[Media Caucus] Media paragraph in CS benchmarks

[Steve Buckley]

Rony

You know perfectly well the language you submitted was not in line with the 
media caucus agreed position and this lengthy obfustication can not hide that.

The language on privatisation is extraordinary. It demands all state 
broadcasters should be privatised whether or not they are turned into 
editorially independent public services. In other words it opposes any 
forms of public ownership.

No one in the media caucus has voiced opposition to the principle of 
private ownership but there has been clear commitment to media pluralism 
and diversity and this requires different models of ownership, not just 
different private owners.

You should remember this document is simply the benchmark document against 
which civil society will accept or reject the intergovernmental texts, so 
it should be confined to specific points which can fulfil the benchmark 
criterion. More detailed civil society proposals, such as the agreed media 
caucus position, should be submitted to and included in the civil society 
vision document. This is certainly not the time to introduce new positions 
inconsistent with those agreed.

The benchmark document quotes Article 19 in full, on advice from Tracey 
that this was the key media caucus "non-negotiable". Similarly the 
inclusion of community media, has been widely (and rightly) seen as a key 
benchmark for civil society in the WSIS process. Is there anything more 
needed than that?

Steve


At 09:33 18/11/03 -0500, Ronald Koven wrote:
>Dear Victor --
>
>I submitted the language in my own name because the deadline was very tight
>and there ways to be no Media Caucus meeting before a noon deadline. Later,
>several of those still attending the meetings in Geneva in the Media Caucus
>looked at the language and said it was okay with them. Originally, there
>was mention of community media only. That language supplied by Steve
>Buckley was not run past the whole group, either. To have left it at that,
>without broader references to media in general would have been extremely
>unbalanced.
>
>It is absolutely classical and standard in Western Europe now that there
>should be a mixed media scene balanced between public service and private
>TV. This is the pattern in Britain, France, Spain, etc. What was originally
>a state monopoly gets transformed into a mix of public and private. This
>provides competition and diversity and keeps both the public and private
>sectors on their toes.
>
>Your aversion for anything independent of the state is something you should
>look deep into your heart about. States are not naturally friends of
>freedom. Their hands must be forced. The classic way this happens is when
>an independently owned press exists to call governments to account. To be
>independent, private and opinion and news media must make enough money to
>survive and possibly expand. Money has no odor. Like much else, it can
>serve good or bad purposes.
>
>When state-owned media are transformed into public service, all too often
>they become public in name only. The existence of competing privately owned
>media makes it possible for competition to force public media to produce a
>balanced and diverse menu. Of course, media have often in transition
>countries been privatized into the hands of friends of the government, but
>governments are not eternal, nor is particular ownership of channels. The
>existence of alternative possibilities opens the way for improvement.
>
>These principles apply to ownership of community media as well. Municipal
>ownership of community media opens the way to local dictatorship of the
>majority over the minorities. To avert this, there should be diversity of
>ownership patterns on the local level as well.
>
>Best, Rony
>
>_______________________________________________
>Media mailing list
>Media at wsis-cs.org
>http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/media



------------------------------------------------------------
            steve at commedia.org.uk
------------------------------------------------------------
         http://www.commedia.org.uk
------------------------------------------------------------