The Major Aspects the Directives Cover - Term Paper Example

TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary…………………………………………………………………..3 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………..4 Television Without Frontiers Directive……………………………………………...4 Broadcasting Quota and Sponsorship………………………………………..5 Advertisement broadcasts……………………………………………………5 Protection of Minors and Right of Reply……………………………………6 Revised Directive of 1997…………………………………………………………..6 Audiovisual Media Services Directive- AVMS……………………………………..7 Critical review of TVWF and AVMS Directives and Recommendations…………..8 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………….10 Reference List……………………………………………………………………....11 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This paper reviews the EU Directive regarding broadcasting. In the pas two decades, the two Directives that the parliament has adopted are the Television Without Frontiers Directive and the Audiovisual Media Services Directive. Both directives were aimed to remove impediments to the provision of broadcasting services offered across borders within the EU. They were aimed to promote competition, provide quality broadcasting services, and safeguard the rights of the public and limiting the adverse effects and exploitation by advertisements. The paper provides an overview of the major aspects the Directives cover and discusses the criticisms that emerged to the Directives and provides recommendations. In the end, I have followed the critical analysis by a conclusion, establishing the effectiveness of these Directives. INTRODUCTION Since the passage of the Television Without Frontiers Directive in 1989, or TVWF Directive, the European Nation has been successfully managing cross-border broadcasting. This Directive forms the foundation of the broadcasting policy of EU. The Act has two objectives: to maintain a broadcasting quota of at least half the time of channels dedicated to programs by EU countries and the broadcasting of programs across the border without any barriers. The paper gives an overview of the TVWF directive, the areas where amendments were done and the need for a revised Directive. Over the years, with advances in technology, there was a change in the trend in broadcasting, and it was suggested in 2005 to review the Act, and incorporate amendments to meet the current broadcasting demands. Therefore the EU Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMS) was adopted. However, there are still some problems that have not been addressed in the revised Directive, and I have provided an analysis of these problems, along with recommendations. TELEVISION WITHOUT FRONTIERS DIRECTIVE The TVWF Directive states, “Council Directive 89/552/EEC of 3 October 1989 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities.” The Act was passed with keeping in regard the considerations of the Social and Economic Committee. The Act defines television broadcasting as the transmission of programs for the public via wire or by air (Council Directive, 1989). The EU treaty dictates the establishment of a common market, without impediments to the delivery of service across borders to promote competition and, hence, the provision of quality service. Concurrently it offers protection to the public through laws which safeguard public interest objectives. Broadcasting Quota and Sponsorship One of the chief provisions of the Act is the broadcasting quota on the programs being broadcasted. It has been decided in the Directive that more than 50% broadcasting time should be given to the broadcasting of European works. The production and distribution of audio-visual programs will create more employment opportunities in the field of media and broadcasting. The producers are required to promote cultural, educational values and focus on quality entertainment. The Act allows the sponsorship for financing of programs give that certain requirements have been met. Advertisement broadcasts Advertisement broadcasts are defined as public announcements in exchange for a certain amount of payment. Checks on advertisements have been enforced to prevent any negative impact on the minds of the children. The Act also outlaws the playing of commercials on smoking and cigarettes, sets prerequisites for broadcasting alcoholic drinks and medicinal information. Subliminal advertising and surreptitious advertising has been disallowed, and advertisements should observe ethical values like regard for human dignity and racial equality, thus protecting and advancing the rights of the service users. Since the Commission only plays a coordinating role, member states are free to impose obligations on broadcasters according to their jurisdiction (Guerrieri et al., 2005). Protection of Minors and Right of Reply As mentioned above, advertisements should not have a negative influence on the minds of the minors. Programs that show pornography and any type of gratuitous violence are not allowed to broadcast during the day or technical device has been installed to bar children from accessing such programs. Although it is expected of program producers to present fair and correct facts in their shows, however if the show tends to offend any individual and his legitimate interests have been damaged, then the individual has been granted a right of reply. REVISED DIRECTIVE OF 1997 In 1997, the EU adopted a revised directive to incorporate amendments aimed to improve certain aspects of the original directive. These included teleshopping, increased protection of minors from viewing content inappropriate for their age, unrestricted coverage of major events like sports and jurisdictional rules. The Directive has been reviewed on biannual basis and progress reports have been submitted to the concerned authorities, with improvements incorporated into the Directive whenever needed. New advertisement techniques and the production and distribution of programs were reviewed. However, with the rapid advances in technology and the marked incidence of electronic gadgets that makes broadcasting, a revision of TVWF keeping them in mind became a necessity. Therefore, a proposal was submitted in 2005, and was adopted in 2007. The new version, Audiovisual Media Services directive, contains more flexible regulations and liberalizations in rules governing advertisements and marketing. AUDIOVISUAL MEDIA SERVICES DIRECTIVE- AVMS AVMS