Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Official Languages
Issue 10 - Evidence - Meeting of May 7, 2012
OTTAWA, Monday, May 7, 2012
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages met this day at 5 p.m. to examine the use of the Internet, new media and social media and the respect for Canadians' language rights, and also to study the CBC/Radio- Canada's obligations under the Official Languages Act and some aspects of the Broadcasting Act.
Senator Maria Chaput (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: I declare the meeting open. Welcome to the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages. I am Senator Maria Chaput of Manitoba, and I am the chair of the committee. Before introducing the witnesses who are appearing today, I would like to invite committee members to introduce themselves. I will begin on my extreme left.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: I am Senator Suzanne Fortin-Duplessis from Quebec.
Senator Poirier: I am Senator Rose-May Poirier from New Brunswick.
Senator Mockler: I am Senator Percy Mockler from New Brunswick.
Senator Robichaud: Hello, I am Senator Fernand Robichaud. I represent New Brunswick and I am from Saint- Louis-de-Kent. As you can see, New Brunswick has a majority here.
The Chair: The committee is continuing its examination of the use of the Internet, new media and social media and the respect for Canadians' language rights, as well as its study on CBC/Radio-Canada's obligations under the Official Languages Act and some aspects of the Broadcasting Act.
Today, the committee will focus on media, and, for the purpose of its two studies, will hear from representatives of minority anglophone and francophone community organizations.
It is with great pleasure that we welcome Mr. Francis Potié, Executive Director of the Association de la presse francophone, and Mr. Simon Forgues, Development and Communications Officer, from the Alliance des radios communautaires du Canada.
[English]
As well we have Mr. Richard Tardif, Executive Director of the Quebec Community Newspapers Association.
On behalf of the committee I thank you all for appearing today. You now have the floor and senators will follow with questions.
[Translation]
Senator Robichaud: I would like to have some information. On our notice of meeting, it says that Mr. Potié will be with us at 5 p.m. and at 6:30 p.m. Is that correct?
The Chair: Yes, we will have a second panel after the break to discuss a letter Mr. Potié sent to the committee regarding the Canada Periodical Fund.
[English]
Mr. Tardif has accepted to be part of the second round also.
[Translation]
Senator Robichaud: Thank you for the information, Madam Chair.
The Chair: Mr. Potié, you have the floor.
Francis Potié, Director General, Association de la presse francophone: Hello everyone. First, thank you for this invitation. We are pleased to share with you our observations and perspectives, in particular on matters such as the use of the Internet, new media, social media and the respect of Canadians' language rights.
The APF does not really have a position on Radio-Canada's obligations.
But before we begin, a few words about our association, the Association de la presse francophone, and the network of francophone newspapers in minority situations in Canada. Our organization's mission is to bring together, support, serve and represent its member publications in the interest of contributing to the development and advancement of the francophone press, but also of the vitality of Canada's francophone and Acadian communities. We currently have 22 members.
It has been about a dozen years now that the APF and its members have been working to provide media services on the Internet to francophone and Acadian communities. Our adventure began around the year 2000. We launched a site called journaux.apf.ca. This site provided national content written by a journalist from the APF's news service, and it also allowed members the opportunity to build their own Internet sites. At the time, all of the APF members' sites were located in the same place and they all used the same online program.
Over the last ten years, things have evolved, so that the tool we built at the time was gradually abandoned by our members. They built their own site, because they wanted to have their own brand, their own identity, and also because they wanted to meet the needs of the communities in the markets they were in.
Having a website is one thing; being relevant and financially viable is something else altogether.
The level of development of our members' digital platforms varies considerably from one paper to the next, and I would even say that, for each paper, their website success is at best uneven, according to the available human and financial resources at any time.
It is not always easy to create and sustain a website for a large newspaper, for magazines or bimonthly publications. Most of our members have small teams whose main responsibility revolves around the publication of a printed product. And up till now at least, digital platforms have represented extra work which generates very little or no additional revenue. Therefore, it is understandable that this would be a challenge for newspapers that have limited budgets to, on the one hand, create a website, and on the other, to manage it on a regular basis. It is all the harder when, sad to say, the financial revenues are disappointing. So since websites are not profitable, they remain a sideline for the newspaper, and sometimes even a burden.
Despite this, APF's member papers are more and more present and dynamic on the Internet. They are more and more present in social media, where they might have a profile, including on Facebook and Twitter, and this would include our members, our readers, and those who surf the web.
APF members know that they have to develop a presence on the Internet. This is part of the association's priorities. The mandate of the association is to develop programs to support the development of its members. But we do what we can with what we've got.
We want to help our members meet certain industry standards or those of digital platforms. We want to help them develop their skills, especially to develop strategies to generate revenue.
In the short term, we hope that everyone can have a website that receives many hits and is appreciated by the general public. I will give you some statistics.
For example, through a survey conducted by Léger Marketing, which surveyed 5,900 francophones living in a minority situation, we know that 78 per cent of francophones living in our communities use the Internet, and the main reason they do so is to be on social media sites — that would be 57 per cent of them — and they also look at French and English news sites, in more or less the same numbers, 40 per cent and 37 per cent respectively; they also watch movies and videos. Sixty-two per cent of them have a social media account; 60 per cent of them are on Facebook, but they are also on Twitter and LinkedIn, and francophones living in a minority situation use French as much as English on social media sites. The numbers are about the same, 38 per cent for French, 37 per cent for English, and 25 per cent use both languages.
According to the same survey, 20 per cent of newspaper readers visit our websites. That is not a very high percentage, but about half of those visit French news sites.
What we have concluded from the data is that, on the one hand, we are justified in being active and making the development of our Internet presence a priority, and on the other hand, we still have a lot of work to do to attract francophones to content which would interest them on the Internet.
As I mentioned previously, it is probable that the main obstacle to the development of an online presence for the francophone press is that it is not a cost-effective operation. But we are working on it and the situation is improving, albeit very slowly. However this is not unique to our industry; traditional media have found that it takes a very long time to generate enough income to justify the investment.
I will give you two examples. We will come back to the federal government and its language obligations. Historically, sections 11 and 30 of the Official Languages Act have required that, generally speaking, the government support francophone media, and newspapers in particular. The requirement to communicate in French has greatly contributed to the development of the francophone press.
In 1978, the APF had fewer than 10 members. Today, it has 22, but some newspapers are not members. About 30 francophone newspapers of a certain size in Canada, and the requirement that the federal government communicate in French with the francophone population, are mostly responsible for this situation.
Today, according to the Advertising Coordination and Partnerships Directorate at Public Works and Government Services, in 2010 and 2011, federal departments spent $1,790,000 out of a budget of $76 million in advertising in official language media. We would like that amount to be higher, but it nevertheless represents a systematic investment. According to the same directorate, federal departments have invested 12 per cent of their advertising budget, that is $7,780,000, in advertising on the Internet. The percentage of these campaigns which ended up on the websites of community newspapers is zero.
In order words, when it comes to advertising on the Web, the federal government does not use established community media. When departments plan their Internet advertising, it seems that it is not important to reach minority official language communities through established community newspapers, and yet Part VII of the Official Languages Act stipulates that the Government of Canada is committed to enhancing the vitality of the English and French linguistic minority communities in Canada, and to supporting and assisting their development, and fostering the full recognition and use of both English and French. I am quoting from the act. You no doubt are more familiar with it than I am.
In conclusion, we believe that, as far as advertising is concerned, the sections of the act which concern communication with the public — and we have been making the case to the advertising directorate for a while now — should be interpreted so as to not disadvantage francophone communities. As a result, the federal government would communicate with our readers, all the while truly supporting the development of digital platforms in our communities. By systematically not putting advertising on these websites, the federal government is undermining their development, and, by extension, the development of the communities themselves.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Potié. We will now move on to Mr. Forgues.
Simon Forgues, Development and Communications Officer, Alliance des radios communautaires du Canada: Thank you, Madam Chair. The Alliance des radios communautaires du Canada thanks you for your invitation.
