Adaptation Is Not Transformation

Michael Hedges May 29, 2017 - Follow on Twitter

Revising media rules from the depths of the last century for today’s digital consumer preferences challenges the best and brightest legal minds. There is great and valuable logic in adapting what has gone before, not to forget warm fuzzy comfort. But rule makers are inevitably frustrated when the world changes before the ink dries on their latest remedy. A linear process disintegrates in complexity.

Another step was taken last week toward raising European content quotas for online providers. At a meeting of European Union culture ministers a consensus voted to require Netflix, Amazon Prime, iTunes and others to offer and catalogue at least 30% audio and video material produced or originating in the 28 European Union (EU) Member States. It is part of a digital evolution for the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMS), last updated in 2010.

The idea, obviously, is to protect national production houses and pry away European consumers from US produced content. There are other parts to AVMS revision, most related to money. EU Member States can demand direct financial contributions from online and streaming providers to support indigenous producers. TV broadcasters are already required to make steep contributions to original national content, generally about 20% of annual revenues. The European Commission has also proposed lifting hourly TV ad limits, particularly in prime time, and dropping some product placement restrictions.

“We have to adapt the legislation to new forms of viewing,” explained EC vice president for the digital agenda Andrus Ansip after the culture ministers vote, quoted by Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) (May 25). The EC had proposed simply applying the current 20% content quota established for TV broadcasters. The French already require a 50% European content quota for all audiovisual services.

There is no confusion about the object of ire: big, rich, American technology firms. ”It can not be that Microsoft, Apple or Netflix are without responsibility for cultural heritage through film," German MEP Petra Kammerevert, co-author of the AVMS revision. "It is only fair that the person who makes money with the distribution of cultural goods to European viewers is also responsible for their continued existence.” Regardless of where they are established, video streaming services, would be required to invest in original content at the same level as national TV broadcasters. Video sharing platforms, like YouTube and Facebook, have not been included in content quota or investment requirements… so far.

Greece pushed for a 40% quota. “We cannot leave European audiovisual works unprotected, turning Europe into a field of unequal competition with international productions,” offered Greek Minister for Digital Policy, Media and Telecommunications Nikos Pappas, quoted by neweurope.eu (May 23).

Culture ministers from the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and the UK opposed raising the European content quota. “I think it is regrettable that the European Union is moving in this direction,” said Danish culture minister Mette Bock, quoted by mediawatch.dk (May 23). "My concern is that we consider the provider’s position, that they have to buy cheap content in order to fill the quota instead of delivering as good quality as possible. You have to be sure what to do, what the consequences are.”

“Quotas are frustrating for us because there is no real evidence to show that they work,” said Netflix director of global public policy Colin Bortner, quoted by the Financial Times (May 24). “Quotas divert investment away from high-quality European films and series that can attract a global audience.” Netflix just opened a customer service hub in Amsterdam.

Much more blunt was Netflix corporate communications manager Europe Middle East Asia Yann Lafargue, to Le Point (May 26) on the sidelines of the Cannes Film Festival. “Quotas have never guaranteed a great film.” Funding films and TV series, he said, should be a company decision. “We want to decide for ourselves who we work with, and not blindly fund (films) that are not of interest to our subscribers.”

And, one more time, the new world of media is explained. “The Millennials are watching programs on their tablets and smartphones, they will go to the cinema less and less, except for a big blockbuster. As for the big studios, they bet more and more on the big franchises, the remakes of remakes, there is no risk taking any more. Not everyone has a cinema near their home and a cinema (outing) is more expensive than a monthly subscription to Netflix. We prefer films to be seen rather than not, regardless of medium.”

See also in ftm Knowledge

Streaming Everything

Great streams of media are flooding digital devices, faster and faster with each new G. Streaming audio and video are either the surfboard riding the digital wave or just another tech Titanic. As investors pile in the cash broadcasters experience another panic attack. This story's just beginning. 49 pages PDF (January 2016)

Order here

Media Laws - Digital Dividend

Lawmakers and lawyers are challlenged by the new digital reality. We've seen new rules proposed, enacted, dismissed and changed as quickly as technology takes a new turn. The ftm Knowledge file looks at the grand plans and their consequences. 76 pages PDF (April 2013)

Order here