The Croatian government is preparing a second reading of the new bill on electronic media. The public debate has so far been focused on the issue of readers’ comments on web portals. Under the new law, publishers would be forced to choose between censoring comments online and taking responsibility for them, thus risking being fined. But this bill also raises the issue of survival of media in the country. Pročitaj više

There are two particularly problematic areas – punishing success and preventing vertical integration.

In the first area, the bill proposes that a media outlet whose viewership figures reach an annual average of 45 percent of audience will become dominant and thus erode media pluralism. The bill does not explain how and why media outlets are to be defined as erosive forces automatically. It also fails to define who, and by what method, will measure the viewership figures on which such draconian labels will depend. The bill is not looking into more appropriate methods which would ensure the freedom of the media as well as accurate monitoring.

However, the bill does determine that an outlet deemed too successful will not be able to get any new, additional concessions or expand its business by introducing new products.

The second area is vertical integration, which the bill continues to fully ban with a single sentence: An operator which carries out the activity of transmitting audio-visual or radio programme cannot be a TV or radio publisher or offer media services…

Only four EU members – Hungary, Slovenia, Greece, and Austria – have imposed limits on this type of integration, but they have stopped short of banning it completely. The question is what may be achieved with this move regarding media pluralism, and which could not be achieved through other, more common regulation which can ensure editorial independence and tech neutrality, i.e. availability of service to all.

But, what this proposal most certainly does achieve is limiting the business of the media and its publishers which is not in accordance with EU standards, but also hampering those outlets who are exposed to global competition, which is not limited in this manner. Technological rules of the game are constantly, and unpredictably, changing, and such legal solutions can only jeopardise media success.

With the second reading of this bill in preparation, a question arises for the Croatian government – are they aware that these provisions would in fact, contrary to their claims, weaken media outlets and make them more vulnerable, reduce media pluralism and limit media freedom?