Magazine industry creators may want to add their names to letter about cultural policy

Creators within the magazine industry (writers, freelance writers, photographers and illustrators) will want to add their names to the joint letter addressed to Honourable Mélanie Joly, Minister of Canadian Heritage, urging the government to put Canada’s creators at the heart of our cultural policy.

The initiative is supported by Canadian creative industry associations including Music Canada, the Canadian Independent Music Association (CIMA), the Writers’ Union of Canada, the League of Canadian Poets, the Canadian Music Publishers Association, the Playwrights Guild of Canada and the Canadian Country Music Association. (But curiously not included in the coalition are such magazine-related organizations as the Professional Writers Association of Canada (PWAC), the Editors' Association of Canada (EAC) or even Magazines Canada (whose member magazines rely heavily on freelancers.))

People who consider themselves members of the "creative class" may wish to add their name to the letter here. The text is below.

Read more »

Heritage minister drafts advisory panel to help her consider sweeping changes to cultural policy

The federal government has appointed a broad group of experts to help in its review of cultural policies. According to a story from the Globe and Mail, the group of a dozen will meet soon and hold a series of six workshops across the country in the fall as well as holding five meetings with Canadian Heritage minister Mélanie Joly. 

Many members of the "sounding board" are drawn from television, radio and film. One most relevant to the magazine industry is Ken Whyte, the senior vice-president of public policy for Rogers Communications, previously in charge of all Rogers magazine properties and former publisher and editor of Maclean's. The remainder of the panel are:

• Rob Blackie, a producer whose credits include the CBC TV series Republic of Doyle
• Katie Boland, an actor, writer and producer
• Catherine Cano, chief executive officer of public affairs channel CPAC
• Loc Dao, chief digital officer at the National Film Board
• Lisa de Wilde, CEO of public broadcaster TVO
• Michael Donovan, executive chairman of DHX Media Ltd.
• Charles Falzon, dean of Ryerson University’s faculty of communication and design
• Philippe Lamarre, owner of production house Urbania Media
• Jean La Rose, CEO of Aboriginal Peoples Television Network
• Monique Savoie, president and artistic director of Société des Arts Technologique
• Justin West, founder and president of Secret City Records

"The advisory group’s mandate gives few clues as to which issues will be at the forefront of the consultations," the story says, "but helps map an ambitious process that is expected to stretch into next year. The group has no decision-making power, placing final say squarely in the hands of Canadian Heritage Minister Mélanie Joly, and there is no expectation that the group members will draft a formal report."

• Kate Taylor: Cultural policy review is long on intentions, short on planning (Globe and Mail)

Heritage Minister Shelly Glover announces she's dropping out and going home to Manitoba

Shelly Glover, the Minister of Canadian Heritage, has announced that she will not run again, though she will serve until the expected October election. As Heritage Minister, Glover is responsible for -- among many other things -- the CBC, national museums and the Canada Periodical Fund. 

Glover -- Manitoba's most senior cabinet minister -- said "it is time to return to my previous life", by which she apparently means as a member of the Winnipeg Police Service, from which she is on a leave of absence as a sergeant. 

"This past 18 months has been particularly difficult for me and my family as we have dealt with some very serious health issues while I was away from home. As their wife, mother and grandmother [with a second grandchild on the way], my family is very grateful that I am coming home."

She has been in the post as minister of heritage and official languages since July 2013, the latest in a string of heritage ministers; there have been four Conservative ministers since February 2006, including Bev Oda, Josée Verner and James Moore. Glover was first elected in 2008 to represent Saint Boniface riding in Winnipeg. 

At the same time as Glover made her announcement, International Development Minister Christian Paradis also announced he won't run again. 

Shelly Glover named new Canadian Heritage minister in Harper cabinet shuffle

Shelly Glover, an MP from Manitoba who had been parliamentary secretary to the minister of finance, is the new Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages as a result of the shuttle of the cabinet of Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the elevation of eight new ministers, four of them women. Glover replaces James Moore, who has been promoted to Industry, one of the government's senior keystones.

As Heritage Minister, Glover will be responsible for the shepherding of the Canada Periodical Fund and other policies that directly impact the Canadian magazine industry.

Glover is the MP for Saint Boniface in Winnipeg and was first elected in 2008.

Heritage minister refuses to meet about TC Media and its CPF funding

Not that it probably expected much, but the Canadian Media Guild did receive a reply to a letter it sent a month ago to the Minister of Canadian Heritage, James Moore. The reply was posted by Story Board, the joint website of the CMG and the Canadian Writers Group. 

The CMG letter had requested a meeting to discuss funding that TC Media receives from the Canada Periodical Fund (roughly $8 million a year) in light of the company's aggressive freelance contract.

"Instead of enriching the cultural sector and helping to stabilize employment, the latest TC Media contract demands that freelancers sign over all rights to their work, while offering no increase in pay rates," the letter to the minister said. "Under these terms, TC Media has the right to republish or alter the work without permission (including removing the byline) and without paying the freelancer another cent."

