Regulating Beyond Media to Protect Media Pluralism: The EU Media Policies as Seen Through the Lens of the Media Pluralism Monitor

2021 ◽  
pp. 89-116
Author(s):  
Iva Nenadić ◽  
Marko Milosavljević
Keyword(s):  
Media Pluralism ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Eu

EU Media Policies in the Context of Media Pluralism and Turkey's Consistency

2020 ◽  
pp. 500-509
Author(s):  
Vedat Çakır ◽  
Sibel Ozkan
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Diversity ◽  
Public Service ◽  
The Other ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Public Service Broadcasting ◽  
Media Pluralism ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Eu

Media pluralism is one of the basic principles of EU media policies, which enables the protection of cultural diversity and the representation of different voices in the media. One aim of media pluralism is to provide a cultural flow between all member and candidate countries that make up the Union, giving right of representation to each component, while the other is to ensure that the different voices in the countries are heard. However, this economy-centered audio-visual policy, which is based on the free circulation of television broadcasts within the Union, has been criticized for increasing the commercialization, not supporting public service broadcasting enough, and for being inadequate against the concentration in the sector. This chapter examines steps taken when reviewing the legislation on media pluralism in the EU and the reflection of Turkey's media policies and media pluralism in the application of these policies.

scholarly journals On the Allocation of Competences between the European Union and its Member States in the Media Sector | Zur Kompetenzverteilung zwischen der Europäischen Union und den Mitgliedstaaten im Mediensektor

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark D. Cole ◽  
Jörg Ukrow ◽  
Christina Etteldorf
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
Media Regulation ◽  
Media Pluralism ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Eu

With a special focus on safeguarding media pluralism, this study sheds light on the allocation of competences between the EU and the Member States in the media sector. Not only is the primary and secondary legal framework analysed in detail, but the relevant elements for ensuring media pluralism at EU level and core problems in media regulation under public international law are also examined. The study identifies both existing and potential tensions between national and EU level as well as limits to EU regulatory action. The analysis is put into context with the EU Digital Services Act Package and concludes with the identification of policy options for Member States.

A matter of conflict: How events and parties shape the news coverage of EU affairs

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 593-615 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabelle Guinaudeau ◽  
Anna M Palau
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Agenda Setting ◽  
News Coverage ◽  
Time Series Models ◽  
Monthly Data ◽  
Media Agenda ◽  
The Media ◽  
Term Analysis ◽  
The Eu

This article argues that external factors of EU coverage in the media need to be reassessed against domestic factors, in particular how parties modulate media attention to EU affairs. We explain which parties may set the EU on the media agenda, and how parties interact with events depending on the level of conflict over EU issues. Drawing on the first long-term analysis of partisan agenda-setting of EU affairs in the media – based on ARIMA time-series models of monthly data collected for six newspapers from 1990 to 2015 – we determine the scale of partisan agenda-setting and find partial support for our model. Political parties do not face the intrusion of EU issues, but some of them are actively involved in this process.

Biopesticide Summit – Regulatory Reform of Biopesticides, Virtual Conference, 6th July 2021

2021 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 168-170
Author(s):  
Robin Blake
Keyword(s):  
Market Share ◽  
Regulatory System ◽  
Regulatory Reform ◽  
Non Profit ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Media ◽  
Virtual Conference ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Chemical Pesticides ◽  
The Eu

