Features
Winnipeg and Israel
La vie se rétracte ou se dilate à proportion de notre courage.
Anaïs Nin (1903 – 1977)
By Dr. DAVID HOULT Israel has come of age among the nations of the world. After almost two thousand years of yearning, it can now join the ranks of those that ply power and pain. It is an odd conceit for most of us, for we imbibed so thoroughly from childhood the notions of Jewish vulnerability, suffering and solidarity, the need for self-sufficiency and circling the wagons when attacked. The foundation of a Jewish state came as the Great Hope, a shining star, the salvation from the wreckage of the Holocaust: a Jewish liberal democracy with a military having sterling and stirring ideals standing alone in a rough Middle-East neighbourhood. It appeared to many to be a miracle, and Judaism intertwined with Zionism and state to create a pinnacle of pride and pilgrimage – a tool of God to promote Their divine scheme, and to initiate the return of the Jews to the land They promised to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
But now, many of us are troubled. We fear deep down that Israel has gone astray, but are scared to confront the possibility, scared to give The Enemy ammunition if we say anything. So in our pain, we punish those who give even a hint of voicing dissent and fall back on our conceit. We defiantly, and somewhat desperately, have declarations of loyalty and synagogue security committees to keep traitors and Enemies out of our holy places, continue to sing Hatikvah, pray for the IDF and are hyper-vigilant for any sign of anti-Semitism. Underneath though, the stress born of dichotomy grows as we watch the apocalypse that is Gaza, massive demonstrations in Tel Aviv, Jew attacking Jew in Ra’anana, and settlers in the West Bank strutting, scaring, slinging stones and even slaying.
Politically, the seeds of our distress can be traced back over a hundred years to the Balfour Declaration. Based on the anti-Semitic assumption that Jews had great financial clout, it was one long, carefully crafted, vague and contradictory sentence (67 words) designed to enhance British influence in the Middle East. Zionists seized upon the ambiguous phrase “national home for the Jewish people” but carefully ignored the clause “… it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine …”. (Notably, nothing about political rights was included.) Soon, even President Roosevelt was declaring that “Palestine must be made a Jewish State”. Unsurprisingly, there was vocal opposition from most of the local inhabitants (over 90% Arab) and the situation quickly proved untenable. One British historian1 has declared that “measured by British interests alone, [the declaration was] one of the greatest mistakes in [its] imperial history.”
When the British threw up their hands and withdrew from Palestine, the United Nations proposed a partition of the land; the Arab League strongly objected and when the State of Israel was declared in 1948, as every Jewish child knows, the War of Independence began. But by the end of the war, Israel had triumphed; it held about 78% of Palestine and about 750,000 inhabitants had become refugees, a figure confirmed by many Israeli historians. Notwithstanding the details of how they had been exiled, they were not allowed to return. They were scapegoats sent into the wilderness for the sins of the Germans, and it is this refusal that laid the essential foundation of ethnic Jewish statehood – a Jewish majority. And that majority increased: by 1951, the population of Israel was expanded by the immigration of 700,000 Jews, some, ironically, expelled from Arab states in retaliation, thereby enhancing the ethnic imbalance.
I once asked a Palestinian attendee at the Nobel Prize ceremonies in Stockholm for how long her people would try to get their homes and land back and her bitter response was “For ever!” My response was “A bit like we Jews.” But stop for a moment of empathy. In the Talmud, Hillel says: “Don’t do to your neighbour what you wouldn’t have him do to you.” Those 750,000 people suffered the same fate as many Jews under the Romans, traumatised and wretched, filled with hate, anger and despair. But it was war and those sort of rules don’t apply, do they? Do they? For in the aftermath of the Holocaust, Jews were in no mood for the niceties of Torah compassion and empathy: a Jewish state was desperately needed. So what if we didn’t let them back in? Their leaders collaborated with the Nazis, didn’t they? And so the seeds of catastrophe were planted.
If we fast forward, thanks to further wars instigated and lost by the Arabs, Israel now controls almost the whole of what was once Palestine. However, notwithstanding the further exodus of refugees (numbers vary), Jews are no longer in the majority and the presence of so many Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza represents a huge obstacle to the re-creation of “the promised land”. This is a problem that many in their heart of hearts would love to see go away – but how? By fair means or foul?
