Advertisers, agencies and media directors have banded together to denounce Bill C-55, legislation that’s being proposed to protect the Canadian magazine publishing industry from so-called ‘split-run’ magazines.

Split-run magazines are Canadian editions of u.s. magazines that Canadian magazine publishers charge will be able to undercut the ad rates of Canadian publications because they can effectively recycle much of the editorial content.

The Association of Canadian Advertisers (aca), the Institute of Canadian Advertising (ica) and the Canadian Media Directors Council (cmdc) will jointly address the Canadian Heritage Committee Dec 1., to speak against the Foreign Publishers Advertising Services Act.

The Bill is the second attempt by the federal government to ban such magazines. The first was struck down earlier this year by the World Trade Organization for being in contravention of international trade agreements.

At the heart of the organizations’ presentation is the argument that Bill C-55 severely restricts advertiser choices – without providing any tangible advantage to Canadian magazine publishers.

Ron Lund, president and ceo of the aca, says that stopping Canadian companies from advertising in split-run editions doesn’t mean they’ll advertise more often in Canadian magazines. He says those dollars are more likely to go to other media because some audiences are not reached by Canadian magazines.

‘There is no Canadian equivalent, for example, for Sports Illustrated,’ he says.

Lund says studies have shown that magazine usage by advertisers would increase by some 60% if u.s. publications were allowed to enter the Canadian market. Right now, he says, magazines in Canada account for only about 3.5% of the total advertising pie.

He says in the u.s., magazine advertising as a proportion of a client’s media budget is generally three times as much as it is in Canada. He attributes that to the fact that there is a critical mass of u.s. consumer books in which to mount a legitimate campaign.

‘We don’t have the same options in Canada,’ says Lund. ‘It is not a vibrant industry. It has been protected these last 30 years under previous measures and has been relegated to second choice from an advertiser’s perspective.’

Lund says the proposed legislation is less about protecting Canadian culture and more about protecting what he calls the publishing duopoly of Maclean Hunter and Telemedia.

The aca, the ica and the cmdc are hoping their presentation will encourage the Canadian Heritage Committee to slow the progress of the Bill, which has already had two readings in Parliament, and spur the committee to look at other options.

Lund says the groups are suggesting something similar to the Canadian television broadcast model that allows Canadian advertisers to buy u.s. programming by having Canadian broadcasters strip out u.s. advertising and insert Canadian ads.

This wouldn’t mean advertisers would flock to u.s. publications, he says, because the advertising dollar follows the readership. Although Canadian newsstands stock about 80% u.s. content, he points out, those magazines garner only about 50% of readership.

Ten Canadian consumer publications, including four Maclean Hunter and three Telemedia titles, account for 50% of Canadian advertiser dollars spent in magazines.