By Chris Jones - 13th December 2006
MEPs have voted to update EU audiovisual rules, despite concerns from some members that it could lead to a sharp increase in the number of adverts.
The European parliament backed proposals to overhaul the 1989 Television without Frontiers Directive, last updated in 1997 and which has failed to keep pace with the rapid changes in the audiovisual sector.
The new rules will be rechristened the ‘audiovisual media services directive’ to reflect the changes in the marketplace over the last ten years.
But fears that “TV-like” services such as mobile phone clips and online video blogs would be subject to the same burden of regulation as traditional TV proved unfounded.
Instead, MEPs voted to distinguish between mainstream TV transmissions, or linear services, and on-demand, non-linear products such as webclips.
While both will be subject to many of the same rules – on consumer protection and encouraging European production – the way in which the rules will be implemented will not be the same.
Non-linear services are likely to have more self- or co-regulation in a bid to keep the red tape burden as light as possible.
But it was the rules on advertising that proved the most controversial.
EU media commissioner Viviane Reding had put forward plans to allow the use of product placement within programmes, prompting concern from a number of member states.
A compromise agreement with national governments resulted in a blanket ban on product placement within the EU, from which countries can opt-out if they wish.
MEPs backed this proposal, which will allow films, TV series, sports programmes and entertainment to carry product placement advertising, providing viewers are warned in advance and at least once every 20 minutes.
News, current affairs programmes, documentaries and children’s TV programmes will not be allowed to carry product placements.
MEPs stressed that even when it was allowed, product placement must not affect “the responsibility and editorial independence” of broadcasters or “directly encourage the purchase or rental of goods or services”.
But industry groups are seeking greater clarification over rules obliging products used as props in TV programme – for which no payment is made by the brand owner – to also be identified as product placement.
Centre-right German MEP Ruth Hieronymi, parliament’s rapporteur on TWF who brokered the “painful compromise” agreement on product placement, argued that it was already a reality in the EU, and that it was better to have some rules than none at all.
But centre-left spokesman Henri Weber MEP said that while the use of product placement “will be limited”, parliament had “relaxed the rules on advertising” and caved in to the lobbyists.
MEPs also agreed to change the frequency of advertising breaks from once every 45 minutes to once every half-hour, although the vote was extremely close, with 324 in favour and 323 against.
With the maximum length of advertising per hour remaining 12 minutes, this will not necessarily mean more ads, however.
MEPs fell short of backing a total ban on the advertising of junk food to children, despite strong lobbying from consumer groups and green deputies.
Instead, they called on national governments to “encourage audiovisual service providers to develop a code of conduct regarding children’s programming containing advertising, sponsorship or any marketing of unhealthy and inappropriate foods and drinks such as those high in fat, sugar and salt and of alcoholic beverages”.
Parliament also staved off another potential crisis over the country-of-origin principle, which states that companies that comply with the law in their own member state can legally operate in any other.
Some member states, particularly those such as Sweden with tough consumer protection rules, wanted to block programmes broadcast from other countries that did not meet these standards.
But MEPs reinforced the principle, saying that such broadcasts could only be blocked if they were fully justified “for reasons of public policy, including the protection of minors or public security or public health or the protection of cultural diversity”.
They also drew up a list of criteria that national governments must fulfil to justify any such measures, and stipulated that the European commission should have the final say on whether programmes could justifiably be blocked.
Member states are expected to present their opinion on the new rules early in 2007, although they are not expected to diverge much from the compromise agreed in November.
Have your say...
Please enter your comments below.