Thus we come to the latest attempt to punish Israel which, I believe, is succeeding beyond Hamas’s wildest dreams. Why do I say that? Because Israel’s reaction to Hamas’s attack can be shown to violate its own historical and religious ethics and guidelines for the conduct of war. It places itself, by its own standards, firmly in the wrong and as a result, the nation is tearing itself apart and taking the Diaspora with it. To take just one example, from the Rambam2:
“When a siege is placed around a city to conquer it, it should not be surrounded on all four sides, only on three. A place should be left for the inhabitants to flee and for all those who desire, to escape with their lives.” Or how about the next verse: “We should not cut down fruit trees outside a city nor prevent an irrigation ditch from bringing water to them so that they dry up”? In other words, confinement and starvation are out as tactics of war for Jews.
There is, however, a far more basic, ancient and raw imperative, and that is lex talionis: “An eye for an eye …”. It is found in several places in Torah and also in the earlier Code of Hammurabi. (If you are ever in Paris, do see the stunning Hammurabi stele in the Louvre.) The Pharisees maintained that this law was not to be taken literally and referred to appropriate financial compensation. However, let us be gruesome and take it literally. On one side of the scales of justice we have the killing by Hamas of 1,195 people, the taking of 250 hostages, dozens of rapes and sexual assaults and immeasurable anguish, trauma and misery. What shall we place on the other side of the scale? Let us start with the report by the Associated Press that somewhere between three to four thousand Gazan children have suffered amputations, sometimes without anaesthetics. Meanwhile, the Gazan Health Ministry has released the names of 5,000 children under the age of six who have been killed. Are children The Enemy? We must also add to the balance the thousands of adults who have died and the hundreds of thousands suffering without shelter. We are commanded in the Torah “Justice, justice you shall pursue”. Even if the numbers are exaggerated, is the maiming and killing of children justice? What a wonderful way to create a new generation of terrorists thirsting for revenge!
There are those who claim that the Palestinians are part of the seven biblical nations that Joshua was commanded to wipe out. However, this claim was put to rest as long ago as 100 CE when Rabbi Yehoshua declared that the “seven nations” were no longer identifiable.
Inconveniently, David Ben-Gurion and Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, in a book published in 19183, even believed that the Palestinian peasant population (fellahin) was descended from the ancient biblical Hebrews, and there is some genetic evidence to support this position. Nevertheless, in 2007, Mordechai Eliyahu, the former Sephardi Chief Rabbi of Israel wrote in a letter to Prime Minister Olmert that4 “an entire city holds collective responsibility for the immoral behavior of individuals. In Gaza, the entire populace is responsible because they do nothing to stop the firing of Kassam rockets.”. His son, the chief rabbi of Safed, wrote: “If they don’t stop after we kill 100, then we must kill a thousand. And if they do not stop after 1,000 then we must kill 10,000. If they still don’t stop we must kill 100,000, even a million. Whatever it takes to make them stop.” Only now, however, have a few Gazans had the great courage to protest Hamas, an organisation that in the past has attacked, abducted, tortured and murdered those who stand up to them, including members of the Palestinian Authority5. Would you or I risk torture and death to confront such rulers? I doubt I would have the courage. Would you? Thus does evil ever flourish.
Let us be clear: Gaza is controlled by a vicious fundamentalist movement that in its charter calls for the destruction of Israel. But the more the Gazans are carpet bombed and killed, the more Hamas will gain supporters – young men who have seen mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers and cousins maimed and dismembered and want revenge. Quite apart from questions of morality, the annihilation is just plain dumb!
As the years of this century pass, how shall we possibly believe a new “promised land” could materialise? It would take a new Sodom and Gomorrah. The Arab states have learnt their collective lessons regarding military force and Israel is now Goliath to their slingless David. So, unless Israel feigns weakness (and notwithstanding Iran), it is highly unlikely that a new war will arise to give a pretext for expelling millions from the West Bank. Instead, harassment seems to be the method du jour as new settlements are built, land is appropriated and people are slowly forced into cities and refugee camps, or to other countries such as Canada – to Winnipeg, even. Of course Ben-Gurion’s “peasants” are going to strike back! Is harassment an honourable tactic? Is this loving one’s neighbour as oneself? Ah, but they aren’t neighbours you see, they are The Enemy, for they ambush innocent people and kill pregnant women6. Thus does evil ever flourish.
