Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 31 - 45 of 56
Drew Olsen
View Drew Olsen Profile
Drew Olsen
2021-04-19 12:59
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. Shields.
Yes, that would be my interpretation. It would be up to the CRTC to determine what is “clearly” promoting and recommending.
Thomas Owen Ripley
View Thomas Owen Ripley Profile
Thomas Owen Ripley
2021-04-16 13:11
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I will likely call on my colleague, Mr. Olsen, as well.
Just to give the context, the government included the definition of “control” in Bill C-10 as it currently exists to provide some context in the case of how it should be interpreted in certain provisions so that the definition of “affiliate”.... It's relevant when thinking about the relationship with social media companies, which we'll have an opportunity to talk about later, I'm sure. It's important in that context to have an understanding of what it means when an affiliate is under the control of another corporation.
Then, in the context of proposed subparagraph 9.1(1)(i)(i), I think perhaps Mr. Olsen can indicate why we felt it was important to have a definition of “control” in that context.
Drew Olsen
View Drew Olsen Profile
Drew Olsen
2021-04-16 13:13
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The reason we added “control” in paragraph 9.1(i) was just to make sure it was clear that the ownership and control transactions would be not just the control of the legal shares, but also any potential control in fact of the company by somebody else.
When the CRTC processes ownership transactions it typically looks at this. We just wanted to make it clear that “control” in this context includes the “control in fact” situation, as opposed to just legal control of the number of shares and voting shares, for instance.
Kathy Tsui
View Kathy Tsui Profile
Kathy Tsui
2021-04-16 14:54
Thank you for the question.
I would point out that wording very similar to what has been struck from subparagraph3(1)(d)(ii) has been transported to new proposed subparagraph 3(1)(i)(ii.1).
The main reason for that is that the notion of offering information and analysis concerning Canada and other countries from a Canadian point of view speaks more about the programming that is offered in the Canadian broadcasting system, so as paragraph 3(1)(i) talked more about programming offered rather than the Canadian broadcasting system writ large, it seemed to be a better place to place that notion.
Patrick Smith
View Patrick Smith Profile
Patrick Smith
2021-04-16 14:59
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The intention with respect to the existing paragraph 3(1)(d)(ii) was not to remove anything relating to information analysis. It was actually to create a more robust provision in what is now proposed subparagraph 3(1)(d)(ii.1), which relates to news and current events ranging from the local and regional to the international, reflecting “the viewpoints of Canadians, including the viewpoints of Indigenous persons and Canadians from racialized communities and diverse ethnocultural backgrounds”.
Our intention there was to not make it a tail end of the existing clause, but rather to build it up into something that could stand on its own as a news, current events and analysis provision.
View Mélanie Joly Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
It's a pleasure to be here, and I'm glad to see you are healthy.
Thank you, honourable members. I'm pleased to have this opportunity, so thank you for inviting me. I hope you are all healthy as well. I'm joining you from Montreal.
As you know, on February 19, I presented a public reform document for the modernization of the Official Languages Act, entitled “English and French: Towards a Substantive Equality of Official Languages in Canada”. A lot has changed in a year, and when confronted with change, we can either stand in its way or be open to the opportunities. The Canada we know was shaped by people who seized opportunity in a changing world. Canada takes pride in being a diverse country, a bilingual country.
Having two official languages is one of our greatest strengths. The French language is alive and well in North America because Canadians—specifically, Quebeckers, Acadians and French speakers all over the country—made a commitment to protect it throughout our history. More than 50 years ago, we chose a modern vision of our country, a country where our two official languages would play a prominent role. The Official Languages Act gave millions of francophones from coast to coast to coast the right to access federal services in their language. English-speaking Quebeckers also have that right, and young people in official language minority communities have the right to attend school in their mother tongue.
In Canada, language is more than an abstract notion. It is our connection to the past and the vehicle for telling our stories. That is true not just of English and French, but also of indigenous languages, which our language policies must take into account.
