European broadcasting policy

4.5.2 European broadcasting policy

The initial strategy was distribution led rather than production led. The EU funded satellite and cable developments. It was felt that only by creating a pan-European market could the EU cope with Japanese and American competition. Theoretically, production would then expand to fill this increasing broadcast time and market. Little was spent on programming; billions of ECUs were spent on distribution systems. It was widely believed that economic recovery in Europe could only be brought about through development of new technology. However, this was a smokescreen; production did not follow distribution, because this ignored the financial requirements of new production and its ability to fill new markets and outlets. (The majority of the initial satellite and cable stations programmed existing television material, primarily American in origin, or films.)

By the middle of the 1980s, European policy had shifted to the view that European production would bring about a common European identity. The1982 Hann Resolution was concerned with identity. Information was seen as the most decisive factor in creating identification. European identity

a During the 1990s policy did change, through a combination of the 1990 Broadcasting Act, technological change and the decision not to regulate heavily the growth of cable

and satellite television. With the advent of digital distribution the ‘privatisation’ of broadcasting is set to expand, and it could be argued that the medium is no longer perceived, in the UK, as primarily concerned with the dissemination of culture.

European Union media policy

relies on there being an identity that is recognisable; this depends on that identity being transmitted (see Chapter 2).

To some extent, policy ran behind technology; Transfrontier satellite ‘footprints’, made new policy essential. Therefore, individual countries were faced with freedom of reception as a reality before the EU formulated the policy (Television without Frontiers). Apart from the minimum standards mentioned above, the only reason for restrictions being placed on transmission of signals would be a threat to national security, or evidence that programming damaged culture. This would be difficult to prove, since an individual state would have to prove it was damaging to a free society in general and not just to their national identity. (Bias and impartiality were also not covered by EC minimum standards, and these have always been important issues in UK public service broadcasting.)

The EU has applied quotas against non-European television product, primarily from the USA; all members are to strive for 50 per cent European programming. However, it is apparent that this can never be achieved – it was estimated that by 2000, 20 per cent of primetime television would be European. (Presumably, this would be achievable within UK terrestrial broadcasting.) Is the quota merely a PR exercise? The EU commissioners knew that this proposal contravened the spirit of the GATT, (General Agreement on Tariff and Trade), which aims to reduce barriers to global free trade, and hence the USA was vehemently opposed to it. In the Uruguay round, concluded in 1994, this was the only significant area of disagreement between the USA and the EU (1994). Indeed, news coverage at the time of the agreement included a statement by the American negotiator that you could not conduct a free society on this basis (a statement given with such lack of emotion that it belied the very real anger over the EU’s determination not to allow for free trade in film and television with the USA). The statement was later revised to

a 50 per cent quota to be achieved where practicable. Such protectionism ignores the very problem of European audiences who want American productions such as Friends or ER, in a similar way to the demand for

American films over European ones b .

b There is, however, a clear difference in the level of demand, at least in the UK; whereas American films dominate in mainstream cinemas, the most successful American series

tend to be on the minority channels (e.g. Friends and ER on Channel 4; Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Star Trek: The Next Generation on BBC2). The X-Files is a clear exception here, although it was initially perceived as a minority programme and transmitted on BBC2.

Managing in the Media