We are pleased to take part in this study on the use of the Internet, new media and social media and the respect for Canadians' language rights. I will briefly touch upon the obligations of the CBC/Radio-Canada under the Official Languages Act, and also on certain aspects of the Broadcasting Act. I will not necessarily dwell on these things for reasons which I will explain.
Our organization has been active throughout Canada since it was founded in 1991, and its activities are directly based on the willingness of francophone and Acadian community radio stations to take charge of their own advancement and autonomy. We are the general manager of community broadcasting in minority francophone communities in Canada, and our organization provides its members with various services, be they consulting, training, communication, liaison or technical services with regard to any aspect which relates to starting and managing a community radio station.
Today, we have 28 on air radio stations and 2 projects which are still in development. The communities which receive these services are spread out to the four corners of the Canadian francophonie, ranging from the west to the Northwest Territories, and from British Columbia to Nova Scotia. Overall, we are in nine provinces and two territories, everywhere except for the Yukon and Quebec.
Over our 20 years of existence, we have developed a solid broadcasting expertise. I believe that we can attest to the transformation of our sector over that period of time. You will not be surprised to learn that the media are undergoing a profound change since the arrival of the Internet, and this trend is growing with the increasingly marked emergence of new broadcasting platforms, such as smartphones, tablets and portable digital players.
The first thing you have to be aware of is the fact that the idea of community is not at all what it was 20 years ago. The Internet has allowed communities, which previously were defined only by geographic boundaries, to also be defined by a common area of interest. This is a very different situation from what existed when our organization was created in the 1990s. In other words, we are not dependent on proximity anymore to belong to a community, as was the case in a previous era. Today, you can belong to a community of several hundred francophones in a village in Saskatchewan or Ontario and, at the same time, belong to a greater community of fusion jazz lovers who live all over the world, but who nevertheless are very close to each other, and sometimes even closer to each other than to the people who live within their own village. This idea did not exist 20 or 25 years ago. So as borders have been opened wide, and as communities have spread out, it is no surprise to learn that the fusion jazz lover whom I mentioned a moment ago, who used to impatiently wait for his community radio program to start on Thursday night, now can access the music he loves via other channels. I am talking about music, but of course we could be talking about any other subject which people love and can now have access to. In the past, they got it on the radio, and today, they can get any information they want to through other media channels.
Radio, television, movies and the written press, which is often referred to as a traditional media, that is, as opposed to new media, have all been profoundly transformed in their business models because of the Internet. In fact, the Internet is not really a specific type of media, but rather it brings together every type of media in one place. People often refer to the Internet as being a type of media, but the Internet is a collection of images, sounds and words. It is a bunch of things.
Whereas the business model of traditional media has always been based on consumption and publicity, and therefore on economic growth, the business model for the Internet has somewhat scrambled the cards.
By being so closely connected to culture and to giving away things for free, the Internet changed the media ecosystem from top to bottom. The giant media organizations have become bigger and more powerful, in part because of the vertical and multi-sectoral concentration, which has become more pronounced than ever before. Technology has introduced into our lives notions which were until recently relatively unknown, such as interactivity, portability and multitasking. Unfortunately, for small organizations like ours, these principles — these principles of vertical or multi- sectoral concentration — which large conglomerates can afford to engage in, are not so readily available, at least not for now.
Currently, we are seeing some projects emerge that could in fact be considered multisectoral, with web, print, audio, and in certain cases, even video. We have seen, for example, a newspaper and a radio station get together and share their journalistic resources in order to take advantage of the situation.
But let us be careful, this may seem alarmist, but we must not give way to panic either, since this opening of the market is not all bad news for us of course. Let us not forget that Miramichi, in New Brunswick, where CKMA is situated, or Saint-Boniface in Manitoba, where one finds CKXL, are first and foremost communities. One belongs first and foremost to physical communities, whether that be our city, our province, or our country, before belonging to these famous virtual communities. I am not saying that virtual communities cannot be more important in someone's view than their physical community, but if you want to know the weather, for example, if you want to find out road conditions when you are going to work, or to pay your municipal taxes, all of these subjects of interest have to do with our physical community. That is why our community radio stations, which are all firmly rooted in their community, have a crucial role to play for francophones to thrive, despite all the good things one might say about the Internet. Some say it is a panacea, but that is a bit much.
Our community radio stations are increasingly aware that it is in their own interest to embrace or tackle this philosophy of a broader community, because they are coming to understand better and better that even if someone is spending the whole winter in Florida for example, someone from St. John, New Brunswick, may still want to hear the weather back home or listen to his favourite performers and all that, so it is better for the station to have an Internet presence. Providing services to your physical community does not prevent you from providing services to members of the broader community.
There are relatively few stations amongst our members who do not currently broadcast online. Nearly all of them are streaming their broadcasts on the Internet and also have an increasing presence in social media — Facebook, Twitter, Google plus, for example, LinkedIn and all the rest — and on them, they share content with people who are obviously increasingly mobile.
We, the Community Radio Association of Canada, plan to create, in the very near future, mobile applications that will allow people to listen to a radio station on Androïd, iPhone, Blackberry and Windows Phone devices. We do agree on that level. We just have a few more details to finalize and then we will begin developing applications, which people will be able to use to listen to our stations from anywhere not only in the country, and in French Canada, but across the whole world.
In order to fulfil our mission efficiently while adopting these new technologies, we do need human, technical and financial resources. The problem is, not only do we not have the same means as these major corporations I was mentioning earlier, who can afford to go full bore on the Internet, not only do we not wish to just follow behind, but we are increasingly subject to rules because of our status as community media. This in no way diminishes the importance of our role for minority language communities in the country, but certain constraints with respect to specialized content, and that type of thing, may limit our mandate somewhat. Our role is essential and recognized by the entire media sector just as it is by the Canadian state, but we do regret the fact that we lack all the necessary tools to reach our goals in a media universe that is constantly changing and more competitive than ever.
Since its creation in November 2007 by the three main community and campus radio associations in the country, the Community Radio Fund of Canada has made a great deal of progress. We are aware that CBC/Radio-Canada has its own role to play, and we do not wish to see its resources plundered, we do not wish the corporation to lose any money, we do not want to rob Peter to pay Paul, if you don't mind me using that expression; we will therefore not ask that Radio-Canada lose funding, but I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the Government of Canada is collecting rights from what is called part II, the annual amount of $100 million paid by private radio stations in licensing fees, which ends up in the Canadian government consolidated fund, of the Treasury Board Secretariat. We would ask that the Canadian government use $7 million each year of the fees it receives under part II and allocate that amount to the Community Radio Fund of Canada to ensure basic funding to some 140 community radio stations across the country that provide an essential service, that promote French culture and language in minority language communities and, once the basic funding provides a solid foundation, we could allow ourselves to develop new platforms and other things that will allow us to thrive.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
[English]
Richard Tardif, Executive Director, Quebec Community Newspapers Association: Honourable senators, thank you for the invitation to appear here this evening. I am very happy to be here to talk about your study on the use of Internet, news media and social media, and respect for Canadians' language rights.
Lily Ryan, a board member who was supposed to appear with me today, has a very tight and unusual deadline at the Aylmer Bulletin, and she sends her regrets and apologies. She did want to be here.
I will speak about the Quebec Community Newspapers Association. We are English, bilingual publications. We distribute weekly, monthly and daily to some 700,000 readers across the province of Quebec. We serve an exclusive English and bilingual readership in the communities focusing on relevant local news and high editorial-to-advertising ratio.
This brings me directly to the question of how our members make use of the Internet and social media, particularly when it comes to serving their communities and language rights. As we all know, and as my esteemed colleagues have pointed out, the Internet and prevalence of fee news sites, including newspaper sites and larger network sites such as CNN, MSNBC and Yahoo, to name only a few, have been credited with playing a major role in the problems experienced by today's newspaper industry. The use of today's Internet is comprehensive and includes a wide variety of Web tools such as reporter blogs, videos, bots, podcasts, iPod, iPhone and RSS feeds, and who knows what will come in the future. Now Web 2.0, an attribute that is making global information more available in the social context, can be available to everyone no matter where they are geographically.
