AUDIOVISUAL POLICY IN THE DIGITAL AGE
(20991)
14261/99
COM(99) 657
|
Commission Communication: Principles and guidelines for the
Community's audiovisual policy in the digital age.
|
| Legal base: |
— |
| |
| Document originated:
| 14 December 1999 |
| Forwarded to the Council:
| 17 December 1999 |
| Deposited in Parliament:
| 18 February 2000 |
| Department: |
Culture, Media and Sport |
| Basis of consideration:
| EM of 17 March |
| Previous Committee Report:
| None |
| To be discussed in Council:
| 16 May Culture/Audiovisual Council
|
| Committee's assessment:
| Politically important |
| Committee's decision:
| Not cleared; further information requested
|
The Commission document
9.1 The Commission introduces this Communication
by commenting that the audiovisual sector is undergoing major
changes as a result of the introduction of digital technologies
and that the growth of the sector poses two challenges:
"First, it is necessary
to ensure that the legislative framework allows the audiovisual
sector to maximise its potential for growth and job creation in
Europe, whilst continuing to safeguard general interest objectives.
Secondly, the Community must maximise the competitivity of the
European audiovisual industry in order to ensure that digitisation
does not simply result in a flood of imported or archive (repeated)
material."
9.2 The European audiovisual market remains
overwhelmingly dominated by American productions. The annual EU
trade deficit with the USA in this sector is approaching 7,000
million euro, the Commission notes.
"American productions
account for between 60 and 90% of Member States' audiovisual markets
(receipts from cinema ticket sales, video cassette sales and rentals
and from sales of television fiction programmes), whilst the respective
European share of the American market is of the order of 1 or
2%."
9.3 The average European watched over three
hours of television per day in 1998 and European audiences show
a clear preference for content in their own language. Since the
audiovisual media play a major rôle in the transmission
of social and cultural values, there are major public interests
at stake, the Commission says. These include the protection of
minors and the consumer and the preservation of Europe's cultural
diversity. In promoting the production and circulation of quality
content which reflects European values and linguistic identities,
the challenge is to ensure that this content continues to be available,
despite usually being more expensive than imported material.
9.4 The production and distribution of European
works can be encouraged by creating a secure and stable legal
framework. The changes in the sector are likely to require the
framework and the various support mechanisms to be adapted and
the Commission recognises that it is important for all interested
parties to be informed of the strategy it intends to adopt over
the next five years. It has concluded from the consultation exercises
it has carried out in recent years that the fundamental goals
should remain the same but that new approaches and techniques
would appear to be necessary for the future. Its consultations,
which were part of a wide-ranging review, included:
- the Green Paper on Convergence of the Telecommunications,
Media and Information Technology Sectors[29];
- the European Audiovisual Conference organised
by the Commission and the British Presidency in Birmingham in
April 1998;
- the major review of the regulatory framework
for the electronic communications infrastructure known as the
1999 Communications Review[30]
which recommended five general principles. These were that regulation
should be:
— based on clearly
defined policy objectives;
— the minimum necessary to meet those
objectives;
— further enhance legal certainty in a
dynamic market;
— aim to be technologically neutral; and
— be enforced as closely as possible to
the activities being regulated.
9.5 Although these principles are also valid
for content regulation, they need to take account of the specific
nature of the sector and the Commission proposes that a separate
approach should be adopted to regulating content. For instance,
when applying the test of proportionality, the degree to
which an individual user can exercise choice must be taken into
account. Rather than constructing a new regulatory framework,
it would be preferable to build on existing instruments and principles
and to promote initiatives for self-regulation.
9.6 The Commission sets out a timetable
for 10 key actions, which we reproduce below. As well as advancing
supporting arguments for selecting these actions, which include
a further MEDIA programme[31],
which the Commission regards as of crucial importance for the
future of the European audiovisual industry, it covers other issues,
which include:
— Access to audiovisual content
- Content must be readily accessible. Viewers
will need an Electronic Programme Guide (EPG) to navigate through
the multitude of content on offer in a digital broadcasting environment.
As EPGs will be able to influence both the presentation and availability
of content, important questions arise relating to pluralism, cultural
diversity and other general interest objectives, as they do in
the case of the Application Programme Interface[32]
(API). The API dictates which EPG can be installed in decoders
and digital televisions. Both APIs and EPGs also give rise to
significant questions with regard to access to infrastructure.[33]
9.7 At this early stage, when markets and
technological developments are highly unpredictable, the Commission
says that it does not propose any specific action but it will
monitor the sector closely.
