Showing papers on "Media regulation published in 2005"

Constructing the 'media competent child': Media Literacy and Regulatory Policy in the UK

Abstract: Over the past fifteen years, sociologists have mounted an influential challenge to traditional psychological accounts of childhood. The new sociology of childhood has presented a powerful critique of the developmentalist view of children as merely ‹adults in the making›. Such a view, it is argued, judges children only in terms of what they will become in the future, once they have been adequately socialised: they are seen as inherently vulnerable, incomplete and dependent. This article considers how recent research on children and media relates to public policy, and specifically to current debates about media regulation in the UK. Debates about the media are obviously an important arena for contemporary concerns about childhood.

Constructing the 'media competent child': Media Literacy and Regulatory Policy in the UK

Abstract: Over the past fifteen years, sociologists have mounted an influential challenge to traditional psychological accounts of childhood. The new sociology of childhood has presented a powerful critique of the developmentalist view of children as merely ‹adults in the making›. Such a view, it is argued, judges children only in terms of what they will become in the future, once they have been adequately socialised: they are seen as inherently vulnerable, incomplete and dependent. This article considers how recent research on children and media relates to public policy, and specifically to current debates about media regulation in the UK. Debates about the media are obviously an important arena for contemporary concerns about childhood.

Communication Law and Policy: The State of Research and Theory

Abstract: This essay describes the domain of research in communication law and policy. It is based on a content analysis of research published in the journal Communication Law and Policy (1996-2004), papers presented to the Communication Law and Policy Division at annual conferences of the International Communication Association (1997-2004), as well as consideration of other resources. The most frequent areas for research were media regulation, Internet policy, and freedom of expression issues. After reviewing recent literature on the first two topics, we identified and showcased two emergent categories deserving future attention: communication and the law (particularly fair trial-free press issues) and implications of the burgeoning consolidation of media ownership.

Promoting Diversity and Pluralism in Contemporary Communication Policies in the United States and the United Kingdom

Abstract: Recent revisions of media regulation and legislation have emphasized diversity and pluralism as key objectives. Both the Federal Communication Commission's rewriting of broadcasting ownership rules in 2003 and the United Kingdom government's 2003 Communications Act insist that the public interest is best met through providing a dynamic, market-led approach to communications regulation. This article highlights definitions of diversity and pluralism that are increasingly ubiquitous in legislative and regulatory instruments that seek to “modernize ”media systems in our present “communications cornucopia. ”This approach involves conceptualizing media diversity and media pluralism as twin outcomes of strategies designed to maximize consumer choice and market competition. The article argues that we need to challenge the assumption that meaningful forms of diversity can be brought forth only through market structures and questions the validity of quantitative assessments of media sectors that equate choice and competition with diversity. The article suggests that we need to win back a notion of diversity that is based on citizens' engagement with and interrogation of the world rather than the idea that diversity can be measured simply through the number of organizations and channels in the contemporary media environment. ACCESS TO FULL TEXT

Massively Multiplayer Online Games. Productive players and their disruptions to conventional media practices.

