Rogers Communications in Canada is no small company. Employing 28 745 people (as of 2011), with $12.42 million dollars in revenue, it has a major impact on Canada's media industry as a whole.
The company started when Ted Rogers bought a struggling FM radio station, CHFI, while still in law school, and turned it into a success. That was back in 1960. Today, Rogers specializes in more than just radio and has expanded to provide television and telephone services as well.
There are many different television channels owned by Rogers that you would already recognize—City, OMNI Television, Sportsnet—but even when you look at just these three names for example, they do not represent one channel on television, but many! OMNI Television has stations based out of four Canadian cities: Calgary, Edmonton, Toronto and Vancouver; and City has stations based out of seven to eight Canadian cities: Calgary, Edmonton, Montreal, Regina/Saskatoon, Toronto, Vancouver and Winnipeg.
Here is a list of all the specialty channels Rogers owns. (Stations which specialize in one particular genre or theme):
Not only does Rogers dominate the digital market, it also possesses Canada's largest publishing company.
Rogers Publishing Limited has over 70 consumer and business publications. These include popular magazines, like "Chatelaine," Canada's third most popular magazine currently in circulation and Maclean's, Canada's most popular news magazine.
Rogers is perhaps better known for its cable services here in Atlantic Canada. (....) New Brunswickers have Rogers cable. Rogers owns 51 radio stations.
They also own a major league baseball team, the Toronto Blue Jays.
People on online forms only seem to have one shared opinion of Rogers—
that it stinks! But, given that it is the Internet, that kind of response is to be expected.
People just want to be able to express all of their anger and disappointment they have when something doesn't seem to be working properly. They want to be able to share their experiences with other people who are going through the same kinds of ordeals, and so they turn to the Internet when a company like Rogers fails to fix things for them, discovering they are not alone in their frustration.
There was one woman who had this to say about her cable service from Rogers:
A snarl of unused Rogers cable runs along along the outside wall of my house, at waist level. It's a hazard and interferes with my wireless (if live and uncapped) and an eyesore (if dead).
She is VERY critical on her views towards Rogers Communications and the kind of customer service they provide, but she was also very humourous in her response to a question someone had about the company and I enjoyed reading what she had to say. (
Click here if you wish to read the forum from Yelp.)
According to
Amplicate, a website dedicated to gathering data on people's like or dislike of any given topic and whose slogan is "Make Your Opinion Count", Rogers Communications is receiving an 80%
rate of hate from visitors to their website.
So it is quite clear that Rogers' customer service (at least from the Internet's point of view) is quite shabby, if not downright shitty, and does not receive many positive reviews at all. So what are people saying about the media they produce? Nothing actually. There isn't too much negative feedback that shows up on Google when you search for people's opinions on the various TV stations Rogers Communications owns, so it is only safe to assume that people are quite pleased. In my opinion, I think that it is just less of a hot topic than the high speed Internet or cable television bundles people buy from them because it doesn't evoke as much frustration as having to deal with things like waiting on the phone for an hour to talk with someone who is supposed to provide you with solutions to a problem you have or to send someone to your home to give you help. So, according to the Internet, all the magazines published by Rogers, the radio stations, and the channels on television are, for the most part, A-ok.
Now, what do I think about the company? Hmm, well, I can't say that I have had any real bad experiences with Rogers Communications on the cable, satellite, Internet or telephone side of things, but that's only because I don't have to be paying for these kinds of services myself, because, at the moment, my parents do. Mind you, I am sure that once I am off on my own, have a job, and am responsible for making these kind of decisions as to which company I want to get my services from, I might be the slightest bit skeptical of Rogers Communications, having done this assignment and seen all of the negative reviews it was receiving.
I can however talk a little bit about the media they produce. Looking at all the different kinds of television stations they own, it seems as though they cater more towards a male audience than a female one. OMNI and City, for the most part, are neutral, showing sitcoms in the evening that can appeal to both genders. But what about Sportsnet? There really isn't anything that Rogers provides women audiences that can balance out the large amount of men who watch Sportsnet, accept maybe The Shopping Channel. The Outdoor Living Network (OLN), is also very much geared towards males. I don't watch a lot of television, but even so, I find that when City TV chooses to air a movie for their audiences, it tends to be something more along the lines of an action film, which, again, from a stereotypical point of view, appeals mainly to men. I don't know. I wouldn't call it sexism--that may be taking it a little far--so you can correct me if I'm wrong, but that is the trend I see.
In my household, my father is more likely to be found watching OMNI or City than either my mother or sister, and nine times our of ten, if the television is tuned into one of the many different stations under those two names, it is my father who is in the room watching it. Just sayin'
For more information on the history of Rogers Communications, you can look here:
http://your.rogers.com/aboutrogers/historyofrogers/overview.asp
(Although, it may be a little bias) :)
When I started this survey, I hoped that I would be able to make some kind of "new discovery" or find some kind of connection that was never made before in how teens use their cellphones, but when the results from the first students who were polled started flooding in, I saw no significant difference between my data and the data that the larger research organizations had collected. Pooy! So I guess that that my results are only able to confirm what we already know—teens text a lot! 
