Digital Radio Policy in Canada: Fragmentation or Evolution of the Medium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In December 2006, the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) issued its review of Digital Radio Policy. This replaced the transitional digital radio policy of 1995, and sought to implement a framework designed to support multi-platform digital radio broadcasting in an increasingly complex technological environment for the medium. Drawing on policy analysis, interviews and expert group perspectives, this paper traces the background to the legislative provision for digital radio development in Canada. While Canada was an early adopter of the Eureka-147 or Digital Audio Broadcasting (DAB), the policy of DAB as a replacement technology approach proved to be mistaken. Subsequent extensive regulatory intervention to protect Canadian interests similarly proved ineffective against the dominant influence of US interests on Canadian broadcasting, evidenced most recently by the entry of satellite- delivered subscription radio services of XM Radio and Sirius. It is argued that the approach adopted in Canada’s new digital radio policy needs to be set against the background in which the future of radio is now much less obvious and clear than it was ten years ago. Instead of a relatively straightforward transition from analog to digital audio broadcasting (DAB), there is now a wide selection of both competing alternative and complementary technological options for digital audio delivery. As such, radio can be seen to be either facing the danger of fragmentation or in fact surviving by infiltrating into new platforms and becoming more polymorphic. The paper offers a critical appraisal of whether, given previous experience and lessons learned, Canada’s regulatory approach is the appropriate one and potentially a model for other sectors and other markets.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".