Minister Moore's reply rather brusquely turns down any possibility of a meeting and says

"The Government of Canada is not involved in the management decisions of CPF recipients, nor in matters relating to potential labour disputes."

MagsBC gets temporary financial reprieve

The Magazine Association of BC has received what it describes as "a stay of execution" as Canadian Heritage has reviewed and approved one of the two applications that had earlier been rejected. This gives MagsBC $125,020 to fund a number of projects (some of which have alreadywell advanced and for which money has already been spent) such as the 2012 magazine directory, MagsWest 2011 (held last June) and the association's BC Ferries initiative with the News Group. The $25,000 application for industry market research will not be revived.

MagsBC was thrown into crisis by the turndown in funding and warned its members that it was within weeks of closing its doors. 

The association says it may not see a cheque from Heritage until April, after an amended contribution agreement has been signed, though the ministry has said it will expedite things. As a result, the task force meeting was held Feb. 9 to consider ways of reacting to the crisis, current and ongoing and means of finding new ways to function and become self-sustaining. Among the suggestions is to expand the membership to other content providers and media publishers.

Scott Shortliffe leaves as Heritage director of magazines policy and programs

Scott Shortliffe, a fair-minded friend to Canadian magazines inside Canadian Heritage, is leaving his post as director of periodical publishing and programs to accept a promotion dealing with broadcasting and digital media in the same ministry. He will be deputy director general, broadcasting and digital communication, effective March 21. He has been working on the magazines files since June 2006.

Shortliffe, who comes from a civil service family, joined Canadian Heritage in 1994 and has had positions in the Canadian audio-visual certification office (CAVCO), the Canadian studies and youth program and, most recently, periodical policies and programs, with responsibility for the Canada periodicals fund (CPF) and its predecessor, the Canadian magazine fund.

Succeeding him is Ramzi Saad who has been heading the strategic policy and management team at Heritage secretariat federal secretariat, with trade and investment branch and other government departments, including Health Canada.
Related posts:

• Scott Shortliffe confirmed as periodical publishing programs boss

Canadian Heritage announces $52.7 million in Canada Periodical Fund grants

[This post has been updated] The  Aid to Publishers' grant data for the Canada Periodical Fund for the 2010-11 year have been released and are available online. A total of 484 titles received $52,669,029 in grants ranging from the largest, at $1,500,000 to the smallest, at $386. The CPF replaces the postal subsidy (Publications Assistance Program) and the Canada Magazine Fund (CMF).

(As reported in earlier posts, most of the smaller cultural magazines were shut out of funding by a circulation floor that disqualified titles with fewer than 5,000 paid copies per year. and the support for arts and literary magazines (SALM) was discontinued.)

The average grant under this year's CPF was $108,820, but this is somewhat skewed as 11 publications received more than $1 million and five publications received the maximum allowed ($1.5 million) under rules of the new program. The median (the figure where half of recipients receive more, half less) is about $22,222. Here are the magazines that got the maximum:

• Canadian House & Home 
• Canadian Living
• Chatelaine (English)
• Maclean's
• Reader's Digest

The other magazines receiving more than $1 million from the CPF including the above and

• Coup de Pouce ($1,426,187) 
• Style at Home ($1,349, 466) 
• Movie Entertainment ($1,292,492) 
• Châtelaine (French) ($1,236,251) 
• TV Hebdo ($1,157,100) 
• Primeurs ($1,103,183)

While not a surprise since the rules were announced last year, these larger consumer magazines were nevertheless getting considerably less than they previously received from the Publications Assistance Program (PAP) and the Canada Magazine Fund (CMF) combined.  For example, Canadian Living loses $1.36 million in funding under the CPF. The combination of Chatelaine and Châtelaine was $2,736, 251, compared with $3,892,943, a 30% drop. Canadian House & Home receives $1,500,000 where previously they received $1,623,492, a cut of about 7.6%.

At least in part because of this hard cap on grants and the smaller number of magazines eligible, many titles  received slightly or much more than previously. For example:

• Applied Arts ($67,446 compared with $65,616)
• Canadian Business ($535,000 compared with $471,000 in 2008-09) 
• Canadian Plastics ($13,731 vs. $12,758)
• Chirp ($282,220 compared with $211,308)
  
• Clin d'oeil ($480,749 compared with $436,581)
  
• Cottage Life ($265,674 compared with $237,535) 
• Fashion ($715,369, compared with $667,176)
• Flare ($782,000, compared with $720,000) 
• Frank (Atlantic Edition) ($28,450 vs. $8,202)
• Geist ($13,226 vs. $11,806)
• Hamilton magazine ($32,855 compared with $30,470)
• Homemaker's ($859,431 vs. $689,981)
• Legion magazine ($551,969 vs. $445,900) 
• LouLou ($1,027,357 combined for its English and French editions, compared to $891,413) 
• Maisonneuve ($25,717 vs. $26,319) 
• MoneySense ($211,635, compared with $156,930) 
• Motorcycle Mojo ($19,835 vs. $13,224)
• Opera Canada ($6,835 vs. $4,757)
• Outdoor Canada ($277,992 vs. $221,656)
• Prairies North ($26,912 vs. $20,592)
  
