The tension between broadcasters and the cable and satellite providers has been bubbling in the digital age, and the CRTC’s recently unveiled new policies have turned up the heat even further. And those media companies that will come out strongest are likely those with a hand in both pies.

The broadcasters have plainly stated their belief that the regulator has given them the short end of the stick. Despite making gains on distant signals, they did not succeed in getting fee-for-carriage from the BDUs, along with the millions in revenue that would have brought. This failure was one of the points cited by Canwest Global president and CEO Leonard Asper upon the grim but not unexpected announcement of major layoffs at his company. CTVglobemedia head Ivan Fecan reiterated the point in a letter to employees that indicated the ax was hanging over CTVgm’s head as well.

If the casters believe the cable and satellite folks got off the hook on that one, they might not feel too optimistic about the commission’s stance to consider allowing the BDUs to sell ad time in the local avails of programs on the foreign pay and specialty services they offer. The CRTC also proposes that carriers who offer video-on-demand services be allowed to sell ads around VOD shows they acquire. If the programming is obtained from a Canadian broadcaster, the distributor would have to split the revenues with them.

The understanding is that the CRTC is ready to proceed on these initiatives – it is just a matter of ironing out the details.

In the case of the local avails, what this means is that cable and satellite providers will be competing with broadcasters for ad dollars, just at a time of great economic uncertainty, when overall ad spend stands to take a massive hit. The pain might not be felt now, but is expected to by next year.

Although there would be a revenue-sharing agreement between BDUs and casters regarding the VOD ads, going forward, distributors could buy programming directly from producers or foreign broadcasters and then pocket all the proceeds. Which model do you think would appeal more to the BDUs? This arrangement would see cable and satellite companies competing with the broadcasters as programmers in their own right.

In the multi-platform world, it is becoming increasingly challenging for broadcasters to assert their ownership of programs. As one TV viewer recently told me, she no longer feels any particular sense of brand identity among the conventional channels.

Audiences today are driven primarily by individual shows, not particular channels. They can watch their favorite programs on TV, but they can just as easily download them online – legally or otherwise – pick up a season’s worth of DVDs, or order them through VOD. These are attractive options to the consumer, and scary ones for the broadcasters if they don’t have a piece of them.

More than ever, the Canadian casters who rely on U.S. hits must solidify their relationships and output deals with the American studios to ensure they’ve got the buzz shows, and not risk being superseded by these other emerging distribution outlets.

Astral Media and Corus Entertainment understood this when they dealt for the new HBO Canada channel. Although Astral’s The Movie Network and Corus’ Movie Central already offer a slew of HBO programs, HBO is likely the one American cable channel specializing in drama that does have a brand identity that resonates with viewers, and now Astral and Corus are looking to draw more subscribers from that association.

Let’s not make it sound like the broadcasters are helpless in the ever-evolving digital universe, and that everything is tipping in favor of the BDUs.

The Internet is a curse to the broadcasters in that it takes attention away from the TV screen, but it can also be a blessing. Deals for online rights of U.S. shows were slow in coming to the likes of CTVgm and Canwest, but much progress has been made. To today’s younger demographic, downloading or streaming shows is where it’s at. And with promises of online HD picture quality and the ability to move the Internet signal to the living room TV set, will tomorrow’s consumer be willing to continue to pay big subscription fees to the BDUs? Not if the broadcasters can keep offering top-drawer material from their U.S. partners on their websites.

It’s hard to say which side is better positioned going forward, but some aren’t taking any chances. Cable provider Rogers Communications has upped its interest in broadcast with the purchase of the Citytvs, while the Shaw cable clan recently bought additional shares of Corus. Meanwhile, Bell has an ownership stake in CTVgm, although that has shrunk to only 15%.

It’s hard to say who will be the ultimate winners here, but at least we know those that have their bases covered won’t be the losers.