RETURNING LETTER TO THE PRESIDENT OF ROGERS COMMUNICATIONS.

C F I C G R O U P D U N C A N B C C A N A D A.
To; Office of the President Rogers Communication.
Duncan February 18/2019.
To whom it may concern,
We thank you for the letter we received from Rogers, dated February 1/ 2019. However, first, we want to make a statement. Most companies in the world are following the business model of honesty, integrity, and respect, regarding the legal rights of sellers who want to sell the products they want, and for buyers to buy the products they want. But businesses like yours are having different rules, they handle with dominance, oppression, misinformation, and violation of the Law.
Regarding your letter, we have the following to say. Yes, we own the TV set. However, Rogers doesn’t own the signal. Rogers is using the signal to transport programs to customers. There are many broadcasters who are using that signal, as well as service providers. We, the owners of TV sets, are just ordinary buyers of a chosen program. We have nothing to do with regulations, these regulations are affecting only the businesses who are selling the programs. We as customers have the legal right to buy what we want. Nobody has the right to force people to buy only what the seller wishes to sell. Broadcasters are selling programs to us and selling advertising time to advertisers, not to us. Customers are being forced to watch advertising. Advertisers buy airtime from broadcasters. Advertisers then own that bought airtime. Then broadcasters get orders from those advertisers to put that advertising material on OUR screens. In fact, advertisers give broadcasters the order to digitally trespass into our house and make OUR TV set unusable for the purpose we bought it for. Broadcasters are guilty of trespassing and intentionally making our devices unusable for our own viewing pleasure because they occupy our viewing time with their commercial advertising to increase their own profits. Knowing that over 250 companies are buying airtime from broadcasters like Rogers, they must own a huge amount of that airtime. Wondering how they have obtained that huge amount of airtime and how it ends up on our screens. What we know for sure, we, the customers, have not sold any airtime to anyone. We also know that every hour of airtime we have purchased from a service provider is being inundated with commercial messages. Only advertisers have a financial interest in converting programming into commercial messages, but we, customers don’t have any monetary dealings with advertisers. We know the CRTC and broadcasters are allowing the theft of our viewing/airtime by putting that converted content on our screens.We didn’t buy it, we don’t want it. We, the customers/TV unit owners are expecting programming. We do not accept commercial content which only benefits the seller of that commercial content or the buyer of that content. Which television viewer in their right mind would pay for airtime on which limits reasonable viewing time to benefit corporations (broadcasters and advertisers) without compensation to said television viewer/owner? We are not employed by broadcasters nor advertisers, yet clearly we television viewers/owners are being exploited. There is no justice to be found why broadcasters or advertisers allow themselves to be placed in a favored position. You wrote; TV and radio broadcasters are permitted to sell airtime to advertisers to earn revenue. Does that mean we have to accept being inundated with commercial advertising every five to ten minutes? Must we buy so-called programming and added content? Does the Law say we are required to buy it? We want Rogers to proof with the article of Law that we have to accept commercial advertising on our screens. The real advertising time sold by Rogers to advertisers is ending up on our screens. Rogers is selling it a second time as programming to customers, who are actually executing the sale of that airtime. That’s a double dip! No wonder it is a billion dollar industry based in our view on theft. We, the TV viewers/customers are the executors, while Rogers and others are receiving the monetary profits. This is clearly a misuse of corporate power, and a violation of the Antitrust Law. Furthermore, you wrote, Rogers is not providing Cable TV in BC. Yet Rogers is advertising on our screens, taking away valuable watching time and refuse to compensate us as TV unit owners. Rogers is depriving us of watching what we want to watch and is violating our rights. Rogers is selling airtime to the likes of Ford, Nissan, and major banking institutions, but also buying airtime to put their message on our screens. In their correspondence letter, Rogers suggest reading the CRTC primer to understand how advertising works in Canada. But that is not relevant to us because we know exactly how it works. We are the victims of the entire scheme. Is not the television viewers viewing time being exploited? This is a clear indication there is something wrong. The reason is clear, it is content nobody wants to buy, but it is forced upon the TV viewing public. After so many years of wrongdoing, it’s time for real change. It will come. We are waiting, but not very long to receive from Rogers the proof, that we, as owners/ TV viewers have the legal obligations to accept their commercial messages on our screens as a requirement to obtain TV programming.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s