exploremusic

Oh Caaaaan Con our home and native regulation

1 year ago by Jeff Woods | July 1, 2009 11:10 am

This is another one of those ‘the opinions of this blogger don’t necessarily reflect the opinons of this website/radio station/or company that owns this website and radio station’.   Then again … they might, but I might be the only one crusty enough on Canada day to bring it up.

Oh Ca-na-daaaaah. Our home and native land – home of some of classic rock and rock and folk rock’s ultimate bands. The old(er) guard - Neil Young, The Guess Who, The Band, Joni Mitchell, Gordon Lightfoot, April Wine, BTO, Rush.   The new(er) guard – The Tragically Hip, Bryan Adams, Colin James, Lee Aaron, The Tea Party Triumph, Max Webster, Kim Mitchell, Sloan,  Blue Rodeo, Bruce Cockburn,  ……..   And the newest guard, some of which you like, some of which our kids like:   Tom Wilson, Matt Good, Nickelback, O.L.P., City and Colour, Metric, Feist, Ron Sexsmith, Sum 41 and on and on and on.

 

Then there’s all those bands that aren’t from Canada with songs that are deemed Canadian enough to qualify as what’s none as Canadian Content, the can-con that you hear all the time and maybe wonder why so much???    Like all that early Heart (recorded in Vancouver), all the Steppenwolf (formed in L.A. by a German and some Americans and Canadians), Nazareth ‘This Flight Tonight” (Scottish band covering Joni Mitchell).   I’m not suggesting these bands/songs aren’t good and worthy of airplay. It’s simply disproportionate, simply because it qualifies as Canadian Content.    Better example yet???   “Under My Thumb”.   Why on earth would radio play the version by the band Streetheart, instead of the Rolling Stones version? Can-con baby, that’s why.    Does anybody really want to hear ‘Sunny Days’ again?  It was already beaten to death by an ad for some car.  Or ‘Signs’.  Sign signs everywhere signs is right.  Enough already.     

 

Running a Classic Rock station and keeping legal with the goverment simply means you have to play things you wouldn’t otherwise play because the audience simply wouldn’t want to hear them, at the very least not that often.   If we never heard ‘Working for the Weekend’ again, wouldn’t that be cause for celebration?

 

Yes, Canada is home of the antiquated protectionist entity known as ‘Can-Con’, the regulation that continues to be imposed by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) that requires radio and television broadcasters (including cable and satellite specialty channels) air a certain percentage of content that was at least partly written, produced, presented, or otherwise contributed to by persons from Canada. Can-con is also used to describe the content itself, and, more generally, to cultural and creative content that is Canadian in nature, but to me, can-con means regulation. And I hate that with great passion. So much so, if I didn’t have to make a living to pay a mortgage I would make it my premiere goal to find a way to abolish the can-con requirement for radio.

 

Other countries employ similar quota systems. For example, Australian broadcasters are required to broadcast a certain percentage of Australasian content alongside international content. Similar domestic content quota laws also exist in the Philippines, Mexico, Nigeria, France, Israel, Ireland, South Africa, Jamaica, the United Kingdom, and New Zealand. (In the UK, Ireland, and France, this rule is now a European Union content rule rather than a domestic content rule).

 

Apparently there is a fear that without a regulatory system, independent Canadian popular culture would be swallowed up by our friends in the U.S.    I say B.S.  

For music on radio, the requirements are referred to as the MAPL system. Cute, like Maple – some acronyms just fall from the sky – more on how MAPL works below). 

Following an extensive public hearing process organised by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), the MAPL system, created by Stan Klees (co-creator of the Juno Award), was adopted as a way to define and identify Canadian content in pieces of music for the purposes of increasing exposure of Canadian music on Canadian radio through content regulations governing a percentage (25%) of airplay that is to be devoted to Canadian music. The percentage was increased to 30 per cent in the 1980s, and to 35 per cent in 1998.   I was on a Canadian Music Week panel shortly after the increase to 35%, and when asked by the moderator what I would do if it increased to 40 and I passionately blurted out “f&^$%quit”.   It was met with equal parts laughter and surprise.   But seriously, the requirements have become ridiculous.  

