The National Post carried dueling Op Ed pieces debating the merits of the acquisition by Bell of Astral Media.
Supporting approval of the deal was Bell regulatory chief Mirko Bibic, who wrote that the deal provides an alternative to cable giants Videotron and Rogers in an article subtitled: “Astral will make Bell more competitive in a borderless world.”
Canada now has four large vertically integrated companies offering both media and communications services. Of the other three, two oppose the Astral deal, while Shaw supports it. Why the difference? We all compete as broadcasters, but Rogers and Quebecor compete directly with Bell for TV subscribers in Ontario and Quebec. With the launch of Bell’s new Fibe TV service, both are seeing their long-dominant position in the urban TV marketplace under threat.
On the other side of the issue, MTS Allstream’s Chief Corporate Officer Chris Peirce wrote that the CRTC should say ‘yes’ to competition in an article subtitled: “Don’t just say ‘no’ to Bell. Say ‘yes’ to a creative marketplace.”
How can this degree of control by a private economic interest possibly serve Canadians and Canadian businesses? At a minimum, the CRTC and Competition Bureau must recognize that the more Bell is allowed to integrate all of these elements, the more direct and enforced regulation will be needed to prevent Bell from putting its economic interests ahead of the public good and, especially, competition that will result in the innovation, growth and leadership Canada is capable of in this emerging digital era. The measures adopted by the regulator have not been strong enough in this regard.
The oral hearing concluded last week in Montreal. According to the CRTC’s revised schedule, participants in that hearing have until Friday to submit their final comments [up to 10 pages], and then Bell has another week [until September 28] to file its final reply.