Our world is changing. Globalization has imposed certain languages to facilitate trade. At the same time, international trade and digital technologies are promoting the use of English. In the face of these changes, our two official languages are not on equal footing. There are eight million francophones in Canada, within North America, a region of over 360 million inhabitants who are almost exclusively anglophone. It is our responsibility to protect French and to offer a modernized vision of our linguistic duality. We must take action so that all Canadians can identify with the objectives of the Official Languages Act. Our two official languages must stand on more equal footing. The government has a responsibility to ensure that everyone in the country has an opportunity to learn French, speak French and live in French, as is the case for English.
For a language to be living, it must have a strong culture. Francophones must be able to make their voices heard, especially in the digital world, where English is dominant. To that end, federal cultural institutions must promote French content.
The government also recognizes that, in order to protect and promote French, the private sector must be mobilized. People should have the right to be served and to work in French in businesses under federal jurisdiction in Quebec and in regions of the country with a strong francophone presence. A committee of experts has already been created to examine how best to formally recognize these rights and provide recourse under federal legislation, in consultation with the affected sectors.
Nevertheless, when it comes to respecting bilingualism in the workplace and an individual's right to work in the official language of their choice, the federal public service must lead by example. The government will put forward concrete measures to ensure greater compliance with language obligations.
The English-speaking community in Quebec must be able to protect its rights and also to have access to key institutions that are clearly vital to the future of the community. We will stand by their side.
We will also be strengthening the powers of the Commissioner of Official Languages and continuing to promote the use of French abroad, particularly in international organizations. The Government of Canada will make it its duty to attract and facilitate francophone immigration outside Quebec.
Moreover, all of our institutions must be bilingual, including the country's highest court. The Official Languages Act [Technical difficulty—Editor], at the Supreme Court, judges must be bilingual. In our efforts to modernize the act, we will promote bilingualism by eliminating waiting lists for French immersion programs. We will also continue to support communities and all those looking to assert their constitutional language rights.
Our government's vision is rooted in the studies conducted by this committee, so I thank you. I also want to thank you for examining the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the government's ability to deliver information in both official languages. I know you met with my colleague Mr. Duclos, the President of the Treasury Board, and Health Canada officials on the subject, so I, too, would be happy to answer any questions you may have in that connection.
Lastly, I want to thank the department official who is with me today, Denis Racine. He can answer more specific questions related to the official languages branch at Canadian Heritage.
Thank you, all.
It's going to be a pleasure to answer your questions.
Jean-Stéphen Piché
View Jean-Stéphen Piché Profile
Jean-Stéphen Piché
2021-03-08 11:03
Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee members. It's a pleasure to be in committee once again.
I want to take this opportunity to wish you all a happy International Women's Day.
We're talking to you from the national capital region's ancestral territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe peoples.
As you said, Mr. Chair, I am accompanied by Thomas Owen Ripley and Kathy Tsui. They are both experts in the area of broadcasting and have made major contributions to the development of bills and digital projects.
Mr. Chair and members of the Committee, thank you for inviting us here today to help you with your study of Bill C-10. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the committee for the work it has been doing on the bill and for having undertaken to commence its work so expeditiously.
Bill C-10 makes important amendments to the Broadcasting Act that will benefit artists, broadcasters, and Canadians.
It is expected to result in more opportunities for Canadian producers, directors, writers, actors, and musicians to create high quality music and audiovisual content and to reach Canadian audiences.
It will establish a fair and flexible regulatory framework where comparable broadcasting services are subject to similar regulatory requirements.
It will make Canadian music and stories more available through a variety of services, and it will create a more diverse and inclusive broadcasting system that is reflective of Canadian society.
This bill renews the Broadcasting Act for the digital age. The changes that it makes are well overdue. It is one of four initiatives currently under way at Canadian Heritage that will modernize our federal communications legislative framework for the online world.
We're also developing a proposal to address online harms such as hate speech, violent and extremist content, terrorist propaganda, child sexual exploitation and non-consensual distribution of sexually explicit images.
We're working with Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada to amend the Copyright Act.
Then there is the matter of ensuring that Canadian news services are fairly compensated for the use of their material by online services. This work, too, is currently ongoing at Canadian Heritage.
Together, these initiatives will establish rules that will make the online world a more equitable, inclusive and safe place while also ensuring that it remains a fertile ground for innovation and freedom of expression.
Bill C-10, which is focused on broadcasting, is the first piece of this puzzle.
