Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
New Media Regulation Frameworks
New Media Regulation Frameworks
New Media Regulation Frameworks
New Media Regulation Frameworks
New Media Regulation Frameworks
New Media Regulation Frameworks
New Media Regulation Frameworks
New Media Regulation Frameworks
New Media Regulation Frameworks
New Media Regulation Frameworks
New Media Regulation Frameworks
New Media Regulation Frameworks
New Media Regulation Frameworks
New Media Regulation Frameworks
New Media Regulation Frameworks
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

New Media Regulation Frameworks


Published on

European Journalism Centre : Innovation Journalism: Detecting Weak Signals

European Journalism Centre : Innovation Journalism: Detecting Weak Signals

Published in: Business, Economy & Finance
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. New Media Regulation Frameworks Eric Karstens, European Journalism Centre
  • 2. Built-In Diversity: European Institutional Approaches European Council De-regulation; sovereignty of the Member States European Commission Competition; functioning of the internal market European Parliament Pluralism of opinion, content, and cultures
  • 3. Emerging Risks: Current Regulatory Challenges Globalisation Influence of private equity investors; importance of US programming Concentration EU-wide cross-ownership instead of national value chain integration EU Common Market Response to different legacies in EU media landscapes (especially CEE countries) Digitalisation Time lag between regulation of conventional and new media; impact ambiguity
  • 4. Regulatory Failure: The ProSiebenSAT.1 Example (1)
      • Take-over by German publishing house Axel Springer AG prohibited by both anti-trust authority and media regulation bodies on grounds of hazards to competition and pluralism
      • Investment by private equity funds KKR and Permira outside the scope of German media law
      • Quintessential leveraged buyout strategy
      • Dispensation with remaining journalistic, public-service-minded programmes; major staff and cost cuts
  • 5. Regulatory Failure: The ProSiebenSAT.1 Example (2)
      • Result is worse than what was supposed to be averted in the first place
      • Current rules finally register as inadequate with policy makers
      • Hangover in German media regulation
      • But maybe commercial TV has finally arrived in the present?
  • 6. The Two-Speed Market: Central and Eastern Europe (1)
      • Market sizes and economies not necessarily conducive to a diverse choice of (conventional) media
      • EU common market rules took effect before CEE countries had the opportunity to develop into mature media markets on their own
      • Public Service Broadcasting in some cases under-financed and not trusted
      • In-country owned conventional media sometimes still closely connected to political parties or government influence
  • 7. The Two-Speed Market: Central and Eastern Europe (2)
      • Transfer of capital and know-how desired
      • Foreign counter-balance against local oligarchy
      • However:
      • Variety of content limited; dominance of US and Western European productions
      • Control of media taken out of the hands of the societies
  • 8. Means of Deterministic Regulation
      • Prohibiting or prescribing easily recognisable parameters
        • Ownership restrictions
        • Content quotas
        • Competition law
      • „ Soft-policy“ approaches
        • Direct and indirect subsidies
        • Incentives
  • 9. Issues with Deterministic Regulation
      • Easy accountability
      • Quite possibly adverse reactions of the regulated
      • Insufficient stimulus for innovation
      • Low adaptability to environmental change
      • Encouragement of merely subsidy-seeking products
  • 10. The Rationale of Risk Management
      • Modern societies have inserted multiple precautionary layers between original hazards and potential victims
      • Fear of original dangers has been replaced by concerns about dependability of precautionary measures
      • When danger is manageable, averting risks becomes a moral obligation
      • Risk protection acquires a societal rather than individual perspective, because most risk management involves a collective effort
      • Personal risks tend to be forwarded to society
      • If risk management fails, it is perceived to be somebody‘s fault
  • 11. The Definition of Risk
      • Which levels of risk are deemed acceptable depends on common understanding in society
      • Risk evaluation depends on values, political opinion, business interests, individual interests
      • Negotiation of acceptability and reduction of ambiguity open to interest groups in media society
  • 12. Co-Regulation
      • Rather than imposing rules „from above“, stakeholders are invited to negotiate regulation
      • Make use of stakeholder expertise which otherwise might not be available or be tactically shrouded
      • Elicit frank input from the entire field of stakeholders
      • However:
      • Laisser-faire approach as such lacks a fundament of values and disregards long-term impacts
  • 13. Objectives of Risk-based Regulation
      • Rely on common understanding rather than enforcement
      • Negotiate objectives and thresholds rather than impose rules
      • Encourage innovation
      • Retain validity of regulation even through macro-level changes
      • Adaptability to diverse sets of circumstances
      • Reconcile the different policy approaches in one common framework
  • 14. Issues with Risk-based Regulation
      • In media society, blame-prevention tactics can become prevalent
      • Pressure groups can use media salience to push their agendas
      • Abstract framework requires sound and agreed-upon ethical foundations
      • Further complication of enforcement and auditability issues
  • 15. Future Risk-based Media Regulation
      • Bottom-up approach: Assume the user‘s position
      • Account for political culture, level of education, and content preferences
      • Allow for a variety of media landscape configurations
      • Establish a system of indicators and render them measurable
      • Objective of current DG INFSO research project