MEDIADEM In The Media

MEDIADEM project stories published

Credits: yuheitomi/Creative Commons

Phase I

Media policies and regulatory practices in a selected set of European countries, the European Union and the Council of Europe

A comprehensive collective report discussing media policy and regulation in 14 European countries was produced in the context of the MEDIADEM project. The report discusses the configuration of the media landscape in the countries under study, explores the main regulatory instruments used to govern the media, and assesses the implications of the policies conducted for democratic politics.

The report also contains an analysis of the media-related activities of the European Union and the Council of Europe, focusing on the interventions that are relevant for the protection and promotion of media freedom and independence.

You may download the collective report here. Individual chapters are also available in pdf format: Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Italy, Romania, Slovakia, Spain (also available in Spanish), Turkey, the UK, EU/CoE.

The formation and implementation of national media policies in Europe and their relationship to democratic society and media freedom and independence: A theoretical and analytical frame for the MEDIADEM project

A theoretical report clarifying basic concepts and analytical issues upon which MEDIADEM research is based and pursued was produced. The report conceptualises media policy in an increasingly converged and integrated media environment, and discusses its relationship to democracy, as well as its nature, scope, making and implementation. The report further explores the concept of media freedom and independence, which is identified as a distinct area for the study of media policy, and examines present practice and potential of regulation in the field. The report is available here.

Phase II

Case study reports – Does media policy promote media freedom and independence?

14 case study reports discussing the policy processes and the regulatory tools that have a bearing on the development of free and independent media in the countries covered by the MEDIADEM project were issued. The case study reports engage in an empirical study of the institutional dynamics of media policy-making in the countries under review. They also examine the regulatory framework governing the media, investigating whether the domestic rules, as enacted and implemented, facilitate the development of free and independent media. The methodology employed for the case study reports combines an examination of primary resources, secondary literature and semi-structured interviews with policy-makers, journalists and independent media regulators, amongst others.

In more detail, the reports:

  • Identify the institutional structures and the actors involved in media policy formulation and implementation, inquiring into the values that guide their activities, in particular freedom of expression and the right to information;
  • Investigate the formulation and implementation of the legal rules concerned with the configuration of the media market and the diversification of media content;
  • Examine journalists’ professional practices and autonomy;
  • Explore the media literacy initiatives adopted at a state and non-state level, the degree to which they are underpinned by freedom of expression and information standards, and media transparency.

You may download the case study reports in pdf format: Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Italy, Romania, Slovakia (also available in Slovakian), Spain, Turkey, and the UK.

Phase III

Comparative reports – Similarities and differences across the MEDIADEM countries

A collection of reports, entitled Media freedom and independence in 14 European countries: A comparative perspective, was published. The reports focus on a comparative analysis of the most pertinent questions and key issue areas for media freedom and independence across the MEDIADEM countries. Based on the project’s empirical research, these reports examine and analyse the contribution (or not) of different media policy patterns to the promotion of free and independent media. The reports address:

a) the freedom and independence of public service media in the MEDIADEM countries;

b) the relationship between politics and the media in five Eastern European countries: Bulgaria, Croatia, Estonia, Romania and Slovakia;

c) trends and policy approaches pertaining to new media services in the MEDIADEM countries;

d) the professional autonomy in journalism as a factor for safeguarding freedom of expression in the MEDIADEM countries; and

e) the role of the European courts in shaping media policies in the MEDIADEM countries.

MEDIADEM’s comparative output also comprises a report entitled The regulatory quest for free and independent media. This report examines the different forms of media regulation currently in place in the fourteen countries covered by the MEDIADEM project with a view to identifying common patterns, best practices and emerging problems. The report adopts an integrated notion of media, including digital media, and examines: a) different levels of regulation (national and European regulatory processes, stemming from both the European Union and the Council of Europe); and b) various forms of regulation (public and private regulation, hybrids thereof, and multiple institutional and governance arrangements).

Phase IV

Media policy development: Policy suggestions for the promotion of media freedom and independence

The fourth stage of the project involved the formulation of policy guidelines for the promotion of free and independent media on the basis of the project’s findings. These address state and non-state actors involved in media policy?making, the European Union and the Council of Europe. Our policy recommendations take the form of a collective policy report and three policy briefs forming part of MEDIADEM’s policy brief series.

– The collective policy report addressing state and non-state actors involved in the design and implementation of media policies supportive of media freedom and independence, the European Union and the Council of Europe  comprises policy papers with recommendations for the promotion of media freedom and independence in the 14 MEDIADEM countries. In addition, it formulates policy recommendations addressing the Council of Europe and the European Union and offers a regulatory matrix that provides an overview of the regulatory systems at work in the 14 countries under study. The collective report is available here (in English). The policy paper concerning the Council of Europe and the European Union including the regulatory matrix is also available individually here.

– The policy papers for the promotion of media freedom and independence in the 14 countries covered by the MEDIADEM project are also available in the official language(s) of the countries concerned. In addition to the recommendations targeting national media policy-makers and other stakeholders, these policy papers include a succinct summary of the project’s recommendations for the European Union (EU) and the Council of Europe with a view to encouraging the sharing of results and strengthening communication among national and European policy actors.

Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Belgium (in Dutch);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Belgium (in French);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Bulgaria (in Bulgarian);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Croatia (in Croatian);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Denmark (in Danish);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Estonia (in Estonian);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Finland (in Finish);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Germany (in German);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Greece (in Greek);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Italy (in Italian);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Romania (in Romanian);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Slovakia (in Slovakian);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Spain (in Spanish);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Turkey (in Turkish);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in the United Kingdom (in English).

MEDIADEM’s policy brief series comprises:

– The first MEDIADEM policy brief, which contains key observations on how to understand ‘free and independent’ media and puts together broad policy recommendations for their promotion (June 2011). Available in English (also at the Research and Innovation – SSH website of the European Commission) and Greek.

– The second MEDIADEM policy brief, which identifies the main constraints or threats to the operation of free and independent media in the 14 countries under study and makes specific recommendations as to how these concerns might be addressed in practice by the various stakeholders (September 2012). Available here and at the Research and Innovation – SSH website of the European Commission.

– The third MEDIADEM policy brief focuses on the role of the EU and the Council of Europe in supporting media freedom and independence (March 2013). Available here.

Other publications

– Understanding media policies: A European perspective

Edited by E. Psychogiopoulou, the book, entitled ‘Understanding media policies: A European perspective’, inquires into the formulation of contemporary European media policies and the factors and conditions that affect their making. Combining a country-based study in 14 countries with a comparative analysis across various types of media services, the volume explores how media policies are understood, negotiated and applied, testifying to the array of policy approaches and regulatory practices established to govern the media.

Contents:

List of Tables and Figures
Acknowledgements
Notes on Contributors
Recasting the Contours of Media Policy in a Political Context: An Introduction; E. Psychogiopoulou & D. Anagnostou
Media Policy in Belgium: How a Complex Institutional System Deals with Technological Developments; B. Van Besien & P-F. Docquir
Democracy and the Media in Bulgaria: Who Represents the People?; R. Smilova, D. Smilov & G. Ganev
Croatia: A Dynamic Evolvement of Media Policy; P. Bili? & N. Švob-?oki?
Danish Media Policy; H. Søndergaard & R. Helles
Media Policy in Estonia: Small Market Paradoxes; U. Loit & H. Harro-Loit
Finnish Media Policy: Less Restrictive, More Directive; H. Kuutti, E. Lauk, P. Nevalainen & R. Sokka
Media Policy in Germany: Main Features and Current Issues; S. Müller & C. Gusy
The Greek Media Policy Revisited; E. Psychogiopoulou, A. Kandyla & D. Anagnostou
Italian Media Policy Under On-going Transition to Meet the Challenges of the Twenty-first Century; F. Casarosa
Struggling with Media Capture: Romania; A. Mungiu-Pippidi & C. Ghinea
Slovakia: Reinventing Media Policy without a Practical Perspective; A. Školkay & M. Hong
Media Policy in Spain: Public Service, Free Competition and some Internal Diversity; S. de la Sierra, E. Guichot, M. Mantini & I. Sobrino
Turkish Media Policy in National Context; D. Kurban & E. Elmas
Media Policy in the United Kingdom: Trust and Distrust in a Converging Media Environment; R. Craufurd Smith & Y. Stolte
Serving Two Masters: The Roles of the Market and European Politics in the Governance of Media Transformations; K. Sarikakis
References
Index

Endorsements:

‘This very timely, extremely valuable and well-organised collection of informative analyses of media policies in Europe is essential reading for anyone interested in media policy debates, institutional arrangements and regulatory practices within a wide framework of conflicting interests and differing national approaches to communication challenges. Highly commendable!’ – Petros Iosifidis, Director of the MA Media and Communication courses, City University London, UK

‘Understanding Media Policies puts together fascinating evidence of the patchwork of national media policy models in Europe, yet it provides a common background for their comparison. This is a valuable contribution to the growing literature in media policy studies, with compelling descriptions of politics shaping media landscapes’ – Beata Klimkiewicz, The Jagiellonian University, Poland

The following extracts from the editor’s original peer-reviewed and pre-copyedited manuscript can be found here with the permission of Palgrave Macmillan:

  • E. Psychogiopoulou (ed.), ‘Index

The definitive version of these pieces may be found in Understanding media policies edited by E. Psychogiopoulou which can be accessed from www.palgrave.com.

– Media policies revisited. The challenge for media freedom and independence

What are the characteristics that render the media free and independent, and do European media policies develop in ways that promote media freedom and independence? What are the main constraints or threats to the operation of free and independent media, and what are the policy processes, institutional structures, regulatory practices and tools that can help counteract these? MEDIADEM’s second collective volume, entitled ‘Media policies revisited. The challenge for media freedom and independence’ (edited by E. Psychogiopoulou) explores key features of media policies and regulation in fourteen countries, investigating their strengths and weaknesses in the protection of media freedom and the promotion of independent media behaviour.

Contents:

Introduction; Evangelia Psychogiopoulou;

The Emerging Governance Pattern in Media and Communications; Petros Iosifidis
Media Freedom and Independence in Contemporary Democratic Societies; Evangelia Psychogiopoulou

PART I: MEDIA POLICY PROCESSES AND REGULATORY PATTERNS
Media Policy and New Regulatory Systems in Denmark; Henrik Søndergaard and Rasmus Helles
Multi-Level and Interrelated Media Policy Processes in Germany: An Enabling or Constraining Factor for Free and Independent Media?; Sebastian Müller and Christoph Gusy
The ‘Piranha’ Model: Power Plays and Dynamics of Policy-Making Addressing Free and Independent Media in Romania; Ioana Avadani and Cristian Ghinea
The National versus the European: The Croatian Roadmap to Media Freedom and Independence; Nada Švob-?oki? and Paško Bili?