I will now turn things over to Owen Ripley, who will outline the need for Bill C-10 and its primary objectives.
Owen.
Thomas Owen Ripley
View Thomas Owen Ripley Profile
Thomas Owen Ripley
2021-03-08 11:07
Thank you, Mr. Piché.
Thank you for the opportunity today to address the committee and discuss Bill C-10 and how it modernizes the Broadcasting Act.
Before diving into the details of the proposed legislation, I would like to briefly tell you about the Broadcasting Act and the current regulatory framework. It is important to understand the current system, because it is the foundation on which Bill C-10 is built.
The bill aims to modernize our legislation for the digital age; but it also aims to preserve and strengthen key elements of our system that have served us well for many decades. These include our independent communications regulator, our Canadian broadcasters, support for Canadian music and storytelling, and the objective of ensuring that diverse voices, including those of Indigenous peoples, are heard across Canada.
The Broadcasting Act is a key piece of legislation for the sector. It defines broadcasting, outlines policy objectives that serve as guiding principles for developing specific regulations, and sets out the mandate and powers of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, the CRTC. The CRTC’s independence from government is important.
The CRTC makes rules and regulations that govern the media sector. The sector is obviously central in supporting freedom of expression and fostering cultural expression. In a democracy like Canada, it’s important that there be a healthy distance between the government of the day and the media sector. Countries such as Australia, the United Kingdom and France all rely on an independent regulator to oversee the media sector.
The CRTC also has the expertise and experience to make technical regulatory decisions, while balancing many policy considerations. This independence and expertise have served Canadians well.
Ultimately, Bill C-10 preserves an oversight role for the CRTC and for the government. The CRTC has the mandate to oversee the system on a day-to-day basis, while the government's mandate is to ensure that the CRTC operates as it should.
One way that the CRTC has supported Canadian culture is by ensuring that broadcasters support the creation and presentation of Canadian content. Currently, as a condition of licence, TV programming services are required to spend a percentage of their revenues on Canadian content each year. Cable and satellite companies are required to contribute a percentage of their revenues to production funds and local programming to support the development and production of Canadian content. Commercial radio broadcasters and satellite radio carriers contribute a portion of their annual revenues to support Canadian content development initiatives. These contributions totalled $3.34 billion in 2019.
However, digital disruption and competition from online broadcasters threatens this support. Increasing competition is leading to diminishing revenues, with traditional broadcasting revenues declining by 1.4% from 2018 to 2019. Ultimately, this will lead to less funding for Canadian music and programming.
Compared to 2019, recently released aggregate returns data from the CRTC show a 7% decline in broadcasting revenues for large ownership groups in 2020. Aggregate returns include the largest broadcasters and vertically integrated companies but exclude the smaller companies, and as they represent the majority of industry revenues, they are expected to reflect overall industry trends for 2020.
Streaming services obviously aren't new to Canada and have operated in parallel to the traditional broadcasting system for many years now. Their operation in Canada has been facilitated by a regulatory instrument, the digital media exemption order, which exempts online broadcasters from having to seek a licence to operate in Canada, as well as the obligations placed on traditional broadcasters, such as supporting Canadian content.
The DMEO has essentially allowed foreign online broadcasters to operate in Canada outside of the traditional closed system. The DMEO was originally issued in 1999 to promote the growth of the nascent online broadcasting sector. Since then, the sector has greatly increased in size and commercial viability.
For example, in 2011, only 10% of Canadians subscribed to Netflix. By 2020, this had increased to 67% of Canadians. Online broadcasters are now thriving and no longer need to be shielded from regulation. They are well positioned to make an important and meaningful contribution to supporting Canadian music and storytelling. Bill C-10 aims to bring them into the regulatory framework, so that all broadcasters operate on a level playing field.
There's no denying that the digital age has brought many benefits. More services provide more choice for Canadians and more opportunities for creators and producers. Bill C-10 isn't about denying these benefits, but rather about carving out a space for Canadian voices.
To facilitate the inclusion of online broadcasting in the regulatory framework, Bill C-10 adds a new category of broadcasting undertaking to the Act: online broadcasters. This change will ensure that the CRTC can require services such as Crave, Netflix, Amazon Prime, QUB Musique and Spotify to contribute to Canadian stories and music.