I submit that the greatest challenge in terms of presenting the news and information through these various platforms for our members in official languages is not access to the Internet nor even to high-speed Internet. It is more fundamental in two points: Where does the publisher find the resources to translate any content such as news articles, editorials and columns? Second, if a publisher is serving primarily a loyal English or French speaking audience, what is the need or incentive for a site in a second language in that community?
I will address the first point, the question of applicable resources. The QCNA website is in both languages. We have the resource for translation; we have the resource to quickly maintain both official languages. I applaud the duality that is our Quebec. I agree with Sylvia Martin-Laforge, who is the director general of the Quebec Community Groups Network, who spoke before the committee on November 11. She said that, because of our place in society, we have to completely translate material on the site, and we try to maintain the site.
The QCNA is a member in good standing with the QCGN and we concur with Ms. Martin-Laforge. Our members are conscious of linguistic duality, yet they lack the resources to implement. This requires, in most cases in our newspapers, allocating a reporter, a designer or another employee to manage the site and puts further pressure on those who pay the bills to find a qualified professional translator.
One example of a member that maintains a high social media presence through Facebook is the Eastern Door in Kahnewake Quebec. Their Facebook has almost 3,000 friends. That is quite amazing for a newspaper. The website itself, which will be three years old in November, is often not updated.
This is through no fault of the publisher as allocating extra work to staff or other regular employees, usually without compensation, would add more stress to employees that are already overstressed. Therefore, in this case the publisher takes it on further, so any advancement into the realm of social media stops at this point.
We do have a great example, though, of an Internet success in our membership, and I think it is pertinent that I speak quickly about that. The Laval News website has captured awards for its presentation and is an example of a customer and visitor interaction through feedback, polls, online letters to editors, et cetera. The Laval News actually maintains a webmaster, and the site is her job solely and specifically. One question is how many of our members can actually afford to have a website, let alone try to translate it or have it in both official languages.
Second, each of our member's target audience determines the language of their social media and web content. Of our 30 newspaper members in the QCNA, 29 maintain some form of Internet presence. Of the 29, 4 maintain content in French and English.
I mention all of this to demonstrate that our members are already deeply invested in the Internet, new media and social media as it pertains to their local needs, and we as their representation at the QCNA are invested in support of language rights and having a duality in our website, so we do maintain it on their behalf.
In the two cases cited above, both publications are English weeklies in that they maintain English-only sites. In the case of The Aylmer Bulletin, with an approximate 30 per cent English readership, the paper maintains a linguistic duality in print and online. The Aylmer Bulletin for its newsprint actually maintains English and French journalists. Their published articles and editorials gravitate to the website at the same speed and time as would the print issue, so it is a simple mindset in this case of uploading ready-made content using minimal resources, so it is a fast upload without translation.
Stephen Thompson of the QCGN last November before the committee noted that this translation would actually take some time, and in the news business, an hour could mean the difference between old news, breaking news, relevant news or a news story.
Mr. Thompson asks: Would readers be prepared to wait for a translation while it is being translated? Are you prepared to live with a product that is not in perfect English or French? Is this something you can work with?
As a former reporter and editor, any content, without question, in print, online or translated, must be near perfection. I would not want to insult or upset any person who speaks any language because I had to hurriedly translate something to get it up on the website. We as newspaper people will just not do that.
The QCNA also knows that English and French alike read newspapers and websites in both languages. The Aylmer Bulletin is one example.
To have all our members have their websites in both official languages, I feel, is the highest form of respect for a country that honours linguistic duality. Such an approach, however, would gain readership and advertisement revenue for our papers. In a day and age where ads in print are going down, this would help. I would be rather proud to pursue such a project of bringing together all our newspapers in both languages, but I wonder what the need is and how many resources will be needed to maintain this if funding runs out. If funding does run out, do we go back to having just one site and one language?
First, I think we have to help institutions catch up. One of our papers, the Spec, a non-profit paper, in particular is an example of lagging behind in technology. Located in New Carlisle in the Gaspé, the Spec is using very outdated computers, Mac bubbles, if anybody knows what that means. These computers are so out of date that the Spec cannot even take part in webinars, which is a very important new media tool. We have begun video conferencing through the community learning centres, and this is something we are at right now in negotiations with the Spec. In the meantime, any translations on the present site, outsourcing or hiring someone else is out of the question.
Indeed, the Internet and social media is becoming a preferred and indispensable way of sharing information, communicating and delivering services. It is not going away, and the technology is spreading faster than we can keep up. Some papers have the resources, some do not, and some are still in the Dark Ages.
One unavoidable fact among our newspaper industry is this growing digital concern continues to provide only a small part of revenue while the part that is shrinking, which is print, provides most of the money. It is a paradox, but it is difficult to resist getting your word out in advertising up on a website.
One pervasive feeling is that 15 years into the digital transition our executives and publishers still feel they are in the early stages of figuring out how to proceed. Technology changes rather fast. You may be Podcasting. Six months later it may be outdated and you have to have an RSS feed, so they are still grappling with that.
The end question of these proceedings is: Are Canadians' language rights being respected? I think they are, through our members, through the QCNA, because of our situation and place in Quebec, we honour and respect that. For our members, it is a different story.
I would like to see this question of resources addressed. What it may come down to is upgrading technology, addressing language needs and providing sustainable funding without just throwing money at the problem and then waiting five years and then that is the end of the project. Perhaps something in the funds would provide for training and some other type of initiative to keep the system going in the future.
Thank you again for the opportunity for us to be here today. I look forward to your questions, and feel free to contact me at any time you have any further questions.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
Our first questioner will be Senator Fortin-Duplessis.
[Translation]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: First of all, we are very pleased to have you with us today. My questions have to do with Radio-Canada.
Along with the work done by community media, official language minority communities insist upon the role that CBC and Radio-Canada play in their development.
In francophone and Acadian communities, it is often the case that the public broadcaster is the only source of French presence. In anglophone communities in Quebec, the public broadcaster is also called upon to play a major role, that is provide information and reflect culture. Official language minority communities insist upon the importance of seeing their life reflected in CBC/Radio-Canada's national and regional programming.
Could you tell us about existing gaps in that respect or have you noticed any, or in your opinion, is it all right?
Mr. Forgues: We have never, we are not now, and we never will question CBC/Radio-Canada's mandate as a crown corporation. They play an important role, fulfilling a mandate they have been given, which is providing Canadians with information, culture, the arts, and so forth, on the international or national scene, and even to a certain degree, provincially or regionally. They have the mandate, they are fulfilling it.
As community media, it would be difficult for us to fulfil that mandate in the same way. They cannot be asked to become masters in the art of producing national and international newscasts, despite a mandate to serve communities. We represent the base. We are community radio stations used for social networking to announce for example, vaccination clinics or city council meetings and that type of thing.
Radio-Canada has its own mandate in francophone communities across the country and it does not include social bulletin boards or that type of thing. Radio-Canada will broadcast municipal news, but even then, it has to be worth going beyond the strict framework of the small municipality. Therefore, we do not see any gaps in the mandate fulfilled by Radio-Canada, while we, the community media, fulfil our own. Our workload is quite considerable in fact.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: When we held our hearings in the province of Quebec in the anglophone community, we heard criticism from the anglophones. They were disappointed. They felt that in Quebec, especially in Montreal, they were not well covered by CBC because there was always more news about Toronto or elsewhere. That is why I asked you that question.
My next question has to do with the CRTC. Over the next year, the CRTC will renew CBC and Radio-Canada's licences. We can expect several official language in minority situation community organizations to participate in the public hearings. By the first deadline, July 18, 2011, I believe, 1,318 interventions had been filed with the CRTC. It seems to me that this has something to do with the answer you just gave me. According to the information available on the website, it seems to me that the organizations that represent community media did not submit interventions to the CRTC at that point. Do you intend to encourage your members to submit briefs, or does the response you gave me mean that you have nothing to say about that?
Mr. Forgues: We will never criticize CBC/Radio-Canada. I will repeat what I was saying earlier; they have their mandate, and they are fulfilling it better than we would ever be able to as a community media. It is not up to us to generate that type of content. We have a mandate and it is difficult enough for us to fulfil our mandate under all circumstances for the reasons I explained earlier.