This virtual event was held as a follow-up to the inaugural Biopesticide Summit and Exhibition at Swansea University in July 2019, and postponed in 2020 due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Sarah Harding, Communication Director at The World BioProtection Forum (WBF) & Biopesticide Summit opened the event with a few brief words of introduction before handing over to Dr Minshad Ansari, Chairman of the WBF.<br/> Dr Ansari was delighted with the more than 150 attendees already logged into the event with over 300 registered. The WBF was created in 2019 as a non-profit organization to bring together industry and academia for innovation. Dr Ansari thanked the event's supporters – AgBio, Agri Life, Bayer, Bionema, Ecolibrium Biologicals, Koppert Biological Systems, Harry Butler Institute and Sri BioAesthetics, as well as the media partners including Outlooks on Pest Management. He reiterated the need for regulatory reform due to removal of chemical pesticides, demands for organic food, limited biopesticide products registered and a lengthy and costly biopesticide registration process (5 years in EU where there are just 60 products available vs. 2.1 years in USA and where over 200 products are already available on market). The US is clearly in a much better place; in Europe, it is too expensive for SMEs and little progress has been made despite the work of the IBMA (International Biocontrol Manufacturers Association) and others. With respect to the biopesticides market share (value) by region, Europe has 27.7% market share (21.3% CAGR) and yet within UK, the CAGR is limited (unlike other European countries) – there are few products available in the market compared to chemical pesticides. The current biopesticide regulation is complex and not fit for purpose (compare 60 vs 200). Industry is facing a serious problem with pest control following the removal of some chemical pesticides, e.g.European cranefly which has caused many problems to the turf industry and has been impacted by the removal of chlorpyrifos. However, Brexit provides opportunities in the UK through government plans to "Build Back Better" by supporting Green Tech. At the EU level, the EU has committed to reducing use of pesticides by 50% (equating to 505 products) by 2030 so there are opportunities here for biopesticides to fill the market.<br/> Dr Ansari finished his introduction by restating the objectives for the meeting: for the speakers to present and debate the need for reform, their visions for a successful regulatory system, and how the WBF is working towards process reform in UK biopesticide regulation.

Do the media capture banking system risk? Evidence from the EU-15 countries

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 84
Author(s):  
Vincenzo Farina ◽  
Lucrezia Fattobene ◽  
Elvira Anna Graziano
Keyword(s):  
Banking System ◽  
System Risk ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Media Capture

The Media Agenda: The Marginalization and Domestication of Europe

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrin Voltmer ◽  
Christiane Eilders
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
European Integration ◽  
General Public ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
European Level ◽  
National Politics ◽  
Media Agenda ◽  
National Quality ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Eu

This chapter investigates whether the assumption that the media contribute to the communication deficit of the EU is reflected in the empirical pattern of political coverage. In particular, it explores the extent to which German media take a Europeanized perspective on political affairs and whether or not they promote the politics of European integration. The study is based on a content analysis of the editorials of German national quality newspapers covering the period between 1994 and 1998. The findings show that the media under study devote only a very small portion of their attention to European issues, thus marginalizing Europe to an extent that is not warranted by the significance of the European level of governance. If the media do focus on European issues, they predominantly address them in terms of national politics, which is interpreted as a ‘domestication’ of Europe in public discourse. At the same time, the media unanimously support the idea of European integration. This pattern of communicating Europe reflects the élite consensus on European matters in Germany and may have contributed to the alienation of the general public from European politics.

Czech Public Opinion on Turkey's Accession to the EU: An Analysis through the Lenses of Sociological and Discursive Institutionalism*

2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-95
Author(s):  
Pelin Ayan Musil
Keyword(s):  
Czech Republic ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Cultural Context ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Political Elite ◽  
Discursive Institutionalism ◽  
The Czech Republic ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Eu

While Turkey lacks significant levels of public support from the Czech Republic in its EU bid, the existing studies of European public opinion on the question of Turkey do not bring any reasonable explanation as to why this can be so. To shed light on this problem, this article offers an analytical framework derived from sociological and discursive institutionalism. First, it shows that the historical/cultural context in the Czech Republic has created an informal institution built around the norms of “othering” Muslim societies like Turkey (sociological institutionalism). Second, based on the media coverage of selected political issues from Turkey between 2005 and 2010, it argues that this institution both enables and constrains the “discursive ability” of the media in communicating these issues to its audience (discursive institutionalism). Since the media—as a political actor—mostly acts to maintain this institution and does not critically debate it, the public opinion of Turkey as the “cultural other” remains as a dominant perception. The official support of the political elite for Turkey's accession to the EU does not countervail the media influence, as this support is often not conveyed to the Czech public agenda.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document