`
SUMMARY EUROPEAN MEDIA
COMMUNICATIONS & POLICIES
JULIE DE COCK
2019-2020
Prof. Tim Raats
, Julie Sofie J De Cock
1. INTRODUCTION 5
1.1 WHAT IS MEDIA POLICY? 5
1.1.1 POLICY, REGULATION AND GOVERNANCE 6
1.1.2 MULTI-LEVEL GOVERNANCE: TENSIONS AND AMBIGUITIES 7
1.1.3 HOW TO APPROACH MEDIA POLICY THEN? 7
1.1.4 I, I AND I MIX 7
1.1.5 EXAMPLES OF EUROPEAN MEDIA POLICY 8
2. NORMATIVE PRINCIPLES IN MEDIA POLICIES 8
2.1 PUBLIC INTEREST 8
2.1.1 EXAMPLE: DIFFERENT PERCEPTIONS OF PUBLIC INTERESTS AND ROLES 8
2.2 MEDIA FREEDOM 9
2.2.1 EXAMPLE: POLAND - INDEPENDENCE OF PUBLIC SERVICE MEDIA 9
2.3 UNIVERSALITY & ACCESS 10
2.4 QUALITY 10
2.5 OBJECTIVITY, FAIRNESS AND ACCURACY 10
2.5.1 EXAMPLE: VRT GUIDELINES 11
2.6 PRIVACY 11
2.7 DIVERSITY, PLURALISM 12
2.7.1 A MIX OF VARIETY, BALANCE AND DISPARITY 13
2.7.2 SUPPLIED AND CONSUMED DIVERSITIES 14
2.7.3 PRODUCER, PRODUCT AND CONSUMER DIVERSITIES 14
2.8 PLURALISM AND PLURIFORMITY 14
2.9 CONCLUSION 15
3. BIG PARADIGMATIC SHIFTS FOR MEDIA POLICY IN EUROPE 15
3.1 PHASE 1: TELEVISION WITHIN FRONTIERS (1920S - 1980S) 15
3.1.1 MARKET CONTEXT 15
3.1.2 ACTORS AND INTERESTS 16
3.1.3 POLICY DISCOURSE 16
3.1.4 MEDIA POLICY DOMAINS 16
3.1.5 REGULATORY MEASURES 16
3.1.6 IN SUM 16
3.2 PHASE 2: TELEVISION WITHOUT FRONTIERS 17
3.2.1 MARKET CONTEXT 17
3.2.2 ACTORS AND INTERESTS 17
3.2.3 POLICY IDEAS 17
3.2.4 MEDIA POLICY DOMAINS 17
3.2.5 REGULATORY MEASURES 18
3.3 PHASE 3: TELEVISION BEYOND BORDERS 19
3.3.1 MARKET CONTEXT 19
3.3.2 ACTORS AND INTERESTS 20
3.3.3 POLICY IDEAS 21
3.3.4 MEDIA POLICY DOMAINS 21
2
, Julie Sofie J De Cock
3.3.5 REGULATORY MEASURES 22
4. CASE 1: TELEVISION AND BEYOND 24
4.1 CONTEXT 24
4.2 REGULATORY MEASURES FOR TV 24
4.3 FROM NATIONAL REGULATION TO TELEVISION WITHOUT FRONTIERS 25
4.3.1 WHAT IS IN TELEVISION WITHOUT FRONTIERS? 25
4.3.2 FROM TELEVISION WITHOUT FRONTIERS TO AUDIOVISUAL MEDIA SERVICES 26
4.3.3 AUDIOVISUAL MEDIA SERVICES DIRECTIVE (AVMSD) 26
4.3.3.1 2018 AVMSD review 27
4.4 NATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION OF EU RULES: THE NETFLIX TAXES 28
4.4.1 LEVY 29
4.4.2 DIRECT INVESTMENT 29
4.4.3 CHOICE DIRECT INVESTMENT OR LEVY 29
4.4.3.1 JOINT – DIRECT INVESTMENT AND LEVY: FRANCE 29
4.4.3.2 JOINT – DIRECT INVESTMENT AND LEVY: CZECH REP & CROATIA 30
4.4.4 QUOTA 30
4.4.5 CONCLUSION NETFLIX TAXES 30
4.5 NATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION OF EU RULES: ADVERTISEMENT 31
5. CASE 2: PSB 31
5.1 DIFFERENCES WITH COMMERCIAL (PRIVATE) BROADCASTING 31
5.2 CONTEXT 31
5.2.1 PSB AS A MONOPOLY 31
5.2.2 LIBERALISATION OF PUBLIC BROADCAST MARKET 32
5.2.3 DIGITISATION AND CONVERGENCE 33
5.3 PERSPECTIVES ON THE FUTURE ROLE OF PSB 33
5.3.1 LESSONS LEARNED 34
5.4 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK 35
5.4.1 NATIONAL 35
5.4.2 EU 35
5.4.3 COMPETITION RULES LAID OUT IN BROADCASTING COMMUNICATIONS 37
5.5 REGULATORY CHALLENGES FOR PSB 38
5.5.1 EXAMPLES 40
5.5.2 WHAT CAN BE DONE? (ACCORDING TO COUNCIL OF EUROPE) 40
6. CASE 3: SUPPORTING FILM INDUSTRIES 41
6.1 THE EUROPEAN FILM INDUSTRY 41