Mr. Potié: This is not a subject the APF has dwelt upon. That being said, as an association, we are a member of the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne and we support its position. Several of our members — not all — are involved in one way or another in organizations, or they are spokespersons in their respective provinces. Not all of them, because several are private companies and they do not do that. I would be surprised if we prepared a brief for the CRTC, and, since there are 1,318 of them, they probably reflect the opinions of the francophone communities fairly faithfully. I think we share the same points of view that we always hear with respect to Radio-Canada: we want to see ourselves reflected more on air, in Radio-Canada programming: we would like to see more local productions, more productions that reflect our communities being broadcasted to all Canadians.
I am summarizing, but I don't think I am adding very much; it is always a great source of frustration in our communities. We understand the imperatives of ratings, markets and a Montreal-based population, but we do find it disappointing that the national channel, funded by Canadian taxpayers, has programming that is so focused on Montreal with respect to content and people.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: For francophones, but not anglophones.
Mr. Potié: We hear the same comments in English, that is quite focused on Toronto, but less so. It is a question of numbers.
Mr. Forgues: We sometimes have the impression, when listening to people from Moncton or Winnipeg, that they only ever hear about Montreal. If you travel around the province of Quebec and go speak to francophones in Chicoutimi or Rimouski, ask them if they think Radio-Canada speaks too much about Montreal; they may also tell you, just as people in Moncton or Winnipeg do, that they are under the impression the newscasts mostly speak of Montreal.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: We have often heard that.
The Chair: Would you like to hear Mr. Tardif speak on behalf of Quebec anglophones?
[English]
Do you have anything to add, Mr. Tardif?
Mr. Tardif: I am a newspaper print person through and through. When it comes to radio, I am not up to speed, and I cannot speak for the Quebec anglophone radio group at this moment.
The Chair: Thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Robichaud: All three of you ended your presentation by speaking of financial resources, of federal support. You spoke of asking for 7 million out of the $100 million paid in rights.
[English]
Mr. Tardif, you have said "sustainable funding.''
[Translation]
Because we also hear that elsewhere. I sit on the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry and when we talk about support, the period of time is too short, once one sets up a project and manages to implement it, the funding seems to disappear. What type of resources would you like to receive and how much time do you need to fully implement your projects?
Mr. Potié: It has been quite some time now since the virtual program Francommunauté no longer exists, and that program had a major flaw: it was entirely focused on special projects. As we know, anything to do with new technologies evolves very quickly. The required knowledge and skills are constantly changing, so I think the long term may not be the best approach. A lower cost, sustained and ongoing support would be a much more realistic approach for a newspaper or radio station to be able to, over time, build up its skills and be in a mode of continuous improvement. That would be better than coming out with a big bang only to find oneself, six months later, with obsolete technology. Often, what seems the right approach this year is useless the next.
I am going to come back to advertising. I believe it is fundamental. There is a major gap in the way the Official Languages Act is being interpreted. There is new media called Mobile Telephone Internet in which the federal government is beginning to invest. This is escaping our media, and in escaping our media, is a support we do not enjoy to be able to offer something better, to have a better performance on line. One newspaper that is not making money with its website, during a period of overflow, is going to concentrate on its written newspaper to the detriment of its website. That is human nature. Therefore, I think that the federal government could ensure that the communications provisions within the Official Languages Act are interpreted so as to support those media, and used to reach the public, as that would change the culture of our newspapers and radio stations; websites would not be neglected, since advertising could be sold on them.
Senator Robichaud: You would use your website for advertising, which would make your website lucrative, have I understood you correctly?
Mr. Potié: Yes.
Senator Robichaud: Whereas currently, it is not lucrative.
Mr. Potié: It is not very lucrative. It is better than before, but we need to change mentalities; not only ours, but also our clients'. People in our communities are not used to advertising over the Internet, but rather in newspapers and on the radio. This requires a new mindset. Currently, this is not a factor in investment decisions made by departments, being sure to use the media that communities have chosen. They put things on TSN, on Cyberpresse, fine, I have nothing against that, but the tool that communities have chosen are La Liberté, then L'eau vive, then Le Moniteur Acadien.
Senator Robichaud: You are telling me that you do not receive your share of that advertising.
Mr. Potié: We get nothing.
Mr. Forgues: We are talking about the web. In the case of community radio, we have had some bad years with government advertising. These are not the best years. I have already discussed this issue with people who work in conventional media who are quite knowledgeable and have certain means. We are talking about portals, like Cyberpresse and others, who are not necessarily performing miracles with their Internet site. When Rogers decided, a few days ago, to close several of its Internet sites that have existed for several years now such as Branchez-vous, it was certainly not because they were rolling in money. If large companies like that are forced to pull the plug, imagine how things are for small stations like ours who have to do radio, look after volunteer resources, fundraise, provide local advertising, produce local news, et cetera. So when the time comes to look at new media such as websites, Facebook and company, let me tell you it goes on the back burner to some extent.
[English]
Mr. Tardif: I think one of the problems is several studies have recently come out — and I will provide them for the committee — that for a 7 per cent loss in ad revenue from print, advertising on a website only gains back 1 per cent. If I am a publisher, what do I have to balance? I have to focus on keeping my paper alive and all that.
We have thought that perhaps we would have one basic website run through the QCNA where every newspaper, every community has the same logo. That is not a bad idea, but you start to lose the local community. You lose that little flavour. The Aylmer Bulletin, the Eastern Door, The Low Down to Hull and Back in Wakefield, all different websites reflecting community. If we did that and sort of managed the support, it is kind of taking away from our own members.
The other problem is, once you see that you are not gaining ad revenue, as Mr. Potié said, you do not want to work on your website. If you have to hire another person for that, or a journalist, who in most cases is really working hard, and now they have to do the website, you tend to forget the website.
As far as sustainable futures go, I think we have to overcome that problem of the workload and what is the benefit locally for someone to translate their web page. If you have a 75 per cent English readership base, you are going to think twice if you are going to put the resources to translate that. I really do not have an answer of sustainable funding because funding sort of runs out from time to time, and it does not always mean a newspaper can actually raise more funds on their own over a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-year period. As you know, a lot of organizations are given funding for 10 years and part of that 10-year deal is to find other resources once the funding runs out.
I could probably do it on behalf of the papers. It is my job, but it is a major, major task, and I have to attend to every single need, every single need of every single paper at every community, so it is a major task. If a website starts and it is not sustained, it will fall.
[Translation]
Senator Robichaud: In my region, the Étoile Kent is delivered free of charge as far as I know. We receive it every week. The newspaper focuses primarily on local news and it carries small stories and advertising for the people in the area as well.
The Chair: It is local.
Senator Robichaud: Are you losing a lot of people who normally would turn to community radio or small weeklies? I would have thought that people would want to depend on you rather than turn to the web for national items, and less so for local news.
Mr. Potié: Gradually, things are moving to the web for local items, but not at the same fast pace we have seen with the large national advertisers. The web has had an impact on every aspect of traditional media. Let us take the example of the classifieds; people now go to Kijiji. If you want to purchase a house, you go on mls.ca, and to buy used cars, you go to Autonet.ca. This is reality. Some advertising sectors have been tremendously weakened for newspapers and it must the same for radio. These were sectors that used to be very significant sources of revenue. Le Droit still runs its classifieds but there is not much left in the Ottawa Citizen.
Senator Robichaud: You are right.
Mr. Potié: And that represents a great deal of money. True, the impact on small local newspapers has been slower in coming, but it is coming. And I would look at what is happening on the other side. We are not the only ones who are affected. We are speaking on behalf of the newspapers, but the newspapers respond to communities and a francophonie that wants to be vibrant and dynamic, and our young people, our adults and our seniors go on the web and use the Internet. Our communities need us to perform well for them, so that the organizations and businesses can communicate with the public and so that francophones can have an experience in French similar to that which they experience in English. We are talking about revenues because if this is missing, we cannot fulfil this mandate, but this is a community issue. This is about the vitality of the community and we are a symbol of this community.