Abstract: Summary This thesis explores how massively multiplayer online games (MMOGs), as an exemplary new media form, disrupt practices associated with more conventional media. These intensely social games exploit the interactivity and networks afforded by new media technologies in ways that generate new challenges for the organisation, control and regulation of media. The involvement of players in constituting these games – through their production of game-play, derivative works and strong social networks that drive the profitability of the games – disrupts some of the key foundations that underlie other publication media. MMOGs represent a new and hybrid form of media – part publication and part service. As such they sit within a number of sometimes contradictory organising and regulatory regimes. This thesis examines the negotiations and struggles for control between players, developers and publishers as issues of ownership, governance and access arise out of the new configurations. Using an ethnographic approach to gather information and insights into the practices of players, developers and publishers, this project identifies the characteristics of the distributed production network in this experiential medium. It explores structural components of successful interactive applications and analyses how the advent of player agency and the shift in authorship has meant a shift in control of the text and the relations that surround it. The integration of social networks into the textual environment, and into the business model of the media publishers has meant commerce has become entwined with affect in a new way in this medium. Publishers have moved into the role of both property managers, of the intellectual property associated with the game content, and community managers. Intellectual property management is usually associated with the reproduction and distribution of finished media products, and this sits uneasily with the performative and mutable form of this medium. Service provision consists of maintaining the game world environment, community management, providing access for players to other players and to the content generated both by the developers and the other players. Content in an MMOG is identified in this project as both the ‘tangible’ assets of code and artwork, rules and text, and the ‘intangible’ or immaterial assets of affective networks. Players are no longer just consumers of media, or even just active interpreters of media. They are co-producing the media as it is developed. This thesis frames that productiveness as unpaid labour, in an attempt to denaturalise the dominant discourse which casts players as consumers. The regulation of this medium is contentious. Conventional forms of media regulation – such as copyright, or content regulation regimes are inadequate for regulating the hybrid service/publication medium. This thesis explores how the use of contracts as the mechanism which constitutes the formal relations between players, publishers and developers creates challenges to some of the regimes of juridical and political rights held by citizens more generally. This thesis examines the productive practices of players and how the discourses of intellectual property and the discourses of the consumer are mobilised to erase the significance of those productive contributions. It also shows, using a Foucauldian analysis of the power negotiations, that players employ many counter-strategies to circumvent the more formal legal structures of the publishers. The dialogic relationship between players, developers and publishers is shown to mobilise various discursive constructions of the role of each. The outcome of these ongoing negotiations may well shape future interactive applications and the extent to which their innovative capacities will be available for all stakeholders to develop.

Spinners or sinners? PR, journalists and public trust

Abstract: The credibility of journalists and public relations professionals took some bad knocks in 2004. This paper examines the recent history of the debate and some of the efforts being made within the communications industry to rebuild the public confidence that journalism is a vital part of the democratic process. The NUJ has issued new guidelines to its members in public relations at a time when PR professionals are calling for a rethink about the relationship between journalism and PR. The heart of the matter is the issue of trust – which is also high on the post‐Hutton media agenda. Public trust in journalism and in corporate social responsibility is low; “spin” has been disgraced, and media regulation is under reconstruction. How can media professionals forge new relationships with their publics, to promote healthy and open democracy? It is time for dialogue and commitment to work together on redefining the role of all media professionals in an open democracy.

Access to Audiences as a First Amendment Right: Its Relevance and Implications for Electronic Media Policy

Abstract: When the issue of speakers’ rights of access arises in media regulation and policy contexts, the focus typically is on the concept of speakers’ rights of access “to the media,” or “to the press.” This right usually is premised on the audience’s need for access to diverse sources and content. In contrast, in many non-mediated contexts, the concept of speakers’ rights of access frequently is defined in terms of the speaker’s own First Amendment right of access to audiences. This paper explores the important distinctions between these differing interpretations of a speaker’s access rights and argues that the concept of a speaker’s right of access to audiences merits a more prominent position in electronic media regulation and policy. This paper then explores the implications of such a shift in perspective for media regulation and policy-making.

Different Strokes for Different Folk: Regulatory Distinctions in New Zealand Media

Abstract: For much of the past century there was broad acceptance of the stark contrast between the state's involvement in the regulation of the content of broadcasting and its laissez-faire relationship with the columns of the press. The 'failed market' argument that substantiated regulation of the airwaves was difficult to counter. Fundamental changes in technology and media markets have, however, rendered the rationale open to challenge. Some aspects of the 'failed market', such as frequency scarcity, simply do not apply in the digital age. This article examines the nature of media regulation in New Zealand, noting its similarity to the dichotomous approach in Britain, Canada and Australia but also its divergence toward a more neoliberal market model that largely limits statutory oversight to matters that fall broadly into the categories of morals and ethics. It argues that, given the New Zealand Government's decision more than 15 years ago to forego regulation of ownership or the mechanisms that would serve the public good aspirations of a Reithian model, the continuing role of the state in regulation of broadcasting is questionable. A replacement model could be based on an effective regulatory body already present in the New Zealand media industry the Advertising Standards Authority.

