While feeding at the public trough, Canada’s association of campus radio stations apparently want to censor other media voices.

At its annual general meeting in Halifax this year, the National Campus Radio Association passed a resolution (Resolution 2011-F7) calling for “a comprehensive boycott of Israeli media institutions at the national and international levels”, including a call to “Refrain from participation in any form of cooperation, collaboration or joint projects with Israeli media institutions”.

I won’t get into the politics other than to point out that Israel is the only country whose media have been selected for censorship by NCRA, despite its institutions being independent, operating within the only democracy in the region.

What I will look at are the regulatory and communications policy issues raised by this. For example, presentation of diverse viewpoints is a key policy under the Broadcasting Act:

3. (1) It is hereby declared as the broadcasting policy for Canada that

…
(d) the Canadian broadcasting system should

…
(iii) through its programming and the employment opportunities arising out of its operations, serve the needs and interests, and reflect the circumstances and aspirations, of Canadian men, women and children, including equal rights, the linguistic duality and multicultural and multiracial nature of Canadian society and the special place of aboriginal peoples within that society, …

The CAB Code of Ethics requires

Clause 6 – Full, Fair and Proper Presentation

It is recognized that the full, fair and proper presentation of news, opinion, comment and editorial is the prime and fundamental responsibility of each broadcaster. This principle shall apply to all radio and television programming, whether it relates to news, public affairs, magazine, talk, call-in, interview or other broadcasting formats in which news, opinion, comment or editorial may be expressed by broadcaster employees, their invited guests or callers.

Clause 7 – Controversial Public Issues

Recognizing in a democracy the necessity of presenting all sides of a public issue, it shall be the responsibility of broadcasters to treat fairly all subjects of a controversial nature. Time shall be allotted with due regard to all the other elements of balanced program schedules, and the degree of public interest in the questions presented. Recognizing that healthy controversy is essential to the maintenance of democratic institutions, broadcasters will endeavour to encourage the presentation of news and opinion on any controversy which contains an element of the public interest.

The campus radio association resolution is troubling in that it flies in the face of balance required under the Act and under the industry codes. How can a “fair, full and proper presentation” of controversial issues be provided if the democratic free press of a Canadian ally are being silenced by this boycott?

In July, a month after the NCRA meeting, the CRTC handed millions of dollars to campus radio stations [Broadcasting Regulatory Policy CRTC 2011-431]. That decision approved the Operational Plan [pdf] of the Community Radio Fund of Canada (CRFC), which affirms its continued accountability to the CRTC in Section C of the plan. “The CRFC also welcomes questions from the Commission throughout the year.”

It seems to me that the CRTC may wish to file a question with the CRFC to determine if the CRFC will establish, as a condition of funding an individual station, an assurance that the station will not silence diverse perspectives and will distance itself from media censorship.

The imagery of high school pep rallies is appropriate in the first week of school. Very few schools are chanting “We’re number 12.” But that is Canada’s place in the latest ranking from the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Index.

There are a number of areas that bring Canada down, such as the Macroeconomic Environment scores, which examines factors such as Government budget balance (as a percentage of GDP), national savings, inflation, general government debt and the country’s credit rating. Given the state of so many other countries, it is unclear why Canada’s relative ranking is so poor on government debt factors. I found the most interesting data points were the responses to naming the most problematic factors for doing business. Seventeen percent of responses cited “Inefficient government bureaucracy”.

I was exposed to this yesterday as I discovered that Canada’s passport office felt it needed to give two year’s notice to make changes enabling a 10 year passport. Keep in mind that most places require a passport to have 6 months remaining on a passport when entering a country, so a 5 year passport really needs renewal after 54 months. So, every four and a half years, you have the pleasure of being grounded while Canada Post and Passport Canada delay your application by mail. Alternatively, you can throw away your personal productivity by visiting a passport office in person. Does it not seem bizarre that the improvement to this bureaucratic mess requires a consultation and two years advance notice, with no firm readiness date other than “some time in 2012”? It is a little annoyance, symptomatic of government red-tape that doesn’t consider the detrimental impact on international business and lost productivity.

With Parliament returning to session at the end of this month, let’s hope that a majority government can motivate its all of its departments to operate with a greater sense of urgency. Canada’s national digital economic strategy consultation was launched in May of 2010. The Industry Minister, together with colleagues from Heritage and Human Resources, should soon provide leadership to drive Canada towards regaining a top-10 ranking in Global Competitiveness.

I had an interesting discussion recently about unintended consequences. The subject arose when discussing quick fixes to a variety of issues related to social protests in the country I was visiting. People were suggesting that apartments are too expensive, so rents should be reduced across the board. I asked why landlords would want to build new apartments or fix their existing ones if they suddenly lost their income.

Are rental rates uniformly too high, or was there a lack of supply of housing at the lower end of the rental market? Of course, we would all like to see a reduction in anything that represents a monthly bill: rent, utility bills, parking, bus passes. Quick fixes often have unintended consequences.

It got me thinking that Canada has had its share of unintended consequences – some notable incidents in the telecommunications arena. With an especially fragile economy, we need government programs and strategies to avoid the kinds of disincentives that might discourage investment, employment and long term economic growth.

As we get into a new session of parliament on a federal level and enter a season of provincial and territorial elections, let’s hope that our leaders look beyond populist quick fixes in their campaign promises and economic programmes.

Getting ready to fly back to Canada, I can reflect on some international communications experiences. I have been overseas for the past week visiting my daughter. It has been interesting to travel in a country that enjoys mobile penetration of more than 140%, despite prices that appear to be in the same order of magnitude as ours in Canada. My daughter’s voice and data plan is around $70 per month, which takes about 3 and a half hours to earn. Her plan includes 1 GB of data, with extra charges for more. She is shopping for a better plan, no different from her friends back in Toronto.

Mobile phones are everywhere and competition appears to be vibrant, with number portability and switching incentives. But using any measure of affordability, prices are much, much higher as a share of local wages. So, the local government is taking steps to add more competitors to the marketplace.

While most areas have solid connectivity, 3.5G is not prevalent and no one is talking about LTE.

I kept connected with a local SIM card, in part to avoid roaming charges, but mainly so that friends and family over here would have a local number that they would call. Generally, I have used WiFi to connect my Blackberry and PC, thanks to open coffee shop networks.

While the grass always seems greener elsewhere, it has been worthwhile looking beyond raw penetration numbers and arbitrary price baskets to see how people are using their means of communications.

Like many travellers, I have done my part to drive up international mobile penetration rates. I have SIM cards for the UK, the US and a couple other countries where family members travel frequently enough to keep the numbers active. It is an option available that makes it easier for locals to reach me when I am in their country and save money when I am making local calls.

Much has been written about international mobile roaming prices – keep in mind that Europeans cross into other countries more frequently than we Canadians travel inter-provincially. So it is not uncommon for people to carry multiple SIMs in order to arbitrage various rate plans.

I hope you have had time to unwind with family this summer. I’m going to be taking one last break – exercising some international roaming this week – before getting back to work after Labour Day, starting to put together the preliminary program for The 2012 Canadian Telecom Summit, taking place June 4-6, 2012 in Toronto. Send us a note if you want to get sponsorship information or to propose a speaker or a panel discussion theme for one of the break-out sessions.