Introduction
In April 2015, the Madrid correspondent of the Financial Times reported on the current situation facing the Spanish public broadcaster, RTVE. His report echoed concerns raised the previous month by IPI.
“For more than 50 years millions of Spaniards have sat down each night to watch the Telediario, the flagship news programme of state broadcaster TVE. In recent months, however, the channel has not just been reporting the news — but making it as well.
TVE and its news programmes stand accused of blatantly favouring the government of Mariano Rajoy and his ruling Popular Party, while sidelining opposition voices.
The channel’s own journalists have grown so concerned about political interference that they sent a delegation to Brussels this month to make a formal complaint to the European parliament. In a seven-page document, they describe TVE as a “propaganda instrument in the service of the government” — and chronicle a series of alleged journalistic lapses and manipulations.”
His report went on to point to the particular danger the alleged interferences represented given this year of elections in Spain at the local, regional and national level. And he cited the president of RTVE’s News Council, the internal ethical watchdog: “I have been with the channel for 30 years, and I have to say that it has never been this bad,” says Alejandro Caballero. What we want is a channel that is in the service of the public. What we have is a channel that is an instrument of the government, and that is being put to use by the government.”
Report on the mission
As the summer heat hits Madrid, the political temperature is also rising. The ruling conservative party, the Popular Party (PP), has re-launched itself after its losses in the recent local and regional elections, putting forward newer, fresher faces. The classic struggle for power in Spain in which two parties, the PP and the Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE), slug it out has become a four-horse race in which each of the contenders has been attracting around 20 percent support in the polls. As in most wars, the first casualty is truth not least because it is traditional in Spain for the winner to take all the spoils, especially when it comes to public and other significant appointments.
Journalists from across the political spectrum fear that the freedom of expression that Spain has enjoyed since it was enshrined in the Constitution after the end of the dictatorship is under threat both openly and behind the scenes.
Last December the International Press Institute (IPI) sent a fact finding delegation to Spain. The mission report, underlines concerns about independence and impartiality at the RTVE as well as the lack of a sector specific and independent broadcasting regulator.
RTVE
When it comes to the protection of the impartiality of public service broadcasters and the role of broadcast regulation, there are European standards – from both the Council of Europe and the EU – which apply.
The most recent IPI mission sought to persuade Spain’s political parties that it was in all their interests, as well as in the interest of the media and public, to ensure that coverage of the elections by the public broadcaster was accurate and impartial and included all the voices in the campaign.
Recently, the newly appointed chairman of RTVE has boasted of his political affiliation to the PP and overseen a process of putting known government supporters into the newsroom and in key reporting posts.
His own appointment was made thanks to an executive decree that changed the law governing RTVE to allow a simple parliamentary majority rather than a qualified one when appointing the membership of RTVE’s board. This is a dangerous precedent. Decrees which override existing laws should only be used for emergencies – not to upset a fundamental principle of good governance in relation to the public broadcaster.
As a Council of Europe Committee of Ministers Declaration on Public Service Media Governance (February 2012) puts it:
12. A properly functioning governance system depends on a number of conditions. These include the processes through which the support of the key stakeholders – including the State – is secured, the existence of an appropriate level of independence from government or other public and private interests, and the procedural guarantees ensuring that the decisions of public service media are consistent with their remit, are properly taken and fully implemented[emphasis added]
The more obvious party-political approach behind the change was clear. Indeed, Rafael Hernando Fraile, parliamentary spokesman for the PP in Parliament, told the IPI mission that it had to be done as “RTVE reporting had been anti-government”.
When the mission met with the joint parliamentary committee that oversees the public broadcaster, the political fault lines were only too clear. The Right denies that there is a problem or that freedom of expression is under threat; the Left looks at the same facts and draws the opposite conclusion.
In subsequent meetings with the parties, the PSOE said that if elected they would restore the previous law as related to the appointment procedure and would recommend appointments using a system of public advertisement with a selection made by an independent panel before being submitted to Parliament.
No such commitment was forthcoming from the PP though they did agree that an exchange visit between the RTVE and the BBC might be beneficial in the run up to the elections to share experience covering hotly contested campaigns and ensuring impartiality.
Again, the Council of Europe declaration points to a key principle:
47. Public service media organisations occupy a uniquely privileged place in public debate and democratic processes. Their independence is prized precisely because of the expectation that public service media organisations will reflect and promote open and public debate, to underpin wider democratic goals. Public service media organisations need to be confident that they can hold power to account on behalf of the public whose interests they serve without political interference.
Recommendations
Public Service Broadcasting requires trust. Part of that trust comes from being able to rely on the public service broadcaster to provide as impartial and accurate a picture of the world as possible. In news and current affairs coverage, public service broadcasters should set the highest standards of independence and impartiality. News has to be truthful, even when inconvenient; it must be informed, reliable, and never distorted to the point where people are led to false conclusions. A PSB should give people the requisite context and background so that they grasp the significance of what they are being told. It should deal fairly with all political parties and ensure that their policies are reported and challenged appropriately.