6.1.1 REASONS FOR EU INTERVENTION IN FILM 42
6.1.2 POLICY TOOLKIT FOR FILM SUPPORT 43
6.2 EUROPEAN FRAMEWORK 45
6.2.1 RATIONALE FOR EU INTERVENTION 45
6.2.2 FILM SUPPORT PROGRAMS 46
6.2.2.1 Eurimages 46
6.2.2.2 MEDIA (CREATIVE EUROPE) 48
6.2.2.3 EU Film support 52
6.2.2.4 Creative Europe: new proposal 53
3
, Julie Sofie J De Cock
6.2.3 CONCLUSION 54
6.2.4 EU MEDIA POLICY FOR FILM: OTHER IMPORTANT POLICY DOMAINS 54
6.3 FILM SUPPORT: STATE AID TO CINEMA 55
6.3.1 RECAP: COMPETITION POLICY 55
6.3.2 EUROPEAN COMMISSION AS DRIVER IN COMPETITION POLICY 55
6.3.3 GENERAL STATE AID RULES 55
6.3.3.1 Cinema as an exception in state aid 56
6.3.3.2 Cinema Communication 56
6.3.3.3 What about cultural diversity? 57
6.4 NATIONAL FRAMEWORK 57
6.4.1 TRENDS ON NATIONAL LEVEL 57
6.4.1.1 Most film funding still on national level 58
6.4.1.2 Importance of PSB investment 59
6.4.1.3 Shift from public to economic incentives 59
6.4.1.4 Expanding to other genres 61
6.4.1.5 Investment obligations for cable and OTT 62
6.4.1.6 Despite increased emphasis, production remains privileged 62
6.4.1.7 New co-productions, not necessarily resulting from government support
64
6.4.1.8 Audience engagement and development 64
7. CASE 4: REGULATING THE FAANG 64
7.1 CONTEXT 64
7.1.1 PLATFORMS 64
7.1.2 INDUSTRY IS SUFFERING FROM PLATFORM MANIA 65
7.2 PLATFORM CHARACTERISTICS 66
7.2.1 NOT ABOUT MEDIA 68
7.2.2 PLATFORM CAPACITY 68
7.2.2.1 Content 68
7.2.2.2 Connectivity 69
7.2.2.3 Customer 69
7.2.2.4 Capital 70
7.2.3 WHICH POLICY DOMAINS ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? 70
7.3 ASSUMPTIONS OF REGULATION OF PLATFORMS 70
7.4 REGULATORY MEASURES FOR TELEVISION 70
7.4.1 SOMETHING NEW 71
7.4.1.1 Example: Fake News 72
7.4.2 COMPETITION LAW 73
7.4.2.1 Example: Google Shopping (2017) 75
7.4.2.2 Example: Google Android (2018) 75
7.5 EVALUATION OF REGULATORY STEPS 75
7.5.1 LACK OF FOCUS & COURAGE IN POLICY 75
7.5.2 PLATFORM POWER NOT ADDRESSED IN A HOLISTIC MANNER 76
7.5.3 SOMETIMES GAFA HYSTERICS 76
7.5.3.1 Axis platform economics in the US 77
7.5.4 PUBLIC INTEREST CONSIDERATIONS 77
4
, Julie Sofie J De Cock
1. Introduction
1.1 What is media policy?
- Concentration; pluralism; ... in media
- Public broadcaster
- Advertising in media
- OTT players
- Media literacy
- Data protection
- Frequencies, spectrum, ...
- ...
- Policymaking = process that concerns the interaction between different actors, the
institutional structures within which they work and the objectives that they pursue
Ø Interaction: there will be a process in which decisions will be made
Ø Different actors: multiple partners/businesses/voices in interaction
Ø Institutional structures: eg European Parliament
Ø Objectives they pursue: which interests do they serve? What do they want to
protect?
- Media policy = ‘a systematic attempt to foster certain types of media structure and
behavior and to suppress alternative modes of structure and behavior’
- Media policy refers to the variety of ways in which interested participants seek