• This Magazine ($8,911 compared with $5,941)
• Toronto Life ($723,658 vs. $686,788)
• Up Here ($77,518 vs. $69,817)
• The Walrus ($261,264 vs. $217,199)

Here are some examples of magazines that stayed steady or saw a drop in support this year, compared with 2008-09 data on the Canadian Heritage website:

• Border Crossings ($49,515 compared with $52,346 (most of which came from discontinued Support for Arts and Literary Magazines -- SALM)
• The Dance Current ($19,352 vs. $20,487)
• Literary Review of Canada  ($19,499 vs. $19,882)

[Note, the comparative figures are between this year's CPF and the two components that were merged to create it. In some cases, the 2008-09 figures include funding under the SALM component.]

[Update: See Globe and Mail article on grants.]

[More analysis later]

Related posts:

• Small cultural mags were cut adrift because they're not businesses
• Periodical Fund quietly removes requirement to print funded mags in Canada
• New CPF wholly ignored industry recommendations says BCAMP exec
• Canada Periodical Fund abandons small literaries, cuts maximum funding for all but farm pubs
• Is consistency the hobgoblin of the heritage ministry?
• Canadian Business Press calls for federal fairness in funding
• Give responsibility -- and money -- for small mags to the Canada Council, Mags Canada says
• Time is ticking away for solution to small literary and cultural mag funding
• Does the government want to treat small mags and readers like cockroaches?
• Facebook group protests discontinuation of small arts and literary mag funding

Small- and mid-sized mags have until Sept. 17 to apply for CPF Business Innovation funding

Small and mid-sized print and digital magazine publishers have until September 17 to put in their applications to be eligible for the current round (2010-11) of the Business Innovation component of the Canada Periodical Fund from the department of Canadian Heritage. Applications received later will not be considered until the 2011-12 round. 

The business innovation program offers support for projects that innovate in adapting to changing market conditions and contribute to diversity of content.

A portion of the funding for this component has been reserved for digital periodicals. And priority will be given to arts and literary periodicals that were awarded a grant by the Canada Council in 2009-10. (In effect,this may soften the blow for small cultural publications who were denied access to the Aid to Publishers component because they had fewer than 5,000 paid copies annually.) The program for print periodicals is restricted to publications with 50% paid or verified requested circulation and no less than 250 and no more than 45,000 average circulation.

There is an extensive applicant's guide online. Among the general project requirements:

• Projects are considered innovative if they explore new technologies or business models;
• They must be well-researched and clearly demonstrate realistic objectives and measurable outcomes, supported by a business plan or market research;
• Projects must demonstrate that they will increase circulation, advertising or other revenue and thereby support the growth and sustainability of the publishing firm;
• The maximum government contribution is $25,000 ($10,000 for a business plan, $15,000 for a marketing plan) and represent 75% of the project's costs; the rest may be made up of in-kind or cash contributions, including pro-rated salary of individual(s) working directly on the project

Small cultural mags were cut adrift because they're not businesses

It was an interesting presentation this week at the MagNet conference in Toronto by Scott Shortliffe, the director of periodical publishing and programs from the Department of Canadian Heritage. He probably gladdened the hearts of publishers large and small by saying that they were only a couple of weeks away from receiving cheques under the new Canada Periodical Fund (CPF). Almost 1,000 titles have qualified under the Aid to Publishers component, which represents the merger of the former Canadian Magazine Fund (CMF) and the Publications Assistance Program (PAP -- commonly known as the postal subsidy).

I should say upfront that Shortliffe should be commended for his frankness and openness in showing up when asked and answering questions from publishers. He has demonstrated himself to be a sympathetic voice in Ottawa and a sensitive student of the magazine business and its economics.

Something he said last week seemed new, at least to me. That was that the Canada Periodical Fund and the periodical program in general is basically an “industry support program” and that his department made the decision (he used the term “rationalization”) that the programming was intended effectively to support magazines as viable businesses. He said that Heritage had made a departure from normal practice and may have made a mistake (under the  CMF) in funding small arts and cultural publications in the first place since success for them is more often judged on artistic merit rather than their business models.

The costs of servicing very small arts and cultural publications (roughly 50 of them are now ineligible under the CPF if they sell fewer than 5,000 copies a year), he said,  outstripped the benefit to Canadians of their tiny circulations (I am paraphrasing). I even thought I heard him refer to these as”micro magazines”.

He pointed out that the Canada Council was in the business, unlike Heritage, of deciding on funding based on artistic merit and was the appropriate place for small arts and culture magazines to go. Of course the shunting of these small magazines and their tiny but important business and circulation issues to the Canada Council is not likely to help those magazines, since no more money seems forthcoming for the Canada Council to offset this increased need.