 

For the record, I should point out that some radio stations — especially those playing formats where there may be a limited number of Canadian recordings suitable for airplay, such as classical, jazz or "oldies", may be allowed by the CRTC to meet Canadian content targets as low as 20 per cent.  But what about ‘Classic Rock’?  It’s truly the ‘oldies’ of our generation and the government needs to adjust the numbers to make it make sense too.   

There’s a reason why bands like The Guess Who, Neil Young, The Band, April Wine, The Tragically Hip are heard on the radio not less than every 2 hours – GOVERNMENT REGULATION.   I used to love the Hip. I can’t even listen to them now because of what radio, via the government has done to them.

 

The Other Side of the coin:

Before the MAPL system was established in 1971 Canadian music was regarded with indifference by many on Canadian radio.  I’ll buy that, then again truth be told, the best records were being produced in England, London in particular and in New York and L.A., so who could blame radio for playing the best stuff and foregoing the substandard records?      The government was convinced that Canadian musicians in Canada needed a leg up, and so it was – Can-con regulations.   

 

How the MAPL system works

To qualify as Canadian content a musical selection must generally fulfil at least two of the following conditions:

• M (music) — the music is composed entirely by a Canadian.
• A (artist) — the music is, or the lyrics are, performed principally by a Canadian.
• P (production) — the musical selection consists of a performance that is:
  • recorded wholly in Canada, or
  • performed wholly in Canada and broadcast live in Canada.
• L (lyrics) — the lyrics are written entirely by a Canadian.

There are four special cases where a musical selection may qualify as Canadian content:

• The musical selection was recorded before January 1972 and meets one, rather than two, of the above conditions.
• It is an instrumental performance of a musical composition written or composed by a Canadian.
• It is a performance of a musical composition that a Canadian has composed for instruments only.
• The musical selection was performed live or recorded after September 1, 1991, and, in addition to meeting the criterion for either artist or production, a Canadian who has collaborated with a non-Canadian receives at least half of the credit for both music and lyrics.

This last criterion was added in 1991, to accommodate Bryan Adams‘ album Waking Up the Neighbours. Adams had collaborated with British record producer Robert John "Mutt" Lange, and as a result, neither the album nor the worldwide smash hit single "(Everything I Do) I Do It for You" qualified as Canadian content under the existing rules. After extensive controversy in the summer of that year, the CRTC changed the rules to allow for such collaborations. Other Canadian artists with long-time international careers, like Anne Murray, Celine Dion, Avril Lavigne and Shania Twain, have used recording studios in Canada specifically to maintain Cancon status.

 

Back to the Controversy

Some Canadians (I’m first in this line)  believe that Cancon represents an unreasonable and undemocratic intrusion into the right of consumers to make their own entertainment choices.

 

Some musicians and critics suggest that radio stations tend to fulfill their Canadian content quotas by playing "safe" choices, i.e. well-established artists such as Shania Twain, The Tragically Hip or Bryan Adams, to the exclusion of emerging artists. In fact, artists who are not established are sometimes forced to build an audience outside Canada before Canadian radio will play them, the very thing the Canadian content rules were designed to remedy. For example, Arcade Fire had no commercial radio airplay in Canada until months after the band was widely anointed rising stars in the American music media, while Daniel Powter had to reach the pop charts in Europe before Canadian radio played his music.

 

In 2005, the website Indie Pool launched a campaign to have the CRTC review and modify the current Canadian content rules to put greater stress on supporting new and emerging artists. The group’s petition is signed by approximately 5,000 Canadian artists and music fans to date, but is not widely supported by Canadian media or acknowledged by the CRTC.

 

In 2006, the Canadian Association of Broadcasters, in a submission to the CRTC, proposed a lessening of Canadian content regulating to 25 per cent, arguing that conventional radio faced more competition from alternative music sources such as Internet radio, satellite radio and iPods, and, in the same submission, proposed stricter new guidelines on the licensing of new radio stations. In another submission, Friends of Canadian Broadcasting argued the Canadian broadcasting industry is in a healthy position and did not need to have the Canadian content rules relaxed. Essentially they are saying radio has enough listeners and is making enough money – AS IF that’s the bloody issue for music fans! It’s NOT about money. It’s about listening to music based on WANT rather than regulations, says ME).

