CRTC hearings - pay more for TV?
Sometimes I just don't get things. Case in point - the current CRTC hearings about issues on over the air TV. Press reports say that broadcasters have asked to be able to charge the cable and satellite companies for their signals. Of course, that means the viewer. The CBC said one reason they need more money is to move to HDTV, as advertisers won't pay more for HDTV. Ted Rogers of Rogers Cable called the proposal "trash"
So here's what I don't get.
Conventional TV is losing audience for various reasons, including the Intenet video phenomenon.
There is a growing demand for HDTV. People I know that have HDTV's skew their viewing habits towards whatever is in HD.
Thus going to HD should increase (or at least stem the decrease) audience for a show/network. While advertisers may not want to pay more for HD, they do pay based on audience size.
But some broadcasters are slow to adopt HD, and want to charge customers more, which will reduce viewers?
Read a Globe and Mail article on the broadcaster comments