With Ukraine about to launch ‘Ukraine Tomorrow’ in response to the success Russia has had with ‘Russia Today’, the power of the media in controlling and shaping the opinions of millions is very clear.
This power is unlikely to go unnoticed. A plethora of new media organisations have already emerged to broadcast news with the twist their sponsoring state wishes it to have. Russia Today is the most famous, but there is also Euronews, France 24, Deutsche Welle, Japan’s NHK World, Al Jazeera and CNN, to name but a few of the other global providers shaping the narrative.
As domestic newspapers give precedence to commercial pressures over the independence of their reporting, and more and more people become experts in one area while increasingly ignorant concerning others, the opportunities and ‘justifications’ for state institutions to intervene in the media are growing. The days of people having a broad set of views across the spectrum based on their own study are dying; now one-issue lobbying groups are emerging, advocating only their specific area of interest, with many of these crossing borders. All of this challenges the social cohesion of states that need their populations to understand their shared cultural heritage and traditions in order for society to function properly.
Legislating pluralism
The European Parliament’s resolution of 25 September 2008 on concentration and pluralism in the media in the European Union (2007/2253(INI)) calls for media pluralism, in line with Article 11.2 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which states “The freedom and pluralism of the media shall be respected”. The EU Treaties do not touch on the media, except for Protocol 29, which calls for the preservation of media pluralism.
Yet this freedom allows for sources that promote values that assault the very foundations of Western culture, while allowing people to choose their news sources and shape the type of world they want to live in by controlling the information they are exposed to. This very pluralism is creating groups in society that are undermining territorial and social cohesion, and actually undermining democracy by detaching people from their own neighbours and from the issues in their own neighbourhoods. It fundamentally undermines the nation state.
Controlling broadcasters
Protocol 29 also commits Member States to conduct their public service broadcasting in a way that is not “…contrary to the common interest.” Thus the Treaties appear to pressurise broadcasters to tow the European line (which would explain a lot about BBC reporting) while also preserving a multitude of information sources. Yet the reality of competition in a globalised world will lead to greater concentration of power in fewer hands. Euronews already unites broadcasters from across Europe (and outside of the EU) in its shareholders, and this cooperation will only increase until smaller members are subsumed entirely. The demands of the Common Foreign and Security Policy can be used to ensure a single voice is projected by EU members, removing the need for independent national bodies and increasing the rational for a common EU public service broadcaster.
However, in its nature, pluralism also helps to promote disunity. The interests of Greek voters are not in line with those of German ones, and this dichotomy sits as a problem. In order for the EU to more effectively mobilise public support behind common policies, it will have to cut down on diversity.
The Commission has plenty of legal opportunities to assert itself. The link that is argued to exist between media freedom, pluralism and democracy is one area that the Commission can exploit to take more legislative control, while using this as a justification to enhance and harmonise the single market in the field of media provision. This would transfer more power to the EU level to promote a level playing field while eroding national legislative differences. This in turn would encourage the creation of EU-level media conglomerates, with concentrated controlling elites whom the Commission can call, work with and place under pressure with far greater ease.
First steps
Euronews is a step on this way. There is no British shareholder in the list of Euronews investors, but this model of international media cooperation is bringing together national organisations and integrating them at a European-level. The Euronews Charter in point 2.2 (b) commits the organisation to reporting cultural diversity (leading to an erosion of national distinctions), while clause 2.3 commits the organisation to promoting knowledge of the day’s events in the EU institutions, seeking to engage audiences in the EU and insipidly buy it legitimacy. Expect political influence to grow, particularly as, in terms of viewing figures, Euronews is the European leader and it already benefits from substantial funding from the Commission.
The need to focus on the wording of legal agreements and not on the sound bites of politicians is greater than ever. We can help hold the media to account by looking at the actual documents and treaties politicians sign on our behalf rather than just listening to news reports, as the Treaty of Lisbon debates and coverage proved. The need to look beyond pronouncements and to the actual facts is greater than ever.
