The Canadian broadcasting world turned upside down has been on full display at regulatory hearings that continue this week.

The cable companies and broadcasters, mostly one and the same now, together with consumers, are all in the same room in Gatineau, Que., for a two-week, full-on fight about the future of television.

How to deal with the web streaming juggernaut of which Netflix is the poster child? What to do about falling ad revenues for broadcasters? How to pay for Canadian content? How to handle consumer anger about bundled cable services they don’t want? Why are cable bills rising faster than inflation? The average household spends $185 a month on cable, land lines, Internet and cell phones, according to the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC). That’s the country’s sixth-largest household expense.

Have your say

At the edge of the fray is over-the-air television, the way TV was when you were a kid (if you’re old enough): Free, with a modest investment in an antenna and some coaxial cable. About 1 million Canadians get their TV this way and many are worried that it’s going to disappear.

Related: Why pick and pay TV is too little too late for me

On the CRTC’s Let’s talk TV website, the OTA crowd have been the loudest and most passionate in defense of their cause. This ‘good-enough-TV’ crowd is concerned that the hearings mean the end of free over-the air TV, because the CRTC is asking whether OTA transmissions should continue.

I grew up In Etobicoke, where we had a triangular tower at the side of the house with an antenna on top. The rich folks had a box that rotated the antenna to get rid of the fuzz. We had one Motorola TV with a UHF and VHF knob and bunny ears. You had to get up and change channels.

When the cable industry arrived in the ’70s, things changed. The cable guys became middle men, bundling the signals, adding features and selling packages. They made it easy in urban areas. Now they own the broadcasters that transmit the signals, plus specialty channels not available over the air.

The over-the-air crowd is about 8 per cent of the Canadian viewing audience, according to an estimate by Rogers Communications. They want to choose how they get their entertainment and want to be able to combine it with the web-based services. It’s partly about cost and partly about freedom of choice.

Bell Media president Kevin Crull told the hearing last week that he wants to shut down the transmitters that provide free signals. He also wants to be allowed to create a new paid bundle from those free over-the-air channels. Crull says Bell is losing money on local programming and unless the company can find a way to pay for it, Canadian content is in danger.

Crull said ending the transmissions without allowing Bell to charge for a new bundle “would actually make a dire situation even worse.” Bell would save a little money, but lose the viewers who are seeing the ads on the channels they pull down.

Related: Bell wants viewers to pay for local newcasts

Rogers delivered a different message.

“Local TV is facing a number of financial challenges, but we don’t think shutting down OTA transmitters will help their situation,” said Rogers spokesman Kevin Spafford. “It would mean a million Canadians would lose access to free TV.”

Industry consultant Peter Miller, a Toronto communications lawyer and at various times an executive with Vision TV, CHUM and the Canadian Association of Broadcasters, says the players just want a way to adapt, they don’t want to get rid of OTA. The Internet is rewriting the rules of their business model every day, as it is in print publishing.

“None of the players want to get rid of OTA, even though they don’t like it,” he says. “Bell’s view is that the business model is broken and you can’t survive without a new stream of revenue,” Miller says. “Rogers is saying it can survive if you reduce the requirement for Canadian content.”

Here’s why OTA is not really a big issue for broadcasters: A CRTC spokesman said their evidence is that OTA use is falling as more people opt out of TV altogether for web-based services. The transmitters don’t cost much to operate — Bell said it’s 1 per cent of its local programming costs. The companies have spent the money to move from analog to digital signals. And they’ll lose 1 million people who watch their ads.

You can add to that the incalculable cost of the ill will. How many of the million would come back to cable? How many might drop Bell Mobility and Rogers phone plans, switch Internet providers and tell all their friends what they’re doing and why?

So, if you’re a betting person, figure on OTA free TV being around for a while yet. It’s a side show to the main event.

More articles by Adam Mayers

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

Adam Mayers writes about personal finance and pension and retirement issues. Reach him at amayers@thestar.ca