In 2002
Polish Television celebrated its 50th anniversary, and the next year,
Television Assembly of European Broadcasting Union
honoured Polish public television for its outstanding performance in 2002. TVP
SA gained the highest marks for financial stability (including revenue growth,
cost control and planning goals), retention and expansion of audiences, activity
in digital development, provision of key public service programming (such as
news, culture, education, documentaries, and programmes for children), market
performance in highly competitive environment and readiness to launch new theme
channels.
Granting
the EBU award to Telewizja Polska SA gave a chance to present at the
international forum a few fundamental matters for the public television, which
– according to the President of TVP SA – should be included in
legislation on radio and television broadcasting and which concern: 1) the
possibility of starting up theme channels; 2) the ability to collect licence
fees, i.e. by introducing such regulations into legislation that would ensure
the full collection of licence fees and the respect for the law; 3) putting the
status of television archives into order; 4) a fuller use of advanced digital
technology through legislation (in other words, TVP SA wants to receive the
right to be a digital multiplex operator).
Undoubtely,
one of the greatest successes of Telewizja Polska SA is the fact that it is the
biggest television producer in the Polish market (including tv theatre and movie
production). This achievement is the result of the reform carried out in 2000.
The reform introduced a kind of producing system in which the management system
was simplified and the level of employment was reduced by almost 1000 persons.
The source
of revenue of Telewizja Polska SA are receipts from licence fees and advertising.
However, it ought to be emphasised that in 2002 the income from licence fees was
at about 125 mln euro, which is less than 1/3 of the total income. Despite this
unfavourable economic situation, Telewizja Polska SA managed to preserve its
leading position in the advertising market. On the contrary, only one commercial
television increased its advertising incomes in comparison to the previous year.
Advertising revenues of other private tv stations decreased, in some cases
losses were even 40% of income. Meanwhile, the financial nett result of
Telewizja Polska SA in 2002 was 38% higher than in 2001. It must also be
mentioned that TVP SA has maintained a high level of social trust and popularity
for years and it still attracts a large number of tv viewers. The shares of TVP
SA are at about 45-50% of the total tv audience in Poland among viewers aged 16
to 49.
In this
situation, it is easy to understand the attitude of commercial broadcasters who
protest against further strenghtening of the public television in the media
market in Poland, especially after considering the fact that the project for
amendment of the Radio and Television Act introduces almost the same rules of
broadcasting advertisements or sponsorship conditions for public and non-public
broadcasters. Moreover, according to this project public broadcasters are
allowed to finance the production of some programmes from the national budget or
to gain subsidies from local governments.
A strong position of public broadcasters in the media market in Poland is
– as it has already been mentioned – the object of mass criticism
expressed by other participants of the media system. Many contentious issues
concerning media functioning in Poland were highligted by the so-called ‘Rywingate’.
The
information about a corruption proposal, which was put forward by a well-known
movie producer to the editor-in-chief of the leading daily, came as a great
shock for the media and political system in Poland. Acting allegedly ‘on
behalf of a group of people in power’, Lew Rywin offered his mediation in
obtaining favourable conditions for Agora company in the amendment to the Radio
and Television Act in exchange for 17.5 mln $. Disclosing this proposal to the
public by Gazeta Wyborcza
led to the initiate of starting the investigation by the public
prosecutor’s office. Owing to the fact that it was the greatest corruption
scandal in Poland in the last years, Special Parliamentary Investigation
Commission was brought into being.
As it is
clearly seen, the corruption scandal is strictly connected with the amendment to
the broadcasting law. In this amendment – beside the idea of strengthening
the public television and widening certain entitlements of the National
Broadcasting Council (Krajowa Rada Radiofonii i
Telewizji – KRRiT)
– a few provisions concerning the limits of media ownership concentration
evoked the strongest objections. For instance, according to the amendment, the
same owner cannot possess more than one or two (depending on the size of the
city) radio stations in one city. Moreover, according to an additional provision
introduced in the government project of the broadcasting act, the owner of a
national daily cannot buy national television.
As it was
pointed out by the adversaries of the above amendment, limiting ownership
concentration has a negative effect mainly on non-public broadcasters. That is
why, the amendment to the broadcasting law was one of the main themes of media
coverage in the spring of 2002, especially due to the fact that a few members of
the National Broadcasting Council (KRRiT) as well as the president of Poland
came out against the changes proposed by the government.
