DOCSLIB.ORG

P6 TA(2008)0459 Concentration and Pluralism in the Media in The

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
P6 TA(2008)0459 Concentration and Pluralism in the Media in The P6_TA(2008)0459 Concentration and pluralism in the media in the European Union European Parliament resolution of 25 September 2008 on concentration and pluralism in the media in the European Union (2007/2253(INI)) The European Parliament, – having regard to Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, – having regard to the protocol to the Treaty of Amsterdam on the system of public broadcasting in the Member States1 (Amsterdam Treaty Protocol), – having regard to the Commission staff working document entitled "Media pluralism in the Member States of the European Union" (SEC(2007)0032), – having regard to Directive 2007/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2007 amending Council Directive 89/552/EEC on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities2, – having regard to its resolution of 20 November 2002 on media concentration3, – having regard to the 2005 Unesco Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions (Unesco Convention on cultural diversity), – having regard to its resolution of 22 April 2004 on the risks of violation, in the EU and especially in Italy, of freedom of expression and information (Article 11(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights)4, – having regard to the Communication from the Commission of 2001 on the application of State aid rules to public service broadcasting5, – having regard to the Council Resolution of 25 January 1999 concerning public service broadcasting6, – having regard to the Recommendation Rec(2007)3 of 31 January 2007 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to Member States on the remit of public service media in the information society, – having regard to the Recommendation Rec 1466(2000) of 27 June 2000 of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on media education; 1 OJ C 340, 10.11.1997, p. 109. 2 OJ L 332, 18.12.2007, p. 27. 3 OJ C 25 E, 29.1.2004, p. 205. 4 OJ C 104 E, 30.4.2004, p. 1026. 5 OJ C 320, 15.11.2001, p. 5 6 OJ C 30, 5.2.1999, p 1. – having regard to the Recommendation Rec(2007)2 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe of 31 January 2007 on media pluralism and diversity of media content; – having regard to its resolution of 13 November 2007 on the interoperability of digital interactive television services1, – having regard to Rule 45 of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the report of the Committee on Culture and Education and the opinions of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and (A6-0303/2008), A. whereas the European Union has confirmed its commitment to the defence and the promotion of media pluralism, as an essential pillar of the right to information and freedom of expression enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which remain fundamental principles for preserving democracy, civic pluralism and cultural diversity, B. whereas Parliament has repeatedly expressed its view that the Commission should establish a stable legal framework, both in the media and in the information society as a whole, aimed at ensuring an equivalent level of protection of pluralism in the Member States and enabling operators to benefit from the opportunities created by the single market, C. whereas, as the Commission stressed in its above-mentioned staff working document, the concept of media pluralism cannot be limited to the issue of concentration of ownership of companies, but also includes issues related to public broadcasting services, political power, competition in the economy, cultural diversity, the development of new technologies, transparency, and the working conditions of journalists in the Union, D. whereas public broadcasting services need to have the necessary resources and institutions to allow them to be genuinely independent of political pressures and market forces, E. whereas as things stand public broadcasting services are under pressure, unjustifiably and to the detriment of content quality, to compete for ratings with commercial channels, whose objective is ultimately not quality but satisfaction of majority public taste, F. whereas the Unesco Convention on cultural diversity attaches considerable importance to, inter alia, the creation of conditions conducive to media diversity, G. whereas the Unesco Convention on cultural diversity recognises the right of its parties to take measures aimed at enhancing diversity of the media, including through public service broadcasting, H. whereas the important role of the public audiovisual media in ensuring pluralism is recognised in the Unesco Convention on cultural diversity and in the Amsterdam Treaty protocol, which stipulates that the system of public broadcasting in the Member States is 1 Texts adopted, P6_TA(2007)0497. directly related to the democratic, social and cultural needs of each society and the need to preserve media pluralism, while the Member States are responsible for determining the remit of public television broadcasting and providing for its funding, I. whereas the above-mentioned Commission Communication of 2001 fully recognises the central role played by public broadcasting bodies in promoting plurality and cultural and linguistic diversity and stresses that, in examining the state aids in question, the Commission will apply criteria such as the importance of promoting cultural diversity and meeting the democratic, social and cultural needs of each society, J. whereas the above-mentioned Council Resolution of 25 January 1999 reiterates the vital role of public service broadcasting in ensuring pluralism and demands that Member States give it a wide remit that reflects its role of bringing to the public the benefits of new audiovisual and information services and new technologies, K. whereas the Amsterdam Treaty protocol has been adopted to ensure Member States' competence to organise their national public service broadcasting system in a way tailored to the democratic and cultural needs of their society, so as to best serve the aim of preserving media pluralism, L. whereas the above-mentioned Recommendation Rec(2007)3 underlines the specific role of public service broadcasting as a source of impartial and independent information and comment, and of innovative and varied content which complies with high ethical and quality standards, and as a forum for public discussion and a means of promoting broader democratic