Member states seek to water down media rules

European Publishers' Council Executive Director Angela Mills Wade warned that member states were in danger of effectively funding online newspapers with taxpayers' money. 

"Public broadcasters have not only been migrating to digital TV platforms but also to the Internet, and in many cases, morphing into online newspaper and magazine publishers – funded by the public purse – and competing head on with commercial publishers," she said. 

This distorts competition and undermines the national press, she declared, adding that it is neither in line with competition policy nor the European treaties. 

The European Broadcasting Union opposes the introduction of new rules on funding for public service broadcasters (PSBs), which it says could lead to harmonisation of PSB regulations. 

It says the current version of the communication published by the Commission is so detailed that it could "reduce the scope for member states to grant public service broadcasters a significant role in the information society". 

"The EBU strongly supports member states in their refusal to accept Commission measures which indirectly leads to a de facto European harmonisation of PSB regulations," said EBU Director General Jean Réveillon. He said the Commission's approach ignores the views of a large majority of member states, which were expressed in writing to EU Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes. 

Tobias Schmid, vice president of the German Association of Commercial Radio and Telecommunications Providers, welcomed elements of the Commission's communication, but saw scope for changes. 

"While we clearly see points which require improvement in the text, especially regarding transparency of costs, we welcome the guidance given for member states in particular with regard to ex ante scrutiny and the independent regulation. Only those will ensure that the interests of Europe's consumers will be best protected by thriving, competitive markets." 

The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) Trust welcomed the general spirit of the draft, but described it as "more detailed and prescriptive than necessary".