I have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars (of radio company money) on playing music for radio listeners in large rooms, to find out what songs they want to hear more and which songs they don’t want to hear more.   Without fail, the majority of the songs that fall in the bottom of the stack are Canadian and it’s not because Canadians don’t like Canadian music, it’s because the high can-con quota required (35%) forces stations to be a disproportionate amount of Canadian music.

 

A Quick Bit of Important Math

And if you don’t agree with me, perhaps think about it from a population standpoint.

The UK (you know, where Classic Rock was Born has population is in excess of 60 million.

The US population has a population in excess of 300 million.

Canada’s population is approx. 31 Million.

While I would like to see the can-con regulation scrapped altogether, let’s assume that’s unrealistic at this point, and just go with the numbers at hand. Meaning Canada represents less than 10 percent of the population of the total of  world’s most prolific exporters of rock music. So how about it CRTC – how about 10%.  

If I were a musician, I would hate to wonder if a station added my music because it was as good as the rest of the songs in the pile vs. because it was fulfilling a Can-con regulation imposed by the Government.

 

Happy Canada day eh.

Jeff

 

Send to a friend Filed Under: Legends of Classic Rock

• Share

• Share this

• Alisa

  July 1, 2009 at 11:51 am

  Hey Jeff,

  Been reading you & listening to you forever! I find you interesting, compelling & fun. I envy you as you have the greatest job in the world & mine is totally from hell.

  Been listening to Q since day one when it came on the air. I actually remember it being on a little before its debut.

  Q has held my interest always, as it plays the music I love since I was about 8 years old. (Two older brothers & my mom always took me to the free concerts at Ontario place. Rember those?)

  Anyhow, the point to my long winded story. I read your blog today & I have to tell you. I agree with every word you said. There are times you guys play the same songs over & over again (the only one I will mention is Joe Cocker’s “a little help from my friends”. Man that tune just makes me ill. I want to vomit seriosly as soon as it etches in my head. But there are some Canadians (Neil Young excluded) that are overplayed.

  I know it is hard to battle the CRTC, believe me I tried years ago when I was getting bombarded at work with junk faxes. Is that petition that has been signed by approximately 5000 canadians available for people like me? If so would you please let me know. Anyhow, thanks for listening to me. It is fun to be able to have the day off from hell to listen to my favourite radio station in peace.

  So happy Canada day to you as well!

  Best always,
  Alisa

  (Reply)
• Andrew Costley

  July 1, 2009 at 2:39 pm

  Why not truly back your claim by playing songs by MAPL artists that were not hits? Q107 is definitely an “Oldies” station; you only play “hits”. Some of the best musical work by Canadian artists are the “other” tracks on their albums. Ian Thomas is not a one hit wonder (Painted Ladies) but that is all hear from him on Q107! Taking Care of Business, while recognizable, is not the best of BTO. Same goes for “No Sugar Tonight” by the Guess Who.
  Why do I not hear more from Joni Mitchell? If you are prepared to play Tragically Hip,(nothing classic there, yet) why not Bruce Coburn?
  Why does Q107 now play bands that they mocked and shunned when they were in vogue on the Spirit of Radio CFNY (when it was a decent radio station)?

  Andrew

  (Reply)
• steve

  July 1, 2009 at 4:26 pm

  verrrrry interesting

  (Reply)
• Valerie

  July 1, 2009 at 11:52 pm

  I don’t agree with you completely, but otherwise that was a pretty thorough rundown on the history of the regulation. Thanks.

