Call for flexibility in funding of state TV

Date: 14/03/1996

By Fiona McHugh

AS the European Commission considers whether, and to what extent, government funding of state television stations distorts competition, MEPs look set to demand that flexibility be shown in the application of anti-trust rules to government-owned media.

In an own-initiative report on the role of public service broadcasting due to be voted on by the European Parliament's culture committee next Tuesday (19 March), British Socialist Carole Tongue insists that “if unrestricted competition leads to a restriction in either the quality or range of products available, then intervention is clearly justified in the public interest”.

She adds: “In European Union terms, this must mean an intelligent and flexible interpretation of competition rules, not a rigorous adherence to ideological purity.”

Although the report refers only tangentially to a controversial case currently being considered by DGIV, the Directorate-General for competition, involving state aid to French public television stations, France 2 and 3, it is clearly intended to influence the outcome. DGIV has so far displayed uncharacteristic caution in its handling of the complaint lodged by the privately-owned station, TF1, three years ago.

Its verdict, which one way or another is bound to cause waves in the media world, is now expected before the end of the year.

These recommendations will come as an unwelcome reminder to Competition Commissioner Karel Van Miert's team of the outcry which would inevitably follow any decision to apply competition rules strictly to the politically-sensitive media sector. Public stations have welcomed the MEP's suggestions, saying that until now, EU policy, which advocates the promotion of culture but baulks at paying for it, has been contradictory.

Tongue calls on the Commission to draw up general guidelines on state aid to the media sector and recommends that an independent regulator be set up to ensure that public service obligations - paid for out of taxpayers' money - are met. She insists that state television stations should not be included in the scope of forthcoming EU rules on media concentration, but says that they should be asked to keep separate accounts for commercial and public service activities.

Delivering an impassioned defence of public service television, Tongue says that, without it, democracy would not survive.

The intense proliferation of private stations over the past decade has eroded public stations' audience share, leading some commentators to question their legitimacy.

In 1984, public service broadcasters captured 82&percent; of the total EU audience. By 1994, that figure had fallen to 46&percent;.