So here, in a distant country, we sit and watch, a community torn in two. Where do our loyalties lie? As you may have gathered from my quotations, I am a religious Jew who believes that our ethics must be derived from Torah and Talmud. I am a member of a synagogue, but a synagogue that refuses to admit anyone who is perceived to be The Enemy, and a member of a community that states “With Israel, For Israel. Always.” Where do my loyalties lie? Where should they lie? For me, there can no doubt – unequivocally with a Higher Authority, an Authority that demands at the pinnacle of Torah, slap dab in its middle, that I must love my neighbour as myself. That means gently arguing with the racist down the street, having kind words for the Indigenous family pushing back against subtle discrimination and trying to console the Palestinian who is mourning the death of his nephew in Gaza. But there is more.
The Talmud tells us7: “If (anyone) is in a position to protest the sinful conduct of the people of his town, and he fails to do so, he is apprehended for the sins of the people of his town. If he is in a position to protest the sinful conduct of the whole world, and he fails to do so, he is apprehended for the sins of the whole world.” Thus I protest the actions of my synagogue in keeping people out, I protest the actions of my community and I protest the actions of Israel because it is part of this world and it is sinning. It really is that simple – see wrong, protest, for God’s sake (literally), rather than keeping quiet and putting support for Israel first. Torah has an old-fashioned word for such misguided loyalties – idolatry. To quote Abraham Joshua Heschel: “God is not nice. God is not an uncle. God is an earthquake” that shakes us out of our complacency and challenges us first and foremost to reason – to think and analyse, not just feel, using Torah as our guide.
But there is yet more, and it is something we can do in Winnipeg. The same Talmud also states8: “Who is richest of all, …. Some say: One who can turn an enemy into his friend.” And how does one do that? Surely, there can only be one way to begin: by talking – by talking with The Enemy right here in town with empathy for their suffering. That means striving not to be ruled by fear, but taking one’s courage in both hands, being prepared to be made very uncomfortable, to confront other people’s truths. I do not have to agree, I do not have to like it, but I do have to listen. And one day, just possibly, there might be areas of agreement, even friendship, where the seeds of reconciliation are irrigated and can grow and bear fruit, for if God is prepared to reason with us (Isaiah 1, 18), surely we can reason with one another? Can’t we?
___________________________________________________________________________
David Hoult, a physicist who is one of the original developers of the MRI, is the recipient of numerous awards, including the community’s Shem Tov award for his work in helping secure kashrut in the city. He lives in Winnipeg with his wife and children.
1 Monroe, E. Britain’s Moment in the Middle East, 1914–1971. Johns Hopkins University Press (1981).
22 Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 6
33 Erets yisroel in fargangenheyt un gegenvart: geografye, geshikhte, rekhtlekhe ferheltnise, bafelkerung, landvirtshaft, handl un industri (The land of Israel past and present: geography, history, legal circumstances, population, agriculture, business, and industry), with three maps of the country and eighty pictures of Israel (New York, 1918),
Hebrew translation, 1980, pp. 196–200 (in Hebrew).
44 Wagner M., Jerusalem Post, May 30th, 2007.
55 https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2015/05/gaza-palestinians-tortured-summarily-killed-by-hamas-forces-during-2014-conflict/
66 https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgq89yd7p7o
77 Shabbat 54b, 20
88 Avot d’Rabbi Natan 23
Features
Democratic Socialists of America to Demand Mamdani Implement Extreme Anti-Israel Agenda
The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), the largest socialist organization in the US which counts prominent politicians among its ranks, intends to pressure New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani to implement a series of extreme anti-Israel policies when he officially enters office, according to a new report.
JusttheNews.com obtained and published internal plans detailing how the Anti-War Working Group (AWWG) of the DSA’s branch in New York City has been plotting for weeks to push Mamdani, a member of the DSA and self-declared democratic socialist, to impose its agenda from City Hall in Manhattan.
The five-page document, titled “AWWG Palestine Policy Meeting Meeting Agenda & Notes [sic],” outlines a policy agenda that includes 12 demands for the Mamdani administration, each of which target institutions with ties to Israel.
The group plans to urge City Hall to divest New York City pension funds from Israeli bonds and securities, withdraw municipal deposits from banks that lend to or do business in Israel, and terminate all city contracts with companies that do business with Israel.
