Suchergebnisse

After long deliberations, the European Community (EC) has completed the reform of its audiovisual media regulation. The paper examines the main tenets of this reform with particular focus on its implications for the diversity of cultural expressions in the European media landscape. It also takes into account the changed patterns of consumer and business behaviour due to the advances in digital media and their wider spread in society. The paper criticises the somewhat unimaginative approach of the EC to new media and the political (and at times protectionist) considerations behind some of the Directive's provisions.

The European Union's (EU) liberalisation of media policies and its content quality bias towards economic efficiency has resulted in a situation where, in some small markets like Estonia, the audience is divided into two parts. The Russian-speaking audience in Estonia mainly follows Russian state TV channels, and the Estonian-speaking audience watches Estonian television channels. This has happened even though the EU media policy should ensure freedom of information, diversity of opinion and media pluralism. Findings from the Estonian case study show that despite the noble aim of the EU media policy, Estonia has two radically different information fields: Estonian-language media promotes European values, and Russian state media, enjoying high popularity among the Russian speakers, promotes 'Putin's values'.The question is whether the EU legal instrument — Audiovisual Me­dia Service Directive (AVMSD) — is an efficient tool when disinformation from third countries is disseminated with the aim of gaining a political in­fluence over the EU member states' citizens. The recommendation is that the AVMSD should be revised in a way that prevents unfair competition directed from third countries and tools should be developed to compensate for market failures.

Democratic transitions of Eastern countries brought about the need to shifting from eastern into western paradigms. Transitioning into western models of media, more specifically to the public system of broadcasting became a prerequisite for achieving the EU status for Eastern European transitioning countries. It has been twelve years since Albania entered the process of transformation from being a State TV towards becoming a Public Television. The article aims to provide a theoretical framework of public television networks in western countries pointing to the pertaining relationships with their political systems. Using this methodology, the article evaluates the developmental process of RTSH, and traces the evolution of certain fundamental laws to determine that political elites have not put forth any efforts to reform laws to establish self-regulatory instruments and guarantee the media independence as a self regulated institution. Despite international recommendations and internal pressures for change, the practices in the area of public network television services have served the private interest of political parliamentary forces .Using the Hallin and Mancini comparative models for media, we established that efforts towards reformation, the changes of Albanian public television are not guided towards a liberal democratic model; instead they resemble a Mediterranean or polarized system. Political arbitration in choosing key institutions that ensure self regulation and the direction of public service broadcasting reflects similarities with the Italian model of Lottizzazione. However, the design of hybrid laws whose structures and functions do not serve public interests, but instead ensure the interest of political elites, is not a formula that guarantees public service broadcasting. By choosing to pursue the old trend of TVSH's broadcasting methods, politics is channeling the future of public service broadcasting towards a polarizing model. The approach that would allow a liberalization of Public Service Broadcasting, demands a political emancipation and consensus on this particular issue. For now, the sings of consensus are nowhere to be seen, and as such the fate of public service broadcasting remains in a pending status. One of the main consequences in this process, remains the under informed public that is a vital element in a viable democracy. In this case, society becomes the victim of an autocratic system, perpetually stuck in a vicious cycle against democratic interest.

The rapid expansion of video-on-demand platforms, such as Netflix or Disney Plus, associated with the advance of digital capitalism makes the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) adopted by the European Union a particularly relevant case for understanding the politics of the digital media policy. Based on an actor-centred constructivism, the article seeks to propose a conceptual approach to explore platform governance and highlight the key dynamics through which platform governance related to the media sector is formulated in light of the actors involved. As such, it provides an 'in situ and in action' view on normative building, introducing politics into the analysis of platform governance. The study focuses on the political framing of two key issues related to the crystallization of AVMSD: (1) the financial contribution of online platforms to European and national audio-visual content creation and (2) the presence and prominence of European and national audio-visual works in the online catalogues. ; Peer reviewed

This article argues that until recent times, the Estonian media policy has mainly been interpreted as an economic issue and it did not account for the strategic need to build a comprehensive media field to serve all groups in society. This has
happened despite the fact the Estonian media policy is in line with the European Union (EU) media policy, which should ensure freedom of information, diversity of opinion and media pluralism. Findings of the Estonian case study show that despite these noble aims, Estonia has two radically different information fields: one for Estonian speaking audiences and one for Russian speakers. Events in Ukraine have added to the democratic media policy paradigm a question of national security. Now it is a challenge for the policy makers to unite polarised media fields and how to minimise the impact of Russian propaganda. On the EU level, one supportive measure could be a revision of the Audiovisual Media Service
Directive. (author's abstract)

This article explores the new Audiovisual Media Services Directive which will be the main instrument of media regulation in the European Union for the next years. However, instead of analyzing the directive itself which entered into force in December 2007 I am interested in its history.
I will focus on 2 years of intense deliberation among EU institutions that preceded the final directive. A discourse analysis highlights the conflicting rationales that two EU institutions, the European Parliament and the European Commission, use in their respective drafts of the directive.
The central point of reference in the Commission's draft is the Single Market, with Europeans being addressed as consumers. In contrast, at the heart of the Parliament's concept of media regulation is a European public sphere composed of European citizens. My analysis illustrates how, in the
process of drafting and redrafting the law text, the Parliament's emphasis on the media's role for democracy is considerably stripped down.

This article argues that until recent times, the Estonian media policy has mainly been interpreted as an economic issue and it did not account for the strategic need to build a comprehensive media field to serve all groups in society. This has happened despite the fact the Estonian media policy is in line with the European Union (EU) media policy, which should ensure freedom of information, diversity of opinion and media pluralism. Findings of the Estonian case study show that despite these noble aims, Estonia has two radically different information fields: one for Estonian speaking audiences and one for Russian speakers. Events in Ukraine have added to the democratic media policy paradigm a question of national security. Now it is a challenge for the policy makers to unite polarised media fields and how to minimise the impact of Russian propaganda. On the EU level, one supportive measure could be a revision of the Audiovisual Media Service Directive.

Abstract
The European Union's (EU) 2018 Audiovisual Media Services Directive attempted to level the playing field upon which video sharing platforms and audiovisual media services compete by evening out advertising and consumer protection rules. Recent competition policy literature identifies data as a source of dominance in platform markets, suggesting its relevance to such situations where platforms compete with other services. Drawing on a study of this playing field involving stakeholder interviews and a comparison of regulatory frameworks, we present a nuanced understanding of imbalances across three distinct functions of data. We consider the policy implications, arguing for more equitable access to insight from aggregate, anonymized data and financial data.

Abstract
The European Union's (EU) 2018 Audiovisual Media Services Directive attempted to level the playing field upon which video sharing platforms and audiovisual media services compete by evening out advertising and consumer protection rules. Recent competition policy literature identifies data as a source of dominance in platform markets, suggesting its relevance to such situations where platforms compete with other services. Drawing on a study of this playing field involving stakeholder interviews and a comparison of regulatory frameworks, we present a nuanced understanding of imbalances across three distinct functions of data. We consider the policy implications, arguing for more equitable access to insight from aggregate, anonymized data and financial data.

The European Union's (EU) 2018 Audiovisual Media Services Directive attempted to level the playing field upon which video sharing platforms and audiovisual media services compete by evening out advertising and consumer protection rules. Recent competition policy literature identifies data as a source of dominance in platform markets, suggesting its relevance to such situations where platforms compete with other services. Drawing on a study of this playing field involving stakeholder interviews and a comparison of regulatory frameworks, we present a nuanced understanding of imbalances across three distinct functions of data. We consider the policy implications, arguing for more equitable access to insight from aggregate, anonymized data and financial data.