Research report prepared for the australian communications and media authority

3.4Canada review of findings

There are no limits on the amount of advertising which can be broadcast although the CRTC has introduced a new policy which would regulate infomercials of a certain length.

Political advertising is permitted with some restrictions on allocation of time during election periods.

Definitions

The codes administered by the CBSC of relevance to this report are the Code of Ethics and the RTNDA Code. Neither of these codes contains definitions of advertising or sponsorship. The BA 1991 (Ca) includes a definition of ‘commercial message’ and a definition of a content category which accords with general understandings of advertising. Both of these definitions accord with advertising which is concerned with ordinary commercial activity. It would seem that the CBSC in its decisions relies on these definitions and the term as it might be commonly understood in the industry.

There are no definitions of other commercial practices such as ‘sponsorship’ and in general the codes are relatively unsophisticated in their consideration of the scope for commercial influences on programming. However, as discussed in the report, the CBSC is able to respond to these types of practices, and develop policy which it and the CRTC will expect licensees to observe.

Separation of commercial content from other programming

As with other jurisdictions, a key concern identified in the rules is the need to ensure that there is transparency so that audiences know the nature of the material being broadcast. The Code of Ethics deals specifically with news, and in contrast to the other jurisdictions considered in this report, also with ‘public affairs’ (current affairs) reporting. These rules address:

• 
  The need to ensure that advertising is distinguishable from news. As a further assurance, the rules prohibit a newsreader reading a commercial message during a newscast.
  
• 
  The need to ensure that there is no influence by advertisers on the reporting of news and public affairs.
  

As noted, the rules are relatively minimalist in their coverage. Aside from the rules dealing expressly with advertising, there are no rules which regulate sponsorship or other commercial practices. There are provisions in the codes which cover programming generally, and which may be relevant to commercial practices, such as rules which ensure that news and public affairs programs are fully and fairly presented. The CBSC has drawn on such rules when considering programming which has been paid for or sponsored, although it is apparent that the CBSC has not often had to deal with these types of practices.

It is notable that most of the obligations in the two codes which are relevant to concerns about editorial independence relate not to programming generally, but to news and current affairs. This suggests that Canada adopts a position somewhere between the UK (and Ireland) and the US.

Regulatory Obligations

The regulatory obligations are imposed on licensees. The RTNDA Code although applied to licensees, is also a code for journalists in the electronic media. However, the CBSC appears to apply this code only in relation to licensee obligations.

The RTNDA Code prohibits journalists accepting financial compensation for anyone seeking to influence news coverage. However, it would seem that this imposes no direct obligation on the journalist so far as the CBSC is concerned.

3.5Completed or planned reviews

• 
  Their original purpose;
  
• 
  Their relevance and effectiveness having regard to existing and future needs; and
  
• 
  Whether they should be “…retained, improved, streamlined or eliminated in order to serve the purposes of the Broadcasting Act most efficiently and economically.
  

With regard to commercial radio regulation, the review’s recommendations were limited, since it took the view that since the early eighties, the regulatory burden on radio had tended to reduce, taking account of financial and technological developments.²⁸⁸

More generally, it is to be noted that the review did not make any recommendations which might amount to a radical change in the current regulatory framework. Whilst it noted the successful use of industry self-regulation, citing the CBSC, and its value “…when properly implemented and administered, can result in achievement of policy objectives with less regulatory burden for both the regulator and the regulated undertakings…”, the review did not make any specific recommendations for greater use.²⁸⁹ It observed also that, whilst a useful regulatory mechanism, there was a risk that it could “…result in the substitution of private interests for public interests if it is not properly structured”.²⁹⁰ It also observed that the successful examples could be related to where the CRTC had taken an active role in the establishment of schemes, as well as the use of licensing conditions to ensure adherence to codes and standards.²⁹¹

The review also considered the licensing processes of the CRTC, but here also there were few recommendations which might be considered to lead to a radical change in the regulatory framework, and especially in the use made by the CRTC of its licensing powers. As such, there were no recommendations to dispense with, or limit the use of, public hearings, although there was a recommendation that the CRTC should revise its rules and procedures to ensure better control over intervenors in public hearings; the review considered that the latter often took up an undue amount of time given the value of their intervention.²⁹²