Senator Poirier: I would like to thank the witnesses for their presentation. With respect to the Alliance des radios communautaires du Canada, you alluded to the provision of assistance or advice, technical support, training and financial assistance. Out of your 27 member stations, 10 are located in New Brunswick, which is a large number.
Do you help these community radio stations develop their website or platform enabling them to use Twitter, Facebook and the iPhone?
Mr. Forgues: We recently started providing this service to some of our radio stations that did not have an Internet site or were not very well equipped. We installed an Internet site which can be updated easily and quickly and which will be able to aggregate the content that arises automatically either through the RSS format or through YouTube playlists and things like that.
The primary mandate of our community radios is to provide radio services. When people wake up in the morning and they want to hear the weather forecast before leaving for work, they turn on the radio, they listen to the forecast and, if it is winter, they want to know if there will be a storm and whether or not the school will be open or closed and whether the roads will be clear so that they can get to work. We are a first responder radio. Our primary concern is therefore to provide a broadcasting service. And we are getting pushed more and more with the Internet and all of that, yes. We know that people want to obtain information about a whole range of subjects and you can get your news from the Internet. So we have to be there as well, but our primary concern, as a community radio association, is to offer broadcasting-related essential services.
Senator Poirier: Do you charge the community radios that come to you for assistance?
Mr. Forgues: No.
Senator Poirier: So it is free.
Mr. Forgues: We suggest to them that they create an Internet site free of charge using the annual membership dues that they pay to our association. We also provide them with training so that they can do the updates.
They also have access to a national webmaster, me in this case, for development and communications. I help them put content on the Internet site and resolve small technical difficulties or things of that nature should they arise.
Senator Poirier: Considering how fast social media is evolving, is it realistic to think that small community radios will be able to continue evolving as well?
Mr. Forgues: I heard an expert who was travelling throughout the various regions of Quebec to get businesses connected to the Internet. He recently asked for the names of any small or medium-sized businesses that had managed to do business on Facebook and had succeeded in growing with the social media. There are not very many.
We want to invest in the social media. We know that this is important to communicate our news and keep things going. At any rate, I could say more about my thoughts on the role of social media and our community radios and community media but we would be here until eight o'clock this evening. I am not saying that Facebook is a bad thing. When we look at companies like Coca-Cola, who have I do not know how many millions of fans on their page or McDonald's or other companies, it is all well and good, it is great for them, because people talk about the brand and all of that; but it is very time-consuming for our small community radios.
Senator Poirier: I have one final question.
People are used to buying advertising in the newspapers and getting used to doing things differently is sometimes a bit difficult. You said that selling advertising helps you succeed financially and that you would encourage people to continue investing in advertising. But in the case of social media, there is also competition with other sites; just think about Kijiji and other sites. Can we really compete with such sites? Do you think that one day you will be able to get as much advertising revenue from the social media as you did from the newspapers?
Mr. Potié: Obviously, things are changing. The whole field of advertising on the Web has changed tremendously when you compare it to the way it was done with newspapers. Beforehand, everything was done through the newspaper: the classifieds, ads for car sales, et cetera. Now, that has changed and we now have dedicated sites. I think that we are just like everybody else in that we are trying to find our way and discover how we can meet the needs of our communities.
Some people will turn to traditional advertising, such as banners, and others will go to the directories of French- language businesses or services in a community. Digital platforms are different from printed materials and we have to find out how to proceed. This comes from revenue and the development of skills. All of our associations are trying to support their members, but what we are able to do is limited and the amount of time that our members can spend learning this is limited as well. Sometimes there are only two, three or four people on staff and they cannot always be on training.
Mr. Forgues: We are community radio broadcasters. When we hire young radio school graduates, we are hiring young people trained in broadcasting and we hope that they will be able to train the volunteers and things like that. We do not hire them — although now it is important since we know that young people are turning more and more to the new media — with the idea that yes, this person is able to work with the Internet as well. We are radio broadcasters. When we hire people, our first thought is to get people who are good at radio broadcasting and who will be able to do a good job of informing people through our medium: radio broadcasting.
Senator Poirier: What percentage of your budget comes from federal government funding?
Mr. Potié: Are you referring to the association or the newspapers?
Senator Poirier: I am referring to your operating budget, as a group.
Mr. Potié: It would probably be 60 per cent for the APF.
Mr. Forgues: It is difficult for me to answer this question. However, with respect to national advertising that we sell to the government, over the past few years this amount has been relatively negligible.
Mr. Potié: Are you referring to the operating budget for ARC du Canada or for the members?
Senator Poirier: No, for your network.
The Chair: If you do not have the answer, would you please send this information to us?
Mr. Potié: Absolutely.
Senator Poirier: I would imagine that some of your funding comes from the government, some comes from your members and advertising. Have you any other sources of revenue?
Mr. Potié: It is about that for the association. As for the members, well this is mainly advertising and subscription fees.
Mr. Forgues: One thing is clear, for our community radios — I am not talking about the national association — there are no government subsidies.
Senator Poirier: I was referring to the association as such.
Mr. Forgues: Yes, I can get that answer for you.
[English]
Mr. Tardif: I get about 60 per cent funding from the government, I have around 10 per cent blanket classifieds, and national advertising makes up the rest, along with my normal fundraising and membership fees. That is approximate and I can send you a better breakdown but .
[Translation]
Senator Mockler: I carefully listened to what you were saying. You said that you were thinking about developing some mobile applications so that people would tune in more to our community radios. Is that right?
Mr. Forgues: Yes.
Senator Mockler: Over the weekend, I witnessed a fire that destroyed two buildings in Grand-Sault, New Brunswick. The young people turned to the social media, to Facebook and Twitter. In less than three hours, they had raised hundreds of dollars and exceeded the $2,000 mark in a short order. People received clothing for children, babies and others. We have a radio station in Shippagan, in our part of Acadia, which is very popular and present on the Internet.
Earlier, I was listening to you speak and I looked at the number of radio stations in New Brunswick that are present on the Internet. I had the opportunity to speak to these people and I asked them how they raised money. They told me that they did this through electronic advertising. The objective here has two parts to it. First of all, people are listening more with these new applications. I agree with you, this needs to be done. I would like to know how you can do this or whether you need the assistance of the government or governments as partners so that you can take advantage of this new social network, thereby ensuring an increase in your revenues?
Mr. Forgues: These mobile apps that we will be developing will enable us to post advertising banners, among other things.
Now, with the new technologies, we would be able, if we wanted to, to insert a small message or five-second sponsorship before we begin the Web streaming. With new platforms and new media, the opportunities are quite numerous.
The Chair: Mr. Potié, do you wish to answer on behalf of the press?
Mr. Potié: The same thing applies to us. There are standard message formats and we have to ensure that our members make them available and know how to use them.
The IAB has established a certain number of message standards but there are also initiatives, at least there are in the newspaper world, which can be considered and which depend on the initiative of the newspaper, databases, local businesses, a job posting section. But once again, it is all about skills, knowledge and traffic. If people do not visit your site, it is difficult to sell advertising.
So we must help our members to develop good sites and products.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: In Le Devoir of last April 24, I noticed and read an article by Éric Desrosiers with an extremely alarming title, L'État et les entreprises sont victimes des médias sociaux. I will read two quotes and then I would like to ask you a brief question.
Not too long ago, all major societal debates mostly took place in newspapers, on radio stations and on television channels, said Mr. Dorval. Those media were subject to professional and legal rules to ensure rigour, balance and the veracity of the information reported.
He says that:
The arrival of the Internet brought an explosion of social media where information is more personalized, but also a lot less objective, rigorous and reliable, he thinks. However, a growing proportion of the population — especially among those 35 and younger — now mostly get their information from those media. This evolution presents a specific problem for government and businesses that are subject to very strict communication rules.
Do you think that community radios and newspapers are ready to face this new reality?