participation of individuals, and thus demands that Member States remain empowered to adapt that remit to fulfil its purpose in a new media environment, M. whereas media pluralism can only be guaranteed by a proper political balance in the content of public service television, N. whereas experience shows that the unrestricted concentration of ownership jeopardises pluralism and cultural diversity and whereas a system purely based on free market competition alone is not able to guarantee media pluralism, O. whereas in Europe the two-pillar arrangements for private and public television and audiovisual media services have proved their value in consolidating media pluralism and should be further developed, P. whereas concentration of ownership is generating increased dependence by media professionals on the owners of large media enterprises, Q. whereas new technologies, and in particular the shift to digital technology for the production and dissemination of audiovisual content and the entry on the market of new communications and information services have significantly influenced the quantity of available products and means of dissemination; whereas, however, a quantitative increase in media and services does not automatically guarantee content diversity; whereas new updated means of ensuring media pluralism and cultural diversity and the provision of prompt and objective information to the public are therefore necessary, R. whereas the current telecommunications regulatory framework, reflecting the direct relationship and interdependence between infrastructure and content regulation, provides Member States with suitable technical instruments for the protection of media and content plurality, such as access and must-carry rules, S. whereas, however, respect for pluralism of information and diversity of content is not automatically guaranteed by technological advances, but must come about through an active, consistent and vigilant policy on the part of the national and European public authorities, T. whereas, while the internet has greatly increased access to various sources of information, views and opinions, it has not yet replaced traditional media as a decisive public opinion former, U. whereas due to technological developments, newspaper publishers are increasingly disseminating content via the internet and are therefore largely dependent on (online) advertising revenue, V. whereas the media remains a tool of political influence, and whereas there is a considerable risk concerning the media's ability to carry out its functions as a watchdog of democracy, as private media enterprises are predominantly motivated by financial profit; whereas this carries the danger of a loss of diversity, quality of content and multiplicity of opinions, therefore the custody of media pluralism should not be left purely to market mechanisms, W. whereas large media enterprises have built
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Media Pluralism Monitor: Conceptualizing Media Pluralism for the Online Environment Elda Brogi
    The Media pluralism monitor: Conceptualizing media pluralism for the online environment Elda Brogi How to cite this article: Brogi, Elda (2020). “The media pluralism monitor: Conceptualizing media pluralism for the online environment”. Profesional de la información, v. 29, n. 5, e290529. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.sep.29 Invited manuscript received on 18th October 2020 Elda Brogi https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2682-0528 Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom European University Institute Via Boccaccio, 121/111 50133 Florence, Italy [email protected] Abstract Media pluralism is an essential feature and pillar of contemporary democracies. It is a corollary of the right to freedom of expression, as guaranteed by European national constitutions, as well as by theConvention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms (art. 10) and by the Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union (art. 11). Ensuring a plural media environment is a precondition for democracy and may be seen as a policy goal. The availability and accessibility of diverse information and views create the conditions for citizens to form and express their opinions and participate in the democratic debate in an informed way. Due to technological developments and the rapid rise of digital platforms intermediating online content, the concept of media pluralism has been reinterpreted at both academic and policy level, taking into account the recent structural changes in the media sector. The Media pluralism monitor is a methodology to assess the risks to media pluralism, based on a set of 20 indicators covering a broad definition of media pluralism and, therefore, having a holistic perspective.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Disinformation on Democratic Processes and Human Rights in the World
    STUDY Requested by the DROI subcommittee The impact of disinformation on democratic processes and human rights in the world @Adobe Stock Authors: Carme COLOMINA, Héctor SÁNCHEZ MARGALEF, Richard YOUNGS European Parliament coordinator: Policy Department for External Relations EN Directorate General for External Policies of the Union PE 653.635 - April 2021 DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR EXTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT STUDY The impact of disinformation on democratic processes and human rights in the world ABSTRACT Around the world, disinformation is spreading and becoming a more complex phenomenon based on emerging techniques of deception. Disinformation undermines human rights and many elements of good quality democracy; but counter-disinformation measures can also have a prejudicial impact on human rights and democracy. COVID-19 compounds both these dynamics and has unleashed more intense waves of disinformation, allied to human rights and democracy setbacks. Effective responses to disinformation are needed at multiple levels, including formal laws and regulations, corporate measures and civil society action. While the EU has begun to tackle disinformation in its external actions, it has scope to place greater stress on the human rights dimension of this challenge. In doing so, the EU can draw upon best practice examples from around the world that tackle disinformation through a human rights lens. This study proposes steps the EU can take to build counter-disinformation more seamlessly into its global human rights and democracy policies.
