Czech Republic

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Czech Republic Broadcasting and Citizens CZECH REPUBLIC By Anja Herzog 1. TV VIEWERS PARTICIPATION IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC After the collapse of the communist system, the Czech broadcasting system developed, like many others, into a dual system with public and private broadcasters. The national radio and TV station, ?TV, is now a public operator that provides two TV channels with a market share of 21.2 % and 8.7 %. Since 1994 it is complemented by the commercial broadcaster TV Nova, which is today the channel with the highest market share: 44.3 %. The second commercial TV station, Prima TV, has a market share of 18.4 %.1 As the research for this report showed, there are two general problems that characterise the Czech broadcasting system: 1) there still is a strong political influence on the broadcasters, 2) an overall lack of money is a prevalent characteristic of the Czech broadcasting system, which might explain why viewer participation is currently not the most important issue. In the Czech broadcasting system the official possibility to complain is through the Council for Radio and TV Broadcasting, the responsible regulatory authority. On the website of the public broadcaster Czech Television, provides a forum for feedback and discussion about the TV programmes is provided, which is used frequently. In general, the system lacks a feed back loop though, which could incorporate the results of the audience research that is regularly carried out in both qualitative and quantitative studies by the public broadcasters. For an overview on the relevant institutions see the table at the end of this chapter. 1.1 Government and official bodies In the organisation of the Czech broadcasting system, the Czech parliament plays an important role. First of all, it elects the broadcasting council CBC (Council for Radio and TV Broadcasting of the Czech Republic) – which is responsible for the regulatory authority of both public and private broadcasters. Moreover, the controlling body for the public broadcaster ?TV, the Czech Television Council (which consists of 15 members, with one-third of the members being replaced every two years) is also nominated by parliament and like the CBC reflects political interests of the parties of the parliament.2 This controlling body is responsible for the approval of the budget and in addition deals with the appointment of the general director of TV. With respect to accountability, the councils consider themselves as independent but have not reached many conclusions or decisions yet. Furthermore, they do not have much regulatory power. In fact, the councils are directly accountable to Parliament. 1.2 Self-regulation According to the law, the public service broadcaster adopted a code of principles for public service broadcasting on Czech Television3 that is binding for all persons working within the company. The code defines the basic functions of Czech Television based on the programme for public broadcasting, adopted by the Council of Europe. 53 Czech Republic 1.3 Other organisations Until now there are no viewers’ organisations or associations. The only activities of citizens, concerning TV content, have been petitions on violence and pornography on TV (the last in early spring 2004) that had several thousands of subscribers, but they were too general to cause any real changes. There are several Czech consumer organisations4 on regional level, providing information and help on matters of consumers rights and protection. On the website of the Association of Consumer Organisations a consultation form is available as well as an answers archive. 2. TV VIEWERS’ RIGHTS : THE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK 2.1 Sector (TV) specific regulation The Media Control Act (1991) established the new regulations for the broadcasting system after the split up of the Czech and Slovak Republics. This act reorganised the previously combined broadcasting system and built the legal foundation for the formation of separate national broadcasters for both Republics. Another decisive part of the Czech broadcasting system is the Council for Radio and Television Broadcasting, which was established by the Broadcasting Act5 on the 17th of May 2001 (No. 231/2001 Coll.) as a regulatory authority. Its role is to execute government administration in the area of radio and television broadcasting and retransmission. The public broadcaster Czech Television was established as a legal entity on January 1st, 1992 by Act No. 483/1991 coll. on Czech Television. The amendment of the Czech Television Act in 2001 set up new rules for the election of the Council of CTV and provides for adoption of statutes as well as the Czech Television Code to lay down principles of public service provision.6 The Czech Television Council pursues its tasks in accordance with the Czech Television Act. The Czech Television Code starts of with the right of the viewers as citizens and discusses in Article 1.3. the following: “In the fulfilment of its public service obligation stipulated by law and the Code, Czech Television shall ensure the satisfaction of the needs of the citizens-viewers. In order to achieve the aforementioned aim, it shall regularly and systematically collect and analyse data on the needs and wishes of individual viewer groups, as well as on their opinion and evaluation of the programmes broadcast. Each programming decision must take into account the results of such representative surveys, while using a fundamentally different approach to the input and evaluation of available data than that used by commercial operators of television broadcasting, especially in the emphasis placed on qualitative indicators. Programmes that do not take into account confirmed needs of the audience groups at which they are targeted obviously cannot meet the criteria of public service, since they have little effect on their audience. This rule, however, should not stand in the way of creative experiments aimed at testing the ground or stimulating interest in a particular genre or in a specific manner of treatment of a programme.