EU attitudes towards Public Service Broadcasting

1. EU attitudes towards Public Service Broadcasting By HanneloreAnthonissen and MirkoVossen

2. Introduction • Over the past 30 years, public service broadcasting has experienced some major changes • Beginning: reserved activity for the government • Limited availability and high barriers to enter • 70’s: economic and technological developments: more other players • Bigger choice for consumers  greater pluralism • But Member States wanted to maintain public service broadcasting • Amsterdam Protocol: Funding PSB is acceptable when this does not affect the trading conditions and the competition in the Community

3. Introduction • Different technological developments: multiplication of distribution platforms and technologies • E.g. digital television, online information services • Consumers obtain multiple services on 1 platform or any given service on multiple platforms • Fragmentation of audiences • New technologies: better consumer participation and control over the content by consumers • Public and private broadcasters diversified their activities • Complaints from other market players about funding

4. Role of Public Service Broadcasting • Democratic needs: free, every citizen can enjoy it • Social needs: integrate all communities, social groups and generations • Minority groups, young and old people, disadvantaged social groups, persons with disabilities, gender equality issues • Respect the different identities • Era of globalisation, migration and integration: better understanding + promotes intercultural dialogue • Cultural needs: • Common values: freedom of speech, pluralism, improvement of cultural and lingual diversity, protection of minors and of human dignity, consumer protection • Information and education: objective, reliable source, ensures that all citizens are involved in public life • Economic importance

5. Example: Euronews • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__VgtLqC644 • http://www.euronews.com/

6. Problems withfundinganddebatesaboutstateaid

7. Fundingand State aid • Protocol ofthe Amsterdam-Treaty (1997): fundingofthepublicservicebroadcastingistothecompetenceofthememberstates • The fundinghastoserve a publicserviceremit • It must not affecttradeandcompetitionto an extentwhichwouldbecontrarytothecommoninterest

8. Fundingand State aid • Sources: -Protocol ofthe Amsterdam Treaty & Article 16 -Communication fromtheCommission on theapplicationofstateaidrulestopublicservicebroadcasting 2001 & 2009 -EC-Treaty: articles 86, 87, 88 -Treaty of Maastricht -directives

9. Fundingand State aid • Twobroadfundingschemescategories: -single funding: PSB isfinancedonlythroughpublicfound in whatever form -dual funding: combinationofstatefundsandrevenuesfromcommercialactivities • Most countries havemixedsystems, howeverthemainsourceofincomeisusuallythelicencefee • Requirements: transparency, aid must not exceedthenetcostsofthepublicservicemission

10. Fundingsand State aids • Growingconcernsfor a levelplayingfield (private operatorsbroughttheseworriestotheCommission‘sattention) • Article 87 (EG-Treaty): anyaidgrantedby a memberstateorthroughstateresourcesisbasicallyincompatiblewiththecommonmarket, save asotherwiseprovided • Growing concerns for a level playing field (private operators brought these worries to the Commission‘s attention) • Article 87 (EG-Treaty): any aid granted by a member state or through state resources is basically incompatible with the common market, save as otherwise provided • Growing concerns for a level playing field (private operators brought these worries to the Commission‘s attention) • Article 87 (EG-Treaty): any aid granted by a member state or through state resources is basically incompatible with the common market, save as otherwise provided

11. Fundingand State aid Pro State aid-side Against State aid-side Common market = freemarketsystemwiththeaimtobenefitthecommoninterest Private operatorscontributesaswellandis in dangerwhen PSB isfavoured • Importanceofthepublicserviceremit (social, democratic, culturalneeds) • Private operatorsare not abletofullyfulfilthepublicserviceremit

12. Fundingand State aid • Every stateaidtopublicbroadcasters must beexaminedbytheCommissiontodetermineitscompatiblitywiththecommonmarket • The effectofstateintervention not thepurposedecidesof ist stateaidcontentunderarticle 87 • Communication fromtheCommission (2009): stateaidif... -thereis an interventionbythestate -theinterventionisliabletoaffecttrade -itconfers an advantageofthebeneficiary -distortscompetition