Small arts and cultural titles which are seeing their postal costs go up 3 or 4 times with the end of the publications assistance program had come to count on the very valuable Support for Arts and Literary Magazines (SALM) funding which met a very real need and had made some very real differences in the audience-building capacities of those magazines. Surely if costs of administering this relatively small portion of the Heritage periodical budget was the problem, streamlining and simplifying the program would have been a better response than cutting its smallest clients adrift. (I have heard from more than one source that the principle reason for the floor on funding was to cut out academic journals, who tap other sources of funding such as SSHRC, and that the small literary and cultural magazines were collateral damage.)

Shortliffe also said that, at least for the next two years, relatively small arts and literary magazines (between 500 and 45,000 circulation) would be eligible for support under the business innovation portion of the CPF. Some of this funding might go to publications that are just under the 5,000-circulation-per-year minimum for the larger fund and could apply for a project to boost their circulation over the threshold. However they will be assessed on the basis of just that -- their innovative ideas -- and they will be competing with much larger publications for this portion of the pot. Many of the challenges facing small cultural magazines, however, are relatively prosaic ones of fundamental audience development or business planning.

Paradoxically, he said he had no problem with his staff making judgements about the innovativeness of particular applications under the business innovation program. This in answer to my question about whether they would be calling in advisors from the magazine industry to determine what was truly worthwhile and innovative – just as the Canada Council does with its peer review panels who determine if a magazine's artistic merits should be supported.

Shortliffe was unable to say if this transitional arrangement (access to the business innovation component for small arts and cultural titles is only approved for two years) might disappear after the 2011-12 year. 

Canada Periodical Fund abandons small literaries, cuts maximum funding for all but farm pubs

[This post has been updated]
[Update: Magazines Canada has issued a statement about the new Canada Periodical Fund. President and CEO Mark Jamison said:

Magazines Canada welcomes the new Canada Periodical Fund (CPF). The CPF is an important cultural program designed to help Canadian content reach Canadians. It replaces both the Publications Assistance Program (PAP) and the Canada Magazine Fund (CMF),both of which served cultural policy well over many years.

We are grateful for the support of Heritage Minister Moore in sustaining full program funding including the annual $15 million that was once the responsibility of Canada Post in PAP.This first year of the CPF is a transition year through which Magazines Canada will work with Canadian Heritage to address the specific needs of the industry.

We stress that the new “Aid to Publishers” component has a very tight February 19, 2010 deadline. To date, application information and materials are only available for the “Aid to Publishers” component of the program.The other components of the program are also important to segments of the Canadian industry and we look forward to more details on these in the very near future.[end update]

The rules for the new Canada Periodical Fund (CPF) -- promised since last February, but only released late Tuesday -- are what many magazines had feared. Essentially, the Department of Canadian Heritage has not budged from the draft positions it first revealed a year ago (with a couple of notable exceptions, see below).

Distribution of about $75.5 million in funding is to be based on the number of eligible copies distributed in a year, not mailing costs, as it was in the the former publications assistance program (PAP), and not editorial expenses, as it was in the Canada Magazine Fund (CMF), both of which are subsumed into the new CPF. About 95% of funding will be in the "Aid to Publishers" category. Despite the very late publication of the rules and release of the application, the deadline is  one month from today, Monday, February 19, 2010. 

English application information     
French application information

• Small magazines with fewer than 5,000 paid copies circulated annually will receive no funding at all. This includes many of the country's literary and cultural magazines ;
• All magazines must have sold at least 50% of their copies in the year previous to their application; 
• All paid circulation magazines must have a minimum subscription or single copy price of at least $1 a copy or a minimum average subscription price of $12 a year;
  
• Aboriginal, official language minority, ethnocultural and gay/lesbian/bisexual/transsexual publications (GLBT) are exempted from the requirement that they must sell at least 50% of copies;
  
• Aboriginal, official language minority and ethnocultural publications have to sell only 2,500 paid copies a year to be eligible;
  
• All magazines have a funding cap of $1.5 million, which is half of what some magazines received under the editorial content provisions of the CMF plus PAP, both of which are now ending;
• Extraordinarily, farm publications -- among the most profitable magazines in the country -- are exempted from the funding cap in the new regulations. Other business-to-business publications, with which the farm press is usually included, are not;
•  Professional association publications like CA magazine and CMA Management are ineligible;
•  Other association magazines may be eligible, but may not include subscriptions with their membership fees and must allow members to opt out and the public to buy the publication at the same price as members; 
• ‘sponsored circulation’ counts toward determining eligibility but not counted in the formula that determines the support each individual magazine receives;
• Only paid circulation, request circulation and paid circulation non-daily newspapers are eligible to apply;
• Payments under the program will be made direct to publishers, rather than through a Canada Post account and publishers are free to use alternative distribution.

The rules are undoubtedly going to be a major disappointment to the many groups who lobbied hard to have the draft changed, including Magazines Canada and the Canadian Business Press and the ad hoc group of small literary and cultural magazines that mounted a concerted Facebook campaign to get the floor on funding lowered or eliminated.