PART II: COURTS
The Role of Courts in Protecting the Freedom of Expression in Italy; Federica Casarosa and Elda Brogi
The Freedom of Expression in the Media and the Slovak Judiciary; Andrej Školkay
Protecting the Public Interest in a Free Press: The Role of Courts and Regulators in the United Kingdom; Yolande Stolte and Rachael Craufurd Smith

PART III: MEDIA FINANCE AND BUSINESS MODELS
Changing Conditions of Competition for Public Service and Commercial Media in Belgium: Implications for Media Independence; Pierre-François Docquir and Bart Van Besien
New Business Models for the Media: The Spanish Case; Juan Luis Manfredi and Juan Pablo Artero
The Media in Bulgaria: Business Enterprises or PR Divisions of Business Groups?; Ruzha Smilova

PART IV: THE JOURNALISTIC PROFESSION
The State of the Journalistic Profession in Turkey; Ceren Sözeri and Dilek Kurban
The Role of Professional Journalism in the ‘Small’ Estonian Democracy; Halliki Harro-Loit and Urmas Loit
Journalists’ Self-Regulation in Greece; Evangelia Psychogiopoulou, Anna Kandyla and Dia Anagnostou
Ethical Demands and Responsibilities in Online Publishing: The Finnish Experience; Epp Lauk and Heikki Kuutti

Conclusion: Towards Media Freedom and Independence; Evangelia Psychogiopoulou

You may order this publication through the website of the publisher Palgrave Macmillan.

– MEDIADEM report on project output and areas for future research

This report seeks to evaluate the lessons learnt from MEDIADEM’s research and to assess the communication strategy employed for the diffusion of project findings to various stakeholders at the national and European levels. On the basis of the research conducted, the report  also considers follow-up research directions in the field of media policy and regulation, and media freedom and independence. The report is available here.

Horizon 2020 website. Featuring an interview with MEDIADEM’s scientific coordinator, Dr. Evangelia Psychogiopoulou, the story reports on the main challenges facing media freedom and independence in Europe and provides an overview of the key policy recommendations put forward by the project.

 

MEDIADEM conference in the news: Slovakia

Credits: ax2groin/Creative Commons

The MEDIADEM project aims at combining a strong academic direction with a policy development orientation. It aspires to produce expert scientific results and generate focused, useful and accessible policy-related output. Project partners are centres with a broad range of educational and research activities, and well-networked with the media sector, media policy-makers and civil society. This renders the MEDIADEM consortium particularly well-positioned to achieve the widest possible diffusion of project findings and access to key target groups.

The project is designed in such a way, so as to allow the largest number of potential users to be approached. Target audiences per type of project activities are described in detail below.

Project reports and collective publications

  • The academic community, graduate students and those carrying out research in the media field
  • Non-state actors involved in media policy-making
    – Media professionals and their representative associations
    – Human rights organisations
    – Other civil society organisations (e.g. viewer and listener organisations, citizens’ associations, other pressure groups)

Mediadem Contributions:

–  A collective report, Media policies and regulatory practices in a selected set of European countries, the EU and the Council of Europe.

–  A theoretical report, The formation and implementation of national media policies in Europe and their relationship to democratic society and media freedom and independence: A theoretical and analytical frame for the MEDIADEM project.

–  14 case study reports, exploring the policy processes and the regulatory tools that have a bearing on the development of free and independent media in:Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Italy, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Turkey, and the UK.

–  A collection of reports which analyse in a comparative fashion the most pertinent questions and key issue areas for media freedom and independence across the MEDIADEM countries. View the collection of reports Media freedom and independence in 14 European countries: A comparative perspective.

–  A comparative  report examining the different forms of media regulation currently in place in the fourteen countries covered by the project with a view to identifying common patterns, best practices and emerging problems. View the report The regulatory quest for free and independent media.

–  An edited volume, entitled ‘Understanding media policies: A European perspective’, which inquires into the formulation of contemporary European media policies and the factors and conditions that affect their making (edited by by E. Psychogiopoulou). The book can be accessed from www.palgrave.com.

Project policy papers and policy briefs

  • European policy-makers (EU institutions and the Council of Europe)
  • Decision-makers at national level
    – Ministries
    – Independent regulatory bodies and supervisory organs
    – Parliamentarians and parliamentary committees
  • Judicial authorities at national and European level
  • Non-state actors involved in media policy-making
    – Media companies, media professionals and their representative associations
    – Human rights organisations
    – Other civil society organisations

Mediadem Contributions:

–  First MEDIADEM policy brief (available in English and Greek).

–  Second MEDIADEM policy brief.

–  A collective policy report addressing state and non-state actors involved in the design and implementation of media policies supportive of media freedom and independence, the European Union and the Council of Europe.

– The individual policy papers for the promotion of media freedom and independence in the 14 countries covered by the project are also available in the official language(s) of the countries concerned:

Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Belgium (in Dutch);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Belgium (in French);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Bulgaria (in Bulgarian);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Croatia (in Croatian);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Denmark (in Danish);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Estonia (in Estonian);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Finland (in Finish);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Germany (in German);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Greece (in Greek);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Italy (in Italian);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Romania (in Romanian);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Slovakia (in Slovakian);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Spain (in Spanish);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Turkey (in Turkish);
Policy suggestions for free and independent media in the United Kingdom (in English).

Project events

  • European policy-makers (EU institutions and the Council of Europe)
  • Decision-makers at national level
    – Ministries
    – Independent regulatory bodies and supervisory organs
    – Parliamentarians and parliamentary committees
  • Judicial authorities at national and European level
  • Non-state actors involved in media policy-making
    – Media companies, media professionals and their representative associations
    – Human rights organisations
    – Other civil society organisations
  • The academic community and those carrying out research in the media field

Mediadem Contributions

–  MEDIADEM final European conference in Brussels (7 February 2013)

–  Workshop ‘Devolution & independence – The future of the media in Scotland’ (Edinburgh, 7 January 2013)

–  What policies for free and independent media in Bulgaria? (Sofia, 14 December 2012)

–  MEDIADEM panel at the ‘Speaking is silver’ conference (Hanasaari, 13-14 December 2012)

–  Conference ‘Freedom and independence in the Italian media system’ (Florence, 13 December 2012)

–  National expert roundtable on media policy in Slovakia (Bratislava, 12 December 2012)

–  Workshop on ‘Media freedom and independence in Greece: Assessment and recommendations for policy’ (Athens, 11 December 2012)

–   Seminar ‘Policy suggestions for free and independent media in Belgium’ (Brussels, 10 December 2012)

–  Conference ‘Media policy: news journalism & media competency – how can the watchdog be nourished?’ (Tartu, 7 December 2012)

–  Conference on ‘Media in transition – Answers from media policy?’ (Copenhagen, 6 December 2012)

–  Presentation of MEDIADEM findings in Zagreb (Zagreb, 5 December 2012)

–  Policies for free and independent media in Romania (Bucharest, 26 November 2012)

–  Workshop on policy suggestions for free and independent media in Spain (Madrid, 23 November 2012)

–  Conference on media freedom in Turkey (Istanbul, 23 November 2012)

MDCEE and MEDIADEM Projects (Oxford, 15 November 2012)

Interconnected subjects – Interconnected public. The Internet as a platform for a European societal consciousness (Berlin, 9-10 November 2012)

–  The politics of media policy in Europe (Istanbul, 24-27 October 2012)

–  Conference on ‘New television screens, new regulation’ (Brussels, 5-6 July 2012)

–  Seminar on ‘Journalists’ professional autonomy and journalism ethics’ (Jyväskylä, 14 June 2012)

–  Working seminar on ‘Media policy recommendations for the development of free and independent media in Slovakia’ (Bratislava, 7 June 2012)

–  MEDIADEM panel at the 2012 Halki International Seminar (Halki, 7-10 June 2012)

–  Discussion group on ‘Media policy: suggestions and recommendations for the development of free and independent media in Croatia’ (Zagreb, 18 April 2012)

–  ELIAMEP research seminar on ‘The media in Greece: Current issues and future challenges’ (Athens, 6 April 2012)

Conference ‘New media, old values? Media freedom and independence in the era of convergence’ (Edinburgh, 9 December 2011)

–  Workshop on ‘The Internet: Between cultural value and economic good. An uncharted legal terrain or do we need a differentiated concept of regulation? (Berlin, 22-23 September 2011)

–  Workshop on ‘Media policies & regulation for media freedom & independence’ (Athens, 30 June 2011)

–  Seminar on ‘regulation, co-regulation, self-regulation and the social responsibility of audiovisual media’ (Barcelona, 20 June 2011)

–  Workshop on ‘The Italian media system’ (Florence, 25 March 2011)

–  Workshop on ‘Government and the internet’ (Florence, 8-9 March 2011)

–  Workshop on ‘Greek media policy’ (Athens, 3 March 2011)

Workshop on ‘Media policies: Country practices within the EU media regulatory framework’ (Zagreb, 10 December 2010)

–  Workshop on the influence of the internet on the media (Brussels, 29 November 2010)

  Workshop on ‘European policy for free and independent media systems: Current issues for regulation’ (Florence, 4 November 2010)

Other project material

  • All key target groups

Mediadem Contributions:

–       The MEDIADEM flyer in Bulgarian, Croatian, Danish, Dutch, English, Estonian, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Italian, Romanian, Slovakian, Spanish and Turkish

–       A detailed MEDIADEM brochure in English

–       News for the media

–       Views and commentary

The third MEDIADEM policy brief is devoted to the role of the EU and the Council of Europe in supporting media freedom and independence. Drawing on the research that was carried out throughout the duration of the MEDIADEM project, singling out, when appropriate, the institutions and other stakeholders that are specifically targeted by these suggestions. The policy brief is available here.

Finland has no real problems with the freedom of expression and media freedom. Instead, with emphasis in four issue areas: a) the implementation of the freedom of expression, b) the improvement of the general trust in the media, c) maintaining high quality journalism, and d) evaluating the role of the public broadcasting company (YLE) in competition with the commercial media.

Professor Hannu Nieminen of the University of Helsinki, who was invited to comment on these recommendations, talked about the citizens’ point of view in the freedom of expression. This refers to the role of the media in general in giving voice to the people and the responsibility of YLE to produce relevant content, among others. Mr. Risto Uimonen, chair of the Council for Mass Media, supported Nieminen’s remarks by underlining the danger Finnish media may face because of rapid technological changes. Conveyor belt-like production of news may weaken journalists’ ability to react to important issues, while the media’s ambition for higher profits pushes down editorial resources, eventually leading to poor journalism.

Mr. Juha Rekola, head of international affairs of the Finnish Union of Journalists, shared the view that the public role of journalism is currently under commercial pressure. Increasing work load and time pressures have a negative impact on journalists ability to actually to their job.

Associate Professor Paivi Tiilikka of the University of Helsinki expressed doubts that updating regularly the Finnish translations of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) online database would be enough for promoting domestic judicial interpretations more favourable for the freedom of speech. According to her, the ECtHR’s interpretations are not always unambiguous and, hence, they are difficult to apply to the Finnish court practice. Often, they do not specify what the aspects that should be taken into consideration by the Finnish courts are.

Mr Mikko Hoikka, Director of the Federation of the Finnish Media Industry reminded that media houses do not anymore compete with each other only. Instead, the media have fragmented with new players and techniques and competition is now about getting the public’s attention first. Concerning YLE, Mr Hoikka raised the question whether public service media should complement the current output of commercial channels or they should bring something new to the market. YLE, for instance, should not copy the ways in which the commercial channels are trying to attract young audience .