    [Show full text]
  • Jurisdictional Review of Plurality Policies, Guidelines, Practices and Rules
    Jurisdictional Review of plurality policies, guidelines, practices and rules. Prepared on behalf of the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland (BAI) Deirdre Kevin, Commsol Ltd March 2018 1 Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... 5 Introduction and outline of report .............................................................................................. 12 Note on methodology .................................................................................................................. 14 Section I: the European and international context ............................................................. 15 Chapter 1. Placing the pluralism debate in a market context ......................................... 16 1.1 Traditional media ...................................................................................................................... 16 News sources, trust and reliability .................................................................................................... 17 1.2 The new digital media world..................................................................................................... 17 Digitisation, proliferation of TV channels and their distribution ...................................................... 17 New online players in the provision and delivery of news ................................................................ 18 Enhancing understanding of new forms of access to news .............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • World Trends in Freedom of Expression and Media Development: 2017/2018 Global Report
    Published in 2018 by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization 7, place de Fontenoy, 7523 Paris 07 SP, France © UNESCO and University of Oxford, 2018 ISBN 978-92-3-100242-7 Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO (CC-BY-SA 3.0 IGO) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/igo/). By using the content of this publication, the users accept to be bound by the terms of use of the UNESCO Open Access Repos- itory (http://www.unesco.org/open-access/terms-use-ccbysa-en). The present license applies exclusively to the textual content of the publication. For the use of any material not clearly identi- fied as belonging to UNESCO, prior permission shall be requested from: [email protected] or UNESCO Publishing, 7, place de Fontenoy, 75352 Paris 07 SP France. Title: World Trends in Freedom of Expression and Media Development: 2017/2018 Global Report This complete World Trends Report Report (and executive summary in six languages) can be found at en.unesco.org/world- media-trends-2017 The complete study should be cited as follows: UNESCO. 2018. World Trends in Freedom of Expression and Media Development: 2017/2018 Global Report, Paris The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authori- ties, or concerning the delimiation of its frontiers or boundaries. The ideas and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors; they are not necessarily those of UNESCO and do not commit the Organization.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparative Analysis of Media Freedom and Pluralism in the EU Member States
    DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT C: CITIZENS' RIGHTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS A comparative analysis of media freedom and pluralism in the EU Member States STUDY Abstract This study was commissioned by the European Parliament's Policy Department for Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the LIBE Committee. The authors argue that democratic processes in several EU countries are suffering from systemic failure, with the result that the basic conditions of media pluralism are not present, and, at the same time, that the distortion in media pluralism is hampering the proper functioning of democracy. The study offers a new approach to strengthening media freedom and pluralism, bearing in mind the different political and social systems of the Member States. The authors propose concrete, enforceable and systematic actions to correct the deficiencies found. PE 571.376 EN ABOUT THE PUBLICATION This research paper was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) and commissioned, overseen and published by the Policy Department for Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs. Policy Departments provide independent expertise, both in-house and external, to support EP committees and other parliamentary bodies in shaping legislation and exercising democratic scrutiny over EU external and internal policies. To contact the Policy Department for Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs or to subscribe
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of the Risks to Media Pluralism 3
    Media Pluralism Monitor 2016 Monitoring Risks for Media Pluralism in the EU and Beyond Country report: Spain Written by Pere Masip, Carlos Ruiz, Jaume Suau, Ángel García Castillejo Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom TABLE OF CONTENT 1. About the Project 1 2. Introduction 2 3. Results from the data collection: assessment of the risks to media pluralism 3 3.1. Basic Protection (35% - medium risk) 4 3.2. Market Plurality (42% - medium risk) 5 3.3. Political Independence (54% - medium risk) 6 3.4 Social Inclusiveness (41% ‒ medium risk) 7 4. Conclusions 9 References 10 Annexe 1. Country Team 11 Annexe 2. Group of Expert 11 1. ABOUT THE PROJECT 1.1 OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT The Media Pluralism Monitor (MPM) is a research tool that was designed to identify potential risks to media pluralism in the Member States of the European Union. This narrative report has been produced within the framework of the first pan-European implementation of the MPM. The implementation was conducted in 28 EU Member States, Montenegro and Turkey with the support of a grant awarded by the European Union to the Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom (CMPF) at the European University Institute. 1.2 METHODOLOGICAL NOTE The CMPF cooperated with experienced, independent national researchers to carry out the data collection and to author the narrative reports, except in the cases of Malta and Italy where data collection was carried out centrally by the CMPF team. The research was based on a standardised questionnaire and apposite guidelines that were developed by the CMPF.
