••• 1
The Audiovisual Policy of the European Union
The Audiovisual Policy
of the
European Union
••• 2
The Audiovisual Policy of the EU
1. Legal Base:
° Treaty of Rome 1957:no legal base (TV hardly existed…)
° 1974:ECJ-judgement defines TV-«signal» as a «service »…
° … which is concerned by « freedom of service delivery » according Art.59 and art.60
° 1989 EU-directive « Television without frontiers »
° 1992 Maastricht-Treaty: Art 151 contains « TV » in context of « culture »
••• 3
1. AV-Policy of EU : Legal Base –Continuation :
° 1997 Treaty of Amsterdam : « Protocol » on public broadcasting added
° 2000 Treaty of Nice : Art.157 replaces unanimity voting on « industry » (including TV) by qualified majority in Council
° 2000 Fundamental Rights Charter : Art.II-11 guarantees freedom of media and media plurality
° 2007 EU-directive « Audiovisual media serviceswithout frontiers »
••• 4
2. Audiovisual Policy of EU-principles :
° AV is both « services » as well as « artistic creation »
° But AV is also a technical-industrial production
° Subsidiarity of MS, but also .....
° EU-Support of cooperation between MS in field of AV
° Completion and support of AV-policies of MS
° No harmonisation of AV-policies of MS!
° EU : only completing, not substituting AV-policies!
••• 5
3. Audiovisual Policy of EU – goals :
° Audiovisual transborder services not to be hindered
° Maintaining and strengthening of European identity
° Maintaining and strengthening of European creative/artistic production
° Maintaining of « special position » of public TV
° Strengthening of European AV-industry
° Protection of consumers (viewers/listeners) and of youth
° Media pleuralism, freedom of opinion and for media
••• 6
4. Audiovisual Policy of EU – Intermediary Summary:
° AV sector underlies to contradictory principles ,f.i. :
- As cultural production it is « national domain »… - but against US-influence strengthening of « European identity » by EU is allowed !
- As «services» free circulation/exchange on Common Market…
- but as public broadcasting exempt of EU competition law !
° AV sector develops much faster than EU-legislation on AV media
° AV policy concerns only actors in MS, but AV-media are by nature international...
••• 7
5. Audiovisual Policy of EU - Instruments:
° Regulation
° Financial support
5.1. Regulation:
* Directive «Television without frontiers» (1989) * «Protocol» in annex of Amsterdam - Treaty 1997* EC-Communication on public TV (2001)* EC-Communication on film industry (2001)* Directive «AV-media services» (2007)
••• 8
5.1.1 « Television without frontiers » - Directive 1989
Motives :
* TV spillover into neighbour countries
* Satellite TV covers several countries
* Private TV competes with public broadcasting monopolies
* Increasing demand for content because of multiplication of TV stations (also cable TV, local, regional TV)
* US entertainment content threatens EU content
••• 9
5.1.1 « Television without frontiers » - Directive 1989 – Continued…
Principles :
* «Directive» addressed to MS – implementation by national laws needed
* Free flow of TV programmes/broadcastinig services throughout EU, between MS
* Strengthening of European AV-production and TV-programme content
••• 10
5.1.1 « Television without frontiers » - Directive 1989 – Continued…
Instruments
* MS shall not restrict TV-transmission on their territory from other MS (exception : if rules for protectionof minors are infringed)
* TV-stations have to ensure «where practicable»a majority of «EU-works» in programme,excluding time for news, sport, games, advertising
* 10% of transmission time «where applicable» reservedfor European works from «independent procedures» (or 10% of programming budget) »independent » ofTV-broadcasters!
••• 11
5.1.1 « Television without frontiers » - Directive 1989 – Continued…
* EC «ensures compliance» with Directive onlyby reports, statistics about fulfilment of quotas
* Limits for advertising : - 15% maximum of daily transmission time and- 20% within given hour period- seperate «blocs» for advertising obligatory
••• 12
5.1.1 « Television without frontiers » - Directive 1989 – Continued…
* Interdicted :
- surreptitious advertising
- interruptive advertising
° (but « natural breaks »ok!)