Director Juhani Wiio from Wiio Co. criticised the commercial media for considering that YLE is only a marginal actor who patches up what the commercial media are not interested in. According to Mr Wiio, YLE should not be seen as a competitor to commercial media. As regards the evaluation of YLE’s new services, parliamentary control would be the best way to go.

The agenda of the conference ‘Speaking is silver’ is available here (in English).

Video recording of the 2nd day of the ‘Speaking is silver’ conference is available here.

For more information you may contact Heikki Kuutti.

The Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP), by Dr Evangelia Psychogiopoulou, research fellow at ELIAMEP and MEDIADEM’s scientific coordinator, which set the scene for the presentations and the two roundtables that followed. Dr Psychogiopoulou explained the scope of the research that was carried out, stressing MEDIADEM’s interest in the media as agents of information and debate that facilitate public discourse in a democratic society. Under this perspective, media policy, for the purposes of MEDIADEM’s research, has been understood, she explained, as the whole range of policy approaches, strategies and tools that are employed (or not employed) to shape the media in a way that promotes their role as facilitators and carriers of public discourse. The analysis has then adopted an institutional dimension, focusing on the contribution of distinct actors at different levels and through different processes on policy formulation and implementation that may benefit or act to the detriment of media freedom and independence. The concept of freedom and independence, she further noted, upon which the whole project was based, sought to cater for all the different types of pressures facing the media: pressures stemming from ownership, finance, the media’s need for access to information, legal rules and judicial practices, among others.

The second presentation was that of Professor Fabrizio Cafaggi of the European University Institute, and Dr Federica Casarosa, researcher at the European University Institute, on fundamental rights and media regulation. The presenters made an overview of the findings of the comparative report The regulatory quest for free and independent media concerning the structure of European Union (EU) competences for the protection of media freedom and independence, the constitutional foundations of regulatory alternatives, the implications of adopting an integrated notion of media as a basis for regulatory intervention, and the different forms of regulation (public and private) adopted in the 14 MEDIADEM countries. As regards the latter, Prof. Cafaggi highlighted that the boundary between public and private regulation is not neat and that there is limited regulatory coordination even at the national level. Regulatory coordination within both public and private regulation at a European level could be effective in protecting fundamental rights in media activity, he noted. Dr Federica Casarosa talked about the independence of the media regulatory authorities vis-à-vis the government in the countries covered by the project and about the increasing role of European and national courts in addressing and solving media related issues while ‘filling’ regulatory gaps.

Professor Epp Lauk of the University of Jyväskylä presented MEDIADEM’s main comparative findings in relation to journalistic autonomy and freedom of expression. She noted that today’s fast changing media environment has blurred the definition of who is a journalist, albeit a universally accepted definition has never existed. In the countries examined, she noted, a status-based (usually linked to membership in a professional association) or an activity-based definition is generally followed; only in few countries (Belgium, Croatia and Italy) the law provides for a definition of ‘professional’ journalists. She then discussed the concept of ‘journalistic autonomy’ as a central value of professional behaviour and a precondition for independent journalism, and elaborated on the factors that support or constrain this autonomy across the MEDIADEM countries. As regards external pressures coming from the sphere of politics, these occur through state involvement in the media and through the relationships established between politicians and journalists and play out differently from country to country. Economic factors and market pressures, although universal, also have a variable impact. The influence of factors stemming from journalists’ immediate environment (newsroom and news organisation, relationship with peers, everyday working routines, etc.) or from within the profession (e.g. ethical rules) on journalists’ autonomy is quite noticeable across the countries examined. Overall, she concluded, the protection of the autonomy of the individual journalist is a pan-European concern and measures that aim at balancing the competitive nature of the job market and the commercial or other interests of media organisations should be considered.

The presentation of Dr Dia Anagnostou, senior research fellow at ELIAMEP, focused on the findings of MEDIADEM’s comparative analysis on the freedom and independence of public service media (PSM). She explained that two key issues influence and shape the nature and function of PSM at present: the relationship with the state and the government of the day, and the relationship with, and pressures from the commercial media, which have intensified with the advent of online technology. In the present context of market competition, PSM are called to reassert their rationale and purpose, and generally justify their existence. She then drew attention to the effectiveness of legal and institutional provisions in guaranteeing the independence of PSM from the government and dominant political forces. These pertain to the remit of PSM, their management and supervisory control structures, and their financing. She highlighted that the independence of PSM must be understood as a contingent outcome of on-going processes of supervisory control and negotiation among a variety of public and private actors, within the constraints and safeguards of the existing governance and financial arrangements.

Dr Andrej Školkay, director of the School of Communication and Media, and Dr Juan Luis Manfredi, senior lecturer at the University of Castilla-La Mancha, presented the project’s comparative findings with respect to media freedom and independence in the new media services environment. Dr Školkay pointed out the lack of a legal definition of new media in most, if not all EU countries and at the EU level. Therefore, the research that was carried out, he explained, focused on the following new media tool: blogs, online-only news portals and the online versions of the traditional media. The analysis shows that there is an urgent institutional need to regulate the behaviour of professionals and non-professionals in the online world. In fact, due to the lack of statutory regulation, regulation comes from the individual media owners with the establishment of codes that can sometimes be particularly restrictive. On the other side, court decisions act as a form of indirect state regulation, adopting, for instance, in cases concerning freedom of speech and libel/defamation either a ‘hard approach’ to new media services (i.e. an approach similar to the one followed for the traditional media) or a ‘soft approach’ (i.e. considering that new media services do not have an equal status with traditional media, and thus have no or limited duties). Any regulatory answer for new media services, they concluded, needs to be in support of free media and independent journalism.

In the discussion following the presentation of MEDIADEM’s comparative findings, comments and issues were raised concerning the role of publicly-funded media in the new media environment, technological convergence and its effects on the regulation of PSM, the independence of PSM and regulatory authorities, the tensions between European level regulation and national competences in the field of the media, and the contribution of self-regulation and ethical codes of conduct to the promotion of professional standards in online and citizen journalism, among others.

The meeting continued with two roundtables. The first roundtable focused on the ‘role of state and non-state actors in promoting media freedom and independence’ and was chaired by Mr Peter Kramer, Brussels representative of the Association of European Journalists. Dr Rachael Craufurd Smith, senior lecturer at the University of Edinburgh, presented the findings of the project concerning the major constraints that affect the operation of free and independent media in the countries reviewed, and discussed the project’s policy recommendations targeting national stakeholders for addressing these constraints in practice. These are: a) supporting a co-ordinated, evidence-led, open and transparent policy development process; b) ensuring effective compliance with international guarantees of freedom of expression and information; c) mitigating inappropriate political influence on appointments to the public service media and the media regulatory bodies and on the allocation of public funds; d) up-dating regulatory rules and structures in the light of convergence; e) supporting a balance between  public service and commercial media; f) monitoring and controlling excessive media ownership; and g) developing quality journalism and supporting media literacy.

Professor Wolfgang Schultz of the Hans-Bredow Institut for Media Research emphasised the close link between regulatory independence and media freedom and discussed the connection between the recommendations advanced by MEDIADEM concerning the independence of media regulators and the indicators of regulatory independence coming out of the INDIREG study which he coordinated. He highlighted that cultural differences impact the way in which independence is demonstrated in practice and noted that transparency is important but is not a panacea for all ills. EPRA Chairman, Jean-François Furnémont, supported MEDIADEM’s recommendations about the need for more coordination between independent regulators in Europe, yet expressed doubts as to the optimum regulatory design for such cooperation. He regretted the absence of a requirement for the independence of regulatory authorities in the Audiovisual Media Services (AVMS) Directive and expressed the hope that this failure will be corrected on the occasion of the next review. Mr Tobias Eberwein, scientific officer at the Erich Brost Institute for Journalism in Europe, discussed the link between MEDIADEM’s recommendations targeting media accountability and the findings of the MediaAct project. He noted that alongside traditional instruments of media accountability (such as press councils), new online accountability instruments (such as journalists’ blogs and comment’s pages) are gaining presence – yet their significance and impact on journalists’ accountability differ among countries.

The second roundtable was dedicated to the ‘role of the European Union and the Council of Europe in promoting media freedom and independence’. It was chaired by Dr Maja Cappello, EPRA vice-chair. It started with a presentation of MEDIADEM’s policy recommendations for the EU and the Council of Europe by Professor Fabrizio Cafaggi, who noted that media freedom and pluralism in the rapidly changing media environment form the object of increasing attention by the EU institutions. Blurring boundaries between markets point to the need of adopting an integrated notion of media where new and conventional media are considered as part of the same regulatory field. At the same time, regulatory fragmentation across countries should be addressed by way of coordination rather than integration. Overall, principle-based, rather than ‘command and control’ regulation, is more suitable to address the fast changing dynamics of the sector. Turning to professional regulation, Prof. Cafaggi noted that an activity-based definition of professional journalism fits better with technological progress. He argued that any regulation addressing professional journalists should be able to capture the distinctions between professional journalism, non-professional journalism, public speech, private speech etc.

Mr Björn Janson, head of Media Division of the Directorate General of Human Rights and Rule of Law of the Council of Europe, discussed the implications of the adoption of a new notion of media by the Council of Europe and the challenges the Council of Europe faces in implementing existing standards in the new media ecosystem. In this context, the issue of safeguarding pluralism and diversity in the online world as well as defining journalism will soon be addressed. He further noted that the work of the Council of Europe supports the use of soft law but the lack of implementation remains an obstacle. Dr Panayotis Voyatzis, referendaire at the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), referred to the measures adopted by the ECtHR to enhance the implementation of its own judgments, in particular to the practice of pinpointing the individual and general measures that should be taken by the member states in order to implement the court’s case law. Mr William Horsley, media freedom representative of the Association of European Journalists, talked about the potential for coordination of the journalistic profession at the European level in light of the MEDIADEM proposals. He elaborated on the current assaults on the practice of journalism and the challenges facing the profession, noting that European institutions are often perceived as unresponsive to journalists’ legitimate demands for protection. In this context, he noted, more efforts should be made in closing the gap between the jurisprudence of the ECtHR concerning free speech and the protection of journalists and the implementation of its judgments. As regards the EU, he observed, some coordination of the competition and human rights competences of the EU (but not regulatory coordination) would be welcomed. The EU Agency for Fundamental Rights, for instance, could be mandated to ensure that within the EU member states a proper monitoring process for the protection of human rights in media activity is established.

Ms Lorena Boix-Alonso, head of unit G.1 Converging Media and Content, DG CONNECT, European Commission, discussed MEDIADEM’s recommendations targeting the European Commission. As regards the role of the EU in the field of fundamental rights, she argued that the EU impact assessment system works quite well in promoting human rights ‘mainstreaming’. On the proposal that the European Commission lead a reflection on the independence of public media regulators, she highlighted that the European Commission recognises the importance of the issue, mentioning that the initial proposal of the European Commission for the AVMS Directive included an article on independent regulatory authorities, which did not make it to the final text. She welcomed the MEDIADEM’s recommendation for a stronger role for the EPRA in coordinating public regulators and for more coordination between EPRA and the European Regulators on Electronic Communications (BEREC). Professor Pier Luigi Parcu, director of the Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom at the European University Institute, supported MEDIADEM’s recommendation on the adoption of a technology neutral approach to media regulation, noting, however, that first, a definition of what constitutes the media should be established. He suggested that the principles of competition policy be revisited to capture the complex dynamics of new media, through, for example, the incorporation of pluralism considerations in competition analysis or the forbidding of holding a dominant position in media markets (and not just the abuse thereof).