Canadian Heritage estimates that, by 2023, the inclusion of online broadcasters could lead to contributions of $830 million annually to Canadian content. This is not a target, and ultimately the final figure will depend on how the CRTC decides to implement the new regulatory framework. Nevertheless, this estimate illustrates the significant and tangible results that Bill C-10 seeks to achieve for Canadian creators.
Some of the discussion regarding Bill C-10 has focused on the Bill’s treatment of social media platforms. These platforms will be subject to regulation, but only in so far as they display content commissioned by the platform itself, or its affiliates.
However, the users of social media platforms and content posted by these users will not be regulated. Social media is an important form of expression for many Canadians, and, as Mr. Piché noted, a separate proposal is being developed to address the impacts of harmful content posted to social media.
To account for the inclusion of online broadcasters, we need a renewed approach to regulation. Bill C-10 shifts away from relying on the rigid system of licensing to a more flexible conditions of service model. This model will allow the CRTC to seek financial contributions from all players and to impose other conditions, such as discoverability requirements, programming standards and information reporting requirements.
The CRTC will hold public processes seeking input from stakeholders and Canadians in order to inform its regulatory choices. Once it has gathered this information, the CRTC will be able to tailor conditions of service to specific broadcasters. We want to avoid an overly rigid approach that results in an undue regulatory burden on broadcasting services and increased costs for Canadians.
Lastly, the broadcasting policy objectives are being updated to ensure that the broadcasting system serves the needs and interests of all Canadians in their diversity. This means ensuring that Canadian voices, including indigenous creators, official language minority communities, racialized and ethnocultural communities, LGBTQ2+ communities and persons with disabilities, are present in the media we consume. That's why Bill C-10 includes stronger support for diverse Canadian content and its creators.
However, Bill C-10 does not include quotas or targets for supporting certain varieties of content such as French-language content. Quotas and targets risk becoming de facto maximums. The CRTC is better placed as the independent and expert regulator to make decisions on how to best support all types of content and to have it evolve over time.
After Bill C-10 receives royal assent, the minister intends to propose to the Governor in Council to issue a policy direction to the CRTC on how the new regulatory tools granted in the bill should be used. Seven priorities are sketched out in the technical briefing presentation.
We know that the committee has requested a draft copy of the policy direction to better understand concretely how these priorities would be communicated to the CRTC and we are working to fulfill this request.
While an important step, we know that Bill C-10 doesn't address all of the issues in the broadcasting sector, such as the future role of CBC/Radio-Canada and the governance structure of the CRTC.
Bill C-10 is intended as a first step on the most pressing policy issues. It makes critical changes that will ensure that Canada's broadcasting system is fair and that it will sustain Canadian music and storytelling into the future. We also have an opportunity to make the system more accessible as well as more inclusive by supporting creators and producers who historically have been marginalized. This bill provides a much-needed update to Canada's Broadcasting Act.
We would now welcome your questions on the bill.
Kathy Tsui
View Kathy Tsui Profile
Kathy Tsui
2021-03-08 11:52
I think you have explained the process completely. I would just add that there is a provision in the act right now that requires the policy direction to be laid in front of both houses of Parliament during that gazetting process.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Good afternoon, everyone.
I am joining you from Montreal, on the traditional territory of the Mohawk and the other Haudenosaunee peoples.
Mr. Chair, members of the Committee, it’s a pleasure for me to appear before you today regarding the study of Bill C-10, An Act to amend the Broadcasting Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts.
I would also like to acknowledge that today is International Women's Day.
I’d like to thank the members of the committee for the preliminary work you have been doing for some time now.
I’m delighted that this bill has finally passed second reading in the House of Commons. The delays that some Conservative members have caused were a concern for me, but we got there, and we can continue to move forward. Let us please remember that this is not a partisan bill. It is a bill that focuses on culture; it is a bill for Canadians, and it deserves to move forward.
I hope that all the members here and their caucuses recognize the urgency of modernizing the Broadcasting Act so that it can better serve the interests of Canadians in the digital world.
