Transnational over-the-top media distribution as a business and policy disruptor: The case of Netflix in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Digital disruption is often characterized as the conflict between the exponential rate of change in technology, and the slower-paced, incremental rate of change in law, economy, policy, and society writ-large (Franklin, 2012). The rapid encroachment of over-the-top (OTT) content distribution raises policy issues concerning jurisdiction, access, pricing, consolidation of ownership, and source diversity (Holt, 2014), while undermining many of the traditional policy instruments. In this paper, we analyze Netflix’s strategic expansion and meteoric growth in Canada, and focus on a landmark event in Canadian broadcasting policymaking: the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission’s (CRTC) “Let’s Talk TV” hearings of 2013-2014. Through an examination of public documents, we analyze the ways Netflix is considered an opportunity, ally, or a threat by consumers, broadcasters, independent producers, and governments. We show that in a reprioritization of values, many of the principles that motivated legacy broadcasting policy are being sidelined by a consumerist approach that gives freer rein to streamed services. However, Netflix’s refusal to provide the Commission with information it was ordered to produce suggests the most serious disruption is to the notion that online video distribution can or should be regulated in the public interest.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".