Mrs Nicola Frank, head of European affairs at the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), discussed the concept of public service media in the digital environment. She welcomed MEDIADEM’s recommendation on the shift from public service broadcasters to PSM which enjoy a broad remit also in the online and multi-platform world. In this context, she referred to the EBU’s Declaration on the Core Values of Public Service Media, which builds around the principles of universality, independence, excellence, accountability and innovation, and to the efforts made by the EBU to assist its members in these areas. The final panelist was Mr Ross Biggam, director general of the Association of Commercial Television, who argued, inter alia, that moving from ‘command and control’ to principles-based regulation while ensuring better coordination among the EPRA members can create some space (and appetite also among commercial media operators) for private regulatory solutions. Self-regulation, he noted, can at the same time benefit freedom of expression and broadcasting standards which may ultimately attract more users and thus protect broadcasters’ commercial interests.

The agenda of the conference is available here.

View the list of participants to the conference.

For more information concerning the conference you may contact Anna Kandyla.

Credit: Tobias Toft/Creative Commons

MEDIADEM’s work plan consisted of four different phases.

Phase 1: State of the art

The first phase of the project established the theoretical foundations for our research and provided background information on the 14 media landscapes and regulatory systems reviewed.

Phase 2: Case-studies

The second phase of the project involved empirical research in the 14 countries selected. Project partners examine media policy-making processes in the countries under study, economic and cultural context, and investigated whether domestic media policy strategies help realise media freedom and independence. Analysis has related to both traditional and new media services and has examined how regulatory, co-regulatory and self-regulatory norms are understood and put into practice.

Phase 3: Comparative analysis

Our empirical findings has fed the third phase of the project, which involved cross-state and cross-media comparative analysis, in order to evaluate and explain variable patterns of media policy-making targeting media freedom and independence.

Phase 4: Policy development

The final stage of the project involved the formulation of concrete policy recommendations for state and non state actors involved in media policy-making, the European Union and the Council of Europe. Best practices for the promotion of free and independent media have also been identified.

Throughout the project the consortium has sought to establish regular channels for the exchange of views and opinions with the broader media community and key actors involved in the design and implementation of media policies.

Credit: Tobias Toft/Creative Commons

MEDIADEM’s work plan consists of four different phases.

Phase 1: State of the art (completed)

The first phase of the project established the theoretical foundations for our research and provided background information on the 14 media landscapes and regulatory systems reviewed.

Phase 2: Case-studies (completed)

The second phase of the project involves empirical research in the 14 countries selected. Project partners examine media policy-making processes in the countries under study, placing them in their proper socio-political, which took place on 7 February 2013 in Brussels. It published a detailed report on the conference presentations, with due emphasis on the intervention of the editor in chief of TheDaily.SK concerning cross-border rules and the protection of individual journalists. More »

 

MEDIADEM workshop in the news: Greece

The Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP) and the MEDIADEM project organised a workshop in order to present the project’s research findings and discuss its policy suggestions for the development of free and independent media in Greece with various stakeholders. The workshop took place on 11 December 2012 at the Athens Chamber of Small & Medium Sized Industries.

The first panel was about the MEDIADEM project. Evangelia Psychogiopoulou, and English.

For more information you may contact Anna Kandyla.

The Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP) and the MEDIADEM project organised a workshop in order to present the project’s research findings and discuss its policy suggestions for the development of free and independent media in Greece with various stakeholders. The workshop took place on 11 December 2012 at the Athens Chamber of Small & Medium Sized Industries. More »

 

First MEDIADEM policy brief on SCOOP news alert service

The Belgian MEDIADEM team and the Conseil supérieur de l’audiovisuel organised an international conference on ‘New television screens, new regulation’ on 5-6 July 2012,  at the prestigious Palais des Académies, in Brussels, Belgium. More »

 

MEDIADEM in the news: Finland

The University of Jyväskylä, in co-operation with the Union of Journalists in Finland and the Federation of the Finnish Media Industry, organised a seminar on ‘Journalists’ professional autonomy and journalism ethics’ under the frame of the MEDIADEM project. The seminar, which took place on 14 June 2012 in the premises of the University of Jyväskylä in Jyväskylä, Finland, served to explore current practices of journalists’ self regulation and their contribution to journalists’ ethical performance. The conference was opened by Heikki Kuutti, leader of the Finnish MEDIADEM team, University of Jyväskylä, who chaired the panels during the day. More »

 

MEDIADEM in the news: Croatia

Craufurd Smith, Rachael (2009): Media Ownership and the Public Interest:  The Case of Virgin Media, British Sky Broadcasting and its ITV Shares. The Journal of Media Law (1), 21-37

Craufurd Smith, Rachael (2008): Balancing Culture and Competition: State Support for Film and Television in European Community Law. Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies (10), 35-66

Craufurd Smith, Rachael (2007): Media Convergence and the Regulation of Audiovisual Content: Is the European Community’s Audiovisual Media Services Directive Fit for Purpose? Current Legal Problems, 238-277

Craufurd Smith, Rachael (2007): The UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions: Building a New World Information and Communication Order? International Journal of Communication, 24-55

Craufurd Smith, Rachael (2006): European Community Media Regulation in a Converging Environment. In Shuibhne N.N. (ed.): Regulating the Internal Market. Edward Elgar Publishing

Craufurd Smith, Rachael (2005): Preserving and Promoting Media Pluralism and Diversity in Europe: The Role of the European Union. In Brogi, E., Vodinelic, V. and Gajin, S. (eds): Developing a Harmonized Information and Communication Law in Europe. Centre for Advanced Legal Studies, Belgrade

De la Sierra, Susana (2008): Principios y Objetivos Relacionados con el Reforzamiento de la identidad Cultural de la Comunidad Autónoma (Principles and Objectives Related to the Reinforcement of Cultural Identity of Autonomous Communities in Spain). In Balaguer Callejón F. (ed.): Reformas Estatutarias y Declarationes de Derechos 789 et seq. Tirant lo blanch/Instituto Andaluz de Administración Pública, Valencia

Docquir, Pierre-François (2007): Variables et Variations de la Liberté d’Expression aux Etats-Unis et en Europe. Coll. Droit & Justice, n° 72. Bruylant, Bruxelles

Docquir, Pierre-François (2007): Droit de Réponse ‘2.0’ ou la Tentation d’un Droit Subjectif d’Accès à la Tribune Médiatique. In Les Propos qui Heurtent, Choquent ou Inquiètent, Revue de Droit de l’ULB. Brussels

Fengler, Susanne & Ruß-Mohl, Stephan (2008): Journalists and Information-Attention-Markets. Journalism 9 (6), 667–690

Fengler, Susanne & Ruß-Mohl, Stephan (2008): The Crumbling Hidden Wall: Towards an Economic Theory of Journalism. Kyklos 61 (4), 520-542

Fengler, Susanne (2008): Media Journalism and the Power of Blogging Citizens. In Krogh, Torbjörn von (eds): Media Accountability Today – and Tomorrow. Göteborg: Nordicom

Fengler, Susanne & Ruß-Mohl, Stephan (2006): The Three Paradoxes of Media Journalism. In Egli von Matt, Sylvia et al. (eds): Media Journalism in the Attention Cycle – Problems, Perspectives, Visions. Lugano/Milano: Giampiero Casagrande Editore

Fengler, Susanne (2003): Holding the News Media Accountable: A Study of Media Reporters and Media Critics in the United States. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 80 (4), 818-832.

Frydman, Benoît et al. (2010): Public Strategies for Internet Co-regulation in the United States, Europe and China. In Brousseau, E. & Marzouki, M, Meadel C. (eds): Governance, Regulations and Powers on the Internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Frydman, Benoît & Englebert, Jacques (2002): Le Contrôle Judiciaire de la Presse. Auteurs & Médias (6)

Frydman, Benoît (1997): Quel Droit pour l’Internet? In  Montero, É. (ed.): Internet Sous le Regard du Droit. Bruxelles. Editions du Jeune Barreau de Bruxelles

Fossum, John Erik & Schlesinger, Philip (eds) (2007): The European Union and the Public Sphere: A Communicative Space in the Making? London and New York: SAGE

Guichot, Emilio (ed.) (2011): Derecho de la Comunicación. Madrid: Iustel

Gusy, Christoph (2008): Pressefreiheit contra Republikschutz (Freedom of the Press versus Protection of the Republic)? In Kohl, Neschwara & Simon (eds), Festschrift für Wilhelm Brauneder zum 65. Geburtstag. Wien

Gusy, Christoph & Haupt, Heinz-Gerhard (eds) (2005): Inklusion und Partizipation – Politische Kommunikation im Historischen Wandel (Inclusion and Participation – Political Communication in its Historical Change). Frankfurt/Main

Lauk, Epp (2009):  Reflections on Changing Patterns of Journalism in the New EU Countries. Journalism Studies 10 (1), 69 – 84

Linde Paniagua, E., Vidal Beltrán, J.M., Medina González, S. (2011): Derecho Audiovisual. Madrid: Editorial Colex

Lauk, Epp (2008): How Will it All Unfold? Media Systems and Journalism Cultures in Post-Communist Countries. In Jakubowicz, K. & Sükösd, M (eds): Finding the Right Place on the Map: Central and Eastern European Media Change in Global Perspective. London: Intellect Books

Mazziotti, Giuseppe (2009): Italy. In Long, C. (ed.): Global Telecommunications Law and Practice. Sweet and Maxwell: London

Mazziotti, Giuseppe (2008): EU Digital Copyright Law and the End-User. Springer Verlag: Berlin

Mungiu-Pippidi, Alina (2002): From State to Public Service: The Failed Reform of State Television in Central Eastern Europe. In Sükösd, M. & Bajomi-Lázár, P. (eds): Reinventing Media: Media Policy Reform in East Central Europe. Budapest: CEU Press

Ondruchova, Maria (2007): Wahlkampf global (Global Election Campaigns). In Politik und Kommunikation

Peruško, Zrinjka. & Popovi?, Helena (2008): Media Concentration Trends in Central and Eastern Europe. In Jakubowicz, K. & Sukosd, M. (eds): Finding the Right Place on the Map: Central and Eastern European Media Change in Global Perspective. Intellect Books: Bristol

Peruško, Zrinjka. & Popovi?, Helena (2008): From Transmission to the Public Good: Media Policy for the Digital Age in Croatia. In: Sukosd, M. & Isanovi?, A. (eds) Public Service Television in the Digital Age: Strategies and Opportunities in Five South-East European Countries.  Mediacentar: Sarajevo

Primorac, Jaka and Jurlin, Kreiimir (2008): Access, Piracy and Culture: The Implications of Digitalization in Southeastern Europe. In: Uzelac, A. & Cvjeti?anin, B. (eds): Digital Culture: The Changing Dynamics, Culturelink Joint Publication Series. Zagreb: Institute for International Relations