13. Fundingand State aid • Altmark judgement (2007): publicservicecompensationdoes not constitutestateaidif... -therecipienthaspublicserviceobligationstodischarge -theparametersforthecompensationareestablished in advance in an objectiveand transparent manner -thecompensationdoes not exceedwhatisnecessary -thecompensationisdetermined on thebasiswhat a typicalundertakingwouldhaveincurred ->The publicserviceremit (whichisdefinedbythememberstates) isveryimportant

14. Fundingand State aid • Conclusion: -twosideswithjustifiablearguments -EU bodiestakebothsidesintoaccountandtrytocreate a balanced dual system -State financingof PSB has a legal fundationbut PSB should not befavouredheavily

15. Debates about the future of PSB in the new digital environment

16. Future of PSB • With the development of new digital technologies and of Internet-based services, new issues have arisen regarding the scope of public services activities • State aid: based on the comments that they receive in public consultations • Member States fear too much Commission intervention • European Commission fears that Member States abuse the margins of the European Treaty to expand the digital public service remit in unauthorized ways • Crisis in PSB: Commercially funded PSB all claim financial pressures • Move from analogue to digital broadcasting: established forms of public support (free of below-cost access) lose value • Viewers are increasingly taking advantage of technological developments  PSB loses advertising revenues • Current economic recession: fall in advertising revenues

17. Pro funding PSB • The European Commission: PSB needs to benefit from the technological progress, bring the public the benefits of the new audio-visual and information services and diversification of activities in the digital age • Provide a wide range of programming: address whole society • Pluralism and diversity of media content

18. Contra funding PSB • Tension between public services and economic • European policy: level-playing-field perspective on PSB ( = environment in which all companies in a given sector of the market economy must be able to compete on the same (equal) grounds, encompassing, fe, laws, competition policy and ownership regulation) • Distortion of market is legitimate when it meets objectives greater than the goal of market integration + based upon objective observation of market failure (disappears in digital arena) • Public sector: non-rival in consumption + non-excludable • Democratic aspect under attack with new technological developments

19. Future of PSB • New multiple technological opportunities: hybrid media environment • Boundaries between public and private sphere are blurring • Public broadcasters enter new media markets: criticism • Position of European Commission is unclear: • Commission challenges the ‘digital’ remit, liberties of Member States about the definition, urge to limit the digital expansion of public broadcasters’ activities • Commission criticizes some digital activities of public broadcasters, but this has not led to ‘remit-based’ negative state aid decision • Need for clarity in policy! • There must be a ‘fair’ balance between private and public undertakings to exploit the potential benefits of digitalization

20. Thank you for your attention • Bardoel, J. & d'Haenens, L. (2009): Reinventing public service broadcasting in Europe: prospects, promises and Problems, In: Media Culture Society 30, 337-355. • Committee of Ministers. (2007). Recommendation CM/Rec(2007)3 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the remit of public service media in the information society, from https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1089759&BackColorInternet=9999CC&BackColorIntranet=FFBB55&BackColorLogged=FFAC75 • Donders, K. & Pauwels, C. (2008). Does EU policy challenge the digital future of public service broadcasting? An analysis of the Commission's state aid approach to digitization and the public service remit of public broadcasting organizations. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 14(3), 295-311. • European Commission. (2009). Communication from the Commission on the application of state aid rules to public service broadcasting, from http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/legislation/broadcasting_communication_en.pdf • European Commission. (2001). Communication from the Commission on the application of State aid rules to public service broadcasting, from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52001XC1115%2801%29:EN:NOT • European Union. (1997). Treaty of Amsterdam: Protocol on the system of public broadcasting in the Member States, from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/treaties/dat/11997D/htm/11997D.html#0109010012 • Lords, H. O. (2009). Public service broadcasting: short-term crisis, long-term future?(Vol. 61): Stationery Office/Tso.