Saturday, December 18, 2010

What is gong on? Update-2

Update from Kiruthikan. please read our first update here.

On December 17, 2010 at 13:33 EST I got an email from CRTC. I was actually CC'd in a mail to Ms. Suzanne Papineau, of the client services division of CRTC. It was a letter from Mr. John van Driel, who is the Vice President of Programming and Operations of MZ Media Inc, which owns CFMZ, CFMX and CFZM. Canadian Thamil Broadcasting Corporation CTBC sub-leases a SCMO (Subsidiary Communication Multiplex Operations) sub-carrier of CFMZ-FM. I've uploaded the letter through screen shots, as neither me nor my computer have the technical competencies to make a PDF File compatible to a Blog.

Letter from MZ Media Inc to CRTC




Translation of the advertisement provided by CTBC to MZ Media Inc


So, CTBC's response has come out in expected lines. whoever produced the advertisement, choose their words cleverly. the sad part of this issue is, people in MZ Media Inc. did not see or did not have the desire to the implied message in the advertisement. I decided to reply the above communication and wrote a letter to Ms. Papineau and CC'd MZ Media Inc.'s President and CEO George Grant, V.P. of Programming and Operations Mr. John van Driel and their lawyer Mr. Mark Lewis. I don't know how professional the letter is, but thought I should not take a step back in this issue.


December 18, 2010
Ms. Suzanne Papineau
Client Services
Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
Ottawa, ON, K1A 0N2

Re: Case Id: 509280

Dear Ms. Papineau,
I received the copy of the letter from Mr. John van Driel (V.P Programming and Operations, MZ Media Inc) and the copy of the document containing the English translation of the advertisement broadcast by CTBC. I acknowledge all the steps taken by CRTC in this case which reinstates my faith in the role of regulatory bodies in the Canadian system. I also want to acknowledge and thank Mr. van Driel for his response and time spent. Though, this is not a case of black and white, we got to investigate the grey shades in between to come up with the final decision.
Following were the main points about the advertisement in Mr. van Driel’s response:
1.       There is nothing in the translation that appears to attack Mr. Smitherman and refer to his sexual orientation.
2.       No mention of Mr. Smitherman’s candidacy is made in the advertisement.
3.       The advertisement was apparently broadcast in support of Mayoral candidate Mr. Rob Ford
Now let us outline the main facts from the advertisement itself:
1.       I am a Tamil. I have a religion and a culture on our own.  Take Rob Ford, his wife is a woman beside he said he will reduce the Land transfer taxes and other taxes.
2.       That (Immigration) is a federal government issue, may be he said this to solicit white people’s votes
Dear Ms. Papineau this is where the questions about the intention of the advertisement arise. This is where as a member of a regulatory board; you must look beyond the direct interpretation of the carefully chosen words used in the advertisement. This is where, Mr. van Driel , as a media person should apply his social responsibility ahead of his corporate responsibility.
As Mr. van Driel outlined there was no direct reference to Mr. Smitherman and his sexual orientation. But, look at the facts of the advertisement.” I am a Tamil; I have a religion and culture of our own” says the person in the advertisement; acknowledged. “He said he will reduce the Land transfer taxes and other taxes” continues the man; accepted with glee. “Immigration is a federal government issue may be he said this to solicit white people’s votes”; makes sense, although it sounds weird for an immigrant society to support a politician with anti-immigration policies. But, Dear Ms. Papineau and Dear Mr. van Driel, I just can’t logically connect all these facts to this statement, “take Rob Ford, his wife is a woman”. What logical sense makes us to connect the fact that Mr. Rob Fords wife being a woman to the candidacy of Mr. Ford? Isn’t it another way of saying “take George Smitherman, his spouse is a male”? Don’t we see the clear and clever manipulation of language in here Ms. Papineau and Mr. van Driel?
Culture is a noise while we transmit messages between cultures. That plays a huge role in the interpretation of this advertisement in question. The tone in which the person who lets out those words in red tells a Tamil speaking person thousand stories. The message is interpreted in the true spirit of the advertisement.  It’s where members of marginalized group have a tough time in getting justice. Dear Ms. Papineau, please do not interpret the message contained in this advertisement by just using the direct meanings of the words given to you in the translation document. Please use your own judgment and some research about the “Religion and Culture” mentioned in the advertisement.
Dear Ms. Papineau, this complaint is not about demanding an action against CTBC. This is about making them acknowledge and apologize. What I want as a general person you may cross on a subway or a mall is an apology from CTBC for the tactics the used in that advertisement or an acknowledgement that they are a conservative media with far right ideologies. If the advertisement was indeed paid for by a third party, identify that third party. Or the least I could ask them is to come up with a logical connection between Mr. Ford’s candidacy and the fact that he is married to a woman. The end result I as a person want is increased responsibility of public media towards the marginalized.

