McBride Communications & Media Inc. owns and operates CHMZ-FM Tofino, CIMM-FM Ucluelet, and CFPV-FM Pemberton in British Columbia. CKPM-FM Port Moody will launch in early 2009.
We'd like to get to know you. Please e-mail your mp3 demo, resume and cover letter describing your background, your career objectives and a clear description of what role you would like to fill within MCMI to jobs@mcmi.ca.
Please be sure to include all of the above items in your application, along with your complete contact information.
Your application will be treated in the strictest confidence. Previous applicants to MCMI or any of our stations are invited to re-submit a full application at this time. Phone inquiries cannot be accepted.
MCMI is an equal opportunity employer; we welcome applications from ethnic minorities and persons with disabilities.
PSR has over 3,000 unique visitors each day. Get your mesage out today - Advertise with Puget Sound Radio.com! Contact: Michael Easton
CRTC Revokes Licence of Dormant Winnipeg Radio Station
In a decision released today, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission announced that it has revoked the licence of the campus instructional station CJWV-FM Winnipeg. The licensee, Harmony Broadcasting Corporation, has been in breach of various regulations and conditions of licence since 2005 and has failed to comply with a number of mandatory orders imposed by the Commission. The station has not been broadcasting since October 2007.
"The use of Canada's public airwaves is a privilege, and the rules and regulations must be followed. Failure to do so not only contravenes the Radio Regulations but also puts the integrity of the broadcasting system at risk," said Len Katz, Vice-Chairman of Telecommunications and Chair of the panel.
Harmony Broadcasting was called to appear before the Commission in September 2006 to explain why it had not complied with its terms of licence.
As a result, in January 2007, the Commission imposed six mandatory orders as conditions for keeping its licence.
These mandatory orders required that they submit on-air tapes and other information, broadcast a specified level of Canadian music including special interest music as prescribed by the regulations, news, and educational programming as required by condition of licence.
Harmony Broadcasting Corporation remained in non-compliance of these mandatory orders, and particularly failed on two separate occasions to submit on-air tapes as requested by the Commission.
On June 4, 2008, the CRTC held a public hearing in Winnipeg, Manitoba, where interested parties of CJWV-FM were given an opportunity to appear before the Commission to explain why the radio station should maintain its broadcasting licence. No convincing reasons for maintaining the licence were advanced.
Given the licensee's past history of non-compliance, the CRTC concluded that revoking Harmony Broadcasting's licence is warranted.
According to info on the Web, the station has been "dark" for some time. David Asper wanted to acquire the fiscally-challenged operation and affiliate it with Robertson College, in keeping with the station's original mandate for at least partial instructional programming.
Anybody closer to the Winnipeg scene who can elaborate, i.e. fill in the blanks?
All I know re: Asper, is that he and another investor (word is that it's former Winnipeg Evening Guy Dick "Get Your Nightly Dick" Rivers) are partnering to bring a new station to Winnipeg which would be a "True" Alternative Rock format. I have no idea what that means, but that was passed along to me through the grapevine about a month or two ago.
The CRTC has the authority to issue orders that are equivalent to an Order from the Federal Court of Canada. In a hypothetical situation where a station wouldn't go off the air after losing a licence... first step would be injunction, then escalate from there. As noted however, Flava has been dark since October.
I come from a Federal Govt regulatory enforcement background in another department.
It is important to note that all Acts and Regulations throughout the Fed Govt are structured in the same manner, whether it be to do with agriculture, banking, transportation, you name it, they are all laid out in the same structure. The Broadcast Act is no exception and carries no special status in the grand scheme of things.
Parliament passes an Act. Within that Act is the provision that Regulations may be made. After drafting, regulations and standards may be approved or modified by Order In Council. (Cabinet) Enforcement of federal Acts and Regulations fall to either the RCMP as the Federal Police Force, or may be delegated to certain departmental staff with Ministerial powers of enforcement after they have met certain training criteria and matters may be proceeded with via "Administrative Action." This creates a dual enforcement system where proceedings may take place by either Federal Court, or by an unbiased adjudicator who may then impose fines or licence suspensions. In my previous job, I was delegated to issue licence suspensions and impose fines if regulations were proven to have been broken. The Feds spent a lot of time and money on my training to ensure the rights of the public weren't trampled on by some over-zealous staff member....and rightly so.
About 5 years ago, I was in the unique position to have a conversation with one of the senior policy people at the CRTC regarding their enforcement policy. She let it slip that they choose to not enforce their regulations, have no formal training program for persons involved in their regulatory program, and have no regulatory enforcement program.
This really took me by surprise.
They prefer instead to conduct their own one-sided investigation and then sit on the results of that investigation until licence renewal time, and then question the applicant on the company's misdeeds in public, with next to zero notice. This means that sometimes a "skeleton lurks in the closet" for maybe 5 to 6 years and is dragged out for you to explain how it happened and what measures you will take to prevent it happening in the future. How well do you think your memory would be about being maybe 3 songs short of a CANCON quota or why a lightning strike knocked out the logger computer for 12 hours on a weekend after that period of time?
First, that process of sitting on a "time bomb" is illegal, as all regulations made persuant to an Act are have a one year statute of limitations. Standards have only a 6 month statute of limitations and a conviction must have been obtained for anything to be used prejudicially against you .
If they don't "catch you" and deal with the matter within one year, the evidence is lost to the Federal Govt and cannot be used against you or a corporation. Its a "dead duck." Next, it flies in the face of the concept of "disclosure" that you will be given all data the govt has on you to build its case that you have violated a regulation. You may then use the material the govt "has on file" to develop a complete defence of your actions, or raise the concept of mitigating factors.
If found guilty by a court or by an administrative action, you or the corporate entity will have a "record" which then may be used against you in future dealings with the govt on the same offence. The CRTC doesn't have an Administrative Action section, nor does it take regulatory violators to Federal Court to obtain convictions. Therefore, you have not been found guilty of any act or omission prescribed in the regulations.
With respect to them issuing Court Orders, the CRTC doesn't do it, they make a presentation to a Federal Court Judge, in turn, makes a Court Order which then carries penalties for non compliance ... the offence then becomes one of contempt of court.
What is screwy about this method of CRTC regulatory enforcement is the Order will direct the miscreant to follow the regulations as published .. so all that has been accomplished is a Judge saying "follow what you should have followed in the first place."
So it really does and accomplishes nothing because it takes you right back to the beginning..
It was explained to me by the Chief of Regulatory Affairs that the CRTC would then be able to obtain "greater weight of law" by this method than charging a licensee with a regulatory infraction, which, if taken before a Federal Court Judge by a Crown Prosecutor from Dept of Justice, would be considered to be an exceptionally minor and petty infraction when compared to other Federal cases on the court docket.
I can see a Judge almost laughing the Crown Counsel out of the courtroom when it became known that a station has played 7 too few Canadian songs in a week. Therefore, the CRTC prefer to go a different route to obtain a "bigger stick" than society in general would see it as deserving.
Hope this hasn't been too hard on your head to follow!
Home
Calendar
Search
Register
Login
Logged
