Children and youth programming and one-off docs are facing a number of systemic issues in Canada, according to the Canada Media Fund‘s (CMF) first-ever genre report.

Children and youth content accounts for an average of 11% of the CMF’s genre funding. Last summer, the CMF surveyed everyone in its funding database from 2014-15 to 2023-24, as well as contributed to an Ipsos survey to gauge Canadians’ views on children and youth content. The organization found 95% of Canadian producers and 100% of broadcasters consider access to Canadian-made children and youth content important. Further, 65% of the general public agrees.

The overall children and youth genre grew 26% from 2013-14 to 2022-23, while the CMF’s contribution decreased by 29%. By comparison, the documentary genre grew overall by 70% over the same decade, and the CMF’s contribution to the genre grew 21%.

A significant reason for this is the decline of BDU funding contributions, which in 2023-24 fell to 39.76%. The report suggests 20% of the envelope funding could be used for a new dedicated program for children and youth funding.

While Canadian children and youth funding is faltering, the CMF‘s report said documentary funding has remained largely stable, despite continued issues around funding for one-off documentaries as opposed to series. The children’s entertainment decline is largely attributed to children’s continued move away from linear broadcast audiences, instead moving to streaming and smartphones.

Children and youth funding

CEOs, producers, showrunners, executives and heads of development were among the 154 respondents to the children and youth survey, Most were from Toronto and Montreal at 40% and 17% respectively.

The report said the CMF may consider establishing a dedicated funding program for Canadian children and youth content, and that without such a measure the organization would be unlikely to meet its 22% children and youth genre target in 2024-25 by an estimated 10% difference.

“Our biggest financing gap comes from Canadian kids broadcasters,” says one respondent quoted in the report. “They genuinely seem like they have little to no desire to greenlight Canadian productions and, when they do, the licence fee is so low it becomes incredibly difficult to create a viable financing structure.”

The report also suggests incorporating alternative financing from distributors or pre-sales into the licence fee threshold. For 78% of respondents, the biggest advantage of financing with linear broadcasters is their ability to trigger other funding. However, another 65% said their largest issue with those broadcasters is their limited number.

“There’s only so much money to go around,” Corus Entertainment co-CEO Troy Reeb previously told Playback. “The reality is that the overall linear viewership of kids services has declined faster than any other segment … we have such a deep library and new isn’t as important to kids either.”

Regarding copyright, 62% of respondents reported that all their children and youth projects are fully owned by Canadians, although about 31% said those fully-owned projects were developed or produced without CMF support. The report suggests the CMF may be missing out on supporting one-third of Canadian children and youth projects that may have otherwise been eligible.

CMF funding eligibility 

Respondents were also asked if the CMF’s funding model was out of date compared to evolving models in other countries. For children and youth content, 62% agreed somewhat or strongly while 58% did so regarding documentary.

Respondents from both genres expressed strong interest in opening eligibility for ungated platforms such as YouTube and social media. One-third of participants noted the biggest advantage in monetizing through these platforms is their direct connection to large audiences, while one-quarter noted the free, easy access to global distribution without contracting by territory. However, 43% of producers noted challenges such as the need to self-fund production while 39% acknowledged the responsibility of finding their own audience for monetization.

The report suggests expanding triggers to include launches on ungated platforms to better help producers connect with audiences.

Documentary one-offs versus series

There were 326 respondents to the documentary survey, with 64% having been in the industry for over 11 years.

Nearly all (93%) of the producers surveyed view the documentary genre as essential for providing opportunities to new and first-time filmmakers. The majority were concentrated in Toronto (24%), Montreal (20%) and B.C. (19%).

Internal CMF data shows a continued drop in legacy broadcast audiences for English-language documentary and a relatively stable audience for French-language documentaries. At the same time, there was a post-pandemic rebound for one-off documentary audiences. In fact, demand for the CMF’s POV program consistently outweighed supply even during the pandemic, with a 2.2 oversubscription rate in 2023-24 compared to a 1.9 rate the previous fiscal year.

The CMF’s 2024-25 funding includes 6% for one-offs and 13% for series. As well, 65% of respondents reported working in both one-offs and series.

Survey results also confirmed cost increase over the last decade, with 35% of respondents citing below-the-line labour increases while 22% cited travel and accommodations.

“All costs are up, yet broadcast licences have stayed the same in over 10 years,” said one respondent.

Documentary respondents top three financing choices were Canadian linear broadcasters (91%); Canadian independent production funds (60%); and distributors, although the rest of Canada was about equally split between a Canadian (33%) and an international distributor (35%), while Quebec’s third choice was just a Canadian distributor (44%).

Neither global streamers nor ungated platforms made the top three.

At the same time, the survey asked which potential CMF trigger flexibilities would be most useful for financing one-off auteur point-of-view documentaries and why. Quebec and the rest of Canada highlighted global streamers (23% for the rest of Canada vs 15% Quebec), a Canadian distributor on their own (22% vs 31% Quebec) and lower licence fee thresholds (16% vs 13% Quebec).

Regarding the advantages and disadvantages of the CMF’s funding structure, requirements for a broadcast licence and 10/10 CAVCO points were seen as most disadvantageous at 62% and 41%, respectively. Results on the CMF guidelines and application process were relatively evenly split between advantage (32%), disadvantage (31%) and neutral (36%).

The CMF said it will continue to monitor the success of one-off documentaries. The full report is available on the CMF website.

With files from Kelly Townsend

Image: Unsplash