[English]
Mr. Tardif: I know the article to which you referred. For our newspapers the answer is a straightforward "no.'' We are not in a position to deal with that. The most that we can do is that the QCNA is planning to begin a group Facebook page, which is costing me nothing and might cost 10 minutes of my time a day. To say that our papers would do this is difficult. We are not even moving forward to address such situations as this because we are not there yet, and I do not think we will be there for quite some time.
[Translation]
Mr. Forgues: Of course, we are subject to rules and codes of conduct that we subscribe to. We do our work as best as we can. Can we fight? Can we fight Facebook and Twitter? It is difficult.
I know the article you are talking about. Some conclusions can be made about social media. Yes, sometimes it looks somewhat uncontrolled and uncontrollable, but we should not forget that great things have been done with those social networks.
We don't have to look too far back; just about a year ago, in the Near East and in the Middle East, I will remind you that without Twitter or Facebook, some totalitarian or dictatorial regimes would have not been toppled without these social tools that can be used to do good things. But there are always two sides to a coin, there are good things and bad things. We have to work on the good things and try to polish our side of the coin.
The Chair: Did you want to add something, Mr. Potié?
Mr. Potié: I don't have the data in front of me, but I know that the public places great trust in traditional brands. When it wants news that they know is true, that has been verified and is not libellous, they will look to the newspapers and CBC websites. The trust afforded to those sites is much higher than in social networks.
But it is clear that the situation has changed. We are not alone anymore. Before, we had kind of a monopoly on the information in our community. Now, we share it with the entire world.
Senator Poirier: I have two questions, one for Mr. Potié and the other for Mr. Tardif.
Mr. Potié, in the francophone Acadian press, there is the Moniteur Acadien, in Shediac, and the Weekender in Madawaska, in New Brunswick.
Are those newspapers also offered in the social media and websites, or are they only available through home delivery?
Mr. Potié: They each have a website. And especially for the Moniteur Acadien, having a website is an obligation. But since it is a small newspaper, they do what they can.
Senator Poirier: Must people pay a subscription fee to read those written media — like newspapers — offered on social networks?
Mr. Potié: No. There are some newspapers that sell an online subscription. That is the full issue of the newspaper and you can buy a subscription, but to access the site as such, there are no fees. That was more or less dropped. It is not a good recipe. There are some newspapers that are able to sell content like that, but only a few. Le Devoir is able to do it, but most newspapers are forced to publish their content on line for free.
[English]
Senator Poirier: I know that in New Brunswick recently there were changes made. People who want to read certain newspapers online through social media now have to buy a subscription.
In the area you serve in Quebec, do the people have to subscribe to the newspaper to be able to read it online?
Mr. Tardif: With some of our members, yes. The public can have access to the website, but if they want the full version of the PDF paper, they pay a certain amount of subscription. In most cases, if the paper costs $2 on the stands on Friday morning, for example, people can get it on Thursday night for $1 in subscription. We have about five papers doing that now, but that is the direction they are all heading.
It saves on the print costs to have more paid subscriptions online, and some people like it. However, the problems are coming with the age group. The younger generation will subscribe to the online version, but in Kahnewake, for example, the Internet does not exist for the older population. They like to read on paper. Some want to go that way and some cannot. It depends on the communities.
Senator Poirier: Moving forward, do you foresee, years from now, that the existence of paper newspapers will no longer be?
Mr. Tardif: That is a question I have been dealing with for about 15 years, since this has come on. Wow. We could have a debate for the rest of the evening on this one. The short answer is 10 years, no. After that, when media gets so technology-sound that everyone will be reading, because as the generations pass, they pass it down, I see problems exist there. For now, I think publishers are still working hard on their print publication and not paying too much attention. Just to end, I think that is something they will have to pay attention to gradually over the years. For now, no, but possibly in the future.
[Translation]
Senator Robichaud: We saw the same thing when community radio began. It was the same thing for the small newspapers, the weeklies we had in our region. Back then, we said we needed this mode of communication for the community to gather and especially for the official languages minority communities.
Everything was controlled by big media and people had no tools to communicate between them. Has that need disappeared? Have you met it so well that now the community says they do not really need you and want something else?
I say that the governments, federal, provincial and even municipal, have a role to play to protect those means of communications for the official languages minority communities.
Mr. Forgues: It is funny, people have developed a reflex or are more and more conditioned to find content on the Internet, maybe at the expense of traditional media like ours. However, when there is a power failure, they cannot go get that news on the Internet, so they turn on the radio which is waiting there to serve them. We still are fundamentally a frontline media in the communities, particularly in official languages communities like ours. Our presence is important. We cannot replace community radios. The Internet is very good, but it is not a panacea for all the needs of the communities.
Mr. Potié: We are talking about Canada. There are more newspapers today than one, five or ten years ago. Transcontinental and Quebecor will not stop creating newspapers and big companies will not stop buying them. Every day, newspapers are bought and sold. Our newspapers are still essential tools for the communities. No one doubts that, certainly not us. Will newspapers disappear? Maybe, but there are more today than ever before.
At a certain point, we said that radio would disappear because of television, and newspapers because of radio, but we are all still here. I think that digital media, mobile media, tablets, the Internet and the rest will add up and as a francophone community, we need to occupy that space. We need to offer something relevant to our communities; if not, they will go elsewhere and in this area, it is easy to go elsewhere, but newspapers are still relevant in the communities. They are read and appreciated.
Senator Robichaud: I do not dispute that.
Mr. Potié: I hope we are here to stay.
Senator Robichaud: The weekly that comes to our home stays there until the next one arrives, and that is true for most of the homes in our region. That is why I say that when the governments place adds in the weeklies, it reaches more people because it stays there longer and there is a greater possibility that more people will read them.
Communities must strive to protect the services that you offer. The language of a community is not lost overnight, it is lost gradually.
[English]
Mr. Tardif: Often, with social media, a story happens on a Tuesday and a newspaper in the community will only print on Friday. In between those two or three days, many of our papers go in-depth. They really find the story. Friday morning, it is not really news because it happened Tuesday, but Friday morning, more happened, what happened, in- depth news.
ComBase did a media study years ago of English readers in Quebec, and three of five English-speaking residents still read the local community newspaper. Three out of five is not too bad. I just visited Wakefield. Spending the night in the community with some of the reporters and the managing editor, everyone is talking about the newspaper and the stories they wrote. I think the community is still there. We are losing a bit of it, but people like that coffee and newspaper in the morning. I still do.
I still believe in the newspaper at this point, so I think there is still a place for the community newspaper.
[Translation]
The Chair: On behalf of committee members, I would like to thank you, gentlemen, for your good presentations as well as your very good answers to senators' questions. Obviously you know what you are doing and you know your members as well as your association.
Honourable senators, the Association de la presse francophone asked to appear before the committee to share its views on the Canada Periodical Fund. The committee accepted to hear them, and since Mr. Tardif was with us, we invited him. He graciously accepted to stay for this part of the meeting and to answer questions asked by senators.
I would now invite Francis Potié, Executive Director of the Association de la presse francophone, to take the floor. We will ask questions after his presentation. Could you briefly explain to us why you sent us the letter? We will take 30 minutes for questions and answers.
Mr. Potié: Thank you again for the invitation.
We are here to talk about a program of the Canada Periodical Fund called Aid to Publishers. It is a new program. It replaces a program known as the Publications Assistance Program; it was the oldest government program, predating the Canadian Confederation.
The Publications Assistance Program subsidized postal fees for magazines and non-daily publications, weekly publications, that were sold and not free, newspapers or subscription magazines. In 2008-2009, there was a comprehensive review. The Department of Canadian Heritage, through its publishing programs, set up a consultation process in which we took part. Our position was that the eligibility criteria of these programs should take the realities of our publications into account.
What are these realities? In some cases, we serve two, three, four and even 10 per cent of the population. Our reality is not the same as that of a newspaper delivered on every doorstep in a municipality. We only reach one, two or five doorsteps out of 100, so the distribution challenges are different.
As a result of the department's review, the Aid to Publishers program was created and the Canada Magazine Fund program was replaced by the Canada Periodical Fund.
