On the first point, by the way, I find I can never trust hotel televisions to faithfully reflect what is available in the surrounding population. Sometimes they do little things, like catering to American tourists, and that type of thing. It may well be that if you were not in this hotel, you could have received better services in the other official language. I'm not sure, but I've have had trouble with hotels before.
But on your point about cbc.ca or radio-canada.ca, in the situation of a shortage, priorities have to be addressed. We advocate more money, as you know, but we believe that the CBC has not been forthcoming about the costs of its Internet operations. We have picked up bits of information about the number of employees, advertising availabilities on their site, and we're making an estimate that something in the range of $20 million is being spent there.
We're asking why, if they can't afford to put Canadian programming on prime time on their largest television networks, they afford this. We're giving you numbers that show that, at any given time, only 2,000 Canadians are on there. Over a day, there are fewer than half a million Canadians, and over a month, four million Canadians.
The French television network of the CBC reaches five million Canadians each week. The English television network reaches 11 million Canadians. That's five times more than the number of people who read the The Globe and Mail or five times more than read La Presse, according to the data in our study.
Now, cbc.ca is the 20th largest website in Canada. We think it's wonderful. We use it. But we think you should be asking questions about priorities within the corporation, just as you should ask a question about how they can afford to invest in Sirius satellite radio and lose money on that every year when they can't afford to put television programs on in prime time.