Today it's impossible to overlook the legislative imbalance that favours digital platforms to the detriment of Canadian broadcasters and creative industries. This reform responds to a pressing need. It is crucial to ensuring the vitality of Canadian businesses now and for decades to come. This is why our government will continue to work constructively and collaboratively so that Canadians can benefit from the most effective legislative tool possible, as soon as possible.
From the outset, the cultural and creative sectors have provided input into the modernization of the current legislation. They've expressed their support for this reform and this favourable movement is trending across the country, particularly in Quebec.
Moreover, since the tabling of the bill, this important discussion has continued in the public space and before your committee. It has given rise to several proposed amendments that we will examine with all the attention they deserve. We are, of course, open to improvements that would maximize the benefits of the amended Act for Canadians.
I know that you have received substantial input from several key contributors, and I look forward to seeing the results of the committee’s work in this regard.
I am well aware that the study of the bill must be carried out with care, for two reasons. First of all, because it introduces methods that are completely new in Canada for implementing a regulatory framework adapted to our current reality. Second, because this is an important issue. Many players in the creative and cultural industries are calling for this update to the Broadcasting Act and are counting on this new tool to continue to develop their work on digital platforms.
Let us remember that the current broadcasting system has served Canadians well for decades. It has fostered the emergence of strong national creative and cultural industries. It has supported the delivery of original content that reflects our identity and our values. Bill C-10 aims to preserve that legacy. However, it also aims to include many new players and new activities. It must therefore take an approach designed to include online broadcasters and ensure their equitable contribution.
With this bill, we want to make the diversity of Canadian voices resonate more clearly: francophone and anglophone voices, the voices of minority communities, Indigenous voices; and the voices of all communities across the country, including ethnocultural communities, racialized communities, and others that are too often underrepresented on the screen and elsewhere.
I want to make it clear that this bill is not intended to change the regulatory structure in broadcasting. Rather, it is intended to update the objectives of the legislation and the tools of the CRTC. It therefore preserves the autonomy conferred on the CRTC to implement the appropriate regulations and achieve the objectives of the Act. This autonomy is all the more important as the broadcasting system begins to incorporate new players with different business models, and as the system continues to evolve.
This bill does not address the regulation of online hate nor the equitable compensation of journalists by the web giants, as these are not strictly broadcasting issues; however, I intend to introduce two more bills on these issues in the near future. In due course, I will be pleased to appear before your committee regarding these other bills, always in the spirit of constructive co-operation.
I will be pleased to provide you with the Order in Council that we intend to issue following the passage of the bill. Please note, however, that this Order in Council was drafted prior to the introduction of the bill. It may therefore be redrafted as a result of amendments to Bill C-10 between now and Royal Assent.
As well, in the interest of transparency and as required by law, the Order will undergo a period of public consultation to invite feedback from Canadians.
I invite you to use the Order in Council as background material for your study, but to focus your efforts on the bill itself. Because that is the legislation that will be with us for several decades and will ensure the sustainability of the broadcasting sector. Over the years, governments will come and go, and will issue various Orders in Council to the CRTC as they respond to changing circumstances.
Finally, I would like to clarify the following situation. When I appeared on November 5, 2020, the member for Richmond—Arthabaska asked me what calculations the department had used to determine that the additional investments in Canadian content through digital television broadcasts would amount to $830 million. On December 11, 2020, the department provided the clerk of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage with the answers to the questions asked at the meetings of October 30 and November 5, 2020, including the one dealing with the calculation of the $830 million. At my last appearance before the committee—
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Yes. Thirty seconds, Mr. Chair.
I feel that this is important.
At my last appearance before the committee, on January 29, the member for Richmond—Arthabaska said that the committee had not yet received that information. I am sure that he does not want to mislead the members of the committee, or the Canadians listening in, by wrongly stating that he had received nothing. I invite him to look at his email inbox, because he did in fact receive the information, which was distributed to all members of the committee.
With that, I thank you. I will stay with you to answer your questions.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you very much. My apologies for the lateness of my arrival. It seems that events are conspiring against my participation in this committee meeting. We had a fire alarm where I am right now, so we had to exit the building.
That being said, we actually explored the possibility of my joining by phone outside. That was technologically complicated, it seems.
I am joining you from Montreal, on the traditional territory of the Mohawk and Haudenosaunee peoples.