Last, but by no means least, a PSB should be truly accountable for what is done and how. A PSB should aim to set the standard in terms of what is reported, how it is reported and why. A PSB should also be prepared to explain and, where necessary, defend the decisions it takes. It should also have the courage and the grace to admit mistakes when they are made. For example, its editorial guidelines should be available to all, as well as its promises of performance.
Again, as the Council of Europe Declaration puts it:
3. The primary mission of public service media is to support general interest objectives such as social progress, public awareness of democratic processes…. As an important public source of unbiased information and diverse political opinions, public service media must remain independent from political or economic interference and achieve high editorial standards of impartiality, objectivity and fairness.
We continue to suggest that:
— the appointments process for the Chairman and board of RTVE revert to the system originally foreseen by the 2006 Law on Public Radio and Television and be supported by an independent advertising and selection process;
— there be a legislative duty on RTVE to provide impartial news and election coverage;
— RTVE coverage be given to all the significant parties contesting the election and that such coverage be both both balanced and fair;
— RTVE take part in exchanges with other PSBs in Europe;
— RTVE editorial guidelines be made available to the public; and
— a transparent complaints process be put in place.
Independent regulation
We were disturbed to learn in Madrid that six new digital TV licences are to be awarded in November just before national elections are expected to take place. It is unusual for such licenses to be granted directly by the Government, as they are in Spain, rather than by an independent sector specific regulator. It is even more troubling when the awarding of licenses is so obviously tied to the electoral calendar and leaves the Government open to the charge of seeking to reward political service by media owners.
We again raised the issue of restoring the section of the 2010 General Broadcasting Act which foresaw the creation of an independent regulator, the National Broadcasting Council, which would guarantee:
a) The free exercise of broadcast communication in the areas of radio, television and connective and interactive service foreseen in the present law.
b) The full implementation of the rights and obligations established in the this law, especially as relates to minors
c) Transparency and pluralism in the broadcasting sector
d) Independence and impartiality in public radio, television and connective and interactive series and the fulfilment of the public service mission that they embody.
Unfortunately, the parties of the left and the right are also split on this issue.
Other European countries see the value in having an independent, standalone body in this crucial field of freedom of expression and content that has the necessary sectoral expertise and is able to balance freedom of expression and economic and plurality issues. Such bodies can work with flexibility and speed; provide credibility and stability as they are insulated from day-to-day political influence; are efficient and effective; provide for public participation and transparency; and reduce both political uncertainty and interference.
[Ed. Note: Currently, content regulation is performed by the National Commission on Markets and Competition, the so-called “superregulator”, which is also responsible for regulating the energy, telecommunications, railway, postal and airport industries. The Commission was created by Law 3/2013 of June 4, on the Creation of the National Commission on Markets and Competition, which also officially repealed the sections of the 2010 General Broadcasting Act related to the National Broadcasting Council.]
European standards
The European Union’s directives take legal precedence in all 28 member states. They require member states to achieve a particular result without dictating the means of achieving that result. In the field of broadcasting, the 2010 Audiovisual Media Services Directive (“AVMSD”) is the pre-emptive legal authority.
The AVMSD suggests, but does not direct, member states to have independent regulators for broadcasting. Reference is made in Article 30 as follows:
“Member States shall take appropriate measures to provide each other and the Commission with the information necessary for the application of this Directive… through their competent independent regulatory bodies.”
In March 2013, the Commission consulted on whether there should be greater legal clarity at EU level on the function, organisation, status, competences and resources of independent regulatory bodies within the context of the AVMSD. This followed on from two significant reports conducted for the Commission.
The High Level Group on Freedom and Media Pluralism recommended that: “A network of national audio‐visual regulatory authorities should be created, on the model of the one created by the electronic communications framework. It would help in sharing common good practices and set quality standards. All regulators should be independent, with appointments being made in a transparent manner, with all appropriate checks and balances.”
The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs also issued a report which called, “on the National Regulatory Authorities to cooperate and coordinate at EU level on media matters, for instance by establishing a European Regulators’ Association for audiovisual media services, to harmonise the status of the National Regulatory Authorities foreseen by Articles 29 and 30 AVMSD by ensuring they are independent, impartial and transparent, both in their decision-making processes and in the exercise of their powers, as well as in the monitoring process, and to provide them with appropriate sanctioning powers to ensure that their decisions are implemented.”
Then Commission Vice-President Neelie Kroes also underlined the importance of having independent regulators and stressed the latter’s contribution in shaping the regulatory framework.
Recommendation
We continue to suggest that Spain implement the intention of the original 2010 General Broadcasting Act and create an independent audiovisual regulator.
*This article reflects the views of the author as an independent member of the international mission.