The proposals, described as “demands” in the document, further call for city-run grocery stores to exclude Israeli products and for investigations into real estate agents allegedly involved in the sale of “stolen” West Bank land.
Additional measures outlined in the document include evicting weapons manufacturers and transporters from the New York City metro area, revoking the nonprofit status of charities that fundraise for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), and directing the City University of New York (CUNY) to divest its endowment while reinstating professors fired over what DSA described as pro-Palestinian activism.
The agenda also seeks to dismantle outgoing Mayor Eric Adams’s NYC–Israel Economic Council, end New York City Police Department (NYPD) training programs with Israeli security forces, halt police “repression of demonstrators,” and even pursue the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and IDF soldiers on war-crimes charges.
The proposals, organizers noted, are part of an effort to strengthen DSA’s anti-Israel platform and align city policy with the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement, which seeks to isolate the world’s lone Jewish state on the international state as a step toward its eventual elimination.
Mamdani, who has made anti-Israel activism a cornerstone of his young political career, has repeatedly declared his support for both the BDS movement and arresting Netanyahu if he visits New York — the latter of which he does not have authority to do, according to legal experts.
Meanwhile, the DSA has formally endorsed the BDS movement and earlier this year adopted a resolution that makes various actions in support of Israel, such as “making statements that ‘Israel has a right to defend itself’” and “endorsing statements equating anti-Zionism with antisemitism,” an “expellable offense,” subject to a vote by the DSA’s National Political Committee.
DSA’s lofty ambitions for New York City may face political hurdles, however.
US Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY), one of the most vocal allies of Israel in the US Congress, warned that he would not hesitate to launch an investigation into the Mamdani administration if it were to adopt the slate of anti-Israel directives.
“As Chair of the Middle East and North Africa subcommittee on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, I will be watching closely and will conduct hearings if @ZohranKMamdani and New York City engage in policy detrimental to US Foreign Policy,” Lawler posted on social media.
US President Donald Trump has previously warned that he could deprive the city of federal funds, arguing that Mamdani would be an “economic disaster” for the Big Apple.
“If Communist Candidate Zohran Mamdani wins the Election for Mayor of New York City, it is highly unlikely that I will be contributing Federal Funds, other than the very minimum as required, to my beloved first home, because of the fact that, as a Communist, this once great City has ZERO chance of success, or even survival!” Trump wrote on social media.
During his tenure in the New York State Assembly, Mamdani advocated on behalf of the BDS agenda. In the closing stretch of his mayoral campaign, however, Mamdani remained largely mum on whether he supported a divestment of city resources from Israel.
One reason by could be the economic consequences of actually implementing BDS could be disatrious for New York City. Late last month, a new report revealed that Israeli firms pour billions of dollars and tens of thousands of jobs into the local economy.
The study from the United States-Israel Business Alliance revealed that, based on 2024 data, 590 Israeli-founded companies directly created 27,471 jobs in New York City last year and indirectly created over 50,000 jobs when accounting for related factors, such as buying and shipping local products.
These firms generated $8.1 billion in total earnings, adding an estimated $12.4 billion in value to the city’s economy and $17.9 billion in total gross economic output.
As for the State of New York overall, the report, titled the “2025 New York – Israel Economic Impact Report,” found that 648 Israeli-founded companies generated $8.6 billion in total earnings and $19.5 billion in gross economic output, contributing a striking $13.3 billion in added value to the economy. These businesses also directly created 28,524 jobs and a total of 57,145 when accounting for related factors.
While it remains unlikely that Mamdani could entirely divest the city from Israel, an analysis conducted by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency found that he would be able to “stack the boards of two of the city’s five pension funds such that divestment from Israel could be on the table.”
Some of the DSA’s other goals, such as removing city funds from banks that do business with Israel, could be legally difficult. For example, some observers have noted that political discrimination against banks based on nationality could violate state and federal commerce and anti-discrimination laws. The Trump administration and federal lawmakers have already signaled that they will launch investigations against Mamdani if he were to weaponize mayoral powers against entities tied to Israel.
Further complicating the DSA’s efforts could be a New York State executive order which requires state agencies to divest from companies and institutions supporting the BDS movement.
The DSA policing demands could potentially have an easier time being implemented, as the police commissioner is appointed by the mayor and a new selection by Mamdani could share similar views.
