View from the Cheap Seats is kind of an extension of the newsroom. Whenever our three regular reporters, Calvin Daniels, Thom Barker and Randy Brenzen are in the building together, it is frequently a site of heated debate. This week: Would you take a ride in one of the autonomous aerial vehicles (passenger drones) recently unveiled at the world鈥檚 largest consumer electronics show in Las Vegas this month.
TV must change
WIt is not 100 per cent clear, what the future of TV will look like, but it is trending toward more choice.
In fact, last year the CRTC ruled by December of this year, Canadians will be able to buy a 鈥渟kinny鈥� cable package for no more than $25 per month then pick and pay for individual channels they want.
The skinny package must include local and regional stations, public interest channels such as the Aboriginal Peoples Television Network (APTN), education and community channels, plus provincial legislature networks. Locally, that means we should get a CBC, CTV, Global and City TV feed. I would also hope it will include, which they may under the CRTC rules, the national feeds of those networks as well. If it doesn鈥檛 though, I would not individually purchase those channels.
Choosing my first five specialty channels is a breeze, four I already get and one I would currently have if I didn鈥檛 have to buy the whole package it comes in.
I would have to have CBC News Network, The Comedy Network, TSN and Sportsnet. I would also choose The Food Network, which I already want, but don鈥檛 have because of the current bundling model of cable distribution. 95 per cent of what I already watch is on these channels, with the exception of movies.
The movie channels are some that I wouldn鈥檛 mind keeping, but would quickly get used to not having. There are so many ways to get movies now, I don鈥檛 think it would be a sacrifice I couldn鈥檛 live with.
It will be interesting to see what the new regime means for original content. I suspect we will see an increasing trend toward content being developed by online streaming services such as Netflix, Shomi and Crave as specialty channels that relied on bundling fail.
There are lots of vested interests in this business, but viewers have spoken. TV cannot go on as it currently exists.
聽- Thom Barker
Too many options
The future of television as a medium seems in a time of flux.
We have gone from a single channel world to one with dozens, if not hundreds, of channels as part of cable packages.
And we are now seeing more, and more special services provided via the Internet, increasingly with unique content; Netflix and Crave among them.
For those with cable channels have generally been provided in blocks. You want channel 鈥楢鈥� you have to take block seven, which includes several other channels, many you may never watch.
The idyllic future would see subscribers to simply purchase the channels they want, paying a monthly fee per channel selected. The fee will no doubt vary depending on popularity.
So what 鈥榝ive鈥� channels would I make as 鈥榤usts鈥�?
That would ultimately depend on cost, there would be the confines of a monthly budget, but there are favoured choices.
Check off wherever the Winnipeg Jets, Toronto Raptors, Jays and Canadian Football League are on most often. Yes I rather enjoy sports, and assume two spots on the 鈥榖ig-five鈥�.
Next, there would be Space, home to most of the better scifi shows; The Expanse, Killjoys and Dark Matter as examples.
On to PBS where many of the better British shows are available, Midsomer Murders, Grantchester, Foyle鈥檚 War and George Gently.
After that is would be an interesting process, without a natural choice in my mind, but today it would be CW, base home to the great series Arrow, Legends of Tomorrow, and Flash.
Certainly I would want to access Murdoch Mysteries, Elementary and Criminal Minds, plus a few others, but those are likely to be on network TV that are likely to remain basic access channels.
You will note no movie channel, since they are already available as pay per view options, which is a feature likely to offer a growing catalogue in the future.
Of course the question is would my selections be cheaper if paid for individually than as part of current packages? I am betting not, but it is likely the future.
聽- Calvin Daniels
Fence sitter
I鈥檓 both not a fan and a fan of the pick-and-pay method when it comes to television channels.
On one hand I would enjoy having a series of television channels catered to my preferences, but on the other hand sometimes I enjoy watching special on other channels that I鈥檇 usually never even give the light of day.
It鈥檚 also difficult to have to pick and choose which channels I鈥檇 want, so when it came down to this week鈥檚 Cheap Seats discussion 鈥榯he first five channels you鈥檇 choose for pick-and-pay television鈥�, my decision was not an easy one to make.
The first channel I鈥檇 need would have to be TSN. I love sports, so no surprise there, and TSN covers everything and has games from all leagues, so TSN makes the cut.
The next channel would be Sportsnet, but only for the Oilers games (or the first 10 minutes before I get frustrated and change the channel) and Blue Jays games.
After that however, the decision gets tough. Discovery, Comedy, Food Network and the History channel are all ones I frequently watch, so to eliminate one is difficult.
History has to stay because it鈥檚 educational and entertaining. I enjoy learning new things and watching how they portray certain people from throughout history.
The Discover Channel would be the fourth channel that gets chosen because of Shark Week (you鈥檙e lucky, Discovery).
The fifth and final channel I鈥檇 choose would end up being the Comedy channel. Some times people need a good laugh, and while you can get that watching other television stations, that鈥檚 specifically what the Comedy channel is designed for.
In the end the Food Network gets the boot, only because I could easily find recipes online if I need to (although I鈥檇 miss Chopped and Cutthroat Kitchen).
- Randy Brenzen
