Draft proposals for a possible directive on media concentration and pluralism
Letter from Sir Frank Rogers, Chairman of the European Publishers Council (EPC) by fax to:
Sir Leon Brittan
Mario Monti
Martin Bangemann
Jacques Santer
Karel Van Miert
Marcelino Oreja
28 February 1997
You will remember that I wrote to you last August concerning the Commission's preliminary draft for a possible directive in the area of media concentration. At that time we submitted a detailed analysis of our concerns; in particular the adverse effect that the proposals would have had on the majority of the members of the European Publishers Council.
We are concerned that legislation in this area will take at least five years to be agreed by the Council and the European Parliament by which time it will already be out of date. Member States will then be faced with the prospect of implementing legislation which will be completely out of step with the reality of the market place.
With the advent of digital television, European consumers will be able to receive hundreds of TV channels from all over the world, many of which will be interactive, changing the face of media as we know it today, well before a directive is ever adopted.
Legislation, old and new, which deals specifically with media concentration is apparently intended to promote plurality. The convergence of traditional media companies with new forms of delivery, leading to lowered barriers to entry and increased consumer choice of media sources, reduce the need artificially to promote plurality through media-specific legislation.
The members of the European Publishers Council believe that a specific directive on media pluralism is against their long term interests and the interests of a flourishing European media industry and that they would be better served by the strength and simplicity of competition policy.
We recognise that a "flexibility" clause has been introduced into the latest text. This proposes to allow Member States discretion - in certain circumstances for a limited period of time- to allow their media companies to exceed the proposed thresholds. This will not, unfortunately, provide media companies with the legal certainty necessary to commit to major, long-term investment decisions. There is no absolute certainty that a Member State will grant such a derogation. The proposed 10% multi-media threshold, therefore, remains dangerously low as it would affect the majority of EPC members either immediately or in the near future if a particular Member State chose not to make a derogation.
The methods suggested for calculating consumption and share of audience have not been revised. They are intellectually and scientifically insupportable. We believe these will discriminate unfairly against publishers as (a) readership figures only measure penetration, whereas TV measurements are based on actual time and (b) 30% share of the press market is not equivalent to 30% share of the TV market in terms of either capital costs or revenues. Furthermore, you cannot aggregate measurement figures equitably when they have been measured subject to different criteria; there is no harmonised system of measurement across the EU.
Finally we would like to remind you that there is still no industry-wide consensus in favour of action at the European level. The main barriers to cross-border investment in the media sector are linguistic, cultural and commercial which harmonising legislation on media pluralism would not remove.