Features
A Half Century of Calumny at the UN
By HENRY SREBRNIK For the past half-century, the United Nations’ Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People (CEIRPP) has worked to delegitimize the State of Israel by amplifying Palestinian efforts to depict the Jewish state as a “colonial” and “apartheid” regime. The Palestinians are the only people to have such a dedicated propaganda organ inside the United Nations, while Israel is the only UN member state to face such attacks.
The Committee is the child of that notorious day, November 10, 1975, when the UN General Assembly passed Resolution 3379, equating Zionism with “racism.” The General Assembly also passed Resolution 3376, which created CEIRPP. In subsequent years, further resolutions expanded CEIRPP and provided it with greater resources. A UN report from 2024 shows that financial resources dedicated to servicing CEIRPP specifically stand at $3.1 million per year.
The language of Resolution 3379 encapsulated the antisemitic themes of Soviet and Arab propaganda. In his address to the General Assembly opposing Resolution 3379, Israel’s then-UN ambassador, Chaim Herzog, remarked that the draft was being debated on the 37th anniversary of the Nazi pogrom known as Kristallnacht, adding that Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler would have welcomed the proceedings.
While that resolution was ultimately rescinded in 1991, CEIRPP continued to carry out its work, promoting the ideas at the heart of the Zionism-is-racism resolution, with its call for “the elimination of colonialism and neo-colonialism, foreign occupation, zionism, apartheid and racial discrimination in all its forms.”
Within two years of the committee’s creation, its work and mission became further entrenched within the internal UN bureaucracy. On December 2, 1977, the General Assembly passed Resolution 32/40 (B), authorizing the creation of a “Special Unit on Palestinian Rights,” which would serve the committee by “preparing studies and publications” devoted to both Palestinian rights and the United Nations’ own efforts in that regard. This included the announcement of the annual observance of November 29, the anniversary of the United Nations General Assembly 1947 passage of Resolution 181 to partition Palestine, as the “International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People.”
The “Special Unit” created through Resolution 32/40 (B) grew into an entire Division for Palestinian Rights (DPR) in 1979, housed within what is now known as the Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs. The DPR’s current role includes planning and servicing the committee’s various meetings in New York and internationally, maintaining an online database known as the United Nations Information System on the Question of Palestine.
The CEIRPP is presently composed of 25 member states and 24 observers, the vast majority non-democratic countries in the Global South. Of these, 23 are Muslim countries. Observers include the League of Arab States and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.
The committee works in five areas: promoting Palestinian self-determination, advocating for an “immediate end” to Israel’s control of territories conquered during the 1967 war, mobilizing international support, liaising with UN bodies on the Palestinian question, and working with civil society organizations and parliamentarians to advance the Palestinian cause. While the committee does not directly impact the foreign policy of member states, it influences policy discussions and provides anti-Zionist NGOs with access to UN diplomats, staff, and financial resources.
In addition to the CEIRPP, there are several other UN bodies solely dedicated to the Palestinian cause. Created to provide humanitarian aid to Palestinians displaced by the 1948 Arab-Israeli war, the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), a billion-dollar agency with 30,000 employees, expanded its roster from an initial 750,000 to 5.9 million by embracing a uniquely expansive definition of refugees. It is the only refugee agency dedicated to one particular group. All others come under the aegis of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Israel estimates that as 25 per cent of UNRWA employees belong to terrorist organizations. Some were found to have not only supported but directly participated in the October 7 Hamas attacks.
The position of the Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories was launched by a resolution in 1993, and its occupant reports on the human rights situation in the territories. In July 2025, the United States announced sanctions against the present rapporteur, Francesca Albanese, accusing her of having “spewed unabashed antisemitism.” Albanese’s activities are supported by staff from the UN human rights office, at an estimated cost of $500,000 a year.
Launched in 1968, the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices has produced annual 70-page reports, with legal analysis and recommendations on Israel’s alleged violations, summaries of Palestinian testimonies, and collections of statistics. Composed of Malaysia, Senegal, and Sri Lanka, and staffed out of the UN human rights office, the Special Committee also conducts regular field missions, including to Amman, Cairo, and Damascus. It has a mandate to investigate only alleged Israeli abuses. Its reports include unsubstantiated allegations, such as claims that Israeli excavations undermine the structural foundations of the Al-Aqsa Mosque on Jerusalem’s Temple Mount.