“ 2.2 Regulatory practices for positive and negative content regulation Part 5 of the Broadcasting Act provides regulations about the “Rights and Duties in Programme Broadcasting”. Article 31 states that the broadcasters shall provide objective and balanced information and moreover, commentaries shall be separated from information. Article 32 describes the basic duties of broadcasters: “to ensure that programme units do not promote war or show brutal or otherwise inhumane behaviour, […] that the programme units do not arouse hatred for reasons relating to race, gender, religion, nationality or membership of a certain group of the population” as well as the protection of minors e.g. by pictorial symbols warning of the 54 Broadcasting and Citizens unsuitability of the programme for minors and division of advertisement and programme. Article 33 defines the obligations of the broadcaster with respect to the broadcasting of events of major importance for society. Article 35 regulates the right of reply. Articles 42-47 implements the provisions of the “Television without Frontiers” Directive concerning promotion of European productions. Articles 48-53 provide regulations concerning advertising, teleshopping and sponsorship of programme units. Part 6 of the Broadcasting Act regulates the securing of the plurality of information in broadcasting. According to Czech Television, it “has been required by the amended Act on Radio and Television Broadcasting to make 25 % of its broadcasts accessible to the hard of hearing; in January 2001 a new amendment to the Act changed the percentage to 70 %.” In the annual report of 2002, the following percentages of the program where specifically aimed at the hearing impaired. 13,967 programmes, i. e. 49.0 % of all broadcast programmes of which: - closed captioning 12,997, i. e. 45.6 % - on-screen captioning (subtitles) 537, i. e. 1.9 % - no words 49, i. e. 0.2 % - sign language 385, i. e. 1.3 %. 2.3 Instruments established by law The controlling bodies for the Czech broadcasting system is the CBC. The Council’s nine members are appointed by the Czech Parliament. According to the website of the CBC7, its communication with the public is “intensive and effective”. This communication takes place through press releases, issued immediately after any negotiations; through its web pages, the media, press conferences (not only in Prague, but also during the sessions on travel in the regions) and through publications of the individual members of the Council. “The Council also continuously evaluated (at the suggestion of the public as well) the practice of public appearances of the individual members of the Council, and set a detailed definition of the difference between a common standpoint of the Council and an individual opinion of a member, so that such standpoints would not be confused. This does not affect the constitutional right of an individual to express his/her own opinion” (see 3.1). 3. VIEWERS’ ORGANISATIONS SOCIAL IMPACT Case Study: Council for Radio and TV Broadcasting (CBC) The Council for Broadcasting is the broadcasting authority of the Czech Republic, elected by parliament and with the task to licence and supervise radio and TV broadcasting. One critical point is that the parliament pays big attention to the perfectly executed balance of party representatives in the Council, according to the balances in parliament which causes frequent changes in the membership of the Council. Moreover, this system clearly displays the influence of
Recommended publications
  • TV Nova S.R.O. GENERAL and PRICING TERMS and CONDITIONS of INTERNET ADVERTISEMENT October 17, 2019
    TV Nova s.r.o. GENERAL AND PRICING TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF INTERNET ADVERTISEMENT October 17, 2019 the Advertiser to the Provider that is necessary for the publication of the PREAMBLE Internet Advertisement on the Servers in compliance with the Specific These Terms and Conditions represent the general and pricing terms and Order; conditions concerning the procurement of the publication of an Internet “Advertising Format” shall mean an ordinary technical execution of the Advertisement on the Servers and shall apply to all Advertisers purchasing advertising message, which is different from the Advertising Spot and/or the an Internet Advertisement from the Provider. Non-Standard Advertising, referred to in the Technical Conditions of Internet Advertisement and the relevant Internet Advertisement Price List; These Terms and Conditions shall enter into effect on October 17, 2019, and “Advertising Position” shall mean a specific space on the web page of the shall substitute any and all previous general and pricing terms and given service on the Server where the individual Advertising shall be conditions regulating the publication of an Internet Advertisement purchased presented. The Advertising Positions may be specified in the relevant from the Provider. Internet Advertisement Price List; TABLE OF CONTENTS “Advertising Spot” shall mean an audiovisual or, as the case may be, visual announcement, display or other presentation determined for the support of 1. Definitions business activities, in particular, support of the consumption or sale of 2. Purchase of Internet Advertisement goods, housing, the lease or sale of real estate, the sale or exercise of rights 3. Placement of Internet Advertisement or obligations, support for providing services; 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2020
    Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2020 Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2020 Nic Newman with Richard Fletcher, Anne Schulz, Simge Andı, and Rasmus Kleis Nielsen Supported by Surveyed by © Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism / Digital News Report 2020 4 Contents Foreword by Rasmus Kleis Nielsen 5 3.15 Netherlands 76 Methodology 6 3.16 Norway 77 Authorship and Research Acknowledgements 7 3.17 Poland 78 3.18 Portugal 79 SECTION 1 3.19 Romania 80 Executive Summary and Key Findings by Nic Newman 9 3.20 Slovakia 81 3.21 Spain 82 SECTION 2 3.22 Sweden 83 Further Analysis and International Comparison 33 3.23 Switzerland 84 2.1 How and Why People are Paying for Online News 34 3.24 Turkey 85 2.2 The Resurgence and Importance of Email Newsletters 38 AMERICAS 2.3 How Do People Want the Media to Cover Politics? 42 3.25 United States 88 2.4 Global Turmoil in the Neighbourhood: 3.26 Argentina 89 Problems Mount for Regional and Local News 47 3.27 Brazil 90 2.5 How People Access News about Climate Change 52 3.28 Canada 91 3.29 Chile 92 SECTION 3 3.30 Mexico 93 Country and Market Data 59 ASIA PACIFIC EUROPE 3.31 Australia 96 3.01 United Kingdom 62 3.32 Hong Kong 97 3.02 Austria 63 3.33 Japan 98 3.03 Belgium 64 3.34 Malaysia 99 3.04 Bulgaria 65 3.35 Philippines 100 3.05 Croatia 66 3.36 Singapore 101 3.06 Czech Republic 67 3.37 South Korea 102 3.07 Denmark 68 3.38 Taiwan 103 3.08 Finland 69 AFRICA 3.09 France 70 3.39 Kenya 106 3.10 Germany 71 3.40 South Africa 107 3.11 Greece 72 3.12 Hungary 73 SECTION 4 3.13 Ireland 74 References and Selected Publications 109 3.14 Italy 75 4 / 5 Foreword Professor Rasmus Kleis Nielsen Director, Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism (RISJ) The coronavirus crisis is having a profound impact not just on Our main survey this year covered respondents in 40 markets, our health and our communities, but also on the news media.
    [Show full text]
  • European Public Service Broadcasting Online
    UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI, COMMUNICATIONS RESEARCH CENTRE (CRC) European Public Service Broadcasting Online Services and Regulation JockumHildén,M.Soc.Sci. 30November2013 ThisstudyiscommissionedbytheFinnishBroadcastingCompanyǡYle.Theresearch wascarriedoutfromAugusttoNovember2013. Table of Contents PublicServiceBroadcasters.......................................................................................1 ListofAbbreviations.....................................................................................................3 Foreword..........................................................................................................................4 Executivesummary.......................................................................................................5 ͳIntroduction...............................................................................................................11 ʹPre-evaluationofnewservices.............................................................................15 2.1TheCommission’sexantetest...................................................................................16 2.2Legalbasisofthepublicvaluetest...........................................................................18 2.3Institutionalresponsibility.........................................................................................24 2.4Themarketimpactassessment.................................................................................31 2.5Thequestionofnewservices.....................................................................................36
    [Show full text]
  • Digital News Report 2018 Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism / Digital News Report 2018 2 2 / 3
    1 Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2018 Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism / Digital News Report 2018 2 2 / 3 Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2018 Nic Newman with Richard Fletcher, Antonis Kalogeropoulos, David A. L. Levy and Rasmus Kleis Nielsen Supported by Surveyed by © Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism / Digital News Report 2018 4 Contents Foreword by David A. L. Levy 5 3.12 Hungary 84 Methodology 6 3.13 Ireland 86 Authorship and Research Acknowledgements 7 3.14 Italy 88 3.15 Netherlands 90 SECTION 1 3.16 Norway 92 Executive Summary and Key Findings by Nic Newman 8 3.17 Poland 94 3.18 Portugal 96 SECTION 2 3.19 Romania 98 Further Analysis and International Comparison 32 3.20 Slovakia 100 2.1 The Impact of Greater News Literacy 34 3.21 Spain 102 2.2 Misinformation and Disinformation Unpacked 38 3.22 Sweden 104 2.3 Which Brands do we Trust and Why? 42 3.23 Switzerland 106 2.4 Who Uses Alternative and Partisan News Brands? 45 3.24 Turkey 108 2.5 Donations & Crowdfunding: an Emerging Opportunity? 49 Americas 2.6 The Rise of Messaging Apps for News 52 3.25 United States 112 2.7 Podcasts and New Audio Strategies 55 3.26 Argentina 114 3.27 Brazil 116 SECTION 3 3.28 Canada 118 Analysis by Country 58 3.29 Chile 120 Europe 3.30 Mexico 122 3.01 United Kingdom 62 Asia Pacific 3.02 Austria 64 3.31 Australia 126 3.03 Belgium 66 3.32 Hong Kong 128 3.04 Bulgaria 68 3.33 Japan 130 3.05 Croatia 70 3.34 Malaysia 132 3.06 Czech Republic 72 3.35 Singapore 134 3.07 Denmark 74 3.36 South Korea 136 3.08 Finland 76 3.37 Taiwan 138 3.09 France 78 3.10 Germany 80 SECTION 4 3.11 Greece 82 Postscript and Further Reading 140 4 / 5 Foreword Dr David A.