— Copyright
- The Internet makes possible new ways and means
of distributing audiovisual works and with digital technology
it is possible to make perfect copies. The Commission says that
it considers the rapid adoption of the proposed Directive on Copyright
and Related Rights in the Information Society[34]
to be of paramount importance.
— Regulatory authorities
- Its consultations lead the Commission to suggest
some common guidelines:
"— regulatory
authorities should be independent of government and operators;
"— content issues are essentially
national in nature, being directly and closely connected to the
cultural, social and democratic needs of a particular society,
in line with the principle of subsidiarity, therefore, content
regulation is primarily the responsibility of Member States;
"— technological convergence requires
increased co-operation between the regulators concerned (communication
infrastructures, audiovisual sector, competition);
"— regulatory authorities can contribute
to the development and implementation of self-regulation. In this
respect, the Commission will examine the utility of establishing
a specific forum for European-level co-operation between regulators,
operators and consumers in the audiovisual sector."
The Government's view
9.8 The Secretary of State for Culture,
Media and Sport (the Rt. Hon. Chris Smith) comments:
"The UK welcomes the
policy document as a contribution to transparency and to forward
planning in light of increasing globalisation and rapid technological
change. The UK welcomes the evolutionary approach which the Commission
is proposing, whereby the fundamental principles of the Community's
audiovisual policy would be retained, but closely monitored and
adapted as necessary. As the majority of the actions listed are
not new, and have already been the subject of extensive consultation,
the Communication is acceptable in this respect.
"The UK Government supports the Commission approach
of adopting a single set of regulatory principles on which any
future proposals would be based which would apply to both content
and infrastructure regulation, whilst recognising the specificity
of the audiovisual content. We also agree that the relevance of
the current regulatory framework should be monitored closely with
a view to adaptation where necessary. The UK will publish a White
Paper later this year which will take fully into account the ongoing
European work and proposed actions."
Consultation
9.9 The UK consulted widely on the Convergence
Green Paper1 and any specific proposals on actions
listed by the Commission in this document will be the subject
of further consultation when they issue, the Minister says.
Timetable
9.10 The Secretary of State says that the
16 May Culture/Audiovisual Council is likely to be asked to agree
Conclusions related to this Communication and that a preliminary
draft was expected to be issued before the Working Group meeting
on 22 March. Two aspects have been singled out by Member States:
digital terrestrial television and public service broadcasting.
He points out that the UK, Sweden and Spain have already developed
digital terrestrial platforms.
Scrutiny
9.11 This document was adopted by the Commission
on 14 December and issued in English on 3 January. It was not
deposited until 18 February and the EM was signed on 17 March.
We are seeking an explanation for the delay in deposit.
Conclusion
9.12 Although rambling and repetitive,
this Communication is a landmark document in that it encompasses
a wide range of issues connected with the digital revolution,
brings together the Commission's thoughts on the approach to be
adopted to it at this stage, and presents in one paper a number
of actions which the Commission is proposing to take.
9.13 As the Secretary of State says,
most of these actions have been under discussion for some time,
but this paper makes a useful contribution to transparency and
to forward planning. We thank him for his comments and ask him
to provide us with a Supplementary EM in due course on any formal
response the Government makes to it. In the absence of such a
response, we shall await his Explanatory Memoranda on any specific
proposals submitted for our consideration.
9.14 Meanwhile, we do not clear the document
but ask the Secretary of State to provide us with an EM on the
draft Conclusions, and a copy of the unofficial text, in time
for us to consider it before the 16 May Council.
29 (18724) 13289/97; see HC 155-xiv (1997-98), paragraph
5 (28 January 1998) and HC 155-xxiii (1997-98), paragraph 1 (1
April 1998); Official Report, European Standing Committee
B, 8 April 1998; (19979) 6751/99; see HC 34-xx (1998-99), paragraph
10 (19 May 1999). Back
30 Commission
Communication, Towards a new framework for Electronic Communications
Infrastructure and Associated Services: the 1999 Communications
Review: (20666) 12839/99; see HC 23-ix, paragraph 7 (16 February
2000). Back
31 (19996)
6887/99; see HC 34-xix (1998-99), paragraph 14 (12 May 1999). Back
32 The
API can be compared to a computer operating system. It defines
how software applications are managed and displayed. Back
33 See
section 4.2.5 of the 1999 Communications Review (see footnote
23 above). [Comm Com Towards a new frame..]. Back
34 (18820
)5562/98; see HC 155-xviii (1997-98), paragraph 1 (25 February
1998); (20191) 8723/99; see HC 34-xxiii (1998-99), paragraph 2
(23 June 1999); and Official Report, European Standing
Committee C, 27 October 1999. Back
| 