Thank you.
Regards
Kumarasamy Kiruthikan.

CC’d:     George Grant, President & CEO MZ Media Inc,
                John van Driel, V.P. Programming and Operations, MZ Media Inc
                Mark Lewis, Lewis Birnberg Hanet, LLP

I attached this to an email and sent it to Ms. Papineau on December 18, 2010 at 11.06. As was the case, I'm waiting for a reply. 

I have a small request for people who read this update, "Please Join Hands"

Saturday, December 11, 2010

What is gong on?

An update from Kiruthikan: 
On Friday, November the 19th 2010, we, Friends Against Homophobia called for an open discussion against homophobia. We thought that the prevalence of Gay/Lesbian and Trans-gender bashing and normalizing of such discourses demanded a greater effort to record the voice of Tamil queers in the community. We were pleasantly surprised to see almost 40 people at Scarborough Civic Center. We discussed many issues including
  • The role of the public medias in promoting a homogeneous, homophobic Tamil identity
  • The lack of 'terminology' in Tamil to address plural identities
  • The myth of a steadfast culture and its impact in the process of marginalization
  • Canadian Tamil Broadcasting Corporation's hate advertisement on Mayoral Candidate George Smitherman's sexual preference and their irresponsible behavior towards people questioning the advertisement. 
Main issue that raised during that meeting centered around the follow-up actions of Friends Against Homophobia, against Canadian Tamil Broadcasting Corporation. Although the idea to call for such a meeting stemmed from a proposed demonstration, after discussions with some well-wishers and some rational thinking, we had ruled out the possibility of that even before we put forward our invitation for the meeting to the general public. But during the meeting things went a little out of agenda, and a demonstration was proposed for  28th of December, 2010. But signals from the participants started to get less positive. So, we, Friends Against Homophobia decided to call for a quick get together to review the decision on the demonstration. Responses received were next to nothing, so we had to drop the idea of organizing a demonstration of some scale against CTBC.

The other proposal we put forward was to file a complaint with Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunication Commission against CTBC. Suthan, who proposed this idea, collected all necessary information needed to go ahead with the process. He did send the following e-mail on behalf of Friends Against Homophobia containing all details, on Friday November 2010 at 22:59 EST. The main contained the following in its body:

I am just sharing these information to make  the complaining procedure little easier.  Anyone interested in filing a complain can do this.

Here is the process:

Filing a broadcasting complaint with the CRTC


To make a complaint to the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission

Step 1: 
Go to: http://www.crtc.gc.ca/RapidsCCM/Register.asp?lang=E  

Step 2:
On the ride side column, there is a tab to make a complaint. Click on "I would like to make a complaint" and this will take you though a few steps. You will be asked if you are ok with your name being accessible to the public. Once you click yes, the site will then proceed to ask how you would like to make the complaint etc.  


Other info from the website:

Write your complaint

All broadcasting complaints must be made in writing. If you make a complaint by phone, you also need to send a written version. 


Include this information in your complaint:
  • your name, and an email or postal address
  • a description of the problem and/or your concerns
  • the radio or TV station’s name or call sign, and location
  • the date, time and name of the program or ad that prompted you to write
  • the name and location of your service provider (i.e., cable company, satellite provider, or wireless distribution service), where applicable

Include your name

Include your name with your complaint. The CRTC doesn't follow up on anonymous complaints. 


Broadcasters and service providers have the right to know who makes a complaint, and what the complaint is. They also have the right to respond. You can file a complaint with the CRTC, without fear of retaliation from any company.

File within 4 weeks of the broadcast

File your complaint within 4 weeks following the broadcast. 


Why? Because broadcasters keep tapes of their broadcasts for 4 weeks. If they receive your complaint more than 4 weeks after the program or ad has aired, the tapes may no longer be available, and the CRTC may not be able to follow up. 

Note about broadcast tapes: The CRTC can request tapes for its own use, but can't ask for tapes or transcripts for you. If you want tapes or transcripts of a program, some broadcasters will sell them, but they don't have to provide tapes or transcripts to the public.

How the CRTC handles complaints

Responding to you

CRTC Client Services receives and reviews your complaint, and responds to you directly or forwards your complaint.


Depending on the volume of complaints and enquiries, you should receive a response from the CRTC within 10 working days after the complaint is received, even if it's just to let you know that your complaint has been forwarded.