Applications under the new rules for current recipients of CMF and/or PAP funding will be subject to a streamlined "one-time-only" process (involving a simple, two-page application using data already filed with Heritage). They will receive an amount between 90% and 150% of their total funding from the SEC in 2008‑2009, the SALM in 2008‑2009, and the PAP in 2008‑2009, up to a maximum of $1.5 million (unless you are a farm publication).

Related posts:

• Facebook group protests discontinuation of small arts and literary mag funding
• Canadian Business Press calls for federal fairness in funding
• Give responsibility -- and money -- for small mags to the Canada Council, Mags Canada says
• Modify the circulation threshold? The answer is no says minister Moore
• Time is ticking away for solution to small literary and cultural magazine funding
• Does the government want to treat small mags and readers like cockroaches?
• Unintended consequences?
• Magazines Canada wants targetted program for small arts & literary mags
• Circulation floor on new CPF could exclude smaller arts and literary titles
• New Canada Periodical Fund holds stead at $75.5 million
• Magazine funding overhaul delayed until 2010
• Radical funding overhaul by Canadian Heritage proposes merger of CMF and PAP

Is consistency the hobgoblin of the heritage ministry?*

The minister of Canadian Heritage, and by extension his department, can at least be given points for their consistency. Recently, as a result of a review process, Heritage has decided to terminate a program that supported independent performers and small scale independent music-making in favour of support for enterprises that are considered more commercially marketable.

If this sounds familiar, it is essentially the same process and outcome as has occurred in the periodicals industry; small literary, arts and cultural magazines being cut adrift if their paid circulation is less than 5,000 annually.

What's interesting is the apparent intentions of minister of Canadian Heritage, James Moore. In Saturday's Globe and Mail he said that the Canada Council had its own funding and was free to help independent artists cut adrift by the end of the $1.35 million Canadian Musical Diversity Program. (This is essentially what he said to independent magazine publishers.)

“The Canada Council has their own envelope of funding – I believe it's $9-million. If they want to spend their money in a way to help independent artists, they're free to do that,” he said....

“The envelope they were looking for was basically to fund artists who have no interest in developing any kind of commercial opportunities for their music, that's just a different approach than what we have in mind,” Moore told the CBC.

Moore said yesterday the Conservatives' philosophical inclination is toward funding artists with commercial promise, a view Prime Minister Stephen Harper has espoused. “But not entirely,” Moore added.

“It's not my view that in order for art to have merit and value to society, it has to be commercially viable,” Moore said. “I'm not at all castigating independent artists and what their hopes are for their creations. … It's about funding things that are of a higher priority for government and for the industry.”

So, to paraphrase, it's not minister Moore's view that commercial viability is synonymous with excellence, but commercial projects are all the government wants to invest in.

It's hard not to agree with Gary Cristal, a manager of independent artists (and former acting head of the Canada Council's music branch) who told the Globe:

“They were Robin Hood in reverse. They robbed the poor to give to the rich.”

(As an aside, the musical diversity program, which is being cut, was administered by the Canada Council. This doesn't augur well for the one, small hope being nurtured by small literary, art and cultural publishers -- and Magazines Canada. They have been hoping that Heritage might somehow agree to shift some of its periodical funding over to the Council -- equivalent to the $1 million SALM (Support for Arts and Literary Magazines) portion of the Canada Magazine Fund -- as part of its merger of the CMF and the Publications Assistance Program into the Canada Periodical Fund next spring.

It will do little or no good to direct small publishers, and musicians, to the Canada Council for further support if there is no further funding.)

*"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

Related posts:

• Give responsibility -- and money -- for small mags to the Canada Council, Mags Canada says
• Modify the circulation threshold? The answer is no, says minister Moore
• Time is ticking away for solution to small literary and cultural mag funding
• Does the government want to treat small mags and readers like cockroaches?
• Magazines Canada wants targetted program for small arts & literary mags
• Facebook group protests discontinuation of small arts and literary mag funding
  

Give responsibilty -- and money -- for small mags to the Canada Council, Mags Canada says

The federal government is being urged by Magazines Canada to transfer responsibility and the approximately $620,000 funding envelope that affects small cultural magazines distributing fewer than 5,000 paid copies annually to the Canada Council for the Arts.

In its pre-budget submission to be released today (Monday), Magazines Canada says that while it supports the new Canada Periodical Fund (CPF), the proposed 5,000 paid copy threshold means the CPF will not support the small press art and literary magazines that rely very heavily on current funding to support Canadian editorial development and to offset postal rates. The proposed floor would affect some 42 magazines.

The solution recommended is that the funding (and the responsibility) that had previously been administered by Canadian Heritage under the Canadian Magazine Fund (CMF) be transferred to the Canada Council "which already delivers an effective program to art and literary titles".

