When Bill C-11 was ratified in 2023, online streaming services had been railing against it and calling for its implementation to be slowed – if not completely scrapped – for years. It saw some of the biggest names in the tech industry, including YouTube and TikTok, wage an assault on it through billboard marketing and targeted content aimed to stir up opposition in Canada and further afield.
This article is being disseminated on behalf of a third-party issuer and is intended for informational purposes only.
It passed, however, and with it, it was believed that local artists in Canada would have their work promoted, thereby curbing the influence of streaming behemoths and allowing for creative growth within the country. However, why was it really controversial with names like YouTube, Spotify, and even the author Margaret Atwood? Well, first, we need to look at how streaming plays its part in Canadian culture.
Streaming is a day-to-day occurrence for Canadians
Streaming is now as ubiquitous as the TV and radio were before it. Where it once was a niche way to consume media, constrained by the ability of internet bandwidth and device capabilities, it is now flourishing. Almost everyone holds a device in their pockets that is more powerful than the desktop computers we used to consume media just 15 or so years ago.
It’s not just in film and music where streaming has had a considerable impact, either. In the iGaming industry – commonly known as the online casino – games have been radically transformed by the ability to stream HD video directly to all kinds of devices. You can find live dealer casino sites where players can watch a real person manage the game and take part in game shows.
This has been revolutionary for that industry, and it mirrors what has happened in the arts and media. While there has been a recent resurgence in the purchase of vinyl records, driven by a desire for “authentic sound”, there is no doubt that physical media is largely in decline, with streaming the go-to for around 90% of Canadians. We are cloud-based more than ever.
Bill C-11 could stifle voices deemed not Canadian enough
The biggest concern many platforms and producers have expressed is whether the law will actually help or hinder the promotion of Canadian artists and content creators. It means well, with the bill suggesting that all major platforms must ensure their algorithms add weight to Canadian programming in both official languages, as well as in the Indigenous languages of Canada.
In music, this has been the case in some form for some time now. It is known as “MAPL”, a system which determines how Canadian music is by assigning points for having singers, writers, and producers from the country. However, it will now be applied to streaming platforms in a way that will radically alter the way the algorithm recommends content to users.
For some, that has left them wondering if they would be Canadian enough to be seen. For example, does an entirely Canada-produced piece of English-language content about the country with a full team of locals on board rank higher or lower than a French-produced piece with both official languages, and perhaps some indigenous representation sprinkled in?
Lack of content relevance: Another possible pitfall
However, one of the primary ways that the law could shape the future of streaming is how people respond to the changes. Most people would agree with promoting local artists and giving people a platform. However, if content is artificially ranked highly, it may turn them off by what the algorithm presents to them.
This could lead to two outcomes: good content being overlooked, and local artists’ content being poorly received due to its promotion outside its intended audience. It’s a real concern and could cause a mess for streamers and users alike if good content is lost to the algorithm and audiences are unable to find their niche. Whether this unfolds as the law approaches its third year remains to be seen.
Stockhouse does not provide investment advice or recommendations. All investment decisions should be made based on your own research and consultation with a registered investment professional. The issuer is solely responsible for the accuracy of the information contained herein. For full disclaimer information, please click here.