, the big fish eat the little fish. If the Bell – Astral merger proves anything, it is that even the CRTC can’t stop the big from getting bigger. There is nothing saying that within 5 years the Rogers and Bell of the market would start buying out the smaller carriers, and the spectrum that they own along with it.
 

The Bell buyout of Astral is proof that the biggest fish will always eat the smallest fish, eventually.

Well then at least for a few years wouldn’t having more players in the market lower process?

Does having more gas station lower the price of gas? Guess what – mobile service is essentially viewed as a commodity. Most carriers know the price point of the market and don’t really lower the prices for plans when you compare apples to apples. Instead, they rely on promos to bring you in (great price for the first 6 months of a longer contract) or give you discounts only if you bundle with other services they offer. In the end, more carriers may give Canadians more choices but it is highly doubtful that the prices or plan options will be significantly better than what we have now.

Nobody watches OTA TV so who cares if we cut its spectrum?

That “nobody” is actually 1 in 8 Canadians who have an antenna hooked up to at least one TV in their home and up to 14% of residents depending on which province you look at. With most Canadian TV stations now using state-of-the art digital broadcasting, it’s possible the demand for OTA TV may actually increase in coming years, as the CRTC pointed recently in an announcement last month. You can read their entire policy on OTA here, and it doesn’t seem like it’s going to disappear any time soon.

 

CRTC chairman Jean-Pierre Blais was quoted in his Jan 29^th speech as saying:  “The next few years could yield renewed interest for OTA broadcasting, especially in urban areas” Source

 

The OTA TV spectrum is under-utilized so we can cut it without affecting OTA TV service, right?

This is partly true. In rural areas serviced by only a handful of stations, this may be the case. In urban areas with neighbouring communities and especially in US border areas there can be over 20 OTA channels broadcasting; and compressing the OTA TV spectrum could result in service issues for Canadians using it as their TV source.

TV broadcasts are required to respect certain coverage zones to avoid interfering with other neighbouring channels, either local or out-of-market. By compressing the spectrum, more channels will be tightly packed next to each other causing what is called “adjacent” or “Co-channel” interference.  What this means is that viewers in certain areas could see signal degradation or even the loss of certain channels, especially in areas where viewers are dealing with a strong local channel and a weaker, more distant channel sharing the same or adjacent frequency.

Despite the FCC and Industry Canada’s best efforts to try to ensure that neighbouring stations won’t interfere, even stations operating on a reduced coverage footprint could still interfere with each other during favorable atmospheric conditions such as tropospheric ducting (when warm, moist air allows signals to propagate well beyond their defined contours). During these types of events, OTA users may experience loss of service as the spectrum becomes over-burdened with local and neighbouring broadcasts.

In the end, OTA users won’t be affected by the changes so why all the fuss?

Maybe not in some markets, but very probably in the markets where OTA TV is the most popular. Besides the increased interference mentioned above, some people used to catching out-of-market stations (like Canadians near the US border) may require more complex setups, or even lose those channels altogether if local channels allocation are shifted in such a way that they essentially block out the weaker out-of-market signals.

Also, there is talk of a return of some OTA channels back into the VHF-LO spectrum (channels 2 thru 6), which requires larger antennas. New OTA users who have currently purchased smaller, more compact antennas may need to change their equipment if stations migrate back towards lower VHF. Apart from the cost, these antennas are more unsightly when mounted outside.

 

VHF-Lo antennas are synonymous with the large, hulking dipoles as per the antenna (top). The current spectrum allocation of VHF-Hi and UHF allows for antennas the size of a BBQ grill like the ChannelMaster CM4228HD (bottom).

 

Isn’t the USA moving forward with the “UHF repack auctions” and doesn’t Canada have to follow suit?

In the US, TV broadcasters are much better organized and are able to ensure that OTA TV service will not be severely downgraded. Entities like the NAB (National Association of Broadcasters) are a unified front that ensures the viability of broadcast television in relation to any proposed changes by the FCC. It’s hard to know right now how deep the repack will be, or if it even ends up happening at all.

Also, the auction is an incentive auction, where broadcasters call the shots on if they want to sell their spectrum or not. You can read more about the FCC repack, various scenarios and incentive auctions here.  

Don’t we need these frequencies to allow expansion of internet and mobile services in rural areas?

Well, not really. This can also be done using television whitespaces which allow OTA TV and new data services to coexist in the same spectrum band.

So what should we do now?

Auctioning off a small portion of the UHF spectrum could make some sense, but not right now. Not after the last auction occurred only three years ago and was part of a transition that turned the OTA TV landscape upside down.

Today, it’s hard to see what the benefit for regular Canadians is despite what Industry Canada claims. Oh, and about those last auctions (700MHz): they raised over 5.27 billion dollars for the Canadian government. All that cash was put in a “Consolidated Revenue Fund and reinvested in priorities that matter to Canadians.”  

Yeah. Gotcha.

(Details are here by the way)

So in summary, if you love your current OTA setup, it’s time to speak up to Industry Canada before the February 26^th 2015 deadline.

You can email them with your concerns and opinions at spectrum.auctions@ic.gc.ca and specify which option your believe is in the best interest of Canadians; or simply tell them to leave the 600MHz band alone.

In the end, if the response is staggering enough, it cannot be ignored. During the CRTC's TalkTV exercise, we encouraged you to post your comments about keeping OTA in Canada and the response was staggering - over 95% of respondents were in favour of maintaining OTA broadcasts, a number so large it couldn't be ignored and left the CRTC no choice but to build its policy around the wishes of the public. 

The same can be done now. Make your voice heard. Remember, Industry Canada works for you. Let them know what you think.