This [recommendation] would ensure that this investment continues to be directed to arts and literary titles. While this is a relatively modest level of the overall CPF budget, it is substantial in its benefit to these small titles. This also has the advantage, from a program streamlining point of view, of consolidating all arts and literary investment under ‘one roof’. Here, the Canada Council for the Arts can evolve and shape its programming to meet the needs of this unique family of titles. This would be a markedimprovement over the current approach in which both the Canada Council and theCMF SALM provide support to the same community of titles but with uncoordinated criteria and funding formulas.

Further, MagsCan recommends that, rather than implementing the CPF overnight, effective April 1, 2010, that an (unspecified) transition period be negotiated to ease the industry into the new program.

We believe it would be unacceptable to cut longstanding support to these magazine titles all at once next year and have recommended to the Minister that a multi-year transition plan be put in place.

The recommendations are part of the pre-budget submission which suggests that the federal government concentrate on two, critical areas in its 2010 budget: the new Canada Periodical Fund (CPF) and the impacts of the Canada Post strategic review panel recommendations, particularly distance-based pricing and creation of a universal service obligation.

This year's budget consultations come at a time when the Canadian magazine industry is coping with a crippling recession. Average spending on advertising in Canadian magazines is down dramatically. This has had a significant impact on employment and has meant reductions in the amount of original Canadian content that magazines are able to create.

Magazines Canada says that Canada Post needs to review its approach to "distance-related pricing", which threatens the delivery of Canadian content to rural areas and contradicts Canada's longstanging magazine policy to ensure affordable and accessible availability of Canadian content to everyone.

It agrees with the post office's own review panel's recommendations that said CPC needs to modernize its network and define a contractual relationship with magazine publishers to develop a "universal service obligation". Further, it says that Canada Post should not have its letter mail rates restricted to 2/3 of the consumer price index because this means that other services -- such as mailing magazines -- would then have to bear the greater cost increases.

PAP topped up as part of federal budget

It appears that lobbying by the magazine industry has resulted in $15 million being injected into the Publications Assistance Program (PAP), replacing the contribution that was being withdrawn this spring by Canada Post. The funding is part of a substantial $335 million in new funding flowing to Heritage as part of the "stimulus" budget.Representatives from the industry have been vigorously arguing that, if Canada Post must remove the $15 million, Heritage should replace it. That's apparently what's happened.

The proposal by Minister of Canadian Heritage James Moore has been to roll the PAP and the Canada Magazine Fund into a single, $75 million, envelope -- the new Canada Periodicals Fund (CPF).

That new fund has been approved as policy, and the commitment for the funding is for two years while the details of the new program are worked out. That means, for magazine clients of PAP and the CMF, it will be business as usual until April 2010 when the new program begins.

"We're very appreciative of the support we're getting. Clearly this minister is being listened to where it counts," said Magazines Canada president Mark Jamison.

Now, the magazine industry will want to make its voice heard in the development of the new program so that the $75 million is retained (that is, so the whole is not less than the sum of the parts) and, it would be hoped, enlarged.

Canada Magazine Fund SBDMP Applicant Survey

Hi, Jon Spencer here -- with a quick+easy favour to ask of all (fairly recent) applicants to the Canada Magazine Fund's "Support for Business Development for Magazine Publishers" program:

I would be interested to hear whether your applications to this program in the current fiscal year (from April 2008 to March 2009) have been handled as they have been in previous years, or if you have encountered any changes to the approval process. I would appreciate your sending a short email to me -- whether your experience has been good or bad -- at "js.abacus [at] sympatico.ca", answering the following questions:

1) In what month did you submit your most recent application to the CMF's SBDMP program?

2) How many times have you applied in previous years (roughly)?

3) How many times have those applications (in previous years) been accepted for funding, and how long does it usually take?

4) Has your latest application been accepted or rejected, or are you still awaiting approval?

5) Briefly describe your experience with your latest application, and (if possible) indicate how it compares with the approval process for applications you have submitted in previous years.

Thank you!

Industry CMF support program cut by 20%; what else is in play? Who knows?

[This post has been updated] Like buses and streetcars, budget cuts seem to come in clusters and that was certainly the case in the last couple of weeks where the minister of Canadian Heritage has confirmed total cuts to arts funding of more than $40 million. Included in that amount were: Trade Routes ($9 million); Culture.ca ($3.8 million); Culture Online ($5.6 million); book publishing ($1 million); arts and heritage stabilization ($3.5 million) and film and video support ($2.5 million).

One of the programs feeling the impact of the cuts is the Support for Industry Development component of the Canada Magazine Fund, which will see a cut for the 2009-10 fiscal year of $500,000, or about a 20% of this year's $2.5 million budget. The program supports industry-wide research and promotional projects run by magazine associations such as Magazines Canada and the various provincial bodies(BCAMP etc.). The main effect of this news is to reduce the overall budget for the CMF from $16 million to $15.5 million annually starting in 2009-10.

[UPDATE: The Globe and Mail reports that the total of the cuts is $44.8 million, with nine of the affected programs under the Department of Canadian Heritage. It also reports the exasperated response of the Prime Minister's \ communications director, Kory Teneycke.

"To listen to some in the arts community and the opposition, you would think that there's blood in the streets," he said.]

