Lines On the Sandy Brussels Beach

Michael Hedges - July 3, 2006

Immediate response was rather muted to EC Media Commissioner Vivaine Reding proposed revisions to the TV Without Frontiers Directive. That was six months ago. EURO-MEI and British government, regulator and media business are firmly opposed...for different reasons.

Mrs Reding has taken her defense of her proposed EC Directive intuitively called Audiovisual Media Without Frontiers or Audiovisual Media Services (AMS) on the road over the last 6 months. It seems the more she defends it, the more blunt the criticism.

Taken in the context of the most vocal constituents – “stakeholders” being the preferred Brussels’ term, either the proposed AMS Directive goes to far or not far enough.

In its statement (Friday, 30 June) EURO-MEI, the consortium of audiovisual and media trade unions, came down squarely on the side of more regulation, including areas Mrs Reding’s proposal left out.

“To be effective the scope of the directive must include all audiovisual media services,” said the EURO-MEI statement. The argument bares considerable logic: all audiovisual services are, well, equal in the technology neutral world. Added to the Directive, according to the trade union group, should be “information services in which the audiovisual part is not primary,” online news, “private and partly public electronic communications such as private and commercial websites,” radio services and online games. 

Largely – and loudly – arguments for less Brussels media regulation has come from private sector (more often British) media groups. With far greater restraint – and fewer public pronouncements - national regulators are closing ranks in opposition to more EC regulation.

UK creative industries Minister Shaun Woodward called the new proposed Directive “hugely damaging” to the creative sector. He went on to suggest that media companies might re-locate to non-EU countries like Norway to avoid onerous regulation. Omnious that his statement appeared the same day as Mecom bought Norwegian conglomerate Orkla’s media business, intending to keep the headquarters in Oslo.

The proposed new audiovisual media rules startled bloggers and email users who feared they, too, would come under compliance orders, such as content regulation. Mrs Reding, aiming to expose many fears as red herrings, has been on the road intensely for six months. She pointed out that video blogs would not be affected, contrary to the wishes of the trade unions.

While EURO-MEI’s statement to the EC Committee of Culture calls for more scrutiny of “commercial media concentration” as part of the new rule making, nary a call is made for a similar look at public broadcasters, many of which have wide and deep horizontal and vertical entanglements. The European Broadcasting Union (EBU), whos’ members are public and state broadcasters, issued only the most tepid response to the proposed revisions. But, EBU member broadcasters are far more likely to have union agreements in place than private sector employers.

The issue, it seems, is whether or not the broadly defined media – getting broader each day - will be viewed by EC rules as part of the culture or economic sectors. Cultural activities fare well from the EC’s largess, for example, forcing States to find funding solutions for public broadcasting.  Economic sectors also fare well insofar as they create jobs and tax revenues.

The fate of the AMS Directive is entirely in the hands of members of the European Parliament (MEPs), who will debate formally the new Directive in December. Politicians rarely shun an opportunity for new rules, particularly when taxes and quotas can be attached. At the same time many European national governments are intent on getting all media – not limited to its new forms – under control.

The union leadership position, it would seem, will find resonance among many MEPs. Private sector media interests – with Rupert Murdoch and Silvio Berlusconi as icons – attract nothing but fear. Woodward faulted European media companies for not coming forward in voicing their displeasure with the proposed directive. UK media has been quite vocal, with the support of national regulator Office for Communication (OFCOM).

One particularly fearsome “stakeholder” has not issued a statement, figuratively or literally: consumers. They are too busy learning about and using all the newly arrived media choices.

Full disclosure: Author continues to consult the European Commission's Social Dialogue committee for the audiovisual sector. Johannes Studinger, EURO-MEI's Deputy Director, was the author of the EURO-MEI statment referred to above. Mr. Studinger is co-coordinator of the EC's Social Dialogue committee for the audiovisual sector. Opinions expressed in the above article are entirely those of the author and do not represent opinions, positions or policies of the European Commission, the Social Dialogue committee for the audiovisual sector or any of its members.

ftm Follow Up & Comments