20/12/2002 - The International Cinema and Television Festival has addressed the issue of the hopes for the future of the nine candidate EU candidate countries.

Eurovisions, dedicated to Europe’s audiovisual market and its technological, cultural and economic development and transformation was held from 20 to 22 October, 2002.
Created by a group of European audiovisual operators, Eurovisions is promoted by the cultural association of the same name that is coordinated by Bernard Miyet, who will succeed Luciana Castellina as the new president. Standing side by side, they welcomed speakers and guests to the Academy of France in Rome’s Villa dei Medici, where a variety of meetings about political, economic and legislative consequences of “Extending Audiovisual Europe” (this year’s key issue) were held.
A comparative study of public television service in Central and Eastern Europe was discussed as was the economic future and forecast for the audiovisual industries of EU membership candidate countries.

For ulterior information:
- A comparative analysis by the European Audiovisual Observatory on Public funding for the European film industry and companies financial situation;
- A report about European television production;
- A report on the distribution of Central and East European films in the European Union.

The economic dimension of the enlargement

The economic expectations of the audiovisual industry of the candidate countries has been discussed during a workshop chaired by Michèle Cotta, president group AB, Key-Note Speaker: Walter Lerouge, Directeur EUREKA AUDIOVISUEL; Research: Joachim Ph. Wolf, Vicedirector MEDIA Salles.
The analysis of the economic situations of the audiovisual industries of the countries candidate to join the European Union was developed and discussed by the participants in this Workshop and gave rise to the following recommendations:

1. Given the frail and poor financial conditions of the production and distribution structures in these Countries, it is absolutely essential to protect and strengthen the support systems that exist in the European Union on the regional, national and European level; to extend its coverage and access to these new EU members; and create new and more efficient ones where there aren’t any. This goal could be pursued only through an enhancement of their current resources.
2. The other economic engine that must be strengthened and revived is the financial capacity of the public television services. In all candidate countries it constitutes a main partner in national audio-visual production that can play an essential role in the relationship with various national publics and, therefore, in final analysis, in satisfying the demand to create identity on each national market;
3. However, the sector’s regulation framework must be uniform and coherent (for cinema and television and for public and private companies), especially regarding the terms of their production obligations (that needn’t be identical but equivalent and proportioned) and contribution in supporting the national and European industry;
4. It will be necessary in time to establish complete and transparent circumstances for the audio-visual industry of each candidate country by the competent European and national organizations (the basic questionnaire used for this workshop can define the minimum level of the current situation in each country), to allow potential investors as well as national, European and international regulators (from venture capitals to banks, from the European Union to the national authorities) to make their decisions in full knowledge of the facts;
5. The specific situation of the audio-visual market of each candidate country must be taken into consideration both in terms of the most appropriated steps to the economic support of the national industry and of the political field as well as, lastly, the regulation and competition fields (tax shelter, antitrust laws)
6. The European model of the “mixed system” (public—private) in the organisation of the audio-visual sector must be adapted and modified according to the needs and risks tied to the particular situation and economic climate of each candidate country, using as a reference a serious and analytical balance sheet of the results and limits arising from this system over the last 20 years of experience matured in the European Union member countries;
7. It is a priority to encourage, with all possible means, the access of the audio-visual products and works of the patrimony of the candidate countries to the Union’s outlets using all distribution forms (cinema screens, TV, on-line, new media,...) and vice versa, in order to accelerate the integration of the audio-visual industries of the candidate countries within the Single Market, and counter these processes to the very determined penetration of the American industry on their national markets, ongoing for over ten years;
8. The best possible comprehension by the professionals and entrepreneurs of the entire enlarged Union of the different national economic regulation panoramas (objectives, resources, devices…) must be promoted and encouraged so as to facilitate their spirit of initiative across the European territory, as a first step towards the future harmonisation of regulations. In particular this goal could be pursued by the MEDIA desks network and by the existing training initiatives of the MEDIA programme;
9. Finally, a realistic view and solid principle of graduation must inspire the expectations and decisions of the candidate countries in relation to their technological investments linked to digital development (either terrestrial, satellite or in cinematographic applications, etc)

The legal dimension of the enlargement

For the legal workshop the chairman was Karol Jakubowicz, president of the Permanent Committee of the European Council for the “TV without borders” Convention, and head of TVP strategic programming. Key-Note Speaker: Susanne Nikoltchev, Legal Expert European Audiovisual Observatory and Krzysztof Wojciechowski, Adviser to the Board of Management, Polish TV.
They asked themselves whether the enlargement must be grounds for enthusiasm or a reason for worry, above all means answering three questions:
1. How does the awareness of the ‘acquis communautaire’ (the whole package of audiovisual regulations, incentive measures, directives achieved within the E.U. during the last 20 years) present itself today in the legislation of candidate countries?
2. What are the problems that exist, particularly to reconcile the obligations of joining the European Union with the obligations set by adherence to OCDE or WTO – World Trade Organisation?
3. How will these new partners be linked to the revision of the “TV without frontiers” directive and, more generally, to the process of new directives addressed to regulate the technical evolutions in progress?
An observation can be made on the first question. All the candidate countries have already introduced most of the European rules in their legislations to the point where almost all of them are already or are about to be associated with MEDIA programme.
To give an estimate of the progress made, the Krzysztof Wojciechowski (TVP) noted that all of these countries come from far away and before joining the European audio-visual project had not only the pursuit of a democracy conditions as a primary objective but also to revive the same need for democracy within their citizens. It is in this sense that the new meaning has to be given to words such as ‘pluralism’ and the relationship between audiovisual media and political power.
In most countries of Central and Western Europe, the awareness of the ‘acquis communautaire’ did not begin with the project to join the E.U. It is the goal of the process that began on a national level with the preparation of the first regulatory texts regarding media, in particular with efforts aimed at building a democratic and pluralist television and at affirming the principle of free circulation of the programmes.
This process started in the framework of the Council of Europe and through exchange and co-production programmes developed within the EBU (European Broadcasting Union).
Today the European principles on the subject of media diversity, pluralism and independence have been totally included in national laws.
The same can be said, with some nuances, for the adoption of the E.U. directive “TV without frontiers” that regulate advertising, tele-shopping, or in another context, the protection of minors or the transmission in clear of highly important national events.
On the other hand, there are two points where the alignment with European Union practices has seemed more complicate: regulation of author protection and compensation, and especially the questions regarding the space to be reserved for national and European programmes in the production programming schedule policies of the TV broadcasters of the candidate countries.
The legislation of most of the candidate countries have actually been faced with two problems:
a) the reserve in replacing the national quotas with European quotas, amplified in numerous countries by the weakness of their internal markets;
b) the pressure of the United States, exercised through organisations such as OCDE and WTO, in order not to limit the freedom to invest and trade in the audio-visual sector.