How these cuts otherwise augur for the current review of the Publications Assistance Program (PAP)and the Canada Magazine Fund (CMF) is an open question. We already know that the secretariat is recommending the two programs be merged into a single periodical fund; we also know that it all depends on the budget process and -- by extension -- on the decision whether or not to have an election this fall.

As we've reported before, the merged entity cannot be put into place before 2010-11. But the budget envelope for periodical funding could be adjusted anytime until early spring, by whatever government is in power. So none of the other components of CMF can be considered safe, though a vigorous lobbying effort by Magazines Canada may have mitigated the damage, for now.

Less than two weeks left to comment on PAP and CMF proposals

A reminder that the deadline for submissions in the consultation process by the Department of Heritage on the redesign of the Publications Assistance Program (PAP) and the Canadian Magazine Fund (CMF) is fast approaching.Written comments will be accepted up to Friday April 25th, either by email at periodicals@canadianheritage.gc.ca, by fax at 819-994-3154, or by mail to:

Periodical Publishing Policy
15 Eddy Street, 15-4-F
Gatineau, PQ, K1A 0M5

You can read the department's proposals at its website and some questions that can be directly answered, though respondents needn't feel their comments are restricted to those. While publishers who are eligible for PAP and CMF now have an obvious interest, every publisher should probably be interested in influencing the ultimate outcomes of the review, which may be quite radical and sweeping.

See earlier post on this here.

Have your say about changes to federal magazine programs

It's April, already, and a deadline looms to have your say about proposals for re-designing the Publications Assistance Program (PAP) and the Canada Magazine Fund (CMF). The Department of Canadian Heritage has made specific proposals for reform and is seeking comment.

While various industry interest groups have participated in roundtables held across the country and will be making formal responses, individual publishers and others with a stake in magazines should not be slow to wade into the discussion. It is critical to the way magazines are going to be delivered and supported in the years to come.

You can read the proposals and the background information here. And you can comment on them at periodicals@canadianheritage.gc.ca.

You have until April 25.

Big funding changes require long transition, says Magazines Canada

Overhauling federal programs of support for the magazine industry is such a massive change, says Magazines Canada, that it is looking for a significant transition period, during which current programs need to be fully funded and functional. (How long? Certainly two or three years, at least through the 2009-10 government fiscal year.)

In a letter to the heritage minister, Magazines Canada President Mark Jamison said, in part:

The changes proposed in the consultation document are very substantial, including the elimination of the two primary programs serving the sector and their replacement with a single and very different program. If these changes move forward, they will impact the business plans and editorial decisions of periodical publishers across Canada. The development of a new program will be a complex task and will take time. We are also concerned with the length of time it will take to secure approvals in Ottawa, especially in light of a possible federal election prior to April 2009.

We urge you and your Cabinet colleagues to act immediately to ensure that the Publications Assistance Program and the Canada Magazines Fund continue and that they be fully funded at current levels through the 2009–2010 fiscal year or until the redesign process is complete and publishers have adequate time to analyze the new programs and plan for their implementation. In the case of the PAP, the funding level required through this transition period includes both the contribution amounts from Canadian Heritage and from Canada Post.

The announcement last week of the outcome of a comprehensive review was that Heritage is proposing to merge the Publications Assistance Program (PAP) and the Canada Magazine Fund (CMF) into one program called the Canada Periodical Fund.

Magazines Canada's strategy seems to include acknowledging the inevitability of changes, manage the transition and to obtain the best possible arrangement for Canadian magazines of all types. In a statement, Jamison said:

"The need for all parties to stay focused on the big picture is paramount. Based on our deliberations with members and other associations over many months, we will, in a few days be releasing top line perspectives on the DCH paper. The consensus at Magazines Canada is clear: we must work with the needs of all magazines at the table and, as stability and predictability are key goals, we must all recognize that a very carefully planned and executed transition to a new framework is just as important as the new policy framework itself."

Meanwhile, DCH has announced the dates for its "roundtable" discussions about its proposals:

Vancouver-February 11
Calgary-February 12
Winnipeg-February 14
Halifax-February 25
Montreal-February 27 and 28
Toronto-March 3 and 4

Radical funding overhaul by Canadian Heritage proposes merger of CMF and PAP

[This post has been updated.] The Department of Canadian Heritage is proposing a radical overhaul of its funding programs, combining the Canada Magazine Fund (CMF) and the Publications Assistance Program (PAP) into one, new program called the Canada Periodical Fund. It proposes that funding be used to encourage the development of digital and online intiatives of print publishers. [And it indicates that the $1 million program called Support for Arts and Literary Magazines (SALM) would be gone, a major hit for the hundreds of very small cultural magazines in this country.]

The department has launched a consultation process by posting a discussion paper, a PowerPoint presentation and various background documents on its website and asking for public and industry consultation and reaction by April 25. Individuals may respond and there will be roundtable discussions by invitation to stakeholder groups in the industry.