Forwarding your complaint

Your complaint may be forwarded to one of the following: 

  • http://www.cbsc.ca" target="_blank">CBSC. If your complaint involves a member of the CBSC, the CRTC forwards it to the CBSC right away, and lets you know it has been forwarded.
  • The company involved, to resolve the issue with you. Sometimes no follow up by the CRTC is necessary.
  • The company involved, asking it to respond to you (with a copy to the CRTC) within 3 weeks. CRTC staff review your concerns and the response to decide whether any regulatory action is needed. If not, the CRTC may not contact you again.

Following up

If the company doesn't respond within 3 weeks, the CRTC sends a written reminder. If there's still no answer, the CRTC raises all unanswered complaints with the company when it applies to renew its licence.

If your complaint alleges that the company violated the Broadcasting Act or CRTC policies or regulations, CRTC staff will decide if any further process or regulatory action is required.

Privacy

If your complaint involves a member of the CBSC, the CRTC forwards it right away.


The CRTC notifies you that it is forwarding your complaint, with your name and address, to the company involved. If you have concerns about your privacy, contact the CRTC within 3 weeks of receiving the notification. 

If you contact the CRTC to remove your name and address from the file, the complaint will be withdrawn. If you don't contact the CRTC, the complaint will be pursued.

Under Canada's Privacy Act, you can ask that your correspondence not be made publicly accessible. But if you do, the CRTC may not be able to follow up on your complaint. 

Once the file is closed, your name, your complaint, and the response to your complaint are kept in a file that can be read by the public. This information is used to assess the performance of the broadcaster at the time of licence renewal.

Follow up if you are dissatisfied

If you’re not satisfied with the response to a complaint handled by the CRTC or by the CBSC, you can ask, in writing, that the CRTC review the complete file and issue a decision.

Also, a broadcaster's performance is reviewed when it applies to renew its licence, and you can submit comments or intervene at that time.Find out how to participate in a CRTC public process.




The other link we looked at the other night was for the Ontario Human Rights Commission 

they will not take individual complaints but there are several resources: http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en

One of the resources from the Human Rights Commission:

To discuss your rights or if you need legal help please contact the Human Rights Legal Support Centre at:
Toll Free: 1-866-625-5179
TTY Toll Free: 1-866-612-8627
Website: www.hrlsc.on.ca
To Make A Complain About the Ad 

2. Click the icon on your right side saying "Submit a Complain About advertising to..."
3. Follow the instructions and Proceed with the complain.
I followed the link Suthan suggested and was directed step by step. It was a simple hassle free 2 minutes process.


Once I selected "I'd like to send a Complaint" and clicked "Next" Button, the following page opened. 







After the last selection, I got a confirmation number. At 7:39 Eastern Time I got an email from CRTC, confirming my complaint which read:

Reference number:  507457

Thank you for contacting the CRTC. This is an automatic confirmation that we have received your message. If a further response is required, we should contact you within 10 working days. We apologize in advance for any delay that may be caused by the high volume of correspondence received in the Commission.

If your request is urgent, for example, if it involves the disconnection of your telephone service, please contact Client Services toll-free at 1-877-249-2782 and provide the above-mentioned Reference Number. If you use a TDD, you can reach us toll-free at 1-877-909-2782.

To reply or to add to your submission click here http://www.crtc.gc.ca/rapidsccm/landing.asp?lang=E&caseid=507457&key=40891.0242018519

This is the information included in your message.

Industry of interest/concern: Radio
Type of message: Complaint
Your Message:  Canadian Tamil Broadcasting Corporation broadcasted an advertisement that attacked sexual preference of gays, in particular Mayoral Candidate Mr. George Smitherman. This piece of advertisement was aired on October 24th around 10:00 a.m.

Even the details of my complaint was summarized in this e-mail, including my Typo. After this message for almost 1 week there was no response, and I was losing faith in CRTC. But on November 26th 2010 at 10:48 EST I received the following mail from CRTC:

Dear Mr. Kiruthikan:

Thanks for contacting the CRTC with your concerns.

It's the broadcasters themselves - not the CRTC - who are responsible for the programming they provide. This is spelled out in the Broadcasting Act. Our job is to make sure broadcasters have acted responsibly - and to hold them accountable for their programming when it's called for.

In order to follow this matter, I am asking CJRT-FM, by copy of this message, to respond directly to you within three weeks and to send us a copy of its reply for review by Commission staff. I am also asking that it hold a tape of the broadcast in question until your case is resolved. You will hear from us again if any regulatory action is required.

Your complaint and all related correspondence will be placed on CJRT-FM 's public file at the end of three weeks. The Commission may review it at licence renewal time and interested parties may consult the file at any time. In accordance with your rights under the Privacy Act, you may refuse to have your correspondence placed on such a file. If that is the case, please contact us within three weeks of the date of this response by clicking on the link provided below, by mail, fax or telephone, quoting the reference number. Please note that the Commission may not be able to pursue your complaint if all correspondence cannot be made public.