Popovi?, Helena & Hromadži?, Hajrudin (2008): Media Users: From Readership to Co-Creators. In Uzelac, A. & Cvjeticanin, B. (eds): The Changing Dynamics, Culturelink Joint Publication Series. Zagreb: Institute for International Relations

Psychogiopoulou, Evangelia (2012): State aids to the press: The EU’s perspective’. European State Aid Law Quarterly (1), 57-71

Psychogiopoulou, Evangelia (2010): The ‘Cultural’ Criterion in the European Commission’s Assessment of State-Aids to the Audio-Visual Sector. Legal Issues of Economic Integration (37), 273-91

Psychogiopoulou, Evangelia (2011): Hof van Justitie van de EU, 22 September 2011, zaken C-244/10 en C-245/10, Mesopotamia Broadcast A/S METV en Roj TV A/A tegen Duitsland, Noot (Case note in English). European Human Rights Cases 12 (12-17 December), 1857-1869

Psychogiopoulou, Evangelia (2008): The Integration of Cultural Considerations in EU Law and Policies. Martinus NIjhoff Publishers: Brill

Psychogiopoulou, Evangelia (2006): EC State Aid Control and Cultural Justifications. Legal Issues of Economic Integration 33 (1), 3-38

Rorive, Isabelle & Frydman, Benoît (2002): Regulating Internet Content through Intermediaries in Europe and the USA. Zeitschrift für Rechtssoziologie. Max Planck Institute

Rorive, Isabelle (2003): Strategies to Tackle Racism and Xenophobia on the Internet – Where are We in Europe? International Journal of Communications Law and Policy, 7. Available at: http://www.ijclp.net/ijclp_web-doc_8-7-2003.html

Schlesinger, Philip (2009): Cultural and Communications Policy and the Stateless Nation. Catalan Journal of Communication & Cultural Studies 1(1), 9-14

Schlesinger, Philip (2009): Creativity and the Experts: New Labour, Think Tanks and the Policy Process’. International Journal of Press Politics 14(3), 3-20

Schlesinger, Philip (2007): La Nación y Espacio Comunicativo. In Lila Luchessi & María Graciela Rodriguez (eds): Fronteras Globales: Cultura, Política y Medios de Comunicacíon. Buenos Aires: La Crujía

Schlesinger, Philip (1991): Media, State and Nation. London: Sage

Schulz, Wolfgang (2009): The Legal Framework for Public Service Broadcasting after the German State Aid Case: Procrustean Bed or Hammock? Journal of Media Law 1 (2), 219-241

Schulz, Wolfgang (2008): Kommentierung zu Art. 10 EMRK und Art. 5 GG. In Berlit W, Meyer C and Paschke M (eds.): Hamburger Kommentar zum gesamten Medienrecht. Baden-Baden

Schulz, Wolfgang (2008): Medienkonvergenz light – Zur neuen Europäischen Richtlinie über audiovisuelle Mediendienste [Media Convergence Light – on the New European Directives on Audiovisual Media Services]. EuZW

Schulz, Wolfgang, Held, Thorsten & Laudien, Arne (2005): Suchmaschinen als Gatekeeper in der öffentlichen Kommunikation. Berlin

Schulz, Wolfgang & Held, Thorsten (2004): Regulated Self-regulation as a Form of Modern Government. An Analysis of Case Studies from Media and Telecommunications Law. Eastleigh

Schulz, Wolfgang & Ziewitz, Malte (2004): Extending the Access Obligation to EPGs and Service Platforms? In Closs, W. & Nikolzchev S. (eds): Regulating Access to Digital Television. Strasbourg

Schulz, Wolfgang (2003): Aufmerksamkeit für die “Res Publica” im Zeitalter der Vernetzung: vom Leitbild der integrativen Gesamtöffentlichkeit zur Koordination situativer Themenöffentlichkeiten. In Ladeur K.-H. (Ed): Innovationsoffene Regulierung des Internet: Neues Recht für Kommunikationsnetzwerke. Baden-Baden

Schulz, Wolfgang, Held, Thorsten & Kops, Manfred (2001): Von der dualen Rundfunkordnung zur dienstespezifisch diversifizierten Informationsordnung? Baden-Baden

Skolkay, Andrej (2010): Media Law in Slovakia. Kluwer Publishers

Skolkay Andrej (2009): Media and Globalisation. Bratislava: School of Communication and Media

Stolte, Yolande (2005): Preserving and Promoting Media Pluralism and Diversity in Europe: The Role of the European Union. In Brogi, E., Vodinelic, V. and Gajin, S. (eds): Developing a Harmonized Information and Communication Law in Europe. Centre for Advanced Legal Studies: Belgrade

Švob-?oki?, Nada et al. (2008): Kultura Zaborava. Industrijalizacija Kulturnih Djelatnosti (The Culture of Oblivion. The Industrialization of Culture). Zagreb: Naklada Jesenski-Turk

Švob-?oki?, Nada (ed.) (2004): Cultural Transitions in South-Eastern Europe. Zagreb: Institute for International Relations

A number of Croatian web portals have reported on the Croatian case study findings and have provided information on the MEDIADEM project. More »

 

MEDIADEM workshop on ‘Media policies & regulation for media freedom & independence’ in the news: Spain

Credits: yuheitomi/Creative Commons

Media policies and regulatory practices in a selected set of European countries, the European Union and the Council of Europe

A comprehensive collective report discussing media policy and regulation in 14 European countries was produced in the context of the MEDIADEM project. The report discusses the configuration of the media landscape in the countries under study, explores the main regulatory instruments used to govern the media, and assesses the implications of the policies conducted for democratic politics.

The report also contains an analysis of the media-related activities of the European Union and the Council of Europe, focusing on the interventions that are relevant for the protection and promotion of media freedom and independence.

You may download the collective report here. Individual chapters are also available in pdf format (Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Italy, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Turkey, the UK, EU/CoE).

The formation and implementation of national media policies in Europe and their relationship to democratic society and media freedom and independence: A theoretical and analytical frame for the MEDIADEM project

A theoretical report clarifying basic concepts and analytical issues upon which MEDIADEM research is based and pursued was produced. The report conceptualises media policy in an increasingly converged and integrated media environment, and discusses its relationship to democracy, as well as its nature, scope, making and implementation. The report further explores the concept of media freedom and independence, which is identified as a distinct area for the study of media policy, and examines present practice and potential of regulation in the field. The report is available here.

Key observations on how to understand ‘free and independent’ media can also be found at the first MEDIADEM policy brief (available in English and Greek), which also provides policy recommendations for their promotion.

Universia, a webpage on news about university issues in Spain, which was held on 30 June 2011 in Athens. More »

 

MEDIADEM workshop on ‘Media policies & regulation for media freedom & independence’ in the Greek press

The Hellenic Foundation for European & Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP) & the Association of European Journalists (AEJ) – Greek Section organised a workshop on ‘Media policies & regulation for media freedom & independence’. The workshop took place on 30 June 2011 at the central building of the University of Athens, by Evangelia Psychogiopoulou. Evangelia Psychogiopoulou, Research Fellow at ELIAMEP, addressed the complexities and shortcomings of the legal framework, highlighting that the lack of strategic planning, coordination and supervision on behalf of the state has not only created market uncertainties but also favoured market foreclosure, with serious implications for democratic politics. Pierre-François Docquir, Senior Researcher at Université Libre de Bruxelles, then took the floor to present the rules and funding schemes that aim to guarantee a plurality of media services in Belgium. His analysis centred on the degree to which the effectiveness of those mechanisms is challenged by the development of new media services (as defined under the EU Audiovisual Media Services Directive) and the Internet. Rachael Craufurd Smith, Senior Lecturer at the University of Edinburgh, discussed the development of a media plurality test in the UK that sits alongside the competition rules and, in particular, its application regarding the proposed NewsCorp purchase of remaining shares in the satellite broadcaster BSkyB.

The second session focused on news media content regulation and media freedom and independence. Member of the Icelandic Parliament and Chair for the International Modern Media Institute, Birgitta Jónsdóttir talked about the Icelandic Modern Media Initiative (IMMI), a catch-all freedom of expression law-based project that aims to make Iceland a global safe haven for investigative journalism in the digital era. Birgitta Jónsdóttir explained that the IMMI is based on extensive research on the best legal practices for the promotion of freedom of the press and information from around the world and stressed the significance of whistleblower protection and transparency laws. The presentation of William Horsley, Media Freedom Representative of the Association of European Journalists, dealt with the many-sided implications of Wikileaks on media law and journalists’ ethics, focusing particularly on issues of internet governance and the conflict between privacy/secrecy on the one hand and the need for information on the other. The discussion continued with Susanna de la Sierra, Professor at the University of Castilla-La Mancha, who elaborated on recent developments regarding practices of journalists’ self-regulation in the print and audiovisual media in Spain. She noted that strategies of self-regulation in the field are quite promising, yet there is still ambiguity on their type and scope. The session ended with the presentation of Dilek Kurban, Director of the Democratization Program at Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation. Dilek Kurban provided an overview of the evolving media content regulation in Turkey, with a focus on the tension between criminal laws regulating anti-terrorism and freedom of expression. The reforms in the national legal framework for the media, introduced as part of the country’s EU harmonisation process, were also analysed in detail.

The third session explored aspects of public service media freedom and independence. Henrik Søndergaard, Associate Professor at the University of Copenhagen, talked about the unfulfilled privatisation of the public channel TV2 in Denmark. He argued that one of the lessons learnt from the conflicts between the European Commission and the Danish state about the funding of TV2 is that the state for quite a long time failed to realise the importance of adjusting to EU state aid regulation. Alina Mungiu-Pippidi, Professor at Hertie School of Governance, discussed public service broadcasting (PSB) in Eastern Europe, noting that the variation across cases of government behaviour towards PSB can be attributed to the varying degrees of political clientelism. On his part, Sebastian Müller, Researcher at the University of Bielefeld, elaborated on the principle of PSB state independence in Germany. He highlighted that the principle is generally respected, yet noted that there is room for improvement through, for example, the re-evaluation of the composition of the broadcasting councils, so as to include relevant societal groups (such as migrant organisations).

The final session was devoted to the practices of Greek media regulatory authorities. Alexandros Oikonomou, Lawyer at the National Council for Radio and Television (NCRT), discussed the role and functions of the Greek National Council for Radio and Television, arguing that the state should recognise the need for granting the Council with substantial regulatory autonomy. Pantelis Borovas, Head of the Media Sector Unit of the Hellenic Competition Commission (HCC), presented the role and practice of the HCC regarding the support of pluralism in the media sector, highlighting some of the principal constraints that the HCC faces in this respect. Aggelos Syrigos, Assistant Professor at Panteion University and Vice President for the Sector of Electronic Communications of the National Telecommunications and Post Commission (NTTC), then focused on the role and competences of the NTTC in regulating the media sector, with due emphasis on the transition to digital terrestrial broadcasting.

The speakers’ presentations were commented by Dia Anagnostou, Senior Research Fellow at ELIAMEP, Spyridoula Kalogirou, Head of the Legal Department at the Hellenic Audiovisual Institute, and Dimitris Charalambis, Professor at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. In the substantive discussions that followed speakers and participants exchanged views on the challenges that media freedom and independence faces in the increasingly converged media environment as well as due to the concentration trends that have spread rapidly throughout the sector.

