In defence of Canadian Content laws

Yesterday, I wrote a piece about how Shaw Cable had a beef with Netflix. They say that Netflix should be regulated by the CRTC, because, for all intents and purposes, Netflix is a broadcaster (in Shaw's opinion), and moreover, Netflix doesn’t follow Canadian Content laws.

I was surprised by how much attention the article received and the strong feelings it invoked in our readers. Here are some examples of comments made towards the article:

• Canadian Content laws are just not necessary. They are archaic, wasteful, encourage mediocrity and contribute to our national inferiority complex.
• On an issue of a Canadian content, I think instead of feeding bunch of lame projects that are only seeing the day, because they wanted to make some money of Telefim credits - we should encourage the competitiveness and again let people, the public watch what they want to watch.
• CANCON is a bullshit policy that has done more to inhibit our cultural industries than it has to enhance them.

Harsh words for the CRTC and Canadian Content laws, but certainly not unprecedented. Many Canadians don’t get why we have CanCon, and many feel that the money is a waste. Why should taxpayers have to pay for content they don’t use? Why can’t the free market decide what succeeds or fails? Why can’t the playing field be level?

Truth be told, CanCon laws are what allows us to have a level playing field. Ask anyone who’s ever worked in film and television or been on a movie set — making original content is an expensive, expensive proposition in this country.

I was once on the crew of a low-budget sketch comedy show filmed in Vancouver for the local market. We filmed a five-minute sketch about two people in a restaurant, which took about six hours to complete, required about a dozen film tradespeople (who make anywhere between $20–$50 hourly), maybe $1,000 in rented equipment and a restaurant to close its doors early to be used as a set (I assure you, restaurants do not do that for free).

Factor in several hours of post-production, which requires another three or so editors to accomplish (who, again, make between $20–$50 hourly), plus rented office space for them to work in, and you’re looking at perhaps five or ten thousand dollars just to produce five minutes of “low-budget” television — assuming nothing goes wrong (something always goes wrong), you can get a bunch of volunteers and you’re resourceful enough

Now, let’s say you’re a creative person with a great idea for a television program; if you wanted to produce that television show on your own, as a rugged individual, you’re basically putting your financial future on the line. Producing a pilot can cost several times this amount, and can be expensive as a mortgage on a small house. And, if it turns out your great idea wasn’t so great, well, it’s not like buying a house that you can later sell and reclaim money on; if your idea doesn’t work out, you’re screwed. Good luck paying the bank back all that money you borrowed.

The problem is only exacerbated by the sluggish, risk-averse private broadcasting sector in this country. Why should they bother risking their programming budgets on a home-grown program that might not catch on, when there are safe, proven American reruns that can be obtained for a fraction of the cost? It only makes sense from the perspective of the bottom line. I’m sure that if they could, Canadian broadcasters wouldn’t bother producing any content of their own; CanCon laws are the only thing that obligates them to do so.

With production costs beyond the means of most people and the private sector of little help, tax credits, Telefilm and other federal and provincial film programs are sometimes the only way Canadian film and television can ever hope to be produced. The system is far from perfect — our film industry produces some absolute garbage (think Score: A Hockey Musical), and CanCon requirements mean that most broadcasters want to show the least objectionable Canadian programming as opposed to the most innovative — so there certainly is room for improvement and reform. But to say that the involvement of Telefilm et al in our cultural landscape is destroying it just isn’t true. In fact, if they weren’t involved, we might not have a cultural landscape at all.

By the way, thanks again to all of our readers who commented on my original piece. As always, Techvibes welcomes your thoughts on pieces like this, so feel free to weigh in on this issue!