    [Show full text]
  • Stream Name Category Name Coronavirus (COVID-19) |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT ---TNT-SAT ---|EU| FRANCE TNTSAT TF1 SD |EU|
    stream_name category_name Coronavirus (COVID-19) |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT ---------- TNT-SAT ---------- |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT TF1 SD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT TF1 HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT TF1 FULL HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT TF1 FULL HD 1 |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT FRANCE 2 SD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT FRANCE 2 HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT FRANCE 2 FULL HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT FRANCE 3 SD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT FRANCE 3 HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT FRANCE 3 FULL HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT FRANCE 4 SD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT FRANCE 4 HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT FRANCE 4 FULL HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT FRANCE 5 SD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT FRANCE 5 HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT FRANCE 5 FULL HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT FRANCE O SD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT FRANCE O HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT FRANCE O FULL HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT M6 SD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT M6 HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT M6 FHD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT PARIS PREMIERE |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT PARIS PREMIERE FULL HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT TMC SD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT TMC HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT TMC FULL HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT TMC 1 FULL HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT 6TER SD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT 6TER HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT 6TER FULL HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT CHERIE 25 SD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT CHERIE 25 |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT CHERIE 25 FULL HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT ARTE SD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT ARTE FR |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT RMC STORY |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT RMC STORY SD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT ---------- Information ---------- |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT TV5 |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT TV5 MONDE FBS HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT CNEWS SD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT CNEWS |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT CNEWS HD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT France 24 |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT FRANCE INFO SD |EU| FRANCE TNTSAT FRANCE INFO HD
    [Show full text]
  • State of Subtitling 2011 Report
    State of subtitling access free Europe for all hard of hearing citizens - in EU rier 2011 Report reating a bar C EFHOH/2011 1 Subtitling in the European Union. Easier done than said..... Dear Reader, Articles 11 and 14 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights confirm access to information and education as basic human rights. The EU has recently adhered to UN Convention or Right of People with Disabilities. Still over 50 million of deaf or hard of hearing European are deprived of basic human rights simply because they cannot hear programmes broadcasted on TV, they do not understand films in the cinema or plays in the theatre. These reasons have pushed The European Federation of Hard of Hearing People (EFHOH) to launch a pan European campaign in order promote subtitling in audiovisual media in all member states as the easiest solution to grant deaf and hard of hearing people full access to information society. During almost 10 years of our campaign we have gained valuable expertise on this issue which we would like to share with you by/thanks to this information leaflet. Our vision is the full inclusion of people with hearing loss in the society which will only be achieved by giving them full access to media and information. In our opinion 100% of programmes in public TV channels should be subtitled by 2020. We are aware that today we are far from achieving this objective. According to our own research access to subtitles varies strongly/considerably between Member states. We have also found differences in the subtitling access via various teletext pages, which is very confusing to an average user.
