Summary of the Considerations of Senator Carlo Rognoni
We are in the midst of a process of profound change in the media system. The new digital scenario represents a genuine revolution, and the public service broadcasting companies are by far the most exposed to the upheaval now underway. They risk ending up trapped in a pincer that can crush, de-legitimize and marginalize them as compared to the other big communication companies. And let us not forget that the rich and powerful telcos are now at the forefront. One side of this “pincer” represents the evolution of the cross-media market and the other side represents politics.
If this is the case throughout Europe, in Italy it is even more so. At any rate the effects are especially evident here, where the combined action of these two factors, the market and bad politics - that move separately, not in harmony with each other - is threatening to drag RAI into a precipice of record lows: of audience share, of the loss of advertising revenues, and of increasing levels of dissatisfaction by viewers who are either becoming more and more reluctant to pay their TV licences or do not pay them at all.
There are at least two simple questions that predominate over all the others. Firstly, what arguments are there in favour of the European “dual” model, characterized by the coexistence within the television market of private broadcasters and a public organization with significant audience shares? And secondly, what are the “conditions for survival” of public service media in the society of information?
Meetings like this one of the “European Group of Turin,” organized by Infocivica in conjunction with the Prix Italia , are extremely useful. It is ambitious, mainly because of its objective?? of drawing up a Green Paper, which will hopefully induce the political world and the business community, as well as all of civil society to engage upon a serious and in-depth reflection on the purpose and the future of public services.
This great task, which at present mainly involves a selection of the university professors and experts of various European countries, has two commendable objectives: to restore to Europe – at this stage in which she seems to have lost the thread of institutional and political growth – her pride in having a strong role in the exceptionally delicate and politically sensitive sector of the new and old media. One must not forget to mention the strategic economic importance of the global media system . It has been written that “the world war of contents has been declared”, and in his marvellous book Mainstream Frederic Martel writes:
“Within the flow of international content, loosely measured in quantitative terms by the IMF, WTO, UNESCO and the World Bank, there is the colossus of the United States, which exports its contents everywhere, amounting to about 50 percent of world exports. North America, including Canada and Mexico, dominates the trade without any real competition (since these countries together represent about 60 percent of world exports). The European Union, consisting of twenty-seven countries, is a potential competitor with one third of world exports, but it is probably in decline”.
Is it utopian and impractical of us to dream of a large European company producing contents? Maybe one that is founded upon an agreement between the European public services? The Spanish sociologist Manuel Castells has very accurately summed up the importance of the media system today. In fact he writes that “it is more than a fourth power. It is the playing field in which all the political, economic and social powers, as well as those of trade unions and associations, meet, confront each other and come to blows.” Hence the importance for a modern and advanced democracy to have a neutral playground and a referee or arbitrator who has not been bought and is not for sale.
The other major goal that we should try to bring to the attention of the public, also thanks to laudable initiatives such as that of Infocivica , is to revive and redefine the debate on the mission of the public service, which remains one of the characteristics of our European countries. Besides the traditional functions (guaranteeing a universal service, protecting pluralism, diversity and the quality of information, as well as contributing to the growth of culture and national identity) and the requirements dictated by the digital revolution (making contents available on all platforms, providing quality online content, and guiding the transition from analogical TV to digital TV) a new imperative for the European states seems to be emerging with greater ever strength: that of ensuring autonomy and distance from the controlling powers. The documents of the European Parliament and the Council of Europe refer more and more insistently to the importance of political and economic independence, as an indispensable precondition for the credibility of the public service and its mission.
I personally am more than ever convinced that the necessary condition for the survival of a public service that is showing signs of a deep crisis in many parts of Europe, is that public television should be gradually transformed into an “institution”: one that is non-partisan and independent, that provides safeguards and ensures pluralism and that has a counter-majoritarian role of monitoring and controlling the operation of power, in a similar way to the Constitutional Court and the judiciary in Italy. This institution would also be able to promote the identity and the cultural diversity of the nation, with a role that is not so different from that of state schools, in contrast to commercial television, which tends towards standardization on an international scale.
Meanwhile, in Italy one cannot fail to see the growing unease and detachment of public opinion with regard to a company that used to be a hotbed of new ideas and an important element of national cohesion. It is conceivable that in the future RAI will once more become a place for genuine creativity, expressive freedom and innovation? Will it rediscover the heady flavour of autonomy? Let us hope so, because if these goals are relinquished it will be difficult to find a meaningful role or an authentic purpose for the public service.
Indeed it is precisely on the basis of these beliefs and convictions that the opposition parties in Italy have all begun to reflect on and analyse the need for an immediate legislative intervention in order to change at least the criteria for the appointment of RAI's board of directors. This would be a first step towards the emancipation of the company from the evils of politics. It would provide RAI with the minimum conditions for dealing with the new vast ocean of the digital market, equipped at last with a medium-and long-term strategy, free from the shackles of intolerable and costly conflicts of interest belonging to others.
|
