Canadians don’t have the freedom to view what they want. We are controlled by the State, by way of the CRTC.

The Canadian Radio—Television Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) was established in another age (1968), at a time when there were very few broadcast channels available. Its purpose was to maintain a balance, in the public interest, between the cultural, social and economic goals of the broadcast industry.

It did not do its job very well. There is little balanced programming on the CBC, CTV and Global TV, which consistently promote the perspective of the social and fiscal left.

However, today, because of the approximately 500-channel universe brought about by digital television, CRTC is hard put to exercise control over broadcasting with the same effectiveness. Nonetheless, it continues to ignore reality, and casts its shadow over Canadian broadcasting—especially religious broadcasting. The CRTC has permitted only a few licenses for religious broadcasters, despite the many applications made for such programming.

Yet, the CRTC has no problem licensing pornography and homosexual broadcasts. Its most recent license for homosexual broadcasting occurred in 2011, when it granted a license to a company for a music and talk station in French, catering to homosexuals.

When questioned about its controversial licensing of homosexual and pornography broadcasts, the CRTC’s commissioners contemptuously respond that the Commission does not judge the contents of programs. This is a surprise, in view of the fact that when it granted the homosexual TV channel, PrideVision, a license in 2000, it stated:

PrideVision will bring added diversity to the Canadian broadcasting system by providing a unique service with the potential to create understanding and reduce stereotyping of a significant portion of Canadian society…
…It will have the potential to be a “bridging” service, creating understanding and thereby reducing stereotyping.

Further, the CRTC doesn’t hesitate to pass judgment and to react with horror to applications for religious broadcasting. What is the reason for this intense dislike of religious broadcasting?

The answer to this riddle was exposed when an application was made to amend the stringent conditions attached to its license, by the Christian Crossroads Television System (CTS), which was first granted a license in 1998. Its license required that it provide “balanced” programming on a wide range of issues for 20 hours per week, of which 12 hours must be broadcast between 6:00 p.m., and 11:00 p.m., (the peak hours). No other license issued by CRTC has included such stringent conditions. CTS applied to the CRTC to amend these conditions to permit the balancing of its programming to be measured over the full broadcast schedule, not just during the evening peak hours.

The CRTC, true to form, in February 2012, refused the request of CTS. What was significant, however, was the dissent to this latter decision by one of the Commissioners, Peter Menzies, a former editor of the Calgary Herald. In his dissent, Mr. Menzies let “the cat out of the bag” as to why the CRTC hates religious broadcasting.

According to Mr. Menzies, a recommendation was made by the Royal Commission on broadcasting (1928) to effectively ban exclusive religious broadcasting in Canada:

This attention can be traced back more than 80 years to when at least one broadcaster was using its spectrum in a manner that inflamed sectarian and political tensions.

However, church and religious programming have been included in the broader broadcast systems. These sectarian tensions refer to an attack made by an organization called the “Bible Students Association” (the Canadian arm of the Jehovah’s Witnesses) on other religions, especially the Catholic Church, as well as the government.

This led to the revocation of the licenses of the Bible Students Association and to the establishment on Royal Commission on Broadcasting in 1928, which made the recommendation to prohibit religious broadcasting.

In 1993, the CRTC, in a contentious vote, passed a Religious Broadcasting Policy in which it agreed to license religious broadcasters. Several dissenting Commissioners to the new policy stated:

We are disturbed by the extent of social, cultural, and racial intolerance which is often rooted in religious intolerance. One need only look to Bosnia, the Middle East, India, Northern Ireland, South Africa, and other world “trouble spots” to observe this phenomenon in its most violent form. Such cultural and racial intolerance is less dramatic and violent, but no less real, in Canada.According to Mr. Menzies,

This opinion is reasonably representative of the fundamental secularist view that religion is more likely to be a force for harm than for good and therefore should exist apart from and not as a part of secular society. This Commissioner shares the concern expressed regarding intolerance and does not contest the fact that religion has been and can be a useful tool for extremists.

Mr. Menzies then went on to question whether the so called “unrest” fomented through the abuse of religion by extremists is different from unrest caused by other extremists, such as those in “trade, sovereignty, economics, politics, language, property, money and culture, all of which have been and will continue to be “root causes” of intolerance.” He continued: ” Indeed, it seems there are few boundaries to the extent to which people of ill will are anxious to find useful vehicles in the pursuit of their goals. Even hockey, as Canada witnessed most recently in June 2011 in Vancouver, can be the excuse for civil misconduct.”

Mr. Menzies further stated in his dissent:

…

[Commissioners]… appear to have chosen to view religion through an entirely negative lens and completely overlooked the positive role that faith organizations play in society.

Indeed. Why are these appointed, prejudiced, intolerant bureaucrats on the CRTC permitted to control that which Canadians may see and hear on public broadcasts? Why does the CRTC have the power to decide what is good and bad for Canadian viewers and to be the arbiter of what is considered “acceptable” and in good taste in Canada, thereby frequently ignoring what the viewers actually want to see?

The CRTC, at best, is subjective in its selection of license applications. Why can’t broadcasters be free to broadcast as they wish, subject to the usual restraints, such as the defamation laws, etc.? If the viewers want to see and hear what the broadcasters provide, then it will be a successful undertaking. If not, it will fail financially. That is what should happen in a democracy. Instead, Canadians don’t have the freedom to view what they want. We are controlled by the State, by way of the CRTC.