    [Show full text]
  • The Skripal Case Representation in Czech Television News
    The Skripal Case Representation in Czech Television News Renáta Sedláková Palacký University, Czech Republic | [email protected] Marek Lapčík Silesian University in Opava, Czech Republic | [email protected] ABSTRACT This article examines the representation of Agent Skripal’s poisoning on the public service broadcasting channel Czech Television (CT) in the first half of 2018, using content, discourse and semiotic analyses. We analysed the representation of this event on the following five television news programmes: Events (Události), Events and Commentaries (Události komentáře), News at 23 (Zprávy ve 23), Horizon CT24 (Horizont ČT24) and 90’ CT24 (90’ ČT24). The event’s representation was based on the presentation of aspects of the event and statements by individual actors. The article shows naturalisation of the British explanation of the event in the Czech television broadcasts. This so-called ‘British narrative’ was the prevailing framing of the event. Differences in the representation of various opinions and in the proportionality of the time devoted to the individual actors were present. However, significant systematic intentional implications, obvious evaluations or identifiable authorial signposting was not evident in the researched sample. We argue that the television coverage of the Skripal case represents a habitual form of the news reporting by the Czech public service broadcaster within the applicable law. KEYWORDS news discourse, discourse analysis, content analysis, Czech public broadcaster, public service television,
    [Show full text]
  • Presidential Election 2020 BELARUS Television & Social
    Presidential election 2020 BELARUS Television & Social Media Media Monitoring Campaign report (15 July – 4 August 2020) 10 August 2020 Bratislava, Minsk This project was supported by the Open Initiative Partnership MEMO 98 www.memo98.sk | [email protected] | www.facebook.com/memo98.sk | +421 903 581 591 [email protected] (Rasťo Kužel), [email protected] (Ivan Godársky), [email protected] (Marek Mračka) 2 INTRODUCTION Between 29 April – 19 May (first monitoring period) and 3 – 23 June 2020 (second monitoring period), MEMO 98, a Slovak non-profit specialist media-monitoring organization, in cooperation with the EAST Center (Eurasian States in Transition Research Center), a Belarusian think-tank focusing on post-Soviet and East-European studies, and Linking Media, a Belarusian civil society organization focusing on media, monitored traditional1 and social2 media in the run-up to the 9 August presidential election. The findings of both periods were presented in our interim report published on 3 August. This report presents the media monitoring findings of both, traditional and social3 media during three weeks of the official campaign period from 15 July through 4 August.4 The main purpose of the media monitoring was to determine if voters were provided an opportunity to receive ample information to make qualified choices at the ballot box and whether this information was sufficiently diverse, balanced and of adequate quality.5 While for most people, television is the primary source of information about politics6, the growing relevance of social media7 has inspired us to include also Facebook, Instagram, Telegram and VK into our monitoring.8 We were assessing to what extent were social media used during elections and to what extent could nominated candidates overcome the state monopoly on information by turning to social media.
    [Show full text]
  • Broadcast Anniversaries As Key Elements of Media History – a Research Study
    Broadcast Anniversaries as Key Elements of Media History – A Research Study Magdalena Reitbauer MMag. Magdalena Reitbauer University of Vienna [email protected] A Study funded by the FIAT/IFTA Television Studies Grant 2014 INDEX I) Introduction ...................................................................... 2 II) Case Studies ...................................................................... 4 Germany ARD .................................................................................... 4 ZDF ..................................................................................... 9 RTL ................................................................................... 16 United Kingdom BBC .................................................................................. 23 Ireland RTÉ ................................................................................... 34 Italy RAI ................................................................................... 43 Czech Republic ČRo and ČT ....................................................................... 52 Various International Examples ........................................... 63 III) Conclusion ....................................................................... 67 1 I) Introduction Institutional broadcast anniversaries are key moments for broadcasters´ expression of self- conception towards their audiences and the media market as a whole – both in present and historical contexts. Within the FIAT/IFTA Television Studies Commission’s Grant Programme,