Avalik-õigusliku ringhäälingu legitimatsioon: Eesti kogemus rahvusvahelises kontekstis

Abstract: The purpose of this theoretical research "Legitimation of public-service broadcasting - Estonian experience in international context" is to analyse the legitimation of the Estonian public service broadcasting and the factors that affected the process. For a broader background basis, the development of international media politics and, in more detail, European Union media politics are observed. On the basis of this analysis possible solutions for a stronger legitimation of PsB in the Republic of Estonia is offered. Defining and implementation of sufficient and stabile PsB (including a financial scheme for funding) has been problematic during the full re-independence period of the Republic of Estonia. Until now a working complex solution has not been implemented. In this paper it is assumed that the obstacle for finding positive solutions for PsB in Estonian media politics is the lack of consensus about PsB in the society. To get a better grounds for understanding PsB legitimation process in Estonia, this paper observes the general historic development of the PsB in 20th Century, the creation of European Union (media) legislation, and the change of the public service media regulation acts in correlation to the development of society. In addition, the paper gives an overview of the current EU media policy's crises, and methods for solving these crisis which have been adapted by the EU. In addition to theoretical sources, the paper is also based on the European practice and the results of the work of Estonian workgroups that have been dealing with the subject of broadcasting (primarily PsB). This paper analyses the main issues and the paper itself is part of an attempt to strengthen the PsB legitimation in the Estonian media landscape. In detail local processes of political and economical legitimation are observed. Main focus is on development, adoption in Parliament and practical failure of the Development Plan for Estonian Radio and Television for 2003-2005. The theoretical resource for the work is Jurgen Habermas' communication theory and concept of public sphere, which has been also the starting point for work of Croteau and Hoynes also used. These researches can be summarized as follows: a) the existence of a developed public sphere is important for developing civi society and democracy; b) media has an important role in the development of the public sphere; c) the development of the public sphere is the public interest; d) the basis for the existence of private media is primarily a profit oriented activity; e) the purpose of the public service media (primarily broadcast) is to serve public interest; f) the political-administrative system sees economy (incl. mediaeconomy foremost as liberal and needing as little regulation as possible; at the same time regulation is necessary to guarantee the public sector media (broadcast) activities; g) the basis of this conflict is the scarce legitimacy of the PsB in the political- administrative system. Considering that a) the general EU (economic) policy is oriented towards the enlargment of genera libelarisation and free competition; b) EU mediapolitics is subordinate to economic politics; c) the defining of PsB purposes and tasks has been given to the sole competency of nation-states; meaning that EU will not draw any guidance that would specify the support towards PsB (services) or that would be compulsory for the nation- state legislation; d) the history and position in the society of the PsB is different in the old and new (transition countries) EU member states; e) the economic size and capacity of the nation-states` market is different the development of the PsB in Estonia is problematic because of the small size of the market and the lack of PsB tradition. To overcome this problem stronger legitimation of the PsB should be considered. For that it is necessary to enforce the communication between all parties to find a consensus.

Emancipation, the media and modernity: some reflections on Garnham's Kantian turn

Abstract: In Emancipation, the Media and Modernity, Nicholas Garnham argues for the continued viability of the Enlightenment project, suggesting that, despite attacks from the right and various postmodernists, "coercive inequality and avoidable ignorance" still require an enlightened response. Discarding history is an especially fraught outcome of the turn away from Enlightenment values. Where history might inform, say, public debate and policy-making on and for the media, it is instead largely ignored. In consequence, the Enlightenment concept of free expression is now by no means seen as a crucial public good, the key human right. The history of the struggle for press freedom is forgotten. The basic principle of free speech is abridged and adjusted for non-print media as with current British communications regulatory structures. However, it can be argued that all of the received legitimations for media-specific content controls above the general law - from supposed spectrum scarcity through to the public right to know - are poorly grounded. Their undebated general acceptance dangerously undermines the concept of free expression. Yet, as Garnham reminds us, for Kant and his successors emancipation depended on enlightenment which in turn depended on publicity - the free exchange of ideas about the world and about social relations with fellow citizens in order to arrive at truth and a freely chosen and shared moral community.

