Recommendation 1641
(2004)1
Public service broadcasting
1. Public service broadcasting, a vital element of democracy in
Europe, is under threat. It is challenged by political and economic interests,
by increasing competition from commercial media, by media concentrations and
by financial difficulties. It is also faced with the challenge of adapting to
globalisation and the new technologies.
2. Public service broadcasting, whether run by public
organisations or privately-owned companies, differs from broadcasting for
purely commercial or political reasons because of its specific remit, which is
essentially to operate independently of those holding economic and political
power. It provides the whole of society with information, culture, education
and entertainment; it enhances social, political and cultural citizenship and
promotes social cohesion. To that end, it is typically universal in terms of
content and access; it guarantees editorial independence and impartiality; it
provides a benchmark of quality; it offers a variety of programmes and
services catering for the needs of all groups in society and it is publicly
accountable. These principles apply, whatever changes may have to be
introduced to meet the requirements of the twenty-first century.
3. It is a matter of concern that many European countries have
so far failed to meet the commitment that their governments undertook, at the
4th European Ministerial Conference on Mass Media Policy held in Prague in
1994, to maintain and develop a strong public broadcasting system. It is also
worrying that the fundamental principle of the independence of public service
broadcasting contained in Recommendation No. R (96) 10 of the Committee of
Ministers is still not firmly established in a number of member states.
Moreover, governments across the continent are in the process of reorienting
their media policies in the light of the development of digital technology and
are in danger of leaving public service broadcasting without enough support.
4. Public service broadcasting was born in western Europe and
has evolved by adapting itself naturally to the needs of a mature democracy.
In central and eastern Europe it is not yet socially embedded, since it was
“transplanted” into an environment that lacked the necessary political and
management culture, and in which civil society is still weak, has inadequate
resources and little dedication to public service values.
5. The situation varies across Europe. At one extreme national
broadcasting continues to be under strict governmental control and there is
little prospect of introducing public service broadcasting by legislation in
the foreseeable future. In the Russian Federation, for instance, the lack of
independent public service broadcasting was a major contributing factor to the
absence of balanced political debate in the lead-up to the recent
parliamentary elections, as mentioned by the international election
observation mission. Hardly any progress has been made in adopting the
necessary public service broadcasting legislation that might meet Council of
Europe standards in Azerbaijan, Georgia and Ukraine.
6. In Bosnia and Herzegovina and in Kosovo public service
broadcasting still only operates under regulations imposed from outside by the
international community. Adoption of a proper law has been delayed in Bosnia
and Herzegovina as a result of internal resistance to structural change and in
Kosovo because of attempts to undermine the funding of public service
broadcasting.
7. In other countries laws on public service broadcasting have
been adopted, but certain provisions and practices contradict European
standards. In Armenia all the members of the Council for Public Radio and
Television are appointed by the President. It remains to be seen whether the
day-to-day operation of TeleRadio Moldova will be able to be independent after
two changes made to the law in 2003. The appointment of a Serbian broadcasting
agency has been marred by scandals that have yet to be resolved.
8. More substantial progress has been made in other countries,
although problems still remain. Changes to broadcasting laws, making
broadcasting corporations more politically independent and financially viable,
have been recommended by the Council of Europe in Bulgaria and “the former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”. There are still attempts to change laws in
order to make them more suitable for a ruling majority, as with the new
Croatian Law on Radio and Television. Severe financial difficulties are
experienced with public service broadcasting in the Czech Republic, Hungary
and Slovakia.
9. There is political pressure on public service broadcasting
in western Europe too. The BBC was attacked by the British Government over its
coverage of the war in Iraq. In Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain,
situations variously defined as “political clientelism”, “state paternalism”
and “partitocrazia” have prevented the full emancipation of public service
broadcasters from direct, “hands-on” political control. Manipulation of
information under political influence led to the unprecedented sentencing of
TVE for its coverage of the general strike in Spain in June 2002. The
politicisation of RAI caused by a unique division of the three Italian
channels between the main political parties has been further aggravated by the
current government.
10. There is a growing tendency to go beyond hitherto existing
forms of public service broadcasting regulation and define its obligations
more precisely, often by contracts backed up by accountability reports to the
parliament, the government and/or a regulatory agency. Increasing attention is
paid to the financial aspects of the operation of the public service
broadcaster. While such moves are to be welcomed in so far as they give public
service broadcasting organisations greater stability, it should be ensured
that they are not used by governments to undermine the financial and statutory
situation of these organisations. Recent government decisions in the
Netherlands and France have seriously affected the funding of their public
service broadcasters.
