30. 09. 2010

JOINT CONCLUSIONS ON TRANSPARENCY OF OWNERSHIP, ILLEGAL CONCENTRATION AND THE ROLE OF THE STATE IN PRINT MEDIA

After the last, fifth round table dedicated to drafting the Media Strategy, held on September 27, 2010, on the topic "Print media", ANEM, NUNS (IJAS), UNS (JAS), NDNV (IJAV) and Local Press, prepared and submitted to the Ministry of Culture on September 30, 2010, the joint conclusions related to transparency of ownership, illegal concentration and the role of the state in print media.

Joint conclusions on transparency of ownership, illegal concentration and the role of the state in print media

1)         In their joint stands that have been agreed upon before the beginning of the round tables about the Media Study and the public discussion on the Media Strategy, the Independent Journalists' Association of Serbia (NUNS), Association of Independent Electronic Media (ANEM), NDNV (IJAV), Local Press and the Journalists' Association of Serbia (UNS) have already demanded the following: ownership transparency, forbidden concentration of ownership (no monopolies), complete withdrawal of the state from media ownership and equal treatment of all media outlets in the market.

2)        Despite the large number of print media outlets in Serbia, pluralism of ideas is absent because the market has been divided, on the one side, among several big players and the state, and on the other side it is influenced by big marketing agencies which indirectly control the flow of money and political influence. Therefore it is necessary to adopt special anti-monopoly legislation that would prevent overwhelming or prevailing influence on the public opinion, stimulate competition, and provide a free flow of information, thoughts and ideas which would advance individuals' rights to freedom of expression and exchange of information.

3)        The state should only have a visible role in the areas of legislation and regulation, with the aim to ensure the freedom of public expression and the pluralism of ideas; to protect the public interest, media pluralism and equal treatment of all media outlets; and to prevent abuse of dominant positions. Full withdrawal of the state from media ownership (with the exception of the public service broadcaster) is a necessary precondition for successful fight against media concentration.

4)        Transparency of ownership is a required condition for prevention of monopolies, regardless of whether the direct or indirect influence is exerted by the state, the media industry or the advertising lobby. The most efficient way to prevent or at least limit media concentration is to establish legal mechanisms that would require explicit naming of owners. In that sense, it is necessary to form a media register - linked to databases of other countries - that would reveal true ownership.

5)        The rules on illegal concentration of ownership must not hinder development of the media industry or diminish the acquired rights of owners, except if it was acquired illegally. These rules would be implemented together with stimulatory measures for development of pluralism and media diversity.

6)        At the same time, the public's inability to find out the true structure of ownership threatens the development of the media who are not part of the concentration and are victims of unfair competition and concentrated media industry.

7)  The sold number of copies (circulation) is a fundamental mechanism to diagnose and limit illegal concentration and monopolies, provided a reliable auditing has been assured. Free issues should also be taken into account during evaluation of circulation, since they also influence the public opinion.

8)  At all levels, the state as an advertiser must be obliged to perform transparent and non-discriminatory distribution of advertising (public announcements, competitions, advertisements of public companies...) in accordance with public interest, with special emphasis on local press.

9)  Media concentration and integration can be viewed at two levels - within the same type of media market (the press) and within converged ownership over various types of media (the press, electronic media, new media). It is necessary to limit the influence of distributors by precisely specifying conditions in which concurrent ownership over both newspapers and the distribution network is acceptable. 

10)  All laws that are in any way related to regulation of media issues, especially the media laws, must be mutually harmonized and based on European principles and standards. At all times, media regulation has to be the subject of a wide-ranging professional and public debate. Media laws must not be adopted in a shortened procedure and without a public discussion.

The Media Strategy should emphasize the government's readiness to accept and uphold fundamental European standards and principles with regard to freedom of expression, which should be clearly demonstrated by the government in the very process of preparation of the Strategy.

Freedom of the press does not exist if journalists are the victims of poverty, corruption and fear.

Numerous court proceedings against the media and journalists are a special form of pressure. We propose that a special course on media law be introduced at the Legal Academy which would include judges, prosecutors, lawyers, editors and journalists. Since the Legal Academy influences only the future judges and prosecutors, it is necessary to introduce special seminars that would cover the current staff in higher courts, courts of appeal and prosecutor's offices. This form of education and sensitization has been approved by the Legal Academy, the Ministry of Justice and the High Council of Judiciary, but it should also be a part of the Media Strategy, as one of the means to protect the media, journalists, as well as the public and the right of public expression.

11)  We demand that adoption of the Law on Illegal Media Concentration and Transparency of Media Ownership be considered again. The draft Law already exists and it must first be harmonized with opinions expressed during the debate on the Media Study.