| Author (Person) | Cronin, David |
|---|---|
| Series Title | European Voice |
| Series Details | Vol.11, No.39, 3.11.05 |
| Publication Date | 03/11/2005 |
| Content Type | News |
|
Date: 03/11/05 Next month, the UK's Ofcom Board will be considering the future of local digital televison and one of the ideas it will be considering is the role of broadband internet in delivering such content in the future. At the same time, the media and telecoms companies Arqiva and O2 are launching a trial in Oxford that will allow viewers to watch television channels on their mobile phones. The independent producer Endemol has announced a deal to produce a reality TV channel on Orange mobile phones in the UK. Developments such as these demonstrate that the means of delivering audiovisual content to viewers is changing radically. And regulation must change with it. We at Ofcom are pleased to have played a role in the review process for the 'television without frontiers' (TWF) directive and I was delighted to chair the working group at a conference in Liverpool concerned with the extension of scope. It is no secret that Ofcom is doubtful as to whether the best way to promote such new content and business models is through yet more regulation. The original TWF directive was introduced to a highly developed market some 40 years after the start of commercial television in Europe. Crucially, it was adopted at a point in the evolution of that market when a need for Europe-wide regulation - to create 'television without frontiers' - had been proven. I and many of the stakeholders were encouraged to hear Fabio Colasanti, the Commission's director-general for information society and media, state that there was no intention to extend regulation to the internet but many of us remain confused as to how this laudable aim can be reconciled with extending the scope of the directive to non-linear content, where viewers download content in their own time. We do not believe - and many of those at Liverpool seemed to share our view - that the benefit of any theoretical harmonisation of regulation will outweigh the costs being imposed on new businesses, many of whom are still developing, trialling and evolving their business models The divergence of views at Liverpool were summed up by James Purnell, the UK minister for creative industries and tourism, who, in his closing speech to the conference, remarked on the "very clear difference of view" between the traditional broadcasters and the providers of new services. "I think it is important that this difference is bridged if we are to move this debate forward in a constructive fashion," the minister said. He added that a successful new directive must bridge this divide, adding that a combination of co-regulation and self- regulation is most likely to achieve this. So as EU officials draft the new directive over the next few weeks and share their proposals with the College of commissioners, we would urge them to balance these costs and benefits carefully. We also urge the Commission to engage with the national regulators who will have responsibility for implementing the directive that emerges. What we hope emerges is a piece of legislation that balances the aims of the protection of minors and the fight against racial hatred with the need to provide a strong environment for news businesses setting out to contribute to the achievement of the Commission's important i2010 objectives. Ofcom is also starting to look ahead to when the new directive is implemented. We welcome much of what the Commission is proposing in the area of commercial communications. In particular, we agree with the Commission that the time is rapidly approaching when a principle based on separation of editorial content from commercial content should be replaced by one placed on transparency. This will ensure that advertisers remain committed to investing in commercial television at a time when it may come under threat from developments such as personal video recorders - which allow the viewer to skip advertising messages - and, as the examples I cited seem to indicate, from the appeal of delivering content to consumers via new delivery mechanisms such as mobile phones and broadband internet. We also believe that, whatever the outcome of the debate on scope, much future regulation can be delivered by self- and co-regulation rather than by statutory measures. We already have evidence of this working well in the UK. The Commission has often cited the success of the self-regulatory system operated by the Association for Television on-demand (ATVOD) to regulate the provision of video-on-demand. The UK mobile phone operators have developed their own standards governing audiovisual content and Ofcom itself enabled the co-regulation of advertising standards via the UK Advertising Standards Authority. We believe that the best regulation often occurs when it is enabled by business itself, when it is no longer seen as a cost on business but as an important element of competitive advantage and helping to inspire confidence in consumers. Linked to this is a belief that more should be done to encourage media literacy across Europe to ensure that consumers can take responsibility for what they view and listen to, irrespective of how it is delivered to them. The ultimate aim must be to ensure that the new directive delivers throughout the EU success in audiovisual content industries following the way that the existing TWF has undoubtedly contributed to European success in television production and distribution. If the EU can deliver this, Of-com, Arqiva, O2, Endemol, Orange and the many other players in this exciting new world will have every reason to thank the Commission in the years ahead.
Analysis feature by the chairman of Ofcom, the regulator and competition authority for the communications industries in the UK. He argues that delivering audiovisual content to viewers was changing radically and that therefore regulation had to change too. He called on the European Commission, which was in the middle of reviewing key legislation in the field, not to extend regulation inadequately but to opt for co-regulation and self- regulation of the industry. |
|
| Source Link | Link to Main Source http://www.european-voice.com/ |
| Related Links |
|
| Subject Categories | Business and Industry |
| Countries / Regions | Europe |