The most important change was to eliminate the relationship with Canada Post. That way, from then on, the subsidy was for sold copies of a newspaper or a magazine that could be distributed through the two best-known ways, mail or paper carrier, as well as, I would imagine, any other means that would be less known. During this whole review, the government implemented several exceptional provisions that seemed to be aimed at better supporting official languages publications in a minority situation. For example, there was an exemption for the minimum price of a subscription, for the minimum threshold or minimum percentage of sold copies to be eligible, the certified printing, without going into too much detail.
When we saw the revised program, when the minister announced it, we applauded. We liked its greater flexibility as well as the different exemptions that seemed to profit our network. That is the impression we had throughout the exercise, when we discussed things with people from the department, that is that they wanted to provide more help to the small publications as well as to official languages publications. We also talked about publications that focused on aboriginal communities rather than supporting the very large publications such as Maclean's, L'Actualité or Reader's Digest.
The 2010-11 fiscal year was a transition year. There was a new program. They said "Okay, we are not quite ready, but here is your funding for 2010-2011.'' It is a transition year. We looked at it and thought it was a good deal.
All of the members of the APF received an additional 20 per cent in income. There were four newspapers not eligible beforehand that became so through the various exemption measures. We believed that this was a great deal. All the members, except for two of them, had a little bit more than beforehand. On the whole, we felt that the changes brought to this program were advantageous for official languages publications. We applauded it and issued a press release regarding this.
In the meantime, regarding the year 2011-12, we received the final formula. They told us how the funding would be distributed among magazines, agricultural newspapers and on-demand magazines. We fell into the category of newspapers that are not published daily. We saw that this was a good thing for newspapers that were not massively distributed and only publish around 500, 600 or 700 copies. One of our members had an agricultural newspaper and this was a winning formula for him. Newspapers that were not eligible beforehand had to start from scratch. This was a good thing. And there are also newspapers who were not using Canada Post to deliver their copies.
I would like to give you the example of Moniteur acadien. Some of its copies are distributed by Canada Post and others by newspaper boys. This is also the case for Nord de Hearst, whose revenues increased as well. We were happy with this.
However, the funds that were given to French newspapers, to the people in our network, dropped to the tune of $27,000 in the first year. And, within the next three years, these funds will decrease annually by $82,000. What troubles us even more, if my calculations are right, is that four of our members, of our newspapers, will be facing a deficit in the next three years. The department seems to have calculated these sums differently. According to the results for 2011- 2012, we see how this will apply for the three next years, and we are looking at a drop of about $180,000. The highest sum is that of Le Voyageur, representing $96,000 per year. Next comes La Liberté with $60,000 per year. Le Franco and Le Courrier will see smaller reductions, but they are smaller newspapers and have smaller teams.
The Chair: Could you please pair the regions with the names of the newspapers?
Mr. Potié: Le Voyageur is published in the region of Sudbury. La Liberté is a provincial newspaper from Manitoba, Le Franco is a provincial newspaper from Alberta, and I will let you guess where Le Courrier de la Nouvelle-Écosse is published.
I would just like to come back to the newspaper Franco. Although a loss of $11,300 might not seem substantial, you must know that, in the meantime, it has doubled its production. Postal fees are now twice as high as they were beforehand and its funding will be decreased by approximately 30 per cent over the next three years.
The problem that we are noticing is that the new eligibility criteria enable some newspapers to change their distribution mode and still benefit from the subsidy. We are not opposed to this. We are actually in favour of this as we have been in the past, but the problem remains that there are some newspapers for whom this is simply not a possibility.
In Manitoba, if you want to send copies out to Sainte-Rose-du-Lac, Pine Falls or Saint-Claude, you must do so by using the postal service. The same applies to Alberta and Nova Scotia. Newspaper boys do not distribute 30 copies here or 20 copies there. It is all done by the postal service. We believe that although the government demonstrated that it wanted to support our newspapers throughout this review exercise, when the formula was created, it did not take into account the reality of certain markets. The per copy subsidy has led to the fact that 2 to 15 per cent of those concerned are losing half or a third of their funding, although the costs that they must pay have not changed. Moreover, these newspapers will not be able to reduce their costs, while other newspapers can simply opt out of using Canada Post and find another solution.
That is pretty much what we do. We would like the department to review funding levels at least for official languages publications, to make sure that they reflects distribution challenges and related costs in our communities. We have an amount — one penny here, one penny there — and we are going to compensate the $200,000 or so a year, or the $180,000 a year in our case.
I do not know if Mr. Tardif has anything to add. I will stop here.
[English]
The Chair: Thank you. Do you have anything to add, Mr. Tardif?
Mr. Tardif: If I may. We have about eight papers who are presently receiving this type of funds. It is not so bad. The Canadian Jewish News, for example, 31 per cent approximate loss which would occur over the next couple of years while other papers are experiencing 8 per cent loss, but we have some that are a 9 per cent gain and a 4 per cent gain. It is not too bad. The Canadian Jewish News in 2010-11 had 513,000; this year 460,000; and by 2014, approximately 353,000. They are receiving the most, so they are taking a big hit.
Now The Equity in Shawville, they will lose about $4,000. As Mr. Potié said, that is a print run for The Equity. You know, their cost is going up, so they have to diversify somehow to make up for that money, and they have been doing pretty good the last little bit, 1 per cent decrease, but $4,000 is quite a chunk.
We only have eight paid subscriptions, so while it might not reflect in the big scheme of things, it does affect some of our papers.
[Translation]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: I have two short questions. What recommendations would you make to the Canadian Heritage and official languages ministers to ensure the long-term sustainability of French-language newspapers in minority communities?
Mr. Potié: Sustainability is a big issue. Obviously, constant support is required. With regard to that program, what is needed is a level of funding that meets the needs of magazines that have the same distribution realities as ours. They are directed to specific clienteles. Our specific clientele is the francophonie, whereas for magazines, I do not really know, as there might be the odd D.I.Y. enthusiast here and there, and the level of funding reflects that reality. That is what we would consider for that program.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Thank you, you also answered my second question.
Senator Poirier: As a result of the new formula, four newspapers have lost their funding. Do you know why such a formula was contemplated?
Mr. Potié: I am going to explain it as best as I can and people from the department might interpret it differently, but essentially, there is a per copy subsidy. They have removed a direct link with Canada Post and made certain copies, such as those delivered by vendors, for example, eligible. I think there should be more eligible copies and they need to adjust the per copy subsidy.
As for non-daily newspapers, the per copy subsidy starts at 27 cents a copy. Prior to that, I do not have the exact figures, but it was around 40 cents a copy. It decreases based on the number of copies. In our case, things are pretty simple, the per copy subsidy is lower, and we have the same number of copies; so we have less money.
Senator Poirier: Have you raised your concerns with the department?
Mr. Potié: We talked to the managers and sent a letter to the minister. In our contacts with the managers, we felt that the program would be there for the next three years, and that there would be a new opening at the end of 2013-14. Our most affected members would like us to convince them to change that before 2013-14.
Senator Poirier: Do you have a sense of the impact of this formula on the future of these four newspapers?
Mr. Potié: Let us take La Liberté for example. Sixty-thousand dollars, depending on wages, represents two employees, which results in financial stress. What I cannot say is whether such or such a newspaper is going to close and when. These newspapers will have to provide less. They are going to experience greater financial stress. Are they going to close? That is another issue. It remains a challenge. Currently there is no French-language newspaper in British Columbia. They are not money-printing machines. Those are markets where it is hard to provide a newspaper to the community. Those are newspapers that are generally not profitable. They are sustainable. They manage to get by but they are not newspapers that generate huge surpluses at the end of the year.
Senator Poirier: Except for those four newspapers, if I got it right, the new formula was beneficial for all your other members?
Mr. Potié: Others are losing small amounts, but we will not argue over $1,000. The program and the government's will seemed to be to do more, and I would say that the majority of our members who benefit from the program have done a bit better.
The Chair: My question is further to that put by Senator Poirier. If I understand correctly, Mr. Potié, these four newspapers you have just mentioned will have the highest losses. Is the difficulty related to the fact that they have to distribute the newspaper through Canada Post?
