Does Canada have reality shows?

Cafe Society
1

I ask this cuz I read where a couple of Canadians were complaining that they couldn’t enter the upcoming Amazing Race show and I was wondering if Canada has any of their own reality shows.

I know the US, England and Australia all have their own versions of Survivor, Big Brother, The Mole, and I know the US & Australia have versions of Temptation Island (not sure about England)…

But I never hear about Canadian versions of these shows. And if they don’t have them, why don’t they?

They’re obviously very popular and great for ratings!

2

There was a Canadian version of “Pop Stars”, resulting in a band known as “Sugar Jones” if I remember correctly. That’s the only example I can think of.

As to why there aren’t more: possibly because Canadians have access to most of the American reality shows already. Most cable companies in Canada carry the big six American networks, which together account for every big-ticket reality show except “Big Brother”, I think. Plus the Canadian networks show a lot of U.S. programming. There’s not as much of an incentive to produce a Canadian “Survivor” when the U.S. version is already out there.

3

They air the US shows in other countries aswell. The incentive to produce your own versions of these shows is so that your own citizens can participate, no???

4

There are six big American networks? I can only think of 5 (ABC, CBS, Fox, NBC, PBS).

Possibly, but another major incentive is to produce a local version in the local language. Since with the exception of Quebec, Canada is an English-speaking market, the American versions of these shows will parse just fine. We don’t even fret about the accents, as Australians and Brits might.

Canadians have a few shows along the lines of historical recreation, putting non-actors onto farms and whatnot and seeing if they can handle using 19th-century tools. One such series was called Quest for the Bay, which was not actually a shopping excursion but a recreation of the arduous lives of 1840s fur traders. The elements of competition and voting people off was omitted, though the participants tend to drop out on their own accord when they learn they have to haul their boats across the “leech-filled sloughs of the Echimamish River before reaching the arduous 1600-meter Robinson Portage.”

History Bites (not a reality show) had a hysterical parody of Survivor played by members of the Donner Party. All the votes for who got to leave the mountain were for “me”, except the guy who got stuck with immunity.

5

Well, for one thing I honestly wasn’t aware that Canadians couldn’t participate on U.S. reality shows in the first place. Maybe most Canucks think they could participate in the U.S. shows if they wanted to. (Can you tell I’ve gone into wild speculation mode here?)

Or maybe most Canadians simply don’t want to humiliate themselves on international TV, except possibly in the context of a girl band, and are content to watch Americans humiliate themselves instead :slight_smile:

Or maybe there aren’t many Canadian production companies with the money to produce such a show and the desire to do it. This, sadly, is probably closest to the truth. I have a hard time imagining the CBC producing “Temptation Island”. Moses Znaimer’s company (CHUM/City) might pull it off, but I can’t think of any others.

(Aside: I’m pandering to stereotypes here, but when I think of a Canadian reality show I think of a dozen Canadians on Prince Edward Island too polite to vote each other off.)

Added on preview: I was actually counting UPN and WB as numbers 5 and 6, Bryan. And I hadn’t heard of “Quest for the Bay”; that sounds interesting. Like “The Nineteenth Century House”, only even tougher. (See what I miss when I don’t get back to the home country much?)

6

Maybe he was referring to the WB and UPN?

7

There was “The Lofters” (aka U8TV) which was kind of a cross between Real World and Big Brother. Its first season went well, but it got yanked halfway through its second season.

Basically, it was eight (?) 20-somethings living in a loft in Toronto, and they’d go out and interview people and stuff.

And it sucked.

8
9

Do those qualify as “networks” ? I always though a network was a group of independant but similar stations with a common affiliation but well-defined territories. The honchos at NBC, for example, determine programming content during certain hours, but the rest of the time the local station determines what shows to buy (through syndicates) or locally produce.

Isn’t all of WB and UPN content determined at the top level and then beamed to subscribers? Are there any semi-independent and locally-owned WB or UPN “affiliates” ?

Incidentally, neither WB nor UPN is available in Montreal, a large Canadian (albeit mostly French-speaking) market. Many of their shows get run on Canadian cable or, rarely, our own mainstream networks; CTV, CBC and Global.