to develop both forma land informal mechanisms to shape the conduct of media
systems”
Ø Formal (rules) AND informal (eg influencing players to not broadcast negative
news) mechanisms
- Media policy
Ø “Decisions about the media are made in the most transparent and accessible
ways with an emphasis on expert advice, open discussion and public
participation” (cited in Freedman 2008: 31)"
Ø "Policymaking in which a range of views is sought, the evidence is considered
carefully, and a decision is reached based only on the merits of the specific
situation. Special interests are held at bay while the public interest remains
paramount” (cited in Freedman, media policy fetishism)
- Never ideal, not per se mechanical, technocratic, administrative, dynamic & unforeseen
- Ideology-driven (serving views of government in specific context)
- Result of power positions, unequal negotiation positions, lobbyists, conflictual, yet with
a view on consensus
Ø Every policy is a consensus, compromise, ...
Ø Often can’t see this and/or struggle in the outcome
- “Policymaking (...) as a battleground in which contrasting political positions fight for
material advantage [...] This struggle occurs throughout the policy process [...]”
(Freedman 2008: 3)“
- Media policy [...] is a deeply political phenomenon” (Freedman 2008: 1)
5
, Julie Sofie J De Cock
- There is no such a thing as an ‘ideal’ policy outcome, nor perfect policymaking process;
always unforeseen dysfunctions à policy should be flexible and dynamic; Yet: problem
of ad hoc policies...
- “Media policymaking ‘is not and can never be the tidy creation of ideal situations.
Compromises and trade-offs are endemic’ (Garnham, N. 1998: 210)
- What is media policy?
Ø The definition of a policy problem is already ‘political’: “How a policy issue
area is identified is political... because it determines who participates in
decision making, the rhetorical frames and operational definitions used, and
the resources, and goals, considered pertinent” (Braman, S. 2004:154)
Either we define Cultural Diversity, plurality, freedom, as a challenge
or policy objective, or we don’t
Ø Dynamic and changing over time
Ø What a policy problem is, is dependent on different contexts
Ø Not only formal policy discussions, but also informal
Ø Combination of (different) instruments for tackling similar policy problems
Ø Based on conflict striving towards consensus: outcome = compromise
1.1.1 Policy, regulation and governance
- Media policy is about the media policy principles and the behavior one wants to achieve,
e.g. cultural diversity & identity, cohesion
- 2. Media regulation is about the specific laws and rulemaking, e.g European regulation
on competition, national law, directives
- 3.Media Governance relates to (1) MLG and (2) multi-stakeholder approach and
considering (3) new regulatory mechanisms such as soft law, co- and self regulation, as
well as (4) formal & informal policy mechanisms/negotiations
- MLG = Multi level governance
- Soft law = eg White Papers (are not laws themselves)
- How to approach?
6