The agenda of the workshop is available here.

For more information on the workshop you may contact Anna Kandyla.

The Hellenic Foundation for European & Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP) & the Association of European Journalists (AEJ) – Greek Section organised a workshop on ‘Media policies & regulation for media freedom & independence’. The workshop took place on 30 June 2011 at the central building of the University of Athens, by Evangelia Psychogiopoulou. Evangelia Psychogiopoulou, that sits alongside the competition rules and, in particular, its application regarding the proposed NewsCorp purchase of remaining shares in the satellite broadcaster BSkyB.

The second session focused on news media content regulation and media freedom and independence. Member of the Icelandic Parliament and Chair for the International Modern Media Institute, Birgitta Jónsdóttir talked about the Icelandic Modern Media Initiative (IMMI), a catch-all freedom of expression law-based project that aims to make Iceland a global safe haven for investigative journalism in the digital era. Birgitta Jónsdóttir explained that the IMMI is based on extensive research on the best legal practices for the promotion of freedom of the press and information from around the world and stressed the significance of whistleblower protection and transparency laws. The presentation of William Horsley, Media Freedom Representative of the Association of European Journalists, dealt with the many-sided implications of Wikileaks on media law and journalists’ ethics, focusing particularly on issues of internet governance and the conflict between privacy/secrecy on the one hand and the need for information on the other. The discussion continued with Susanna de la Sierra, Professor at the University of Castilla-La Mancha, who elaborated on recent developments regarding practices of journalists’ self-regulation in the print and audiovisual media in Spain. She noted that strategies of self-regulation in the field are quite promising, yet there is still ambiguity on their type and scope. The session ended with the presentation of Dilek Kurban, Director of the Democratization Program at Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation. Dilek Kurban provided an overview of the evolving media content regulation in Turkey, with a focus on the tension between criminal laws regulating anti-terrorism and freedom of expression. The reforms in the national legal framework for the media, introduced as part of the country’s EU harmonisation process, were also analysed in detail.

The third session explored aspects of public service media freedom and independence. Henrik Søndergaard, Associate Professor at the University of Copenhagen, talked about the unfulfilled privatisation of the public channel TV2 in Denmark. He argued that one of the lessons learnt from the conflicts between the European Commission and the Danish state about the funding of TV2 is that the state for quite a long time failed to realise the importance of adjusting to EU state aid regulation. Alina Mungiu-Pippidi, Professor at Hertie School of Governance, discussed public service broadcasting (PSB) in Eastern Europe, noting that the variation across cases of government behaviour towards PSB can be attributed to the varying degrees of political clientelism. On his part, Sebastian Müller, Researcher at the University of Bielefeld, elaborated on the principle of PSB state independence in Germany. He highlighted that the principle is generally respected, yet noted that there is room for improvement through, for example, the re-evaluation of the composition of the broadcasting councils, so as to include relevant societal groups (such as migrant organisations).

The final session was devoted to the practices of Greek media regulatory authorities. Alexandros Oikonomou, Lawyer at the National Council for Radio and Television (NCRT), discussed the role and functions of the Greek National Council for Radio and Television, arguing that the state should recognise the need for granting the Council with substantial regulatory autonomy. Pantelis Borovas, Head of the Media Sector Unit of the Hellenic Competition Commission (HCC), presented the role and practice of the HCC regarding the support of pluralism in the media sector, highlighting some of the principal constraints that the HCC faces in this respect. Aggelos Syrigos, Assistant Professor at Panteion University and Vice President for the Sector of Electronic Communications of the National Telecommunications and Post Commission (NTTC), then focused on the role and competences of the NTTC in regulating the media sector, with due emphasis on the transition to digital terrestrial broadcasting.

The speakers’ presentations were commented by Dia Anagnostou, Senior Research Fellow at ELIAMEP, Spyridoula Kalogirou, Head of the Legal Department at the Hellenic Audiovisual Institute, and Dimitris Charalambis, Professor at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. In the substantive discussions that followed speakers and participants exchanged views on the challenges that media freedom and independence faces in the increasingly converged media environment as well as due to the concentration trends that have spread rapidly throughout the sector.

The agenda of the workshop is available here.

For more information on the workshop you may contact Anna Kandyla.

The Hellenic Foundation for European & Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP) & the Association of European Journalists (AEJ) – Greek Section organised a workshop on ‘Media policies & regulation for media freedom & independence’. The workshop took place on 30 June 2011 at the central building of the University of Athens, by Evangelia Psychogiopoulou. Evangelia Psychogiopoulou, Research Fellow at ELIAMEP, addressed the complexities and shortcomings of the legal framework, highlighting that the lack of strategic planning, coordination and supervision on behalf of the state has not only created market uncertainties but also favoured market foreclosure, with serious implications for democratic politics. Pierre-François Docquir, Senior Researcher at Université Libre de Bruxelles, then took the floor to present the rules and funding schemes that aim to guarantee a plurality of media services in Belgium. His analysis centred on the degree to which the effectiveness of those mechanisms is challenged by the development of new media services (as defined under the EU Audiovisual Media Services Directive) and the Internet. Rachael Craufurd Smith, Senior Lecturer at the University of Edinburgh, discussed the development of a media plurality test in the UK that sits alongside the competition rules and, in particular, its application regarding the proposed NewsCorp purchase of remaining shares in the satellite broadcaster BSkyB.

The second session focused on news media content regulation and media freedom and independence. Member of the Icelandic Parliament and Chair for the International Modern Media Institute, Birgitta Jónsdóttir talked about the Icelandic Modern Media Initiative (IMMI), a catch-all freedom of expression law-based project that aims to make Iceland a global safe haven for investigative journalism in the digital era. Birgitta Jónsdóttir explained that the IMMI is based on extensive research on the best legal practices for the promotion of freedom of the press and information from around the world and stressed the significance of whistleblower protection and transparency laws. The presentation of William Horsley, Media Freedom Representative of the Association of European Journalists, dealt with the many-sided implications of Wikileaks on media law and journalists’ ethics, focusing particularly on issues of internet governance and the conflict between privacy/secrecy on the one hand and the need for information on the other. The discussion continued with Susanna de la Sierra, Professor at the University of Castilla-La Mancha, who elaborated on recent developments regarding practices of journalists’ self-regulation in the print and audiovisual media in Spain. She noted that strategies of self-regulation in the field are quite promising, yet there is still ambiguity on their type and scope. The session ended with the presentation of Dilek Kurban, Director of the Democratization Program at Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation. Dilek Kurban provided an overview of the evolving media content regulation in Turkey, with a focus on the tension between criminal laws regulating anti-terrorism and freedom of expression. The reforms in the national legal framework for the media, introduced as part of the country’s EU harmonisation process, were also analysed in detail.

The third session explored aspects of public service media freedom and independence. Henrik Søndergaard, Associate Professor at the University of Copenhagen, talked about the unfulfilled privatisation of the public channel TV2 in Denmark. He argued that one of the lessons learnt from the conflicts between the European Commission and the Danish state about the funding of TV2 is that the state for quite a long time failed to realise the importance of adjusting to EU state aid regulation. Alina Mungiu-Pippidi, Professor at Hertie School of Governance, discussed public service broadcasting (PSB) in Eastern Europe, noting that the variation across cases of government behaviour towards PSB can be attributed to the varying degrees of political clientelism. On his part, Sebastian Müller, Researcher at the University of Bielefeld, elaborated on the principle of PSB state independence in Germany. He highlighted that the principle is generally respected, yet noted that there is room for improvement through, for example, the re-evaluation of the composition of the broadcasting councils, so as to include relevant societal groups (such as migrant organisations).

The final session was devoted to the practices of Greek media regulatory authorities. Alexandros Oikonomou, Lawyer at the National Council for Radio and Television (NCRT), discussed the role and functions of the Greek National Council for Radio and Television, arguing that the state should recognise the need for granting the Council with substantial regulatory autonomy. Pantelis Borovas, Head of the Media Sector Unit of the Hellenic Competition Commission (HCC), presented the role and practice of the HCC regarding the support of pluralism in the media sector, highlighting some of the principal constraints that the HCC faces in this respect. Aggelos Syrigos, Assistant Professor at Panteion University and Vice President for the Sector of Electronic Communications of the National Telecommunications and Post Commission (NTTC), then focused on the role and competences of the NTTC in regulating the media sector, with due emphasis on the transition to digital terrestrial broadcasting.

The speakers’ presentations were commented by Dia Anagnostou, Senior Research Fellow at ELIAMEP, Spyridoula Kalogirou, Head of the Legal Department at the Hellenic Audiovisual Institute, and Dimitris Charalambis, Professor at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. In the substantive discussions that followed speakers and participants exchanged views on the challenges that media freedom and independence faces in the increasingly converged media environment as well as due to the concentration trends that have spread rapidly throughout the sector.

The agenda of the workshop is available here.

For more information on the workshop you may contact Anna Kandyla.

The Hellenic Foundation for European & Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP) & the Association of European Journalists (AEJ) – Greek Section organised a workshop on ‘Media policies & regulation for media freedom & independence’. The workshop took place on 30 June 2011 at the central building of the University of Athens, by Evangelia Psychogiopoulou. Evangelia Psychogiopoulou, Research Fellow at ELIAMEP, addressed the complexities and shortcomings of the legal framework, highlighting that the lack of strategic planning, coordination and supervision on behalf of the state has not only created market uncertainties but also favoured market foreclosure, with serious implications for democratic politics. Pierre-François Docquir, Senior Researcher at Université Libre de Bruxelles, then took the floor to present the rules and funding schemes that aim to guarantee a plurality of media services in Belgium. His analysis centred on the degree to which the effectiveness of those mechanisms is challenged by the development of new media services (as defined under the EU Audiovisual Media Services Directive) and the Internet. Rachael Craufurd Smith, Senior Lecturer at the University of Edinburgh, discussed the development of a media plurality test in the UK that sits alongside the competition rules and, in particular, its application regarding the proposed NewsCorp purchase of remaining shares in the satellite broadcaster BSkyB.

The second session focused on news media content regulation and media freedom and independence. Member of the Icelandic Parliament and Chair for the International Modern Media Institute, Birgitta Jónsdóttir talked about the Icelandic Modern Media Initiative (IMMI), a catch-all freedom of expression law-based project that aims to make Iceland a global safe haven for investigative journalism in the digital era. Birgitta Jónsdóttir explained that the IMMI is based on extensive research on the best legal practices for the promotion of freedom of the press and information from around the world and stressed the significance of whistleblower protection and transparency laws. The presentation of William Horsley, Media Freedom Representative of the Association of European Journalists, dealt with the many-sided implications of Wikileaks on media law and journalists’ ethics, focusing particularly on issues of internet governance and the conflict between privacy/secrecy on the one hand and the need for information on the other. The discussion continued with Susanna de la Sierra, Professor at the University of Castilla-La Mancha, who elaborated on recent developments regarding practices of journalists’ self-regulation in the print and audiovisual media in Spain. She noted that strategies of self-regulation in the field are quite promising, yet there is still ambiguity on their type and scope. The session ended with the presentation of Dilek Kurban, Director of the Democratization Program at Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation. Dilek Kurban provided an overview of the evolving media content regulation in Turkey, with a focus on the tension between criminal laws regulating anti-terrorism and freedom of expression. The reforms in the national legal framework for the media, introduced as part of the country’s EU harmonisation process, were also analysed in detail.

