Canadian Issues DAVID DESCÔTEAUX Pledges for the CBC
900-plus member stations across the US. Most of its funding comes from listeners, who are willing to pay because NPR offers them what they want to hear. Listeners influence programming through their donations. For instance, when the Maine member station is in the midst of its pledge drive, fans of the morning jazz show will call in to make a donation while the show is on the air. Any show that doesn’t bring in enough dona- tions stands to be cut. The upshot: programming reflects listen- ers’ tastes, and a connection is established between station and community. CBC Radio operates under a completely different model.
Over the years, its programming has driſted from its “public” mission (e.g., addressing topics covered little elsewhere, from a noncommercial perspective) to look more and more like that of its private competitors. The reason is that audiences have had no say in its content. Ratings and advertising revenue are the core concerns of executives. Conversely, NPR aims to satisfy its listeners/donors; in other words, it strives to distinguish itself from commercial stations by mainly offering current affairs programming, local content, even radio drama. Some will argue that this model can’t work in Canada, where
L
AST NOVEMBER, Conservative leadership candidate Maxime Bernier sent ripples across the media industry. Bernier proposed that the CBC should resume its role as a
quality public broadcaster, with fewer celebrity cook shows and knockoffs of American serials, and more current affairs pro- grams and documentaries. But what stood out the most was his suggestion that the Crown corporation move to a funding model similar to that of the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) and National Public Radio (NPR) in the US, which are partially funded through donations from varied sources. Pledge drives at the CBC? Why not? It’s a good funding model
to enhance the quality of programming, instead of relying on ratings — the precondition for ad sales. It would also give Canadians a break — not everyone likes the CBC, but everyone must contribute to the $1 billion the Mother Corp. receives in annual subsidies. In short, Bernier’s proposal means “selling” the CBC to its viewers and listeners. PBS and NPR are not-for-profit organizations that receive
approximately 16% of their funding from the government. The rest comes from individuals, foundations, corporate sponsor- ships and colleges and universities. NPR, for example, produces programs and sells them to its
22 | CPA MAGAZINE | MARCH 2017
the culture of giving is less developed. But nothing prevents the CBC from getting part of its funding this way. It would be a start. Replacing 15% to 20% of the CBC’s funding with public dona- tions would not only save taxpayers some $200 million, but would also give a voice to those listeners and viewers who truly support the organization. This model is not completely foreign to us. In Ontario, the
TVO network gets close to 80% (or $40 million) of its funding from the Ontario government, and 10% (or $5 million) from public and corporate donations. More than 33,000 Ontarians support TVO with financial donations. One of TVO’s programs, The Agenda with Steve Paikin, is even partly funded by donations from CPA Ontario. Crown corporations should not be the exclusive domain of a
select few bureaucrats; they belong to citizens above all. The same is true of the CBC — its audiences are not looking for another private network. Although the “donations-as-votes” model has its share of critics, at the very least Canadians should be consulted annually on their level of satisfaction with the programming they are offered. Aſter all, they’re the ones footing the bill.
DAVID DESCÔTEAUX is a Montreal-based business columnist
Geneviève Côté
Photo: Yanick Dery
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72