° (but once after 45 min of one programme OK)
° other detailed procedures for interrupting as in
children programmes…)
- advertising for tobacco and prescription medicines
- advertising directly exhosting minors to buy product
••• 13
5.1.1 « Television without frontiers » - Directive 1989 – Continued…
Interdicted :
* Advertising which lacks respect of human dignity, includes discrimination (race, sex, nationality), offenses religious/political beliefs, is dangerous to health/safety/environment
* Sponsorship of programmes is permitted if
- programme not influenced by sponsor
- sponsored programme is identified as such
••• 14
5.1.1 « Television without frontiers » - Directive 1989 – Continued…
* Sponsorship of programmes is permitted if – continuation….
- Sponsored programme does not encourage buying of product of sponsor
- Not by a tobaccocompany, for medical products/treatments
- Programme is « news »
••• 15
5.1.1 « Television without frontiers » - Directive 1989 – Continued…
* Special rules for advertising for alcohol (e.g. encourage immoderate consumption)
* Protection of minors :
- programmes impairing physical/mental development of minors (violence, pornography) interdicted
- exception : transmission time « not normally » seen by youth
- programmes must not incite hatred on grounds of race, sex, nationality
* Right of reply for any person damaged by incorrect facts
••• 16
5.1.1 « Television without frontiers Directive » - Problems :
- Legal uncertainties
- Scarcity/costs of european AV-content
- No «hard» measures against infringement of EU-content rules (only reports… »shaming and blaming »)
Therefore revision of Directive in 1997:
* Principle of jurisdiction : MS is responsible for TV, if its head quarters and programming decisions are located on its territory (or satellite frequences given by it)
••• 17
5.1.1 « Television without frontiers Directive » Problems - continued :
* Events of major importance for society(such as sporting events) :
- must be open for free broadcasting to everybody, list of events by MS
- must be broadcast unencoded even if exclusive rights purchased by pay-TV-channels
* Teleshopping : subject to most of rules for advertising. Blocks to last at least 15 minutes
* Protection of minors : potentially «dangerous» programmes have to be preceded by accoustic or optical signal
••• 18
5.1.2. «Protocol» in Amsterdam Treaty (1997):
Protection of public broadcasting:
Problem: - public broadcasting frequently obtains «state aids» (license fees; fixed tariffs for TV advertising…)
- State aids in principle interdicted or only with special permission
«Solution»: Protocol protects public broadcasting of application of EU-law, if
* State aid is necessary for accomplishing public broadcasting obligations
* And if competition between actors is not substantially influenced
••• 19
5.1.2. Amsterdam Protocol-problems :
° Cross-financing ° What/how much is «public» in public broadcasting? ° Each MS defines «public» tasks of public broadcasting
differently ° «New services»?
Detailed regulations in :
° Council decision on Public Broadcasting (1999) ° EC-Communication on application of rules on state-aids for public broadcasting (2001)
••• 20
5.1.3. EC-Communication on public TV (2001):
Contains obligations for public broadcasting :
- General audiences must be able to use its offered services
- Technological progress has to be used
- Advantages of new AV-services have to be propagated
- Digital technology is to be used
- «Broad spectrum of program content» and ...
- «high viewing quotas» are to be pursued
••• 21
5.1.4. Communication on public TV (2001) continued :
* EC checks financial situation of all public-broadcasting stations separately/individually
* Prerequisites for approval of state-aids:
- Democratic, social and cultural demands have to be satisfied by program
- Media pluralism is maintained
- Supply of AV-services is maintained (territorial, timely)
- Not only entertainment, but also information/education is offered
••• 22
5.1.4. Communication on public TV (2001) – continuation :
- Adherence to and communication of common values as…
° freedom of opinion, speech
° right of counterstatement ° fair balance of program contents ° protection of intellectual property rights ° cultural and linguistic pluralism ° protection of minors, consumer interests
••• 23
5.1.5. Communication on film industry (2001):
Problems: - State aid to film industry (1,6 m E p.a.)
- "State" = Nation, Region, community…
- State aids in EU in principle interdicted / obligation of approval
„Solutions": - Film-Communication 2001 protects film industry of EU-law, if state-aids fulfil certain criteria
- Film-communication prolongated 2009-2012
••• 24
5.1.5. Film Communication – criteria for approval of state aids :
- Other MS are not discriminated – equal treatment !