Also since 1968, the World Health Organization (WHO) has maintained an agenda item dedicated to scrutinizing Israel’s health record at the annual meetings of the World Health Assembly, its decision-making body. Israel is the only state to face such an agenda item.
In 2024, the UN General Assembly adopted 164 resolutions on Israel and 84 on all other countries combined. From 2006 through 2024, the UN Human Rights Council adopted 108 resolutions against Israel, 44 against Syria, 15 against Iran, eight against Russia, and three against Venezuela.
Meanwhile, the anti-Israel machine goes on without pause. Yet another UN commission of inquiry on Israel, headed by Navi Pillay, on Oct. 28 presented a report accusing the Jewish state of genocide. This body was initiated by the Arab and Islamic states at a special session that they convened at the UN Human Rights Council in wake of the May 2021 Hamas-Israel war. It was tasked with examining the “root causes” of the conflict, including Israel’s alleged “systematic discrimination” based on race. Instead of the usual one-year term for such inquiries, the investigation of Israel was made perpetual — it has no end date.
So while most people focus on the attacks on Israel launched regularly both in the UN General Assembly and Security Council, behind the scenes an entire bureaucracy is engaged in slandering and defaming the world’s only Jewish state. This relentless campaign takes its toll and serves to continually paint Israel as a uniquely malevolent nation worthy of elimination. We have seen the fruits of these labours since October 7, 2023.
Henry Srebrnik is a professor of political science at the University of Prince Edward Island.
Features
Streaming-only households are growing in Canada
More and more Canadians are cutting the cord and relying exclusively on internet-delivered video. Fresh industry data indicates streaming-only homes are approaching three in then households, while the share with no cable or satellite subscription hit roughly 46% in 2024, clear signs of a decisive shift toward SVOD and free ad-supported streaming.
Cord-cutting crosses a new threshold
The long-running trickle of cord-cutting has become a stream. Convergence Research’s latest “Couch Potato” outlook estimates that 46% of Canadian households had no cable, satellite or telco TV subscription in 2024, up four percent from 2023, with the figure projected to rise further in the next few years. Trade coverage of the same report underscores the trend: OTT revenues rose an estimated 15% in 2024 as traditional TV subscriptions continued falling. While individual timelines differ by source, the trend is the same: legacy TV is shrinking fast as Canadians rebuild their viewing stacks around apps.
At the same time, streaming is not only near-universal but increasingly standalone. Media in Canada reported “nearly three in 10” households are streaming-only, relying on online sources instead of cable bundles. It’s a trend we’ve seen in other fields as well, such as casino games, where people are more interested in the online alternatives instead of landbased sites. Thus, digitalization is not a TV-thing only, but a general trend in the country. Young adult Canadians are even more onboard on this trend, accelerating the generational hand-off from channel guides to connected-TV home screens.
Regulatory and market signals reinforce the shift as well. In June 2024, the CRTC required large online streaming services to contribute 5% of their Canadian revenues to support local news and domestic content. Major platforms challenged certain aspects of the framework, but the new contributions regime, according to reports, should add roughly C$200 million annually to the ecosystem.
What’s driving streaming-only growth
Three intertwined forces explain why this change keeps advancing. First come value and flexibility: with household budgets under pressure, Canadians are more selective about which services they keep year-round. MTM’s 2024/2025 read shows people are “streamlining” their subscriptions, maintaining one or two anchors and rotating others around tent-pole releases, while filling gaps with free ad-supported TV and platform freebies.
Technology and habit formation have an important role as well. The app grid on a smart TV has replaced the channel guide for many households; game consoles and streaming sticks have made it trivial to jump between different streaming apps. Once viewers get used to on-demand navigation, reverting to fixed-time channels feels limiting, especially for younger audiences that were born with immediacy and personalization.
Content economics are nudging straggles online too. Rights for premium series and more live sports are flowing to digital, thanks to options like NBA Pass, F1 TV Pro, and others. As subscription TV revenues are declining, broadcasters and distributors are experimenting with slimmer linear tiers, hybrid bundles that pair broadband with streamer discounts, and ad-supported options that meet price-sensitive households where they are. The result is a feedback loop: as more content and better prices accrue to streaming, more households find they no longer need traditional TV packages at all.