    [Show full text]
  • Independent Study on Indicators for Media Pluralism in the Member States – Towards a Risk-Based
    Independent Study on Indicators for Media Pluralism in the Member States – Towards a Risk-Based Approach Prepared for the European Commission Directorate-General Information Society and Media SMART 007A 2007-0002 by K.U.Leuven – ICRI (lead contractor) Jönköping International Business School - MMTC Central European University - CMCS Ernst & Young Consultancy Belgium Preliminary Final Report Contract No.: 30-CE-0154276/00-76 Leuven, April 2009 Editorial Note: The findings reported here provide the basis for a public hearing to be held in Brussels in the spring of 2009. The Final Report will take account of comments and suggestions made by stakeholders at that meeting, or subsequently submitted in writing. The deadline for the submission of written comments will be announced at the hearing as well as on the website of the European Commission from where this preliminary report is available. Prof. Dr. Peggy Valcke Project leader Independent Study on “Indicators for Media Pluralism in the Member States – Towards a Risk-Based Approach” AUTHORS OF THE REPORT This study is carried out by a consortium of three academic institutes, K.U. Leuven – ICRI, Central European University – CMCS and Jönköping International Business School – MMTC, and a consultancy firm, Ernst & Young Consultancy Belgium. The consortium is supported by three categories of subcontractors: non-affiliated members of the research team, members of the Quality Control Team and members of the network of local media experts (‘Country Correspondents’). The following persons have contributed to the Second Interim Report: For K.U.Leuven – ICRI: Prof. Dr. Peggy Valcke (project leader; senior legal expert) Katrien Lefever Robin Kerremans Aleksandra Kuczerawy Michael Dunstan and Jago Chanter (linguistic revision) For Central European University – CMCS: Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparative Analysis of Media Freedom and Pluralism in the EU Member States
    DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT C: CITIZENS' RIGHTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS A comparative analysis of media freedom and pluralism in the EU Member States STUDY Abstract This study was commissioned by the European Parliament's Policy Department for Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the LIBE Committee. The authors argue that democratic processes in several EU countries are suffering from systemic failure, with the result that the basic conditions of media pluralism are not present, and, at the same time, that the distortion in media pluralism is hampering the proper functioning of democracy. The study offers a new approach to strengthening media freedom and pluralism, bearing in mind the different political and social systems of the Member States. The authors propose concrete, enforceable and systematic actions to correct the deficiencies found. PE 571.376 EN ABOUT THE PUBLICATION This research paper was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) and commissioned, overseen and published by the Policy Department for Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs. Policy Departments provide independent expertise, both in-house and external, to support EP committees and other parliamentary bodies in shaping legislation and exercising democratic scrutiny over EU external and internal policies. To contact the Policy Department for Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs or to subscribe
    [Show full text]
  • The Illusion of Pluralism. Regulatory Aspects of Equality in the New Media
    Chapter 8 The illusion of pluralism Regulatory aspects of equality in the new media Judit Bayer This chapter examines some normative regulatory aspects of furthering equality in the media. From the perspective of legal regulation, equality is a normative concept that is dependent on many social and economic factors. Legal regulation alone may achieve only limited results in this area. This chapter focuses on various aspects of pluralism and diversity as factors that have the potential to advance equality in the media. To approximate this ideal, the efforts of all actors in society are needed, including the us- ers themselves,1 journalists, state regulators and international policy makers. A new set of actors emerged in the era of Web 2.0 media: platform providers as facilitators and gatekeepers of spontaneous citizen communication. Equality in publishing and accessing information online raises issues regarding the rights and responsibilities of gatekeepers. The roles and responsibilities of these actors have not been crystallized yet. Freedom of expression is one of the prerequisites of democracy. Deliberative democ- racies cannot operate without open, public discussion of social matters. To pursue valuable public discussions, access to public information is also needed, along with the possibilities and capacities to exercise these rights. Participation in discussions on common-interest matters must be wide enough and citizens need to be well informed to achieve a meaningful level of discussion. The media traditionally did not provide the possibility for everyone to publish their ideas, and this produced regulatory theories regarding the responsibility of the media to be representative of all sides in society, which became part of the concept of media pluralism.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Media Pluralism : a Complex Issue