10

Sorry - don’t know the answer to that.

I think some places in the US can’t get the WB either! (I could be wrong)

11

Don’t forget the series Pioneer Quest, where two couples had to spend a year living in Manitoba, creating a farmstead using 1870s methods and technology.

http://pioneer.history.ca/index.cfm?navmonth=june2001&splash=yes

(I’m just waiting for the latest 2 reality shows from the UK: “The 1940s House,” and “The Trench.”)

12

A “network” is a very ephemeral thing, and it is up to the members to define what it is. For instance there is the “SFM Holiday Network” which distributes special programming and movies on holidays. AFAIK, they don’t actually produce any programming at all. Also many pro sports teams are broadcast over regional networks, entities that exist only to distribute that team’s games.

And yes, WB and UPN affiliates are mostly (maybe all) independently owned. There is a limit to how many stations a single entity can own; it used to be 7, but it was upped in the Reagan years and I think it’s about a dozen or so now. They were built by signing distribution contracts with independently owned stations. And since WB and UPN produce relatively little programming, their affiliates have a lot MORE time to fill locally than those of a “major” network.

13

I’m trying to remember my “Communications Law” class from college, plus the changes since then. Too lazy to look it all up and provide links right now. So take all of this with a grain of salt.

Station ownership limits have been increased by the FCC several times during the deregulation era of the 80s and 90s. I believe an entity can own up to 35% of the market in the entire country( 35% of TV, 35% of radio). On the local level, an owner can own up to 35% of a local market stations, with a maximum of 8 stations in a particular market. IIRC, there are exceptions such as a single entity can’t currently own a broadcast TV station and a newspaper in the same market. But there has been talk of changing that rule. Sod off Michael Powell.

UPN and WB are usually considered “junior networks” in the US since neither one currently airs seven nights of network programming over their affiliate stations, much like Fox in it’s early years. Most of the UPN and WB affiliates are independently owned, as noted by many others, with distribution agreements to air network programming. Most broadcast network programming in the US is delivered this way, regardless of the network.

Several years ago, a local independent station where I live began to carry WB shows, becoming an affiliate. After a couple of years, WB dumped the station as an affiliate for some reason. I heard rumors why but nothing concrete enough to state here. The station and it’s owner do have bad reputations in the area going back for many years though.

Also, a local UPN affiliate’s finanical troubles came to light recently after it couldn’t pay it’s licensing fees to UPN. At one point a few weeks ago, the station’s assests, FCC license, and new broadcast tower were set to be auctioned off. But that has since been put on hold.

The only case where I’ve heard of a network in the US currently owning the majority of it’s affiliates is PAX. PAX considers itself a “seventh network” because so many over-the-air stations (most of which Paxson Commuincations owns) carry its programming, so it falls under the FCC’s “must carry rules” for cable operators. Although, IIRC, most of the homes that receive PAX in the US, get it from cable only with no local over-the-air affiliate.

Could someone with more US media knowledge please come along and point out and correct the mistakes I’m sure I made?

14

Here is a summary of US ownership rules for radio, TV and cable stations.

Note that this is not necessarily related to the existence of a “network”, which is a distribution rather than an ownership entity.

But returning to the OP, I know little about Canadian television, but I suspect that government ownership of the CBC has a great deal to do with it. Are there privately owned commercial TV stations in Canada? That I have to ask this question underscores the depth of my ignorance of the subject.

15

Quite a few. The CBC is but one of three major Canadian networks, the other two being the corporate CTV and Global (CanWest). They have about 40 stations between them. In Quebec, Télévision Quatre Saisons (Four Seasons) operates 10 French-language stations.

Corporate television is alive and well in Canada. The CBC has a mandate to, among other things, supply television and/or radio service to far Northern areas where corporate stations would be unprofitable. It operates in mild competition with the private networks, but is extremely unlkely to displace them.

16

Don’t forget the CHUMCity family of stations (Not networks, but that’s not what y-guy was asking) (CHUMCity owns CityTV, Much Music, Much More Music, Space, Bravo, and a couple others, as well as the CHUM radio stations (1050 AM and CHUMFM (Can’t remember the dial position)).)

CanWest/Global also owns Prime.