I want to start by acknowledging that, four years ago today, a gunman took the lives of six people at the Quebec City mosque and seriously injured 19 others. They were Muslim fathers, husbands, loved ones and friends. Their sudden and tragic deaths were heartbreaking not just for their families, but also for Muslim communities around the world and all Canadians.
Mr. Chair, I am very happy to be appearing before you again today.
With me is the deputy minister of Canadian Heritage, Hélène Laurendeau; as well as Jean-Stéphen Piché, senior assistant deputy minister.
The pandemic continues to weigh heavily on Canada's heritage, arts, culture and sport communities. We are all committed to helping them get through the crisis and supporting them in their recovery.
I want to thank the committee for pursuing it's important work despite the difficult circumstances. Your study on the challenges faced by the arts, culture, heritage and sport sectors caused by COVID-19 will be a valuable asset in these efforts. Canadian Heritage was pleased to participate.
I would also like to acknowledge the excellent work you have done on Bill C-5, which seeks to establish the National Day of Truth and Reconciliation as a statutory holiday.
When we met for the main and supplementary budget estimates review, I had just tabled Bill C-10, an act to amend the Broadcasting Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other acts. It will be referred to your committee shortly, and we will welcome your input on this legislation as well.
As I indicated before the holidays, I look forward to better understanding your perspectives and how the bill could be improved.
Like many Canadians, our government is concerned about the current imbalance that favours the web giants at the expense of Canadian businesses. The economic and social stakes resulting from this situation are too important for us to stand idly by.
That is why the Speech from the Throne mentioned that things must change to ensure more equitable sharing of revenues with our Canadian creators and media.
Mr. Chair, our government is committed to regulating digital platforms and putting them to work for Canadians. One of the objectives of Bill C-10 is to require those platforms to invest in our creators, our music and our stories, which could lead to more than $800 million of additional money being invested here in Canada every year.
This bill has been positively received by the community and stakeholders. I must share the credit for this success with the employees of Canadian Heritage, as it would not have been possible without their supporting work. I would like to salute their expertise and professionalism. As you know, it is up to elected officials to lead the development of public policy, and our government has been very clear on how we want to tackle social media platforms and web giants. The Canadian Heritage team is providing excellent evidence-based support in this regard.
Our government will also complement these efforts by levelling the playing field on the tax front, as we proposed in the 2020 fall economic statement. Digital businesses will now be required to collect and remit the GST. We will also ensure that digital corporations pay their fair share of taxes in respect of their activities in Canada.
I must also note that we are currently studying a made-in-Canada formula to ensure fair remuneration of news publishers by online platforms, similar to what you might have seen move ahead in certain other countries.
We have seen during the pandemic that digital platforms are more than ever at the heart of communications between Canadians, and are keeping us connected. Unfortunately, some Internet users are also exploiting these platforms maliciously to spread hate, racism and child pornography. There is currently illegal content being uploaded and shared online, to the detriment of Canadians and our society. This is simply unacceptable.
My apologies, Mr. Chair, but I'm having some technical problems.
Hélène Laurendeau
View Hélène Laurendeau Profile
Hélène Laurendeau
2021-01-29 13:00
I would say two things.
First, we have nothing to hide when it comes to how we came up with the modelling behind the figure.
Second, I defer to Mr. Piché, but I think it might be helpful for the committee to receive an oral explanation to go along with the documentation. Forwarding the documents without providing further details could lead to confusion, so it might be helpful if we could provide the committee with not only the documentation it has requested, but also a clear explanation—similar to technical briefings we've done in the past. That would be with the committee's permission, of course. We would be glad to do that.
Jean-Stéphen Piché
View Jean-Stéphen Piché Profile
Jean-Stéphen Piché
2021-01-29 13:01
The figure was calculated using the assumptions on which the current regime is based. I think we explained that once before when we appeared before the parliamentary committee. Canadian broadcasters have to spend a certain amount, not just in direct contributions to funding, but also in production-related operating funding. According to estimates for a company like Netflix, we can estimate a certain amount will be generated based on a similar figure.
Results: 31 - 45 of 56 | Page: 3 of 4

|<
<
1
2
3
4
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data