Mr. Potié: The problem comes from the fact that the per copy subsidy is smaller.
The Chair: And the Canada Post costs are not decreasing.
Mr. Potié: The challenge for these newspapers in particular is the following: we hear that over the next three years, during the first year, they will receive $20,000 less, the next year it will be $40,000 less, and the third it will be $60,000 less. Therefore, something must be done and costs must be reduced. These newspapers do not have many options for doing so.
The Chair: They do not have other avenues.
Mr. Potié: There are not many ways of distributing a newspaper. We are saying that the funding formula does not recognize the lack of flexibility these particular newspapers have in reaching the people who want to read them.
The Chair: Unless I am mistaken, many years ago Canada Post had a program that helped subsidize the costs?
Mr. Potié: Yes.
The Chair: This program was eliminated or disappeared. Did Canadian Heritage then take on that responsibility?
Mr. Potié: It is a bit complicated. The Publications Assistance Program was funded by Canadian Heritage, and Canada Post added to it. Canada Post then stated that it no longer wanted to do so. A few years ago, in a government budget, it was announced that the annual $15-million contribution would be replaced, and that it would henceforth come from the budget of Canadian Heritage. The overall level of funding is the same as when Canada Post was involved.
[English]
The Chair: Did you have anything to add, Mr. Tardif?
Mr. Tardif: Yes. We mentioned if papers are losing money through this, while some are gaining, we can go back to the first session on the media and Internet. One of the first things that will be cut — and I can tell from my members that will lose this, they have already expressed their opinion — is what they put on their Internet site.
The Chair: Yes.
Mr. Tardif: While it may sound like two separate issues, the issue is really the money that is lost. Those who gain may go to the Internet, but the papers here that are losing have already suggested they will take from this side first. While it is a separate issue, they are connected.
The Chair: It is linked.
Mr. Tardif: Yes.
The Chair: Thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Robichaud: You say you participated in the consultations on the change of program or the new program.
Mr. Potié: Yes.
Senator Robichaud: Were you told of the reduction that was coming at that time?
Mr. Potié: Things were done over a certain period of time. I remember a meeting, at a certain point, where the department mentioned that it had been long and hard to find a new funding formula.
Senator Robichaud: Were you involved?
Mr. Potié: In drafting the funding formula?
Senator Robichaud: Yes.
Mr. Potié: No. We participated by informing them that, in our opinion, the funding formula should reflect the reality of our markets and the circumstances in which a copy should be eligible or not. However, we were not involved in determining whether one copy would have $0.27, and another, $0.42. We were advised and we understood that the transition year signaled what was to come — after all, that is the purpose of a transition year. When we saw that almost everyone had more, we decided to transition to something better — as we know, that was not the case. During the consultations we were told that the formula was not yet defined, but we expected that our newspapers, overall, would come out on top. We believed that we would come out on top.
Senator Robichaud: How large is the amount of money in question? You said $178,000?
Mr. Potié: The amount of money, overall, for everyone, is not high. We are talking about $80,000 over three years. The problem is related to the fact that four newspapers are receiving $80,000 less. The problem is not as much the overall amount as the fact that it affects four newspapers.
Senator Robichaud: Four newspapers in particular.
Mr. Potié: Of course, we do not want a decrease. The problem is due to the fact that the amount is coming from minority communities. You are aware that in Nova Scotia, Manitoba and Alberta, the percentage of francophones is not very high. These communities are more fragile and more in need of dynamic media. However, we are seeing a reduction in the services, content and capacity of the newspaper. There are not five francophone newspapers in Alberta, but just one. That reality must also be taken into account.
Senator Robichaud: These communities do not have the same leeway either.
Mr. Potié: The Franco has three employees.
Senator Robichaud: If they lose one, things are hard.
Mr. Potié: There is little left to cut. I was talking with the director of Courrier today, and I think there are just three or four of them. We are having a difficult year, with no surpluses.
Senator Robichaud: Did you ask to appear before our committee to have us try to restore things?
Mr. Potié: We want to convince the department and the minister that the formula has it wrong for newspapers that serve significant francophone communities, not in terms of numbers but of value. The level of funding for these environments should be higher than $0.27 a copy. We should be talking about $0.40, $0.50, like for magazines. Ideally, the level should be the same as that of magazines because the distribution challenges are the same.
The Chair: About how much do magazines receive?
Mr. Potié: It is significantly higher than what we receive. It is around $1.24.
The Chair: We are talking about $1.24 a copy.
Mr. Potié: That is the starting point, and the amount decreases from there. That would be a good starting point.
Senator Robichaud: What magazines receive that amount?
Mr. Potié: We are talking about any eligible magazine, like L'Actualité or Maclean's. There are small ones and big ones. These are French and English-Canadian magazines. Some receive large amounts because they have a lot of copies, while others receive $10,000 a year. The complete list of recipients is posted on the department's website.
Senator Poirier: It seems that the new formula benefits the majority more. Can we do something to help the four affected newspapers qualify under the new formula?
Mr. Potié: The newspapers already qualify under the new formula. The problem is that the subsidy per copy is lower.
Senator Poirier: Can we do something to help them qualify, under the new formula, to obtain an equivalent subsidy to that of the other newspapers?
Mr. Potié: It is just the amount per copy.
The Chair: Would it suffice to increase the formula?
Senator Poirier: Is that the only solution?
Mr. Potié: It is the only solution because they have the same number of copies as before, but the subsidy has decreased by half. It is about the only thing. If we want to stay within the same program, it is the only thing.
Senator Poirier: Why does the formula benefit the others?
Mr. Potié: In the case of the four newspapers in question, they were not eligible in the past, because the eligibility criteria changed. Those copies were not distributed by Canada Post.
The Chair: Are the four new ones the winners?
Mr. Potié: They are the four newspapers that for different reasons were not eligible. There were a number of exceptions for our publications. Perhaps they did not sell 50 per cent of copies, so they were not eligible before, but now they are. One of my members is an agricultural newspaper. There is an agricultural newspaper category with a higher subsidy, so it does better.
Senator Poirier: So overall it's a winner, but unfortunately that causes problems for some.
Mr. Potié: Actually, overall, if we count the money of all of our members, there is less and within three years, there will be $82,000 less, which is shared by four more newspapers. In short, the results are mixed. It is good for some newspapers and bad for others and overall, there is less money.
The Chair: There are four losers if I understand correctly.
Mr. Potié: There are four big losers.
Senator Poirier: And four winners?
The Chair: And several winners.
Mr. Potié: There are seven winners, but the gains do not make up for the losses.
Senator Robichaud: How much money are we talking about for these — is it $178,000?
Mr. Potié: It is $180,000 over three years. The formula applies over three years. One-third, one-third, one-third.
Senator Robichaud: So $60,000 a year?
Mr. Potié: For La Liberté, it is $20,000 this year, $40,000 next year or in the current year, and $60,000 in 2013-14. For the four altogether, it would be $180,000 in 2013-14.
Senator Robichaud: If we increase the program by $180,000, that would solve all of the problems.
Mr. Potié: I do not know if that would solve Mr. Tardif's problems, but it would solve ours.
[English]
Mr. Tardif: I have eight papers and will have an approximate loss of $170,000. The Canadian Jewish News and the Quebec Chronicle-Telegraph are 50 per cent in four years. I had two employees. I have to talk to my person down there, but that is quite a chunk for a paper that is having problems now, and $170,000 is a lot of money. Every penny counts in the newspaper business. We have some winners and some losers.
[Translation]
The Chair: Once again, thank you to our witnesses for having answered our questions. It did not fall on deaf ears. We heard what you had to say and the committee will surely study the issue at a certain point.
Senator Robichaud: Madam Chair, before adjourning the meeting, if the committee were to act, it should do so as quickly as possible. If there is something to rectify, it must be done now, because once the mistake is made and people are gone, we will have missed the boat. I am not a member of the committee, so I cannot make a recommendation, but I invite you to do so.
The Chair: I understand, Senator Robichaud. I will submit the subject to the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure and we will return to this committee with a recommendation.
(The committee adjourned.)