APPENDIX 3: CALL FOR EVIDENCE
The House of Lords Select Committee on Communications,
chaired by Lord Inglewood, is announcing today an inquiry
into media plurality. The Committee invites interested organisations
and individuals to submit written evidence as part of the inquiry.
Written evidence is sought by Wednesday 1 May 2013.
Public hearings are expected to be held in June, July and in the
Autumn. The Committee aims to report to the House, with recommendations,
in the late Autumn. The report will receive a response from the
Government and may be debated in the House.
Achieving a workable approach to plurality, particularly
in provision of news and current affairs, is generally considered
fundamental to a well-functioning democratic society, ensuring
as far as possible informed citizens and a media without any single
set of views or individuals wielding too much influence over the
political process. Any consideration of plurality is, of course,
heavily tied in with the wider context of the future of news provision
more generally, particularly of newspapers which, under the current
framework, remain the principal force in agenda-setting and informed,
opinionated commentary.
While one of the Committee's previous reports looked
at The Ownership of the News, issues surrounding media
plurality are once again under the policy spotlight, prompted
by concerns raised about the proposed (and then dropped) acquisition
of BSkyB by News Corporation; Ofcom's report on Measuring Media
Plurality; Lord Justice Leveson's report; the report by the European
Commission's High Level Media Group on Media Freedom & Plurality;
and the recently launched European citizens' initiative for media
pluralism.
Together these have raised a number of ways in which
the policy and regulatory framework currently surrounding plurality
needs updating. The focus placed on plurality across these various
fora might create the expectation that a consensus is forming
and that momentum is now building behind reform. However, plurality
has been rather absent from recent debates and we hope, having
considered it carefully, to make recommendations which will lead
to action.
The need for a Committee of Parliament to undertake
this inquiry is clear. While Ofcom and Lord Justice Leveson have
made a number of proposals relating to plurality, both have insisted
that in a whole range of areas, it is for Parliament to give guidance
on the objectives and broad principles of policy relating to plurality.
The following quotes are indicative:
(a) "There are … areas where a high
degree of judgement is required. The appropriate approach to exercising
such judgement is ultimately for Parliament to debate and determine."[202]
(b) "Along with other aspects of this Report,
I agree that this is a choice for Parliament to make."[203]
Finally, we note that this inquiry makes for an almost
seamless follow on to our inquiry into media convergence. Evidence
received during that inquiry underlined ways in which convergence
has created new threats and exacerbated long-standing concerns
about pluralistic provision of news and current affairs (e.g.
breakdown of traditional market boundaries, threats to the business
model for journalism, news aggregation, the 'filter bubble', concentration
of ownership, vertical integration, etc.). While time did not
allow for these issues to be considered in their own right, the
previous inquiry has primed them and we look forward to receiving
more focussed evidence on these points now.
The Committee would welcome written submissions on
the main concerns associated with the current legal and regulatory
framework for plurality, and particularly proposals, or endorsements
and criticisms of existing proposals, on how this framework might
be brought up to date. The Committee will draw on this evidence
to make forward-looking but concrete recommendations. To assist
those making written submissions, what follows are a number of
the broad questions on which the Committee would be interested
to receive evidence and opinion. You need not address all of these
areas or questions. The Committee would also welcome any other
views, and practical proposals, of which stakeholders think the
Committee should be aware.
· Does
a clearer objective for plurality policy need to be thought out
and incorporated into statute than is currently the case? What
should this be?
· In the
absence of a definition of plurality in statute, Ofcom have provided
the following working formulation. Is this the best definition,
or should it be improved?
(a) "ensuring there is a diversity of viewpoints
available and consumed across and within media enterprises and;
(b) preventing any one media owner or voice having
too much influence over public opinion and the political process/agenda."[204]
· What
should the scope of media plurality policy be? Should it encompass
news and current affairs or wider cultural diversity in content
provision as well?
· What
are the appropriate triggers for a review of media plurality and
with whom should discretion to trigger a review reside, or indeed
should reviews be periodic? Alternatively, should reviews be periodic
while still retaining the possibility that a review can be triggered
under certain circumstances? What should those circumstances be?
· For
the purposes of a review of media plurality, what should 'sufficient
plurality' mean as described in Sections 3 and 375 of the Communications
Act 2003? How should the growing role played by digital intermediaries
acting as gateways to content be taken into account?
· How
should 'sufficient plurality' be measured?
· Should
the BBC's output be included in a review of it?
· How
can internal plurality be sensibly measured against external plurality?
· What
structural and/or behavioural remedies are appropriate if insufficient
plurality is found?
· How
should the deployment of these either structural or behavioural
remedies be balanced with considerations of the wider context
of news provision (e.g. the future of news provision and its financial
viability)?
· With
whom should power to deploy these remedies ultimately reside?
What process for their deployment should be observed?
· To what
extent should plurality be seen in a wider EU context, particularly
given the argument recently made that the Commission has competence
to review and impose obligations in these areas?
· What
should the UK learn from international approaches to media plurality?
28 March 2013
202 Ofcom, Measuring media plurality, Ofcom's advice
to the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport,
19 June 2012. Available online: http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/measuring-plurality/statement/statement.pdf Back
203
The Leveson Inquiry, An inquiry in the culture, practices and
ethics of the press, report, volume III, November 2012. Available
online:
http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/hc1213/hc07/0780/0780_iii.pdf Back
204
Ofcom, 6 June 2012. Measuring media plurality: Ofcom's advice
to the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport.
Available online:
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/measuring-plurality/statement/statement.pdf Back
| 