[UPDATE: Concern is already being expressed that the time allowed for consultation is extremely short in reviewing and commenting on such a sweeping change in policy, particularly one which, like the PAP postal subsidy, has been around for more than 100 years. While the proposals suggest that they are freeing magazines to be compensated for using alternative forms of delivery, for many smaller, independent magazines in this country this is not a reasonable or likely alternative. (Canadians have delivered to them more than 700 million copies of magazines every year through the mail.) The proposal, in effect, lets Canada Post off the hook from its long responsibility to allow Canadian publishers to reach Canadian readers in a cost-effective way.]

This review is not considering whether the Government should fund magazines and non-daily newspapers, [says the DCH document] but how they should be funded. Having considered the current environment and the history of the programs, Canadian Heritage has developed a proposal for discussion during these consultations: the development of a new, combined program tentatively called the Canada Periodical Fund.

All publications which now receive PAP or CMF funding -- that includes all consumer and trade magazines and community newspapers -- can expect to be affected by the proposed changes, says the ministry. No dollar figures are attached; the two programs together were worth $60 million to Canadian magazines in 2006-07 , although the PAP is set to lose $15 million effective March 31, 2009 when Canada Post withdraws the last of its financial support.

If the Canada Periodical Fund were to retain all of the current funding for CMF and PAP (less the departing Canada Post contribution), the merged program would have $60 million to spend, of which about $45 million (about 78%) could conceivably go to magazines. But there are no suggestions in the consultation documents of how much money the new fund may be getting. It could be less than it gets now; it is unlikely to get more.

Scott Shortliffe, the Director of Periodical Publishing and Programs bluntly told a Canadian Business Press meeting last June:

"Frankly, I think the idea of spending more is extraordinarily lofty. This government has been very consistent in saying it has new spending priorities and that more money will be allocated to the cultural industries. Even if someone came forward with a brilliant program that would cost $300 million, it's not going to happen."

Whatever the budget, the proposal is that 95% of the new Fund would go to periodical publishers (magazines and non-daily newspapers) and 5% to industry initiatives. Right now

• a fixed program budget would be allocated by formula to eligible publishers to reimburse magazine content and distribution expenses. Such a formula could be weighted by profitability, proportion of Canadian content, the ad:editorial ratio and whether the publication serves official and other language minorities, aboriginal or rural communities..

• The formula would be adjusted and refined annually.
  

• Publishers could apply and receive payment once a year for all their titles. In other words, application would be made by publisher rather than by title -- so Rogers Media and Transcontinental Media would make one application for support for their dozens of different consumer and trade magazines.The entire program budget would be allocated at one time.

• Eligible distribution expenses could be for either Canada Post or alternative delivery methods, a major change for the industry, which has already explored delivering magazines outside of the traditional and increasingly unaffordable mail system.

Somewhat ominously, the discussion document muses about "whether the relatively large share of program spending received by a relatively small number of large publishing companies is an appropriate and effective use of public funds". This can only be a reference to the postal subsidies and editorial content support being received by large companies like Transcontinental Media and Rogers Media Publishing and large circulation titles like Chatelaine and Maclean's or Canadian Living. DCH notes that 75% of the CMF goes to the 20 largest publishing companies.

It also questions whether the current funding regime is benefiting writers, photographers, illustrators and other creators. And whether federal government support for magazines should be focussed in areas that complement its Advantage Canada strategy to cut taxes and reduce the national debt.

The benchmarks for success of the program could be:

• Increased Canadian content in periodicals, measured by the number of pages of Canadian magazine content produced annually, the incomes of Canadian creators, and the diversity and number of Canadian magazines and non-daily newspapers;
• Greater access by Canadians to Canadian periodicals, measured by market share of Canadian magazines, circulation and access by in smaller communities;
• Greater stability and predictability in program delivery by establishing and adhering to service standards.

The discussion paper says that proposals, which are an outcome of a wide-ranging review over more than a year and a half, are intended to provide optimum value to Canadian readers and predictability and streamlined program delivery to publishers and DCH by merging two programs and delivering them by publishing company rather than by title. It also says that there will be greater flexibility in the type of distribution publishers may use now that Canada Post is withdrawing its last support from PAP effective March 31.

One of the most dramatic departures suggested by the discussion paper is that it contemplates directing money to support and encourage online and digital delivery of Canadian content.

The proposed approach offers opportunities to address changes in the way Canadians are consuming news and entertainment: through joint initiatives on industry-wide projects and by exploring the possibility of opening funding to new forms of publications or to online content produced by print publications.

DCH poses questions that people in the industry will undoubtedly want to answer, among which are (we're paraphrasing):

• Where should the government target its support?
• What types of publications should receive support and which should be excluded?
• Should the program support web-only magazines as well as digital ventures of online publishers?
• Should good environmental practices be rewarded within the program?
• Should appropriate compensation for writers and other contributors be a factor in the program?

There are probably a bunch of other questions to come, including the most compelling:

• Will there be more money, the same money spread differently or less money?

[Statement about consultation, from Magazines Canada.]

[More to come]