Directive is unique in its respect because it is the first piece of EU legislation to differentiate between the linear media, that is television and internet, and the non-linear media, that is the video on demand and internet videos. The most significant revision of the Directive is the liberalization of cross-border broadcast of on demand services (Terzis, 2008). The Directive introduces a basic tier of rules that encourage competitiveness. The rules are stricter regarding the protection of minors, surreptitious advertising, product placement laws, increased broadcasting of European works and the protection of consumer rights thus keeping greater checks on negative attitudes projected in the programs. The broadcasters are to provide more than half of the programming to be on EU related topics (the Stationery Office U.k., 2010). AMS are required to abstain from projecting information targeted to incite hatred and prejudices. The second tier of regulations is concerned with on demand services. The Directive is less strict in its rules for on demand services than for broadcasting service because of the choice of the user in preferentially selecting programs. The two chief rules for on demand services are that content unsuitable for minors should not be made accessible for them and the services should promote European works. Critical review of TVWF and AVMS Directives and Recommendations 1. Product Placement Most types of product placement are prohibited under the AVMS Directive; however there are still some countries, including the UK where product placement does not meet the expected standards. The question arises as to who can be trusted the responsibility of product placement. The rules mentioned in the Directive state that programs should not impeach the editorial independence or give undue and direct promotional references to the product. Therefore since product placement is a form of advertising, the department that regulates and monitors video on demand services can be given the responsibility for this regulating product placement. Allowing product management would dissatisfy the consumers, although service providers are in favor of it. However, the government should not permit it in order to maintain the integrity of the consumers. 2. Co-regulation of the video on demand The AVMS Directive is in favor of co regulation of the video on demand service, meaning that it sets up its own regulatory framework that is in line with the rules and regulations of the Directive. However, the Directive does not elaborate on who would appoint regulatory authorities. Therefore, the government should hand over control of appointment of regulatory bodies to a neutral, non-political regulator like the Ofcom in UK (Anon., 2008). 3. Regulation of Internet services The Directive brings into effect a very light-touch regulation of internet services. The surge in the use of internet technology e.g. podcasting, vidcasting and websites like YouTube, social networking forums etc have no legislative regulations imposed on them. Therefore, these services are free to broadcast all sorts of program that are otherwise prohibited in television broadcasting. The Directive should be revised in order to inculcate regulations of internet services in more detail so that the effectiveness of the Directive can be uniform and optimum, no matter what mode of broadcasting it is. 4. Cultural identity According to Katsirea (2008, p. 292), while liberal internationalists favor the cross-fertilization of ideas facilitated by transnational flows of programs, their opponents warn against the resulting erosion of cultural identity. The Directive thus needs to have stricter regulations of the programs in order to promote cultural values. 5. Quota system The quota system has had a lot of criticism leveled at it. The quota system for European and independent European works is based on a rather convoluted definition of European works (Ward, 2008); the lack of details often subjects the Directive to exploitation. Thus, a revision should incorporate more details of the quota so that broadcasters can not dodge and exploit the Directive. 6. Illegal content The AVSP neither regulates the illegal or detrimental content in case of content distributors, nor any obligations to audiovisual content that is not edited by them but to which they can give access (Donders et al., 2010). This serious gap in the regulatory framework needs to be addressed, with stricter regulations, adapted from the E-Commerce directive to deal with online distributors. CONCLUSION Although the TVWF and AVSP Directives are aimed to promote European works and provide a comprehensive regulatory guide, they lack in certain aspects which the government needs to consider. The Directives have been effective in meeting the objectives of protection of the minors, and consumer rights, the promotion of competition and removing impediments to broadcasting as well as keeping advertising in limits. REFERENCE LIST Anon., 2008. AUDIOVISUAL MEDIA SERVICES DIRECTIVE. Department for culture ,media and sport. [Online] Available at: http://www.culture.gov.uk/images/consultations/AVMS_Consultation_Document.pdf [Accessed 10 may 2010]. Council Directive, 1989. Council Directive. Official Journal. [Online] L 298, pp. 0023 – 0030. Available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31989L0552:EN:HTML [Accessed 10 may 2010]. Donders, Kalimo, H., Pauwels, C. & Rompuy, B. V., 2010. Rethinking European Media and Communications Policy. Brussels: Asp / Vubpress / Upa. Guerrieri, P., Iapadre, P. L. & Koopmann,G., 2005. Cultural diversity and international economic integration: the global governance of the audio-visual sector. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. Katsirea, I., 2008. Public broadcasting and European law: a comparative examination of public service obligations in six member states. Netherlands: Kluwer Law International. The Stationery Office U.k., 2010. British Film and Television Industries - Decline Or Opportunity? First Report of Session 2009-10 Volume I: Report: House of Lords Paper 37-i Session 2009-10. UK: The Stationery Office. Terzis, G., 2008. European media governance: the Brussels dimension. Bristol: Intellect Books. Ward, D., 2008. The European Union and the culture industries: regulation and the public interest. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. Read More