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