Memorandum by the European Newspaper Publishers'
Association
SECOND CALL FOR EVIDENCE
ENPA—the European Newspaper Publishers'
Association is a non-profit association currently representing
5200 national, regional and local newspapers. These daily, weekly
and Sunday titles are published in 26 European countries where
ENPA's members are operating in their national markets.
ENPA appreciates the opportunity to respond
to the House of Lords Select Committee Inquiry on Media Ownership
and the News. ENPA is often consulted by the European Commission
and other European bodies such as the European Parliament at EU
level, and also the international human rights body the Council
of Europe[8]
on the shape of the regulatory framework in this field. It is
vitally important to maintain an ongoing dialogue between the
policy and industry fields in order that the developments in a
fast-changing industry can be fully comprehended. Various stakeholders
have provoked lively debates at the European level on transnational
media concentration. ENPA has actively welcomed and readily engaged
in these debates, with a very positive level of understanding
achieved between all parties.
We respond to the Committee's specific questions
as communicated to us by email of 22 January 2008, as follows:
The Committee has expressed an interest in the
way in which the freedom of the internal market operates and specifically
whether ENPA has any concerns about the way in which this internal
market operates.
First of all, ENPA understands that the Committee
is currently investigating a very wide range of issues related
to media ownership, which also draw on the debate on media pluralism
and diversity, quality of media content, influence of ownership
over content of the news, media competition, etc. There are both
freedom of expression and cultural issues inherent
in this discussion on the one hand, and competition issues on
the other.
Pluralism and diversity
The European Commission is currently
undertaking a study on indicators for measuring media pluralism,
which is to be followed by a Communication issued by DG Information
Society and Media Commissioner Viviane Reding, towards the end
of 2008. ENPA supports the position taken in the European Commission's
Staff Working Paper on 16.01.2007 (document reference: SEC (2007)
32), which, apart from announcing the aforementioned study, and
giving some preliminary data on the status of the media markets
in each EU country, concluded that at the present time there is
no need to take a Community initiative on pluralism.
ENPA recalls that the Group of Specialists
on Media Diversity at the Council of Europe commissioned a
study of four European countries, including the United Kingdom
in 2006 (Ward, 2006) which concluded for the period that was analysed
that there was no indication of strong link between concentration
of markets and diversity of content.[9]
ENPA considers that there is no need or justification
for any action at EU level.
Media competition issues
Having established the key developments currently
at the European level, ENPA professes itself to be generally
satisfied with the incumbent infrastructure of merger control
and competition regulation at the European level regulated
primarily by the Treaties, namely articles 81 (distortion of competition
and affecting trade between Member States) and 82 (abuse of dominant
position) and 86 (application to public undertakings), as well
as in European legislation, namely the Council's Merger Control
Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004.
With regard to the Merger Control Regulation,
Article 21, (4) of that regulation enables Member States to act
against a Commission decision if the plurality of the media as
a legitimate interest is particularly necessary to protect at
national level regarding a certain decision.
ENPA assumes that the Committee has also requested
such a list of relevant merger cases from the European Commission,
as a full record of all such investigations is not possible for
us to document here in this response.
The Committee has also asked us whether there
are examples where "internal EU mergers or acquisitions have
been blocked by national regulatory authorities". Again,
we cannot comment on decisions taken at national level and
specific cases of interest to the Committee should be addressed
to the relevant country authorities concerned.
ENPA outlines the following general principles
pertaining to our position in relation to the news and media
ownership issue:
— There is sufficient robustness
in the EU Regulation for Merger Control and accompanying instruments.
— There is no conclusive evidence
that we have seen which indicates that there is a significant
impact of media ownership on the news to necessitate legislation
to correct this. Adding more legislation to the mechanisms that
already exist would likely produce disproportionate results
to the aims pursued, notably a stifling of free expression.
— ENPA firmly believes in industry
self-regulation to guarantee editorial independence ie in
terms of editorial line. Industry codes of conduct guarantee
such editorial independence. Although the codes do vary between
different countries in Europe, this importantly reflects the different
relationship that each code has relative to each respective national
legislative and cultural tradition.
— ENPA believes that in order to have
a credible, competitive media, companies need a legally certain,
yet independent base to work from politically and economically,
which allows media companies to express their own identities.
This means that media companies should continue to be guaranteed
the freedom to express opinion and take positions on issues of
public interest without being forced to take anodyne, impartial
positions which would extinguish the vibrancy and diversity of
debate in society and indeed the political public sphere. Without
the independence and freedom to publish, media has no credibility.
— Publishers in many countries are
coming across genuine legal obstacles every day that can
require them to rethink how they operate their publications. In
terms of a decision by the national level authorities to prevent
a merger vertically, horizontally or diagonally with another company,
this could in some cases particularly prevent publishers from
innovating and developing their products. This could eliminate
the possibility for gaining efficiencies for both companies and
consumers in terms of cost savings, opportunities missed with
new content service innovations, establishing a competitive online
product, etc.
— ENPA understands that its UK member,
the Newspaper Society will separately be submitting evidence
on the operation of the UK media ownership regime in respect of
regional and local media companies and the need for further liberalisation
of domestic UK law on newspaper transfers, mergers and cross-media
ownership.
— ENPA reminds the select committee
to consider a fair approach to competition between the media in
the fast-evolving competitive media landscape. The EU collectively
is working towards its vision of a dynamic knowledge society.
Publishers represent and wish to continue to represent
a significant positive growth sector for the EU economy.
ENPA rejects any political attempt at disadvantaging the press
publishers with rules that would significantly disadvantage
their development in comparison with other market actors. ENPA
also reminds that freedoms lost are not so easily retrieved as
freedoms won and therefore any resulting impact of potential regulatory
measures on freedom of expression should be very carefully considered.
Of course, ENPA remains at the committee's disposal
for answering further questions related to this issue.
8 February 2008
8 ENPA is an observer to the Steering Committee on
Media and New Communication Services at the Human Rights Directorate
of the Council of Europe. For more details:
<http://www.coe.int/e/human_rights/media/>. Back
9
MC-S-MD(2006)001. "Final report on the study commissioned
to Mr D. Ward by the MC-S-MD-`the assessment of content diversity
in newspapers and television in the context increasing trends
towards concentration of media markets' (David Ward, Director,
Centre for Media Policy and Development)". Web:
<http://www.coe.int/t/e/human_rights/media/l_Intergovernmental_Co-operation/MC-S-MD/MC-S-MD(2006)001_en.pdf>Executive
summary: paragraph 2: page 2. Back
| 