    [Show full text]
  • Geoblocking, Technical Standards and the Law
    Scholarly Commons @ UNLV Boyd Law Scholarly Works Faculty Scholarship 2016 Geoblocking, Technical Standards and the Law Marketa Trimble University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub Part of the Internet Law Commons Recommended Citation Trimble, Marketa, "Geoblocking, Technical Standards and the Law" (2016). Scholarly Works. 947. https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub/947 This Book Chapter is brought to you by the Scholarly Commons @ UNLV Boyd Law, an institutional repository administered by the Wiener-Rogers Law Library at the William S. Boyd School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 54 THEORY ON DEMAND GEOBLOCKING, TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND THE LAW MARKETA TRIMBLE Introduction In a world where countries cannot agree on a single set of laws that would apply uniformly around the globe, most national laws need to be territorially confined. Without territorial limits, laws have extraterritorial effects that often, although not always, impinge upon other coun- tries’ sovereignty and freedom to set their own laws and policies. For example, what might work as law in the United States might not work in France, and therefore French law might be different from U.S. law. Some legal rights and responsibilities exist only within countries’ jurisdictional limits, and therefore persons and entities may enjoy the rights and must fulfill the responsibilities within the defined territory. For example, copyright is territorially limited;
    [Show full text]
  • Must-Carry Rules, and Access to Free-DTT
    Access to TV platforms: must-carry rules, and access to free-DTT European Audiovisual Observatory for the European Commission - DG COMM Deirdre Kevin and Agnes Schneeberger European Audiovisual Observatory December 2015 1 | Page Table of Contents Introduction and context of study 7 Executive Summary 9 1 Must-carry 14 1.1 Universal Services Directive 14 1.2 Platforms referred to in must-carry rules 16 1.3 Must-carry channels and services 19 1.4 Other content access rules 28 1.5 Issues of cost in relation to must-carry 30 2 Digital Terrestrial Television 34 2.1 DTT licensing and obstacles to access 34 2.2 Public service broadcasters MUXs 37 2.3 Must-carry rules and digital terrestrial television 37 2.4 DTT across Europe 38 2.5 Channels on Free DTT services 45 Recent legal developments 50 Country Reports 52 3 AL - ALBANIA 53 3.1 Must-carry rules 53 3.2 Other access rules 54 3.3 DTT networks and platform operators 54 3.4 Summary and conclusion 54 4 AT – AUSTRIA 55 4.1 Must-carry rules 55 4.2 Other access rules 58 4.3 Access to free DTT 59 4.4 Conclusion and summary 60 5 BA – BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA 61 5.1 Must-carry rules 61 5.2 Other access rules 62 5.3 DTT development 62 5.4 Summary and conclusion 62 6 BE – BELGIUM 63 6.1 Must-carry rules 63 6.2 Other access rules 70 6.3 Access to free DTT 72 6.4 Conclusion and summary 73 7 BG – BULGARIA 75 2 | Page 7.1 Must-carry rules 75 7.2 Must offer 75 7.3 Access to free DTT 76 7.4 Summary and conclusion 76 8 CH – SWITZERLAND 77 8.1 Must-carry rules 77 8.2 Other access rules 79 8.3 Access to free DTT
    [Show full text]
  • Czech Television Yearbook
    99 Czech Television Yearbook Czech Television Annual Report Czech Television Council Independent Auditors’ Report CONTENTS Czech Television Annual Report 5 1999 in brief 6 Czech Television in the first quarter of the year 2000, Dušan Chmelíček 10 Czech Television in 1999, Jakub Puchalský 12 Brno Television Studio, Zdeněk Drahoš 14 1 Ostrava Television Studio, Miloslav Petronec 16 2 Documentaries 26 Drama 30 5 Highest ratings in 1999 29 6 Highest ratings in 1999 31 Sport 36 Children's Programmes 38 Highest ratings Highest ratings in 1999 39 9 in 1999 37 10 11 Czech Television Viewers 44 Peoplemeter readings 44 Sociodemographic profile of Czech Television viewers 45 Czech Television sociological research 47 13 Response to programmes: letters, telephone calls, e-mail 47 14 Organisational and Staff Structure 60 Organisational chart 60 Directors and officers 62 Overview of organisational changes 63 16 Number and distribution of employees 65 17 Czech Television Council 87 Council members in 1999 88 Description of Czech Television developments in 1999 88 The institutional crisis: paradoxes, causes, and consequences 90 19 Czech Television activities in 1999: main conclusions of the Czech Television Council 91 1999 PROGRAMMING 20 News 22 Current Affairs 24 Czech Television Highest ratings Highest ratings in 1999 25 broadcasting in 1999 23 in figures 20 3 4 Drama and Music Performances 32 Entertainment 34 7 Highest ratings in 1999 33 8 Highest ratings in 1999 35 Education 40 Supplementary Services 42 Ratings of selected educational Teletext 42 programmes
    [Show full text]