Bell, NFL battle CRTC over ban on Canadian ads during Super Bowl.
FP1
TORONTO• Bell Canada and the National Football League want Canada’s highest court to overturn the federal broadcast regulator’s decision to let Canadians watch big- budget American ads during the Super Bowl.
On Jan. 2, Bell and the NFL applied to the Supreme Court of Canada for leave to appeal after a Federal Court decision up held the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission’ s decision to ban the substitution of U.S. TV commercials for Canadian ones during the championship game.
The 2017 Super Bowl marked the first time football fans north of the border could watch U.S. ads in over 40 years. But if Bell and the NFL get their way, viewers may see Canadian ads during the 2018 Super Bowl.
Bell and the NFL applied for a stay of the CRTC’s decision. They asked the court to expedite the process in hopes they’ll be granted leave to appeal and a stay before the big game on Feb. 4. They argue a stay will cause minimal or no inconvenience to Canadians, considering people can watch the U.S. ads online and only 91 people complained to the CRTC about not being able to watch the U.S. ads.
The court filings are the latest in a protracted legal battle over the CRTC’s August 2016 decision that banned the decades- old practice known as simultaneous substitution or “simsub.”
The regulator made the move after a public consultation found viewers wanted to watch the flashier U. S. ads, which can attract nearly as much attention as the big game itself.
But Bell and the NFL argue the CRTC doesn’t have the jurisdiction to target a single program. Bell said the decision cost it $11 million in 2017 alone, as it can no longer sell advertising spots to local advertisers during the most- watched live TV event in Canada. In the latest court documents, it argues the decision harms the entire economy by limiting the access Canadian businesses have to a large TV audience.
“U. S. businesses that advertise on the U. S. broadcast are now effectively advertising for free to the millions of Canadians who watch the U. S. broadcast,” it stated, adding that U.S. ads don’t always comply with Canadian standards.
“Moreover, the lost advertising revenue results in less funding for local news and information and less funding for Canadian programming.”
The Federal Court sided with the CRTC, though the judge noted an irony in the decision given its apparent economic impacts.
“The appellants argue, and I agree, that there is a certain irony that legislation that has the protection of the Canadian broadcasting industry and its employ- ees as one of its important objectives is being used to allow for the broadcasting of American ads during the Super Bowl to the apparent detriment of the Canadian industry and its employees,” Justice David Near wrote.
While the court campaign continues, Bell is also trying to convince the CRTC to change its mind. It applied to the CRTC to reverse its decision last year. The CRTC’s l eadership has changed since the ban was initially put in place.
The Supreme Court has yet to respond to Bell’s application.