Memorandum by the National Union of Journalists
SECOND CALL FOR EVIDENCE
INTRODUCTION
Building on our submission to the first call
for evidence we would initially reiterate that for the National
Union of Journalists the primary issue in this debate is that
journalism matters in terms of democratic development and
social accountability. These require an objective media to provide
a well informed public with balanced news coverage. We have identified
key areas that are examined from the standpoint of a critically
constructive approach, looking at their manifestation in all sectors
of the media, especially in newspapers and broadcasting.
In answering the questions posed in the second
call for evidence we have sought to draw out the importance of
media ownership as a key factor influencing all others, and thus
having a greatly significant impact on the quality, variety and
objectivity of news and information.
The primary focus here is on broadcasting. However,
that should not deter from the fact that we have a far wider perspective
on the impact of media ownership in general and we would be happy
to elaborate on this further, should we be invited to give oral
evidence.
1. Are the requirements in the Communications
Act 2003 relating to the quality, quantity, scheduling and impartiality
of national and regional broadcast news appropriate? Are they
sufficient? Will they be appropriate and will they be sufficient
after digital switchover?
With digital switchover in progress it is vital
that the new ecology of broadcasting in the digital age is determined
now and not left until it is too late. We have concerns around
how existing commitments on public service broadcasting are being
met and how they can continue to be delivered in the future.
In the light of the recent announcement by ITV
of its intentions to drastically reduce its regional news coverage
this need has become even more acute. Ofcom has a responsibility
to fulfil its legal obligations to "maintain and strengthen"
public service broadcasting in the UK. We have urged Ofcom to
be open minded about alternative models for funding regional news
some of which are detailed below.
The NUJ is looking at the regulatory and statutory
options for ensuring a strong future for PSB programming. In particular,
we are looking at ways to maintain and strengthen regional, national
and international news coverage.
The NUJ believes that significant public service
programming including regional news and non-news should be made
available free to air, on all platforms. We believe the Government
should set the regulatory framework and ask Ofcom to ensure its
policies are carried out.
It is not the case that regulation is more difficult
post switchover. The scarcity of DTT spectrum and the range of
delivery options available shows that a new system, based on the
principle of universality and the provision of PSB programming,
can be the basis for a new compact.
So far, the debate around PSB post-switchover
has concentrated on the idea that the regulator has fewer incentives
to offer broadcasters in order to persuade them to continue (or
commence) significant public service broadcasting.
However this is not the case. Primary legislation
may be required but new levers could be deployed to ensure that
quality PSB continues.
Tax exemptions or reductions concerning licence
fees and spectrum fees (if these are introduced) should be among
the options considered.
Other possible measures are outlined below:
Digital Spectrum
Ofcom and the Government are currently considering
what to do with the new spectrum available once the analogue spectrum
has been switched off. Some of the terrestrial PSB organisations
are lobbying to be given gifted spectrum (to be used for HDTV).
If this were to happen, it would greatly benefit the citizen,
many of whom are expecting to receive a free-to-air HD service
post switchover.
Free-to-air HD television is something that
would serve audiences well and should be part of public policy.
However, the NUJ believes that spectrum should only be given in
return for specific PSB commitments.
In the same way that the analogue PSB compact
relied on the terrestrial broadcasters providing certain desirable
PSB goals in return for access to the analogue spectrum, some
spectrum capacity should be set aside for PSB organisations that
guarantee to provide continued PSB commitments.
ITV PSB commitments have been relaxed in recent
years. This is something the NUJ has campaigned against. However,
at present for ITV, the key component of their PSB offering remains
their local, national and international news.
Listed events
In analogue terrestrial television, the Government
has enshrined certain `listed' events (eg sporting) in legislation.
These must be available to the public free-to-air. In the digital
age broadcasters holding PSB status could be given certain commercial
advantages in bidding for these specified "listed" events.
As above, in return, broadcasters would commit to providing free-to-air
content across all platforms, including providing specific PSB
characteristics such as regional, national and international news.
Regarding the current debate around ITV's news
provision, we note the Ofcom suggestion that national and international
news would continue even if there were no regulation on ITV1.
