The conference touched upon several issues dealing with the relationship between the EU institutions' communication practices and the media. The Commission (and other institutions) have expressed frustration that media do not carry enough European news. One of the solutions put forward in the White Paper is to provide journalists with more and better background material and to upgrade the EU's audiovisual service 'Europe by Satellite'.
One of the hotly debated issues concerned whether Europe needs a new pan-European TV channel. A large majority of the media experts felt that this would be "a huge waste of taxpayers' money" and would not have much impact. British speakers mentioned the lack of success of the UK's Parliamentary channels as an example.
Another topic for debate was media independence when they receive substantial amounts of public money from the Commission. Representatives of some of the public broadcasting services present (Euronews, Deutsche Welle) felt that this funding did not endanger their independence but commercial broadcasters contested this and demanded more careful analysis of "issue placement" (having the media focus on topics demanded by the funding source).
Two special sessions dealing with new technologies (blogs, vlogs, video on demand, Podcasts), new internet media and the emerging citizens' journalism highlighted that audiences are increasingly fragmented and that young people are informing themselves via the internet instead of television. Several speakers underlined the need for platform-neutrality.
Content, not technology should drive decisions to make use of the new possibilities, was one of the main recommendations from the floor. Citizens' videos (made with GSMs) of dramatic or emotional events will be of interest, whereas "talking heads" (such as parliament meetings or conference reports) will have little or no viewer attraction. Blogs can be useful but might also attract only the "blogging elites".
The conference showed a lot of interest in local TV experiments where "communities of interest" used new video technologies to report about hot issues (eg. domestic violence, living conditions in the suburbs, tensions between religious or racial communities). Many conference participants felt that the EU should finance similar projects to support media literacy for the grassroots and connect it to the policymakers.
There was a general consensus that EU journalists need better training but some participants argued that this should not be the Commission's responsibility.
The EU's own communication practices came under fire on the second day, with delegates suggesting that:
- Europa, the EU's internet site, still underuses the most elemental technology of the web, such as hyperlinks between related policy documents and other external background information;
- the press has problems getting 'on-the-spot' interviews with commissioners and the communication skills of EU officials are very poor;
- there is a need to improve the "forward planning" services to make sure the media know in advance what is coming, and;
- the EU is a "huge compromise machine" and is afraid of showing drama, conflict or different opinions, which makes the EU dull.
Webstreaming highlights of all the sessions of the conference are available via the "Europe in Vision" webpages produced by the Commission's audiovisual services.