- Free movement of goods and services guaranteed (free access to markets/exchange of programs)
- Focus on «cultural creativity», not on other aspects of film industry
••• 25
5.1.5. Film Communication – criteria for approval of state aids – continuation :
- Compliance with upper limits of state aids (maximum 50 % of production costs to avoid competition with aids attracting for instance US-producers…)
- Up to 20 % of production costs may be spent in other
than in subsidising country
••• 26
5.1.6 Audiovisual Media Services Directive (2007):
Motives :
* Technological progress since 1989/1997* Market developments
Principles :
* Technological neutrality – Directive concerns any AV content, irrespective of technology used for delivery (TV, Internet, mobile phone)
* Distinction between « linear » (traditional) and « non-linear » (on demand) services * Services concerned are commercial (not private internet websites!),directed to general public and designed as a « programme » (so AV-elements on websites are not covered!), and under editorial responsibility.
••• 27
5.1.6 Audiovisual Media Services Directive (2007) – continued…
Rules applied to linear services only :
* Events of major importance
* Quota for European TV programmes
* Time limits for advertising and tele shopping
* Protection of minors – stricter rules than for on-demand
* Right of reply
••• 28
5.1.6 Audiovisual Media Services Directive (2007) – continued…
Rules applied to non-linear services only :
* protection of minors only for content «seriously» impairing minors* Only «general promotion» of European works
Rules applied for non-linear and linear services :
* Identifying the media provider* Interdiction of incitement to hatred* Accessibility for people with disability* Advertising rules* Sponsoring rules* Product placement rules
••• 29
5.1.6 Audiovisual Media Services Directive (2007) – continued…
Restrictions by MS for receiving possible if
* approved by Commission
* exceptional circumstances as
° for TV : serious violations against human dignity or protection of minors
° for on-demand : also for risk to public health, security, consumer protection
••• 30
5.1.6 Audiovisual Media Services Directive (2007) – continued…
What is new ?
* Wider coverage : covers all media services,«on-demand» and «linear»
* Different levels of strictness, «graduated regulation» : because viewers can control on-demand offers better, fewer/less strict rules apply
* Restriction of unsuitable content : e.g. neo-nazi propaganda, which cannot be restricted in its country of origin
* Same rules apply for all forms of «commercial communication» (advertising, sponsorship, teleshopping)
••• 31
5.1.6 Audiovisual Media Services Directive (2007) –
What is new? - continued…
* Promotion of European works also by non-linear services !
* Product placement : allowed, if identified, if not unduly prominent, if not unhealthy
* Television advertising : new challenges addressed, as unhealthy foodstuff
* Access for disabled persons : TV stations must offer e.g. subtitling and audio description
* Independent national regulators recognised, must cooperate
••• 32
5.1.6 Audiovisual Media Services Directive Results :
Infringement procedures, examples :
* Estonia warned to apply its advertising rules (2009)
* Court action against Spain because of excessive spot-advertising (2008)
Promotion and distribution of European works, examples :
* Eight report (2008) : - 63% of transmission time « European » works
- 35% independent works
••• 33
5.1.6 Audiovisual Media Services Directive Results - continued :
°Lowest quota of European works: - 50% Ireland
°Highest quota of European works: - 86% Denmark
°Lowest quota of Independant works : - 16% Denmark
°Highest quota of Independant works : - 45% Austria
* Seventh report (2006) :
- 60% European works - 30% Independent works
* Sixth report (2005) :
- 67% European works (still EU -15!!) - 38% Independent works
••• 34
5.2. EU Audiovisual Policy – Financial aids:
The MEDIA-programmes
MEDIA I 1990-1995 200 Mio EuroMEDIA II 1996-2000 310 Mio EuroMEDIA Plus 2001-2005 400 Mio EuroMEDIA 2007 2006-2013 755 Mio EuroMedia International 2008-2010 8 Mio EuroMedia Mundus 2011-2013 15 Mio Euro
••• 35
5.2.1. MEDIA-Programmes - Origins: * Rise of private TV in eighties creates additional demand
for TV-programs (films,…)
* This demand gets increasingly satisfied byUS-producers
* Advance of TV leads to decrease of cinema visits, specially of European productions
* European film production loses market shares
••• 36
5.2.1. MEDIA-Programmes – Principles:
* Support only of pre- and post production-activities of film production itself !
* Film distribution (within EU and outside) has priority - 65% of subsidies!
* Leverage-effect of subsidies : Each Euro of subsidies “produces” 6 Euros of private
investments !
••• 37
5.2.1. MEDIA-Programmes – Objectives:
* Strenghtening of competitiveness of EU-film industry (2007 : market share of Hollywood in EU is 63%!!)
