Canadian TV networks in big trouble

It’s a scary new world, and not just for newspapers:

CTVglobemedia takes $1.7B write-down on TV properties
Canwest, lenders extend debt deadline to March 11, credit line cut to $112m
Looming cuts would shake CBC to its core
[whoopee!]

I’m a hell of lot more comfortable with traditional network TV (especially Canadian) disappearing than with newspapers folding. (David Warren likes papers too.)
And this is certainly true:

Bloggers Can’t Fill the Gap Left by Shrinking Press Corps

An aside: the National Post is still a much better read than the Globe and Mail; but the Globe does have more extensive news coverage (matched to horrible headline writers)–and it essentially gives the party line of the dominant class, of which one should be constantly aware.
Mark C.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Canadian TV networks in big trouble

  1. First to go should be analog TV broadcast. That’s a prime band (it goes through walls) and it’s underutilized. The main reason for the digital switchover in the US is to begin to develop new wireless technology.

  2. An interesting article here:
    http://www.tnr.com/story_print.html?id=a4e2aafc-cc92-4e79-90d1-db3946a6d119 VIA http://www.mercatornet.com/
    Here’s a sample of what can be found there.
    • Even before the recession hit, the newspaper industry was facing a mortal threat from the rise of the Internet, falling circulation and advertising revenue, and a long-term decline in readership, as the habit of buying a daily paper dwindled from one generation to the next.
    • Should we care? Some observers, confident of the blessings of technology, refuse to shed any tears for the traditional giants of journalism, on the grounds that their troubles are of their own making and of little consequence to the general welfare. In this view, regardless of whether newspapers successfully adapt to the Internet, new and better sources of news will continue developing online, and they will fill whatever void newspapers leave. Others are so angry at the mainstream media–the reviled “MSM”–that they see the economic misery of the press as a deserved comeuppance. Let the bastards suffer.
    • Online there is certainly a great profusion of opinion, but there is little reporting, and still less of it subject to any rigorous fact-checking or editorial scrutiny.
    • And while the new digital environment is more open to “citizen journalism” and the free expression of opinions, it is also more open to bias, and to journalism for hire.
    • As a result, to the extent that the Internet replaces newspapers as a source of news, it may add to the tendencies that Prior has identified–greater disparities in knowledge between news dropouts and news junkies, as well as greater ideological polarization in both the news-attentive public and the news media.
    I wouldn’t want to see the demise of media as we know it, but when journalists talk like they did during a brief discussion on QP today … From Lawrence Martin wickedly smiling that it is the Conservatives who are going to lose the most, because according to him Canwest Global has a decidedly conservative POV, to Jane Taber’s smug assertion “of course, we’re totally objective at the Globe & Mail, so there you go.”
    Talk like that almost makes me want to echo what was said in the New Republic article: “Others are so angry at the mainstream media–the reviled “MSM”–that they see the economic misery of the press as a deserved comeuppance. Let the bastards suffer.”

  3. It seems to me that David Warren and others have missed the obvious (or simply haven’t stated it). Newspapers are an excellent medium to disseminate the news and informed opinion and are certainly better equipped than bloggers to cover major events. OTH – much of the profitability of newspapers depends upon advertising, especially classifieds, which really is a dinosaur in the internet age.
    IIRC, when I advertised a motorcycle for sale in the Toronto Star about 30 years ago, it cost me close to $100 for a small ad that ran for several days. It was effective at the time but why bother now when so many other channels are available on the internet for a fraction of that price – in nominal dollars, forget inflation adjusted. When the Star used to have one or two full columns advertising boats, a copy I read a year or two ago had one or two boats period. The Star’s Saturday automotive section use to cover two or three full pages; again the copy I read had a fraction of the former number of ads.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s