The third session explored aspects of public service media freedom and independence. Henrik Søndergaard, Associate Professor at the University of Copenhagen, talked about the unfulfilled privatisation of the public channel TV2 in Denmark. He argued that one of the lessons learnt from the conflicts between the European Commission and the Danish state about the funding of TV2 is that the state for quite a long time failed to realise the importance of adjusting to EU state aid regulation. Alina Mungiu-Pippidi, Professor at Hertie School of Governance, discussed public service broadcasting (PSB) in Eastern Europe, noting that the variation across cases of government behaviour towards PSB can be attributed to the varying degrees of political clientelism. On his part, Sebastian Müller, Researcher at the University of Bielefeld, elaborated on the principle of PSB state independence in Germany. He highlighted that the principle is generally respected, yet noted that there is room for improvement through, for example, the re-evaluation of the composition of the broadcasting councils, so as to include relevant societal groups (such as migrant organisations).

The final session was devoted to the practices of the Greek media regulatory authorities. Alexandros Oikonomou, Lawyer at the National Council for Radio and Television (NCRT), discussed the role and functions of the Greek National Council for Radio and Television, arguing that the state should recognise the need for granting the Council with substantial regulatory autonomy. Pantelis Borovas, Head of the Media Sector Unit of the Hellenic Competition Commission (HCC), presented the role and practice of the HCC regarding the support of pluralism in the media sector, highlighting some of the principal constraints that the HCC faces in this respect. Aggelos Syrigos, Assistant Professor at Panteion University and Vice President for the Sector of Electronic Communications of the National Telecommunications and Post Commission (NTTC), then focused on the role and competences of the NTTC in regulating the media sector, with due emphasis on the transition to digital terrestrial broadcasting.

The speakers’ presentations were commented by Dia Anagnostou, Senior Research Fellow at ELIAMEP, Spyridoula Kalogirou, Head of the Legal Department at the Hellenic Audiovisual Institute, and Dimitris Charalambis, Professor at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. In the substantive discussions that followed speakers and participants exchanged views on the challenges that media freedom and independence faces in the increasingly converged media environment as well as due to the concentration trends that have spread rapidly throughout the sector.

The agenda of the workshop is available here.

For more information on the workshop you may contact Anna Kandyla.

The Hellenic Foundation for European & Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP) & the Association of European Journalists (AEJ) – Greek Section organised a workshop on ‘Media policies & regulation for media freedom & independence’. The workshop took place on 30 June 2011 at the central building of the University of Athens, by Evangelia Psychogiopoulou. Evangelia Psychogiopoulou, that sits alongside the competition rules and, in particular, its application regarding the proposed NewsCorp purchase of remaining shares in the satellite broadcaster BSkyB.

The second session focused on news media content regulation and media freedom and independence. Member of the Icelandic Parliament and Chair for the International Modern Media Institute, Birgitta Jónsdóttir talked about the Icelandic Modern Media Initiative (IMMI), a catch-all freedom of expression law-based project that aims to make Iceland a global safe haven for investigative journalism in the digital era. Birgitta Jónsdóttir explained that the IMMI is based on extensive research on the best legal practices for the promotion of freedom of the press and information from around the world and stressed the significance of whistleblower protection and transparency laws. The presentation of William Horsley, Media Freedom Representative of the Association of European Journalists, dealt with the many-sided implications of Wikileaks on media law and journalists’ ethics, focusing particularly on issues of internet governance and the conflict between privacy/secrecy on the one hand and the need for information on the other. The discussion continued with Susana de la Sierra, Professor at the University of Castilla-La Mancha, who elaborated on recent developments regarding practices of journalists’ self-regulation in the print and audiovisual media in Spain. She noted that the strategies of self-regulation in the field are quite promising, yet there is still ambiguity on their type and scope. The session ended with the presentation of Dilek Kurban, Director of the Democratization Program at Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation. Dilek Kurban provided an overview of the evolving media content regulation in Turkey, with a focus on the tension between criminal laws regulating anti-terrorism and freedom of expression. The reforms in the national legal framework for the media, introduced as part of the country’s EU harmonisation process, were also analysed in detail.

The third session explored aspects of public service media freedom and independence. Henrik Søndergaard, Associate Professor at the University of Copenhagen, talked about the unfulfilled privatisation of the public channel TV2 in Denmark. He argued that one of the lessons learnt from the conflicts between the European Commission and the Danish state about the funding of TV2 is that the state for quite a long time failed to realise the importance of adjusting to EU state aid regulation. Alina Mungiu-Pippidi, Professor at Hertie School of Governance, discussed public service broadcasting (PSB) in Eastern Europe, noting that the variation across cases of government behaviour towards PSB can be attributed to the varying degrees of political clientelism. On his part, Sebastian Müller, Researcher at the University of Bielefeld, elaborated on the principle of PSB state independence in Germany. He highlighted that the principle is generally respected, yet noted that there is room for improvement through, for example, the re-evaluation of the composition of the broadcasting councils, so as to include relevant societal groups (such as migrant organisations).

The final session was devoted to the practices of the Greek media regulatory authorities. Alexandros Oikonomou, Lawyer at the National Council for Radio and Television (NCRT), discussed the role and functions of the NCRT, arguing that the state should recognise the need for granting the Council with substantial regulatory autonomy. Pantelis Borovas, Head of the Media Sector Unit of the Hellenic Competition Commission (HCC), presented the role and practice of the HCC regarding the support of pluralism in the media sector, highlighting some of the principal constraints that the HCC faces in this respect. Aggelos Syrigos, Assistant Professor at Panteion University and Vice President for the Sector of Electronic Communications of the National Telecommunications and Post Commission (NTTC), then focused on the role and competences of the NTTC in regulating the media sector, with due emphasis on the transition to digital terrestrial broadcasting.

The speakers’ presentations were commented by Dia Anagnostou, Senior Research Fellow at ELIAMEP, Spyridoula Kalogirou, Head of the Legal Department at the Hellenic Audiovisual Institute, and Dimitris Charalambis, Professor at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. In the substantive discussions that followed speakers and participants exchanged views on the challenges that media freedom and independence faces in the increasingly converged media environment as well as due to the concentration trends that have spread rapidly throughout the sector.

The agenda of the workshop is available here.

For more information on the workshop you may contact Anna Kandyla.

The Hellenic Foundation for European & Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP) & the Association of European Journalists (AEJ) – Greek Section organised a workshop on ‘Media policies & regulation for media freedom & independence’. The workshop took place on 30 June 2011 at the central building of the University of Athens, by Evangelia Psychogiopoulou. Evangelia Psychogiopoulou, Research Fellow at ELIAMEP, addressed the complexities and shortcomings of the legal framework, highlighting that the lack of strategic planning, coordination and supervision on behalf of the state has not only created market uncertainties but also favoured market foreclosure, with serious implications for democratic politics. Pierre-François Docquir, Senior Researcher at Université Libre de Bruxelles, then took the floor to present the rules and funding schemes that aim to guarantee a plurality of media services in Belgium. His analysis centred on the degree to which the effectiveness of those mechanisms is challenged by the development of new media services (as defined under the EU Audiovisual Media Services Directive) and the Internet. Rachael Craufurd Smith, Senior Lecturer at the University of Edinburgh, discussed the development of a media plurality test in the UK that sits alongside the competition rules and, in particular, its application regarding the proposed NewsCorp purchase of remaining shares in the satellite broadcaster BSkyB.

The second session focused on news media content regulation and media freedom and independence. Member of the Icelandic Parliament and Chair for the International Modern Media Institute, Birgitta Jónsdóttir talked about the Icelandic Modern Media Initiative (IMMI), a catch-all freedom of expression law-based project that aims to make Iceland a global safe haven for investigative journalism in the digital era. Birgitta Jónsdóttir explained that the IMMI is based on extensive research on the best legal practices for the promotion of freedom of the press and information from around the world and stressed the significance of whistleblower protection and transparency laws. The presentation of William Horsley, Media Freedom Representative of the Association of European Journalists, dealt with the many-sided implications of Wikileaks on media law and journalists’ ethics, focusing particularly on issues of internet governance and the conflict between privacy/secrecy on the one hand and the need for information on the other. The discussion continued with Susanna de la Sierra, Professor at the University of Castilla-La Mancha, who elaborated on recent developments regarding practices of journalists’ self-regulation in the print and audiovisual media in Spain. She noted that strategies of self-regulation in the field are quite promising, yet there is still ambiguity on their type and scope. The session ended with the presentation of Dilek Kurban, Director of the Democratization Program at Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation. Dilek Kurban provided an overview of the evolving media content regulation in Turkey, with a focus on the tension between criminal laws regulating anti-terrorism and freedom of expression. The reforms in the national legal framework for the media, introduced as part of the country’s EU harmonisation process, were also analysed in detail.

The third session explored aspects of public service media freedom and independence. Henrik Søndergaard, Associate Professor at the University of Copenhagen, talked about the unfulfilled privatisation of the public channel TV2 in Denmark. He argued that one of the lessons learnt from the conflicts between the European Commission and the Danish state about the funding of TV2 is that the state for quite a long time failed to realise the importance of adjusting to EU state aid regulation. Alina Mungiu-Pippidi, Professor at Hertie School of Governance, discussed public service broadcasting (PSB) in Eastern Europe, noting that the variation across cases of government behaviour towards PSB can be attributed to the varying degrees of political clientelism. On his part, Sebastian Müller, Researcher at the University of Bielefeld, elaborated on the principle of PSB state independence in Germany. He highlighted that the principle is generally respected, yet noted that there is room for improvement through, for example, the re-evaluation of the composition of the broadcasting councils, so as to include relevant societal groups (such as migrant organisations).

The final session was devoted to the practices of the Greek media regulatory authorities. Alexandros Oikonomou, Lawyer at the National Council for Radio and Television (NCRT), discussed the role and functions of the Greek National Council for Radio and Television, arguing that the state should recognise the need for granting the Council with substantial regulatory autonomy. Pantelis Borovas, Head of the Media Sector Unit of the Hellenic Competition Commission (HCC), presented the role and practice of the HCC regarding the support of pluralism in the media sector, highlighting some of the principal constraints that the HCC faces in this respect. Aggelos Syrigos, Assistant Professor at Panteion University and Vice President for the Sector of Electronic Communications of the National Telecommunications and Post Commission (NTTC), then focused on the role and competences of the NTTC in regulating the media sector, with due emphasis on the transition to digital terrestrial broadcasting.

The speakers’ presentations were commented by Dia Anagnostou, Senior Research Fellow at ELIAMEP, Spyridoula Kalogirou, Head of the Legal Department at the Hellenic Audiovisual Institute, and Dimitris Charalambis, Professor at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. In the substantive discussions that followed speakers and participants exchanged views on the challenges that media freedom and independence faces in the increasingly converged media environment as well as due to the concentration trends that have spread rapidly throughout the sector.

The agenda of the workshop is available here.

For more information on the workshop you may contact Anna Kandyla.