11. Governments have been examining possible structural changes
that would affect the very nature of public service broadcasting.
Privatisation plans have been discussed in Denmark and Portugal, and in Italy
with the recently proposed broadcasting legislation (the “Gasparri Law”),
which has since then been referred back to Parliament by the President. In the
United Kingdom, there is growing concern at the government’s attitude to the
renewal of the charter of the BBC, fuelled by the very public row between the
corporation and the government.
12. In a large majority
of countries, digital channels have not yet been defined in broadcasting
legislation. There is also a clear absence of legal provisions concerning
Internet activities by public service broadcasters in most countries. This
might affect their ability to expand to new platforms.
13. The coexistence of public and commercial media has largely
contributed to innovating and diversifying the supply of content and has had a
positive impact on quality. However, commercial interests are trying to reduce
competition from the public sector to a minimum. European Union competition
law is often used to attack the funding systems for public service
broadcasting. In this respect, the Assembly welcomes the judgment of the
European Court of Justice in the Altmark case, regarding compensation for
discharging public service obligations, and urges that the situation
concerning public service broadcasting be further clarified on the basis of
this judgment. Commercial broadcasters also challenge the possibility of
public service broadcasting expanding into new areas and new services. Recent
examples include the BBC’s Internet activities and the plans of the German ARD
to turn the Internet into its “third pillar”, which had to be abandoned under
commercial pressure.
14. Commercial broadcasters also claim that the shift to the
multi-channel, on-demand broadcasting offered by digitalisation will enable
the market to cater for all needs and therefore also fulfil the public service
obligations currently assigned to public broadcasting institutions. However,
there is no guarantee about the quality and independence of such provision, or
that it would be free-to-air, universally accessible and constant over time.
15. It is recognised that there can be an overlap with
commercial broadcasting in popular genres. However, the growing
commercialisation and concentration of the media sector with the resulting
“dumbing-down” of general quality vindicates, when this concerns public
service broadcasters, those who criticise the use of public money for such
purposes. Public service broadcasting is suffering an identity crisis, as it
is in many instances striving to combine its public service obligations with
chasing ratings and the need to secure an audience to justify its “public”
character or simply to attract advertising revenue.
16. European countries and the international community in
general must become more actively involved in efforts to develop general
standards and good practice as guidelines for national policies in this area.
17. Therefore the Parliamentary Assembly recommends that the
Committee of Ministers:
i. adopt a new major policy document on public service
broadcasting, taking stock of developments since the Prague ministerial
conference and defining standards and mechanisms of accountability for
future public service broadcasting. The forthcoming Ministerial Conference
on Mass Media Policy in Kyiv could include the preparation of such a
document in its plan of action;
ii. mobilise the relevant structures of the Council of
Europe to ensure proper and transparent monitoring, assistance and, where
necessary, pressure, so that member states undertake the appropriate
legislative, political and practical measures in support of public service
broadcasting;
iii. consider specific measures to ensure that a legislation
in this area in line with European standards is adopted as soon as possible
in Azerbaijan, Georgia, the Russian Federation and Ukraine;
iv.
ensure close co-operation with other international organisations in
maintaining its standards regarding freedom of expression;
v.
continue to press for audiovisual services to be regarded as more than
simply a commodity in the negotiations of the World Trade Organization (WTO)
and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS);
vi. endeavour to ensure that the World Summit on the
Information Society gives proper recognition to public service broadcasting
as an important element in developing the information society and at the
same time easing the shock of the rapid changes this development will
involve;
vii. call on the governments of member states to:
a.
reaffirm their commitment to maintaining a strong and vibrant independent
public broadcasting service, whilst adapting it to the requirements of the
digital age, for instance, on the occasion of the next European
Ministerial Conference on Mass Media Policy in 2004, taking concrete steps
to implement this policy objective and refrain from any interference with
the editorial independence and institutional autonomy of public service
broadcasters;
b.
define an appropriate legal, institutional and financial framework for
the functioning of public service broadcasting and its adaptation and
modernisation to suit the needs of the audience and the requirements of
the digital era;
c.
design education and training programmes, adapted to the digital media
environment, for journalists.
1.
Assembly
debate on
27 January 2004 (3rd Sitting) (see
Doc.10029,
report of the Committee on Culture, Science and Education, rapporteur: Mr
Mooney).
Text adopted by the Assembly on 27 January 2004 (3rd Sitting).