* Strenghtening of production and distribution of European AV-products within and outside of EU
* Promotion of cultural diversity in Europe and facilitation of intercultural dialogue
••• 38
5.2.1. MEDIA-Programmes – Instruments:
* Promotion of networks of training institutions (e.g. for screenplay writing; project development; film management; use of new technologies…)
* Support of distribution (e.g. distribution companies; DVD; production; cinemas; TV-transmission…)
* Boosting of marketing activities for films
* Encouragement of pilot projects – use ofnew technologies
••• 39
5.2.1. MEDIA-Programme – Problems:
* Low endowment
* MS with strong vs MS with weak film industry
* Still dominance of US-film supply
* Distribution companies frequently non-European
* Language barriers (subtitling; dubbing)
* National support programs for film continue to exist – competing subsidies/competition with subsidies,
not for subsidies
* Cinema is under pressure of DVD, “video on demand”
••• 40
5.2.2. MEDIA-2007 – New accents :
Reasons : Digitalisation; enlargement to the “east”
Additional objectives :
* Focus on SME-structures
* Facilitation of private investments
* Focus on MS with weak film industries (language problems…, size of MS)
* Priority for impacts of digitalisation
••• 41
5.2.3. MEDIA-MUNDUS-programme :
Purpose :
* To strenghten cultural and commercial relations between EU-film industry and film-makers of third countries
* Two way flow of films/AV-works, mutual benefits
Basis :
* Experiences of «Preparatory Action» MEDIA- International 2008-2010 - Funding 8 mio Euro, 58 projects
••• 42
5.2.3. MEDIA-MUNDUS-programme : Experiences with « Preparatory action » –
continued…
- Funded projects :
° continuous training of AV-professionals
° promotion of films(reciprocal)- support of marketing/distribution agreements
- support of marketing outside/within EU
° cinema networks which devote programming mainly to EU films and third countries’ films
° awareness-raising for EU/third country films (reciprocal)
••• 43
Experiences with « Preparatory Action » -continued…
Eligible costs :
- between 50% (in EU MS) and 80% (in third countries)
Eligible applicants :
- «coordinator» of applicant group located in EU- at least one applicant located in third country- only legal persons
••• 44
Experiences with « Preparatory Action »–continued…
Selection criteria for projects :- operational capacity- financial capacity
Award criteria for projects :
- quality of proposals submitted in terms of objectives and priorities set
Problems : * small amounts of funding * «discrimination» in funding of big MS film
producers vs.others
••• 45
Experiences with « Preparatory Action »
Motives :
* Small presence of EU films on big markets like Asia, Latin America
* To increase competitiveness of film industries in EU, third countries (mainly vis-à-vis US films!)
* To fill the gap left by film support programmes like MEDIA, Euromed Audiovisual, EU-ACP support programme for film and cinema/AV industries
* Difference of preparatory action to above-mentioned- programmes : Reciprocity !
••• 46
5.2.3. MEDIA-MUNDUS-programme :
Motives :
* Increasing demand for content due to Video-on-demand, internet TV or multichannel-digital TV
* Increasing cultural diversity of film offer in EU
* Intensifying intercultural dialogue
* Positive experiences with «preparatory action», interest of third countries
* Strengthening of «Europe in the world», «soft diplomacy»
••• 47
5.2.3. MEDIA-MUNDUS-programme – continued …
Procedure of decision-making 2008/2009 :
* Stakeholder consultation
* EC-interservice consultation
* Public online-consultation of interested parties
* Expertise by external consultants
* Public hearing
••• 48
5.2.3. MEDIA-MUNDUS-programme – continued…
Funding : * 15 mio Euro 2011-2013 * first call for proposals 2nd half 2010
Objectives :
Specific Objective 1: Information exchange andmarket intelligence
1) Building up websites and databases
2) Network of contact points
4) Initial training
5) Continuous training
6) Market access mechanisms
••• 49
5.2.3. MEDIA-MUNDUS-programme – continued …
Specific Objective 2: Facilitating internationalco-production activities
1) Development
a) Script development
b) Co-production markets/partner search (pitching)
2) Co-production
a) Supplement existing co-production funds
b) Access to finance
••• 50
Specific Objective 3: Distribution and circulationsupport
1) Support to partnerships of rights holders, sales agents and distributors
2) Cinema network
3) Support to broadcasters and digital platforms Specific Objective 4: Reach new audiencesand promote Film literacy
1) Festivals
2) Special events
3) Networks to target young audiences including education activities
4) Support for TV programmes dedicated to young audiences
Top Related