I am also providing you with a link to the fact sheet which explains the CRTC complaints process : http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/INFO_SHT/G8.htm


IMPORTANT NOTE: Please do not reply to this message using the email address indicated above as we cannot receive e-mail at this address. To reply or to add to your submission, please click here and follow the prompts: http://www.crtc.gc.ca/rapidsccm/landing.asp?lang=E&caseid=507457&key=40891.0242018519

Regards,

Suzanne Papineau
Client Services

1-877-249-2782 / télécopieur/facsimile (819) 994-0218
Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des télécommunications canadiennes / Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N2
Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission / Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N2
Gouvernement du Canada / Government of Canada


c.c.: JAZZ.FM91 Inc.

NOTE TO LICENSEE - COPIES OF ELECTRONIC REPLIES/REPORTS TO COMPLAINTS SHOULD BE SENT TO THE FOLLOWING CRTC ADDRESS: REPLIES@CRTC.GC.CA - PLEASE QUOTE OUR REFERENCE NUMBER ON YOUR ELECTRONIC RESPONSE.

On that same day at 16:20 EST I got a call on my cell phone from 416-595-0404. A gentleman by the name of Donnie Tang from Jazz FM was on the phone. CRTC erroneously forwarded my complaint to them. Yes, Two Tamil Radio Stations operate under Jazz FM. They are Geethavani and Tamil Star. I clarified to Mr. Tang that the complaint was directed at neither at Geethavani nor Tamil Star. Mr. Tang thanked me and said he will follow up with CRTC, which he did. CRTC did forward a copy of his communication to me on November 29th at 15:39 EST. Though I have that piece of communication on file, I can't share that in public, as Mr. Tang's email strictly indicates that confidentiality is of high priority. Then on 8th December 2010 at 11:59 EST I got another communication from CRTC, which was very similar to the one I received on November 26th, except they found the right Radio station, CFMX FM, under which CTBC operates. 

Dear Mr. Kiruthikan:

Thanks for contacting the CRTC with your concerns.

It's the broadcasters themselves - not the CRTC - who are responsible for the programming they provide. This is spelled out in the Broadcasting Act. Our job is to make sure broadcasters have acted responsibly - and to hold them accountable for their programming when it's called for.

In order to follow this matter, I am asking CFMX-FM, by copy of this message, to respond directly to you within three weeks and to send us a copy of its reply for review by Commission staff. I am also asking that it hold a tape of the broadcast in question until your case is resolved. You will hear from us again if any regulatory action is required.

Your complaint and all related correspondence will be placed on CFMX-FM's public file at the end of three weeks. The Commission may review it at licence renewal time and interested parties may consult the file at any time. In accordance with your rights under the Privacy Act, you may refuse to have your correspondence placed on such a file. If that is the case, please contact us within three weeks of the date of this response by clicking on the link provided below, by mail, fax or telephone, quoting the reference number. Please note that the Commission may not be able to pursue your complaint if all correspondence cannot be made public.

I am also providing you with a link to the fact sheet which explains the CRTC complaints process : http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/INFO_SHT/G8.htm


IMPORTANT NOTE: Please do not reply to this message using the email address indicated above as we cannot receive e-mail at this address. To reply or to add to your submission, please click here and follow the prompts: http://www.crtc.gc.ca/rapidsccm/landing.asp?lang=E&caseid=509280&key=40910.4034655478

Regards,

Suzanne Papineau
Client Services

1-877-249-2782 / télécopieur/facsimile (819) 994-0218
Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des télécommunications canadiennes / Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N2
Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission / Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N2
Gouvernement du Canada / Government of Canada

After the above communication, there was no more mails or calls from any of the parties concerned. 

Why share?
The reason for me sharing this in public is to prove that the decision taken by Friends Against Homophobia to pursue legal means is well vindicated. With bit more commitment and support, we could have achieved a lot more in this case. May this be a lead for future.









Monday, November 15, 2010


OPEN DISCUSSION
AGAINST HOMOPHOBIA


The prevalence of Gay/Lesbian/Trans-gender bashing, and normalizing such discourses demands a greater effort to record the voices of Tamil queers in the community.

We invite friends to discuss,
-the role of the public medias in promoting a homogeneous, homophobic Tamil identity
- the lack of 'terminology' in Tamil to address plural
- the myth of a steadfast culture and its impact in the process of marginalization

Where: Scarborough Civic Centre
           
150 Borough Road
           (McCowan & Ellesmere)

When:
Friday, November 19, 2010
           At
6.00 PM



Friends Against Homophobia
416 725 4862 / 647 829 9230/ 416 841 6810/ 647 216 6496
email: friendsagainsthomophobia@gmail.com