  One correction, though, and it has to do with the thing about “new and emerging” artists. The CRTC has not been ignoring this idea, certainly not in the last year and a half I’ve been in on a few hearings for new frequencies. N&E has fast become a major part of the discussion about what a broadcasting company will do with a new station – it’s right up there now with Cancon, local news and “Cancon Development” (that stuff stations do like Battles of the Bands and contributing to music programs, etc.). I realize this may be yet another weird thing for “Classic Rock” stations to contend with, but it’s especially an issue for formats most suited to pull it off, like AAA (Adult Album Alternative). We’ll see what happens with it, but believe me, no matter what I may think of the CRTC in other ways, they are all over this N&E thing.

  (Reply)
• Brian Best

  July 2, 2009 at 8:50 am

  I go to Mohawk College for radio broadcasting and when our professor told us for each of our broadcasts we needed to have 35% can-con i kinda had to stop and think.

  isnt the reason we have this “can-con” to insure that the Canadian public doesn’t become assimilated by American culture? i think thats a rather archaic way of thinking now because of the internet. i mean iTunes wont force every Canadian customer to buy one Canadian song for ever 2 American songs they download.

  im with you in wanting to have the whole thing abolished but having it cut down to 10% instead seams like a much more reasonable goal considering all the red tape.

  (Reply)
• debbie m/over 25yrlistner

  July 2, 2009 at 10:23 am

  Hi Jeff,
  Wow that was a rant..But most understood and favourable.

  I can think of others ie Saga most popular in Europe not hear ..My bud Wild t and the spirit same.I would love to hear more Canadian content we have come so far with music and we should be allowed to shine.
  cheers

  (Reply)
• Anvil

  July 2, 2009 at 12:38 pm

  An enlightening, in-depth article, Jeff. Thanks. I would be hesitant, however, to jettison the Can-con requirements because, unlike Australia and the other countries you mention, we are right next door to that behemoth culture-eater, the USA. Yes, Mexico shares a border, but their language and history are distinct and separate enough to provide a safeguard of sorts, similar to Quebec. If you look at Canadian television – with the exception of the CBC who, understandably, is mandated to produce Canadian content – I suspect the other networks would produce very little, if any, homegrown shows if Can-con regulations were removed. We already have too big an appetite for everything from south of the border – even if it’s principally crap.
  No offense, but television and radio execs cannot be trusted to insure there is room for Canadian artists without regulation. There might be an argument that Q’s Classic Rock format severely limits the number of Canadian classic rock hits you can play, but that’s a small price to pay, methinks, to insure we will continue to have music being produced by Canadians for world consumption.
  Cheers.

  (Reply)
• Andrew Roudny

  July 2, 2009 at 7:04 pm

  THANK YOU!!!! Finally a Canadian who’s against CANCON.

  There are lots of complex reasons why CANCON is no good (for Canadian emerging artists and everyone else), but it boils down to this:

  If rock radio is boring, CD sales slump. Simple as that. And right now, rock radio (oldies, classic, and “the edge”) is VERY boring. And how many CDs did the Hip sell last time around?

  (Reply)
• Ed

  July 6, 2009 at 3:01 pm

  Interesting. I for one find that when I try to listen to Classic Rock on XM, I end up switching back to Q107 because I miss the Canadian Music. Just because it’s Canadian doesn’t necessarily make it sub-par. There is lots of good and bad music from all over.
  The restrictive playlists on all the stations that I am able to get is what bothers me. Why play the same song from a particular artist over and over again? Some of these acts (Canadian and not) have dozens of great songs. Mix it up a little (or better, a lot).
  Aside from specific shows like yours that do colour outside the lines somewhat, the arbitrarily short playlists are a bigger drag from my perspective.
  I love Q and listen to it most of the time but I do get tired of the same songs over and over again and that goes for all the songs, not just the Canadian ones. Is there some problem with mixing it up or is it too much effort?
  I have my kids enjoying Classic Rock now but they get tired of the same playlist as well. That is why I let them change the cannel except when Legends or Decades is on that may stray from the tried-and-true (albeit short) playlist. Then I find that some of the current music (rock that is) that they listen to is pretty good as well, regardless of where it comes from.

  (Reply)

Disclaimer: Comments submitted to this sites posts are moderated and will be posted to the website once they are deemed to be suitable.