However, the NUJ does not accept this view. It is imperative that
ITV remains committed to providing a quality news service. Although
the economics of such programming remain favourable, and the current
leadership of ITV appear committed to national and international
news, this cannot be taken for granted. Owners change, as do the
economics of broadcasting. Therefore any review of the Communications
Act needs to consider how to "future-proof" the delivery
of this public good by ensuring that effective regulation is in
place.
2. Are the public interest considerations
for media mergers set down in section 58 of the Enterprise Act
2002 strong and clear enough to protect a diverse and high quality
news media? Are the conditions under which the Secretary of State
can order a public interest investigation appropriate?
The NUJ has strongly welcomed the process under
which the decision was taken by Business Secretary John Hutton
to order BSkyB to cut its stake in ITV.
The minister's decision was in line with the
recommendations of a Competition Commission report, published
in December, which found that BSkyB's shareholding has the potential
to distort competition. We continue to believe that the legal
powers that were exercised throughout this process should not,
in any way, be weakened, lest they become so weak as to be incapable
of defending the public interest.
While, in this case, we welcome the thorough
way in which the procedures were applied, the question has to
be raised as to whether the powers in the Enterprise Act are sufficient
as we question whether such anti-competitive acquisitions should
be allowed to take place in the first instance.
In light of the seemingly ambiguous position
that prevails at present we would urge that more robust regulation
be considered in order to prevent such actions, without such a
complicated process being necessary before the Secretary of State
can order a public investigation.
3. Do current national and local cross-media
and single sector media ownership rules set out in UK legislation
do enough to ensure a high quality and diverse news media? Or
now that most news organizations are moving towards multi-platform
operations, have these rules outlived their usefulness and relevance?
In this context are there effective actions that can be adopted
by news organizations to protect the public interest?
Overall, in the local media for example, while
cost cutting exercises have negatively impacted on the ability
of editorial staff to maintain standards, those staff have continued
to give quality service to the public based upon obligations that
they feel as a result of loyalty to their readerships.
The lack of regulation, however, has shown the
potential for this to be undermined. This is exemplified in the
case of the aborted sale by DMGT of its Northcliffe Newspapers
division last year, before it was taken off the market after the
bids received were said not to be high enough. This is an example
of the lack of public accountability on the part of media owners.
No public consultation was ever conducted on
the proposed sale and neither was it legally required, meaning
the communities that Northcliffe newspapers serve had no opportunity
to raise local interests. Neither were journalists and trade unionists
who represent them ever consulted over the matter, indicating
a lack of concern about what would be the best vehicle to maintain
editorial quality.
The system of sealed bids allowed for neither
accountabilty nor transparency in circumstances where there was
no openly stated criteria covering the need of these publications
to adequately serve their readership and the public at large.
4. Do any problems arise from having four
bodies involved in the regulation of media markets (the OFT, Ofcom,
the Competition Commission and the Secretary of State)? Are there
any desirable reforms that would improve the effectiveness of
the regulatory regime?
The NUJ believes that; putting aside the cumbersome
nature of multi-agency regulation; the substantive issue involved
here is that of the need to end a situation that currently prevails,
whereby bodies that operate solely upon economic criteria are
used to monitor and regulate the media.
It is our contention that the media is a special
case, in that there is a specific need to ensure the quality and
diversity of programming and that such specifications ought to
be included in an updated Communications Act. Following on from
this, it should then be ensured that satisfactory institutional
arrangements are put into place in order to ensure implementation
of such requirements.
5. Has the lifting of all restrictions on
foreign ownership of UK media affected the quality and independence
of the UK news media, or will it affect it in the future? Has
the UK industry benefited, or does in stand to benefit in the
future?
The NUJ believes that unrestricted foreign ownership
has the potential to carry with it the danger of domination by
multinational companies. We are concerned that this could have
a detrimental effect on the plurality and diversity of the media
and ultimately its quality. If called to give oral evidence, the
NUJ would be happy to provide examples in relation to this question.
We believe that greater thought has to be exercised
in order that the public interest is ensured, by greater regulation
over non-UK media ownership.
6 February 2008
| 