Many candidate countries originally adopted a legislation that opened their audio-visual market to the free commercial access of investments and foreign programmes, contrary to the principles posted by the European Union. Naturally this caused serious problems when starting the process to join the E.U. Most of the countries could review their legislation with the help of the European Commission but the difficulties – especially for some countries – still exist. It is the case of Hungary, for example, that having been one of the first countries to move towards economic liberalization already undertook a certain number of commercial obligations such as (in its first regulation of the communications sector) the rule that the transmission of foreign television channels originating from its territory were not included in the field of authority of the national audio-visual regulations but in those of telecommunications.
But the subject much more sensitive to the actual state of negotiations for E.U. membership is still that of the definition of what should be intended for national production.
Two logics contrast.
The first is that of an industrial imprint that favours a wider definition: all the production made in the country in question or with the country’s means.
The other, however, has a more cultural imprint (and much more restrictive), similar to the one adopted by the European Commission that adopts a linguistic definition of national production: only the production made in the language of the country in question is national.
Effectively, the Commission considers that the development of the national industries of programmes is intimately tied to the national support policies, but that these policies must be compatible with the construction of the European audiovisual space.

The last question refers to the review of the “TV without borders” directive and the candidate countries.
The workshop participants, after having proceeded in reading the text of the Directive article by article and after an extremely open exchange of views on the amendments to be applied to the current text, were unanimous in recognising the need to associate candidate countries to their processing and revision if it is requested the new member countries apply the new texts. The more they are associated with the current revision work, the more the legitimacy of the European legislation strengthens.
In conclusion, the group came back to the original question if the enlargement of European audio-visual must be considered as an enthusiastic or worrisome prospective. According to the jurists the question cannot be truly asked in these terms. The eventuality of leaving the audio-visual markets of Central and Eastern Europe at the edge of the European market is not a profitable service. But, above all, it is not profitable to the European Union current member countries since, with the development of satellites "Television without borders " of which the community directive of the same name speaks, has already become a reality that cannot be ignored.

The political dimension of the enlargement

The workshop of the political dimension enlargement chaired by Enzo Cheli president of the Authority for communications guarantees and with the participation of Giuseppe Sangiorgi, commissioner of the Authority for communications guarantees and Péter Bajomi-Lazar, Associate Prof. Dept. Communication, Kodolány University College has written the following final document.
Today, European television is faced with two complementary objectives:
a)The enlargement of audio-visual Europe to the 10 new candidate countries
b) The arrival of digital television.
In this continually changing audio-visual framework, the presence of a strong public service television is a guarantee essential to:
1.the preservation of audio-visual pluralism
2. cultural diversity.

The increase in merger and acquisition operations between commercial operators threatens the plurality of operators in time.
Faced with commercial operators who, to maximize their profits tend to minimise investments in production, public service operators must maximize the service provided to viewing “citizens”, assuring them a diversified offer of quality programmes thus fulfilling their public service mission.
The mixed television system (public + private) that is typical of Western Europe is included in this way of thinking. The national and community public powers are presently involved in creating a political framework consequent to the duality of this system in order to guarantee a balance. However this balance may be threatened by the introduction of digital television if the new rules will be established only by the market. Politicians must arrange a legal and economic framework suited to the new digital environment.
Within the candidate countries of Central and Eastern Europe, the legislative process of the last decade has given rise to a legal framework that encourages audio-visual media plurality, although the balance between public service and commercial television is still very frail:
a) the public television of these countries is still marked by almost 50 years of political monopoly;
b) the reduced size of the national markets does not free enough resources to finance original quality productions
This institutional heritage, that translates in a legitimacy deficit of public television, and these economic limits, that hardly attract national investors, have facilitated the development of commercial television networks controlled by multinational and often North American groups in the Eastern Countries.

To resolve these essential handicaps it is better to:
1. assure transparency in the relations between the political powers and television any television that participates in the life of citizens does politics. Therefore it is better to free it of the will of political power without cutting it out of politics, at least assuring that there is an objective treatment of information. This transparency can be assured by the control Authorities, the independence from which must be assured by legislators and legal power.
2. Assure sufficient and continuous FINANCING to PUBLIC SERVICE television operators so that they are able to offer the best to their viewers, especially in developing national and/or regional productions, possibly through international co-operation. Faced with the offer and audience fragmentation risks, international co-operation must also permit European public service television to build federal offers that reflect the diversity of the national identities.
In the new audio-visual balance of the “Great Europe” of the digital era, politicians must guarantee the media plurality and cultural diversity of their programme offers. To this end it is essential, in this new digital scenario, to guarantee the diversified presence of public service television by all distribution means. Starting from the principle that communications, especially audio-visual, must be one of the pillars of construction of the future enlarged Europe.