- Количество слайдов: 18
About responsibilities of content providers and users Conference Prague, March 18 th - 20 th
Welcome • Seminar about responsibilities of content providers and users • What about regulators? • Short look back • Present attempt - AVMS • Look forward
Short survey • 1989 – no free media • 1990 – 1992 Legal framework for a dual system • State media -> public, private media created • Success of TV Nova (1994*)
Dual System Build Up • Council of Europe: Independence and Accountability • Public media laws • Media laws – – Licensing Objectivity and balance Youth protection Commercial communication • Institutional framework – (1992) Councils of Public Radio and TV, Media Council as an administrative body
Share on TV Market
Harmonization & Technological Change • 1996 – Premier Klaus submitted an application for the entry to the EU • Agenda 2000, harmonization of legal environment with EU • Law passed as MP‘s motion • Soft political environment • Main difference: separation of transmission and content • „Minimal“ regulation over TVWF • News and current affairs – objectivity and balance • Media concentration
Harmonization & Technological Change • Parallel development from 1990: – Rapid change in media landscape • Start of www in 1991 – Market distortion, internet without regulation at present in the CR • ECJ decision in 2005 Mediakabel vs Commissariaat voor de Media • Road to „technologically neutral“ regulation • No other possibility
Harmonization & Technological Change • BASIC FIELDS OF REGULATION – Cultural diversity – Protection of minors – Consumer protection – Fair commercial communication – Media pluralism – Ban on hate speech – Independence of national media regulators.
AVMS • AVMS – a response to technological developments – creation of a new level-playing field in Europe for emerging audiovisual media services (video on demand, mobile TV, audiovisual services on digital TV). – New approaches: Self- and Co- regulation – Media Literacy • Problems: – Very difficult definition of the scope – Difficult enforcement – Non-EU services – Adult channels as serious problem
Alternative? • Alternative approach • During AVMS discussion: • Safer internet – non-anonymous – For banking, commerce, anti-terrorist measures, youth protection mobile services (Vodafone) • Technology should be used to solve problems it brought • Offer, not duty • Conditions for possible responsibility of users should be created by the responsibility of the state • Content regulation closely linked to culture
Help from Technology? Safe Content Rating/User Verification Filtering
Help from Technology? Login Compulsory? No – „Traditional“ Anonymous Service Yes Assisted Regulation User ID/Rating
Orwell‘s House & Cameras » Evening Standard
Orwell‘s world? • Parental controls are standard with all BT Broadband packages. • BT’s Cleanfeed internet filtering system blocks child abuse websites blacklisted by the Internet Watch Foundation. • BT is also a member of the Internet Content Rating Association that enables parents to set their web browser to prevent access to certain types of information. • BT’s Online Safer Surfing guide helps parents and children use the internet safely.
Orwell‘s world? • Child protection: EU measures too weak? [Information Society] There is a pressing need for additional legislative measures to ensure the safe use of the Internet, particularly for children. This is the thrust of a draft Opinion by the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) commenting on the European Commission's proposed Safer Internet Plus Programme 2005 -2008. While broadly supporting the Commission proposal the EESC suggests that there should be a general obligation incumbent on operators, i. e. internet providers, to protect children. Ordering of child pornography and other criminal content using credit cards should be prevented", says the draft Opinion. Systems should also be set up to identify and provide information on harmful content and to remove racist content. "European consumers must be able to use the internet with confidence", say the authors of the Opinion, Daniel Retureau and Ann Davison "It is therefore essential that the European Union takes urgent action to safeguard what is a precious tool for the European citizen. "
Pros • Advantages of ISP regulation – – – Uniform & Enforceable design Voluntary use - responsibility of parents Compulsory rating systems & Self-regulation of big content providers • Google - Warner Bros – Holywood Studios – Self-regulation of mobile operators – National Tailoring • Fairy tale vs. Group sex for 3 € • Filtering of „bad content“?
and Cons • Loss of privacy • Filtering as intrusion into „web freedom“ • Danger of censorship
Regulatory framework • • • Traditional (linear) regulation Self- and Co- regulation (? financial? ) Media Literacy Technological Means ******* Technology can‘t create responsible adults but can help them to protect children