Brussels, 15/09/2005 (Agence Europe) - The committe on culture and education of the European Parliament held a public hearing on 13 September, on the revision of the "Television without Borders" directive (TWB), which has been planned by the Commission for this autumn, in order to take stock with experts and professionals on essential aspects which, in the view of the MEPs, must be taken into account in the proposal. Last week, the plenary adopted the report by French Socialist Henri Weber, which supports the planned revision by the European Executive, but which indicates concern at the phenomenon of concentration in the media (see EUROPE 9024). The hearing has been based around two round tables, on "the impact of technological changes in rules and regulations on audiovisuals", and on "promoting tourism and cultural diversity".
Today, the audiovisual world is moving towards a convergence of broadcast platforms: a film, for example, can now be broadcast using a variety of media, such as the Internet. The development of technologies also allows a broader choice of content to be broadcast, which opens up the possibility for consumers to choose their programmes "à la carte" (which is known as "non-linear content", as opposed to "linear content", which refers to traditional programmes broadcast by television channels). In the view of Yvon Thiec (Association of cinema and television producers "Eurocinéma"), this "revolution" stands to be very positive for cultural diversity if the European Union works on the following questions: guaranteeing a legal framework for Internet access providers and for those eligible for copyright payments (an expensive operation which is not within the scope of the TWB directive, he pointed out); finding a w withoutindow which is compatible for films broadcast on-line in the traditional circuit: cinema, DVD, pay-TV, then traditional television ("chronology of the media"); create a framework to guarantee adequate broadcasting of European works on the Internet. He feels that three measures should be envisaged with a view to this: 1) establish a funding system for the operators of on-line networks in favour of production industries lacking funds; 2) offer a balanced catalogue, including both national and European works, but also works by independent producers (the content of these catalogues currently differs enormously from one Member State to the next, he commented); 3) give access to national and European works first of all (articles 4 and 5 of the TWB directive contain minimum obligations, which may be reinforced by the Member States , he said). Riccardo Perissich, president of Telecom Italia Media (and former director-general within the European Commission) said that technological advances would, effectively, be beneficial for cultural diversity, because "à la carte" television would also offer less famous work a unique opportunity to be broadcast. In his view, the real obstacles are of legal and bureaucratic order. The very high costs of copyright, for example, are a powerful dissuasive element for the diversification of catalogues. According to Mr Perissich, the real plague is not people downloading files for free, but pirated DVDs, the revenue from which goes to pay for criminal organisations.
In the view of Fabio Colasanti, director-general of DG "Information Society" at the Commission, the revision of the directive should help to continue to protect the sector, simplify legislation which is blocking access to films and therefore constitutes a genuine obstacle to tourism and cultural diversity, and help to solve the problem of crime. Obviously, this revision must take account of technological advances, and be more restrictive, particularly in terms of advertising (tobacco, alcohol). Mr Colasanti announced the initial conclusions reached by the Commission last week: 1) there is no point in extending the provisions to non-linear services, because new measures would be technically difficult to implement; 2) there will be no additional bureaucratic burden for the operators, as they seem to fear, quite the contrary; 3) the defence of tourism, which is a fundamental right, will remain at the heart of the new directive. The programmes must respect this principle to qualify for repeat broadcast is, whatever the mode of transmission being used. According to Mr.Colasanti, the problem of pluralism is a highly complex one, which goes beyond just concentration of the media. Other phenomena are at play, depending on the national rules, he stressed (it is worth noting that the Parliament has called on the Commission to take a more serious look at the phenomenon of media concentration).
Olivier Courson, secretary general of Canal Plus, voiced his serious concerns at the appetite of telecoms giants, which are diversifying their activities and turning increasingly towards audiovisuals, with a consequence of a fragilisation of the sector and a phenomenal of concentration, which is a threat to pluralism. This fear was shared by the EP rapporteur Henri Weber, who called for a well-balanced revision, including minimum protective rules, but avoiding over-regulation, which would be an obstacle to harmonious evolution. Valdo Lehari, of the Association of European Editors, called for the protection of the pluralism in the written press not to be neglected, as this is "considered to be the most credible medium", he said.
In his view, new technologies are just an additional means of transmitting content, and that this is what needs to be protected. The Austrian Social Democrat Christa Prets expressed concern about the protection of minors in non-linear services- a fundamental right which must always be respected, whatever the means of broadcasting used and the type of service, said Fabio Colasanti. Ivo Belet (EPP-ED, Belgium) asked whether public television channels tempted to propose non-linear services would be able to include them in their public service mission and thus receive subsidies for them. This is a problem of competition, the question of "public service mission " having already come up against grievances on the part of private enterprises, the director-general underlined. In the view of Giulietto Chiesa (ALDE, Italy), "we are faced with a historic dimension of concentration on the market", and the idea that linear services would offer more diversity is wrong, because the catalogue offered by powerful groups would include a restricted choice determined by these groups, which would continue to manipulate contents. "The revised directive protects no one, much less minors!", he said, calling on the Parliament to keep a close eye on the situation. The president of the Parliamentary committee, Nikolaos Sifunakis, who shared the MEP's concerns, concluded: "we do not want the revised directive to be an obstacle, but it must guarantee pluralism and cultural diversity, because we need to guard against homogenisation".