By: monica
From Ofcom to Europe?
Beyond competition-specific issues, Mr. Ungerer commented on the implications of Ofcom�s PSB review. This is a context where �everything needs to change� was his prime reading of Ofcom�s PSB review and he welcomed the PSP proposal. Mr. Ungerer recognised that the UK is leading the regulatory debate in Europe and that the transition in the continent will likely parallel, or at least be very much influenced by, developments in the UK.
And not just in public broadcasting. Just recently, the Commission manifested its appreciation for UK�s �liberal and light touch approach� in the EU spectrum battle over 3G airwaves. The market led approach in allocating spectrum pushed by Britain is fiercely opposed by countries such as Germany, France, Italy and Finland.
That Brussels, and most other regulators in Europe, look eagerly (and almost reverentially) at Ofcom is well known. This is not surprising as, despite fair criticisms, Ofcom certainly remains one of the best communications regulators in the world. But debates remain highly if not fully national (just look at yesterday�s participants at the Oxford Media Convention and the debates therein). The dangers of importing regulatory solutions without a proper understanding of the context in which those were taken are not negligible. It will be interesting to see what direction do EU regulatory developments take under the UK�s EU presidency later this year�
M�nica Ari�o
Jan 21st 2005
it sounds like a really good lecture and broadly probably corret. But not, sadly, being able to attend some clarification on one point would be helpful.
“Mr. Ungerer stressed the importance of new media services and open markets in Europe and mentioned France and Italy as success examples”
This seems odd to me if we are taking successful media policy in the round and may illustrate some of the difficulties in asessing “success” in media policy - whatever that may be.
Despite the open markets and success of new media services in France and Italy both are political basketcases. President Chirac hangs on in there despite the whiff of corruption. Italy is potentially the single worst example of media plurality in a major western democracy. (BTW - Does anyone know if Mr.Berlusconi ever did sue the Economist for libel?)
My point being, that whilst open markets are an important component thay are not, at least to my mind, a successful outcome. Broadband rollout is important but new media is still not a significant counter-weight to the old yet.
So whilst I respect Mr.Ungerer, it seems strange to hold Italy and France up as examples of success unless in the narrowest possible terms and frankly I’ll take open democracies over open markets anyday.
I thought this was what Damian was getting at with the title of the seminar series - �What’s Wrong with Competition Policy in the Media Sector?� Note the CAPS - but he never could type
I stress - I wasn’t there but would appreciate the thoughts on this of someone who was.
Russ - there’s your first comment as requested! Take care.
Jan 21st 2005
Jamie, thanks for your comment and apologies for the lack of precision on that point. Italy and France were mentioned in the seminar as examples of countries where new media services (especially broadband)are growing and developing in a quite successful manner. In France Video over DSL is regarded seriously by media actors and Fastweb in Italy reached 496.000 clients at the end of 2004. The discussion in this sense was (and perhaps I should have made this clearer) limited to the economic and innovation benefits related to open market structures in new media markets.
Clearly, this does not compensate for the evident democratic flaws in Italy and I fully agree with you in taking open democracies above open markets. In fact the objective of our seminar is to explore where are the limits of competition and how to balance economic and non-economic policy considerations in these markets. I did not intend (and Mr. Ungerer either) to praise Italy’s or France overall media policy in this respect.
I hope this clarifies.
Jan 24th 2005
thanks