IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdh/ebrief/184.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Let the Market Decide: The Case Against Mandatory Pick-and-Pay

Author

Listed:
  • Lawson Hunter

    (Stikeman Elliott LLP)

  • Edward Iacobucci

    (University of Toronto)

  • Michael Trebilcock

    (University of Toronto)

Abstract

A proposal by the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) to mandate “pick-and-pay” television offerings for Canadians is deeply misguided, according to a report from the C.D. Howe Institute. In “Let the Market Decide: The Case Against Mandatory Pick-and-Pay,” authors Lawson Hunter, Edward Iacobucci and Michael Trebilcock find that mandating consumers to be able to subscribe to pay and specialty services on a service-by-service basis would be a slippery slope to still more regulation, and would become irrelevant at best in the ongoing telecom revolution.

Suggested Citation

  • Lawson Hunter & Edward Iacobucci & Michael Trebilcock, 2014. "Let the Market Decide: The Case Against Mandatory Pick-and-Pay," e-briefs 184, C.D. Howe Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:cdh:ebrief:184
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cdhowe.org/let-market-decide-case-against-mandatory-pick-and-pay
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lawson A.W. Hunter, Q.C. & Edward Iacobucci & Michael J. Trebilcock, 2010. "Scrambled Signals: Canadian Content Policies in a World of Technological Abundance," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 301, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. William B.P. Robson & Colin Busby, 2010. "Freeing up Food: The Ongoing Cost, and Potential Reform, of Supply Management," C.D. Howe Institute Backgrounder, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 128, April.
    2. Philippe Bergevin, 2010. "Addicted to Ratings: The Case for Reducing Governments’ Reliance on Credit Ratings," C.D. Howe Institute Backgrounder, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 130, May.
    3. Colin Busby & William B.P. Robson, 2010. "Target Practice Needed: Canada’s 2010 Fiscal Accountability Rankings," C.D. Howe Institute Backgrounder, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 129, May.
    4. Martin Cave & Adrian Foster, 2010. "Solving Spectrum Gridlock: Reforms to Liberalize Radio Spectrum Management in Canada in the Face of Growing Scarcity," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 303, May.
    5. Daniel Schwanen, 2019. "Choosing Canada: Canadian Cultural Policy in the Twenty-first Century," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 558, November.
    6. William B.P. Robson, 2010. "Cutting Through Pension Complexity: Easy Steps Forward for the 2010 Federal Budget," C.D. Howe Institute Backgrounder, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 126, February.
    7. Alexandre Laurin & William B.P. Robson & Colin Busby & Finn Poschmann, 2010. "Back to Balance: A Shadow Federal Budget for 2010," C.D. Howe Institute Backgrounder, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 127, February.
    8. Benjamin Dachis & Daniel Schwanen, 2016. "Changing the Channel on Canadian Communications Regulation," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 451, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Governance and Public INstitutions; Telecommunications; broadcasting;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L82 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Entertainment; Media
    • L96 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Telecommunications

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cdh:ebrief:184. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kristine Gray (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cdhowca.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.