Two Greek nation-wide newspapers, Eleftheros Typos and Estia, reported on the workshop on ‘Media policies & regulation for media freedom & independence’, which was held on 30 June 2011. More »

 

MEDIADEM in the Spanish Press

The Hellenic Foundation of European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP) is organising a workshop to discuss the evolution of Greek media policy and its principal features and characteristics. The workshop will also look at the major shortcomings of national media policy and the principal challenges that it presently faces. The workshop will take place on 3 March 2011 at the Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy, and will lead the discussion with researchers and journalists.

The Hellenic Foundation of European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP) is organising a workshop to discuss the evolution of Greek media policy and its principal features and characteristics. The workshop will also look at the major shortcomings of national media policy and the principal challenges that it presently faces. The workshop will take place on 3 March 2011 at the Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy, and will lead the discussion with researchers and journalists.

The Hellenic Foundation of European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP) is organising a workshop to discuss the evolution of Greek media policy and its principal features and characteristics. The workshop will also look at the major shortcomings of national media policy and the principal challenges that it presently faces. The workshop will take place on 3 March 2011 at the Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy, and will lead the discussion with researchers and journalists.

Diario de Castilla La Mancha, a Spanish regional newspaper, reported on the MEDIADEM project. The article refers to Dr. Susana de la Sierra, the coordinator of the MEDIADEM Spanish team, and her recent visit to the Siberian Federal University in Krasnoyarsk, Russia. Dr. de la Sierra gave an introductory course on EU law and presented some of the main debates concerning media and democracy in the European Union. More »

 

MEDIADEM findings in the Romanian press

Credits: ax2groin/Creative Commons

The MEDIADEM project aims at combining a strong academic direction with a policy development orientation. It aspires to produce expert scientific results and generate focused, useful and accessible policy-related output. Project partners are centres with a broad range of educational and research activities, and well-networked with the media sector, media policy-makers and civil society. This renders the MEDIADEM consortium particularly well-positioned to achieve the widest possible diffusion of project findings and access to key target groups.

The project is designed in such a way, so as to allow the largest number of potential users to be approached. Target audiences per type of project activities are described in detail below.

Project reports and collective publications

  • The academic community, graduate students and those carrying out research in the media field
  • Non-state actors involved in media policy-making
    – Media professionals and their representative associations
    – Human rights organisations
    – Other civil society organisations (e.g. viewer and listener organisations, citizens’ associations, other pressure groups)

Mediadem Contributions:

–       A collective report, Media policies and regulatory practices in a selected set of European countries, the EU and the Council of Europe

–       A theoretical report, The formation and implementation of national media policies in Europe and their relationship to democratic society and media freedom and independence: A theoretical and analytical frame for the MEDIADEM project

Project policy papers and policy briefs

  • European policy-makers (EU institutions and the Council of Europe)
  • Decision-makers at national level
    – Ministries
    – Independent regulatory bodies and supervisory organs
    – Parliamentarians and parliamentary committees
  • Judicial authorities at national and European level
  • Non-state actors involved in media policy-making
    – Media companies, media professionals and their representative associations
    – Human rights organisations
    – Other civil society organisations

Mediadem Contributions: Shortly

Project events

  • European policy-makers (EU institutions and the Council of Europe)
  • Decision-makers at national level
    – Ministries
    – Independent regulatory bodies and supervisory organs
    – Parliamentarians and parliamentary committees
  • Judicial authorities at national and European level
  • Non-state actors involved in media policy-making
    – Media companies, media professionals and their representative associations
    – Human rights organisations
    – Other civil society organisations
  • The academic community and those carrying out research in the media field

Mediadem Contributions

–       Workshop on the influence of the internet on the media

–       Workshop on ‘European policy for free and independent media systems: Current issues for regulation’

–       Workshop on ‘Media policies: Country practices within the EU media regulatory framework’

Other project material

  • All key target groups

Mediadem Contributions:

–       The MEDIADEM flyer in Bulgarian, Croatian, Danish, Dutch, English, Estonian, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Italian, Romanian, Slovakian, Spanish and Turkish

–       A detailed MEDIADEM brochure in English

–       News for the media

–       Views and commentary

EU institutions

European Commission (EN)
Directorate General Information Society and the Media (EN)
Directorate General Competition (EN)
Audiovisual and Media Policies (EN)
Media Task Force (EN)
European Council (EN), Formation: (EN)
European Court of Justice (EN)
European Parliament (EN), (EN)

Council of Europe

Council of Europe (EN), Media and Information Society Division (EN)
Commissioner for Human Rights (EN)
Committee of Ministers (EN)
European Court of Human Rights (EN)
Parliamentary Assembly (EN)
The European Audiovisual Observatory (EN, FR, DE)

Other multilateral fora

Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (EN),
Representative on Freedom of the Media (EN)

Media associations

Association of Commercial Television (EN)
Association of European Radios (EN)
Association of European Journalists (EN)
Community Media Forum Europe (EN)
European Broadcasting Union (EN)
European Digital Media Association (EN)
European Federation of Journalists (EN, FR)
European Newspaper Publishers’ Association (EN)
European Publishers Council (EN)
European Federation of Magazine Publishers (EN)

Research

Seventh Research Framework Programme (EN)
Research – Socio-economic Sciences and Humanities (EN)
European Communication Research and Education Association (EN)
European Journalism Observatory (EN, IT, DE)
Media Accountability and Transparency in Europe (MediaAcT) (EN)
Media and Democracy in Central and Eastern Europe (MDCEE) (EN)
Programme in Comparative Media Law and Policy, Centre for Socio-Legal Studies, University of Oxford (EN)
Professional Journalistic Standards and Code of Ethics, UNESCO/European Commission (EN)

Other initiatives

Icelandic Modern Media Initiative (EN, ICE)
EU institutions

European Commission (EN)
Directorate General Information Society and the Media (EN)
Directorate General Competition (EN)
Audiovisual and Media Policies (EN)
Media Task Force (EN)
European Council (EN), Formation: Education, Youth and Culture (EN)
European Court of Justice (EN)
European Parliament (EN), Culture and Education Committee (EN)

Council of Europe

Council of Europe (EN), Media and Information Society Division (EN)
Commissioner for Human Rights (EN)
Committee of Ministers (EN)
European Court of Human Rights (EN)
Parliamentary Assembly (EN)
The European Audiovisual Observatory (EN, FR, DE)

Other multilateral fora

Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (EN),
Representative on Freedom of the Media (EN)

Media associations

Association of Commercial Television (EN)
Association of European Radios (EN)
Association of European Journalists (EN)
Community Media Forum Europe (EN)
European Broadcasting Union (EN)
European Digital Media Association (EN)
European Federation of Journalists (EN, FR)
European Newspaper Publishers’ Association (EN)
European Publishers Council (EN)
European Federation of Magazine Publishers (EN)

Research

Seventh Research Framework Programme (EN)
Research – Socio-economic Sciences and Humanities (EN)
European Communication Research and Education Association (EN)
European Journalism Observatory (EN, IT, DE)
Media Accountability and Transparency in Europe (MediaAcT) (EN)
Media and Democracy in Central and Eastern Europe (MDCEE) (EN)
Programme in Comparative Media Law and Policy, Centre for Socio-Legal Studies, University of Oxford (EN)
Professional Journalistic Standards and Code of Ethics, UNESCO/European Commission (EN)
Indicators for Independence and Efficient Functioning of AVMS Regulatory Bodies (INIREG) (EN)

Other initiatives

Icelandic Modern Media Initiative (EN, ICE)
EU institutions

European Commission (EN)
Directorate General Information Society and the Media (EN)
Directorate General Competition (EN)
Audiovisual and Media Policies (EN)
Media Task Force (EN)
European Council (EN), (EN)
European Court of Justice (EN)
European Parliament (EN), (EN)

Council of Europe

Council of Europe (EN), Media and Information Society Division (EN)
Commissioner for Human Rights (EN)
Committee of Ministers (EN)
European Court of Human Rights (EN)
Parliamentary Assembly (EN)
The European Audiovisual Observatory (EN, FR, DE)

Other multilateral fora

Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (EN),
Representative on Freedom of the Media (EN)

Media associations

Association of Commercial Television (EN)
Association of European Radios (EN)
Association of European Journalists (EN)
Community Media Forum Europe (EN)
European Broadcasting Union (EN)
European Digital Media Association (EN)
European Federation of Journalists (EN, FR)
European Newspaper Publishers’ Association (EN)
European Publishers Council (EN)
European Federation of Magazine Publishers (EN)

Research

Seventh Research Framework Programme (EN)
Research – Socio-economic Sciences and Humanities (EN)
European Communication Research and Education Association (EN)
European Journalism Observatory (EN, IT, DE)
Media Accountability and Transparency in Europe (MediaAcT) (EN)
Media and Democracy in Central and Eastern Europe (MDCEE) (EN)
Programme in Comparative Media Law and Policy, Centre for Socio-Legal Studies, University of Oxford (EN)
Professional Journalistic Standards and Code of Ethics, UNESCO/European Commission (EN)
Indicators for Independence and Efficient Functioning of AVMS Regulatory Bodies (INIREG) (EN)

Other initiatives

Icelandic Modern Media Initiative (EN, ICE)

On 29 November 2010, (EN)
Directorate General Information Society and the Media (EN)
Directorate General Competition (EN)
Audiovisual and Media Policies (EN)
Media Task Force (EN)
European Council (EN), (EN)
European Court of Justice (EN)
European Parliament (EN), (EN)

Council of Europe

Council of Europe (EN), Media and Information Society Division (EN)
Commissioner for Human Rights (EN)
Committee of Ministers (EN)
European Court of Human Rights (EN)
Parliamentary Assembly (EN)
The European Audiovisual Observatory (EN, FR, DE)

Other multilateral fora

Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (EN),
Representative on Freedom of the Media (EN)

Media associations

Association of Commercial Television (EN)
Association of European Radios (EN)
Association of European Journalists (EN)
Community Media Forum Europe (EN)
European Broadcasting Union (EN)
European Digital Media Association (EN)
European Federation of Journalists (EN, FR)
European Newspaper Publishers’ Association (EN)
European Publishers Council (EN)
European Federation of Magazine Publishers (EN)

Research

Seventh Research Framework Programme (EN)
Research – Socio-economic Sciences and Humanities (EN)
European Communication Research and Education Association (EN)
European Journalism Observatory (EN, IT, DE)
Media Accountability and Transparency in Europe (MediaAcT) (EN)
Media and Democracy in Central and Eastern Europe (MDCEE) (EN)
Programme in Comparative Media Law and Policy, Centre for Socio-Legal Studies, University of Oxford (EN)
Professional Journalistic Standards and Code of Ethics, UNESCO/European Commission (EN)
Indicators for Independence and Efficient Functioning of AVMS Regulatory Bodies (INDIREG) (EN)

Other initiatives

Icelandic Modern Media Initiative (EN, ICE)

On 29 November 2010, the Perelman Centre for Legal Philosophy and the Institute for European Studies of the Free University of Brussels (ULB) organised a conference on the influence of the internet on the media. The conference started with a brief welcome and introduction by Benoît Frydman, professor at the ULB. Bart Van Besien, research fellow at the same university, informed the public on the scope of the Mediadem project and its aim of mapping the influences of various media policies on the development of free and independent media in Europe. More »

 
Page 1 of 212