    Contribution to the EU public consultation on media pluralism and democracy July 2016 Media pluralism is paramount for a functionning democracy and for a free and open society. Access to a plurality of editorial lines and analyses is essential for citizens to be able to confront ideas, to make their own informed choices and to conduct their life freely. 1. Media pluralism : a complex issue Two definitions of pluralism Media pluralism can either mean a plurality of voices, of analyses, of expressed opinions and issues (internal pluralism), or a plurality of media outlets, of types of media (print, radio, TV or digital) and coexistance of private owned media and public service media (external pluralism). Global trend of ownership concentration in the mass media RSF can report a global trend of ownership concentration in the creative industries, including mass media. Alongside this development comes a concentration of control over public opinion in fewer and fewer hands, year after year, which results in a decline of media pluralism almost everywhere. As an outcome of our analysis, we can offer a few indications for possible reasons: 1. Business models vanish : In a highly regulated, analogue environment of the past, the scarcity of distribution channels secured viable businesses. The abundance of offer in our digital world has demolished most of them. 2. Emergence of new players : The subsequent, precarious state of the media has turned it ripe for unfriendly take-overs by all sorts of investors, trying to secure their interests by control over public opinion. Given the tremendous wealth and power of some local oligarchs, seamlessly mixing very profitable businesses of all sorts – organized crime in some cases, political activities and media operations, the development of pluralistic media landscapes stalls or even falls back.
    [Show full text]
  • World Trends in Freedom of Expression and Media Development
    World Trends in Freedom of Expression and Media Development: Regional overview of AFRICA Communication and Information Sector United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization World Trends in Freedom of Expression and Media Development: Regional overview of AFRICA Communication and Information Sector United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization Published in 2014 by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 7, place de Fontenoy, 75352 Paris 07 SP, France © UNESCO 2014 ePub ISBN 978-92-3-100008-9 This publication is available in Open Access under the Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO (CC-BY-SA 3.0 IGO) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/igo/). By using the content of this publication, the users accept to be bound by the terms of use of the UNESCO Open Access Repository (http://www.unesco.org/open-access/terms-use-ccbysa-en). The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The ideas and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors; they are not necessarily those of UNESCO and do not commit the Organization. This publication was supported by Sweden. Editor: Courtney C. Radsch, PhD Associate Editor: Rachel Pollack Graphic design: UNESCO Cover design: UNESCO Illustrations: Ben Stanford, UNESCO Typeset: UNESCO Table of contents INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 5 AFRICA: MEDIA FREEDOM ................................................................ 6 AFRICA: MEDIA PLURALISM ............................................................. 12 AFRICA: MEDIA INDEPENDENCE ....................................................
    [Show full text]
  • ENPA Media Pluralism Paper
    PRESERVING PLURALISM IN A RAPIDLY CHANGING MEDIA MARKET October 2011 Introduction The newspaper and news media publishing sector is one of the main sources of cultural diversity and pluralism in Europe. In every Member State, newspapers are present in the different local, regional and national markets. They are now also accessible from a wide variety of platforms and devices from printed to digital formats. The editorial content of newspapers covers a wide diversity of topics. Newspapers on all platforms encourage and enable their readers to participate actively in democratic debate through blogs, opinion forums, and other new tools which increase the level of democratic participation, diversity and pluralism in the European media landscape. The newspaper and news media sector is currently going through a crucial restructuring phase shaping the future of the press from a print environment to todayʼs multi-channel world. Publishers are investing heavily in new business models to provide citizens with an incredible range of news, views and information in both print and digital formats. While the print edition of newspapers is still the engine room driving the creation of professional news content, publishers are also providing readers with a choice of attractive offers via websites, smart phones and tablet applications. These investments are being made at a time when advertising revenues for newspapers have declined in many countries due to the economic downturn and when the digital environment for both content and advertising has yet to yield significant returns. Furthermore, newspapersʼ growth in the digital market is challenged by news aggregators and search engines which develop their activities by using publishersʼ content without investing in the development of content and negotiating properly with publishers.
    [Show full text]