The Norwegian Television Market in the 1990S Legal Framework, Market Situation, Financial Information and Programming of Public and Private Television

10.1515/nor-2017-0364 The Norwegian Television Market in the 1990s Legal Framework, Market Situation, Financial Information and Programming of Public and Private Television TRINE SYVERTSEN & GRO MAREN MOGSTAD KARLSEN Introduction are the financial resources available to them? And how does this correspond with the programming The Norwegian television market has been com- they put out? pletely transformed in the 1990s. New technology, Thus, the main aim of the report is to present in- along with political and economic liberalisation, formation about the Norwegian situation that is not has led to increased competition for talent, pro- readily available – especially not in English. In ad- grammes, audiences and revenue. At the same dition, the report contributes to the ongoing discus- time, the global processes of concentration, glob- sion about the broadcasting situation in small Euro- alisation and convergence are changing the overall pean countries. Norway is not a member of the framework within which the broadcasters operate. European Union (a majority of the population voted So far, the competition has been most intense be- “no” both in 1972 and 1994), but is still, as a mem- tween national operators, but there is an increased ber of the European Economic Area (EEA), obliged presence of large transnational companies in the by the EU legal framework for broadcasting. In re- Norwegian market. cent years, the European Union, and to some de- In this report, the aim is to identify and discuss gree also national governments, have moved away key features of the television market as it has from traditional forms of broadcasting legislation, evolved throughout the 1990s. The report is based based on cultural policy, towards a situation where on a study originally commissioned by the Euro- broadcasting is perceived more as a business. This pean research agency PROGNOS on behalf of the situation poses challenges to public broadcasting European Commission. The purpose of the study institutions, whose privileges are increasingly con- was to supply the competition authorities (DGIV) tested by the private operators. It also poses inter- of the Commission with market analysis relevant esting challenges to media researchers, who tradi- for competition policy. Much of the data and sev- tionally have been most interested in the cultural eral of the calculations included in the original re- and political aspects of broadcasting. In the new port has been omitted in this version, mostly for situation, economic data and economic analysis reasons of confidentiality. In the present report, the will be increasingly relevant in order to understand key focus is the differences between national tele- how broadcasting institutions operate. vision operators. What are the legally defined privileges and obligations of each channel? What Public and Private Television Channels – an Overview Department of Media and Communication, University The emphasis in the report is on the main national of Oslo, P.O.Box 1093, Blindern, NO-0317 Oslo, channels – NRK1, NRK2, TV2, TVNorge – but sig- [email protected] nificant information is also included regarding TV3 [email protected] and pay-TV-channels available in Norway. Key 71 characteristics of the main Norwegian channels are trends and issues, particularly regarding digitalisa- as follows: tion and convergence. The report is based on documentary analysis NRK1: and interviews. Most of the interviews were carried • Established in 1933, television service from out during the spring and summer months of 1998. 1960. We are grateful to sources in the television compa- • Licence fee funded, state owned company, pub- nies and elsewhere who provided information, lic service obligations. some even during their holidays. A list of sources appear at the end of the report. The original report NRK2: was completed in August 1998 and contained information for the period 1993/94-1997. Most tables • Began broadcasting in 1996. Specialised channel (youth & culture), operated jointly with have later been updated with information for 1998. NRK1 Research assistant Gro Maren Mogstad Karlsen has collected most of the empirical evidence for the • Licence fee funded, state owned company, pub- report. She has conducted almost all the inter- lic service obligations. views, collected most of the market data and contributed to the analysis and discussion. Most of the TV2: actual text has been put together by Trine Syvert- • Established in 1991, began broadcasting in sen. We are also grateful to Terje Solsvik, financial 1992. journalist, who has contributed to the analysis of • Advertisement funded, privately owned chan- the capital structure of various companies. Finally, nel, public service obligations. we wish to thank Josef Trappel of PROGNOS, who constructed the original resarch design and made TVNorge: many valuable comments along the way. • Established and began broadcasting in 1988. Originated as a local television channel. Some co-ordination with TV2 from 1997. I. Legal Framework. Privileges and • Advertisement funded, privately owned, no pub- Obligations of Various Channels lic service obligations. General Information about the Regulation of Television in Norway TV3-Norway: Television in Norway is regulated by the Broad- • Established and began broadcasting in 1987. casting Act (Kringkastingsloven), supplementary Transmitting from the United Kingdom, oper- regulations issued by the Ministry of Culture (for- ates outside Norwegian legislation. skrifter) and licence agreements (konsesjonsbe- • Advertisement funded, privately owned chan- stemmelser). As an EEA member, Norway is bound nel. Part of a pan-Scandinavian multi-channel by the EU Television Directive, and its clauses are operation. incorporated into the Broadcasting Act and the supplementary regulations. In some cases, which will be indicated below, the Norwegian regulations are Chapter Outline. stricter than those of the EU Television Directive. Sources. Division of Labour EU permits individual countries to have stricter The report has four principal parts. In part I the aim regulations for their national operators as long as is to identify the differences in privileges and obli- they permit companies who obey the Directive to gations between private and public channels broadcast within their borders. through a discussion of legislation and practice. In Broadcasting regulation in Norway is rather part II the key characteristics of the competitive fragmented, and there is no single, specialised situation is outlined: market shares, distribution of agency responsible for television regulation. The advertising revenue, competition for rights and tal- Mass Media Authority (Statens medieforvaltning) ent etc. Part III contains financial information and is responsible for local television, press subsidies discuss the television companies as economic op- and advertising/sponsorship regulations, whereas erators. In part IV the main differences in program- the question of whether or not the various channels ming are discussed. The final part outlines current fulfil their obligations, is determined by Parliament 72 and the Ministry of Culture. Another body that has Any television company established within the influenced media regulation in later years is the constitutional area of the Broadcasting Act is Public Broadcasting Council (Allmennkringkast- obliged to abide by Norwegian regulations (supple- ingsrådet). The Council was established 1996 in mentary regulations § 1-1). This is interpreted to order to advice the government on whether or not mean that the company’s actual economic activities the public service channels fulfil their obligations. are carried out within Norwegian borders. There The television market as a whole is to some de- are disagreements as to the interpretation of this in gree regulated by the Norwegian Competition Au- the case of TV3. TV3 broadcasts from the UK, but thority (Konkurransetilsynet). In 1998, a new body, does have an organisation in Norway that sells ad- the Media Ownership Authority (Eierskapstilsynet) vertising. The transactions are nevertheless in- was set up to monitor concentration and mergers in voiced from London, so that it is difficult to deter- the media business. In 1999 a Media Ownership mine where the “actual economic activities” of the Act was put into practice, replacing some of the organisation takes place. Despite sustained efforts, previous restrictions on ownership in the media Norwegian authorities have not succeeded in mak- business. The purpose of the Act is to secure free- ing TV3 comply with Norwegian law. dom of speech, the actual possibilities for expres- sion and a versatile media scene within press and broadcasting. The Media Ownership Authority can Advertising and Sponsorship Regulations stop take-overs or a broadcasting company buying The regulation of advertising and sponsorship is shares in another broadcasting company when the more specific than the general regulation of broad- operator, alone or in co-operation with others, have casting. The total amount of advertising is regu- a significant position in the national, regional or lo- lated, both regarding the total share and the share cal media market, and this is in violation with the in any given hour. Further regulations relate to the purpose of the Act. language used in advertising, when it is forbidden Although there is a comprehensive framework to transmit advertising and which products that can of broadcasting regulation, many of

Load more