In this
discussion, the supporters of the amendment claimed that anti-concentration
provisions in fact are opposed only by a few entrepreneurs whose intention is to
monopolize the media market. Their opponents pointed out that the biggest
multimedia concern in Poland is in fact the treasury, which controls information
producers (i.e. information agencies such as Polska Agencja Prasowa) as well as
major broadcasters (such as Telewizja Polska or Polskie Radio).
According
to several independent observers, what constitutes a characteristic feature of
the public debate concerning the amendment project to the Radio and Television
Act is ‘defensiveness’ of public media advocates, who do not invoke
those important international documents which could support their arguments
against the concentration of media ownership provisions in the media law. For
instance, in programme declaration of the European
Federation of Journalists
one can read some passages devoted exactly to such issues concerning the
necessity of introducing appropriate legal regulations on media ownership at
European level which would ‘(…) restrict the extension of media
groups’ activities through merger, anti-trust and cross-ownership
legislation; (…) limit concentration of media ownership; (…) divest
existing media properties where there are unacceptable levels of concentration’
(Legislating for a Democratic Media in Europe, EFJ, Brussels, January 2003).
In an
atmosphere of corruption scandal many voices appealed for a temporary cessation
of further works on broadcasting act amendment until the affair was clarified.
For instance, media associated in Polish
Confederation of Private Employers
addressed an open letter to members of parliament in which they insisted that
the amendment be limited only to those issues concerning the law harmonisation
in European integration.
The authors
of this letter point out that the project of broadcasting law proposed by the
government and Culture and Media Committee of Polish Parliament excessively
strenghtens public television simultaneously weakening non-public broadcasters.
They also claim that public television currently dominates on the media market,
because accumulated incomes of the leading commercial tv stations are smaller
than an annual budget of TVP SA which is involved in the commercial struggle for
viewers. Moreover, TVP SA moves its ‘public mission programmes’ out
of the television prime time.
In March
2003, Press Freedom Monitoring Centre
also published a similar appeal regarding the broadcasting act, asking for the
limitation of the amendment only to the ‘European matters’.
Nevertheless,
the Centre recognises the necessity of carrying out a radical reform with regard
to range and means of functioning, ways of appointing the memebers of the
National Broadcasting Council as well as the necessity for legal regulation
concerning the public media, however, the control of entrepreneurs’
activity in the field of teleinformatic and audiovisual media should be
transparent and limited to essential minimum.
The Centre
also argues that regulatory task in the field of technical functioning of
broadcasting media and teleinformatic sphere should be performed not by the
National Broadcasting Council, but directly by executive power represented by
the central office like existing Office
of Telecommunications and Post Regulation
(Urząd
Regulacji Telekomunikacji i Poczty – URTiP)
or other similar insitutions.
Recently, many critical opinions were expressed against
‘particisation’ of the public media in Poland. According to these
opinions, the National Broadcasting Council partly bears the responsiblity for
that situation. Ten years after bringing the Council into existance, the
analysis of its activity gives a negative total effect, thus there appear some
voices which appeal for the dissolution of this regulatory body. The Council,
instead of securing the freedom of speech in radio and television, protecting
independece of broadcasters and supporting openness and pluralism of the
electronic media, has become the place where political parties’ interests
predominate, as its opponents point out. Its strong position in the Polish
constitutional system did not protect the Council against ‘particisation’,
moreover, these political parities are moved from the Council to lower levels,
i.e. supervisory bodies and boards of management in public radio and television
where – as well as in the Council – mainly politicians are appointed
instead of experts and representatives of proffesional milieus e.g. academic or
media associations.
The essence
of the problem lies not only in legal regulation, but in flaws of political
culture. As Karol Jakubowicz points out ‘in the same systems either
politicians solely or experts solely might be appointed to the same regulatory
bodies. Even the worst legally-projected institution can be protected by
political culture, on the other hand, even the best projected institution can be
spoilt by lack of it’ (R. Gluza, Rada ministrów, Press,
March 2003, p. 37).
The year 2002 brought about significant changes concerning power configuration in the television market and – probably a more permanent – switch of the main tendencies observed at the turn of the 20th and 21st century. After a long period of regular decrease on the market shares (from 58.4% in 1997 to 49.2%), all