The FCC's New Indecency Enforcement Policy and Its European Counterparts: A Cautionary Tale

Abstract: INTRODUCTION The beginning of 2004 saw an upsurge in the number of complaints filed at the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) against allegedly “indecent” broadcasting. The FCC reported 111 complaints in 2000, 346 in 2002, 13,922 in 2003, and 1,068,802 in 2004. Although one of the recurring subplots in this area is the possibility that the agency adjusted its reporting methodology to support its enforcement policy—a sort of legal, governmental version of “cooking the books” as in the Enron and WorldCom situations— the numbers have at least facial validity.

The Law and Economics of Wardrobe Malfunction

Abstract: I. INTRODUCTION Michael Powell, Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from 2001 to 2005, will likely be most remembered for his controversial indecency enforcement actions against Howard Stern's radio show and Janet Jackson's Super Bowl "wardrobe malfunction."1 This legacy is probably deserved. In addition to these high-profile enforcement actions, Michael Powell imposed a higher total fine amount in 2004 for broadcast indecency than the amount imposed during the previous ten years combined.2 Many have alleged that Powell's enforcement actions were politically motivated stunts made on behalf of powerful special interests.3 Some have argued that the enforcement actions have had a chilling effect on free speech in broadcasting.4 A few have even maintained that the FCC has used its licensure power to discourage owners of television and radio stations from challenging its indecency actions in court5-a Byzantine maneuver that allows congressmen and FCC Commissioners to continue using the indecency enforcement publicity that courts might otherwise stop. The FCC's enforcement process itself creates these problems and suspicions. First, because the FCC does not monitor the airwaves but instead relies upon citizen complaints to initiate enforcement,6 particular interest groups can dominate enforcement even though indecency regulations are supposed to reflect "contemporary community standards."7 According to a recent FCC estimate obtained by Mediaweek, 99.9% of indecency complaints in 2003 were filed by the Parents Television Council, an activist group with links to conservative political and religious organizations.8 As this Article demonstrates, increases in the number of FCC indecency actions have almost always been in response to political pressures emanating from interest groups. When coupled with the inherent vagueness of the indecency standard, the manipulatable enforcement process inevitably leads to claims of selective or arbitrary enforcement. It also leads to public choice speculation that indecency enforcement is simply a vehicle to allow politicians to further their own agendas.9 Or, even more darkly, the complaint process can be used simply as a signaling exercise whereby certain political groups indicate to politicians their political clout in order to influence issues unrelated to broadcast indecency.10 Further, the complaint process takes the FCC away from its stated purpose-clarifying and rendering consistent the "community standards" that underlie the indecency determination. Instead, the FCC's complaint process has confused the standard. After nearly a generation of modern indecency enforcement, the standard is muddier than it was thirty years ago. This Article sets forth a new, market-based approach to indecency regulation designed to avoid many of these problems and to permit the emergence of decency standards that more accurately reflect those of the community. Drawing on recent economic theory involving two-sided markets, we propose a new market-based mechanism for indecency regulation that avoids the pitfalls of the FCC's current politicized approach. Instead of focusing regulations on the broadcaster, this Article advocates shifting the current regulatory scheme to market-based regulation of the vieweradvertiser relationship. Specifically, this Article proposes that the FCC require all programs to explicitly state the entities that advertise with them and make that information easily accessible to consumers. This approach would allow consumers to directly pressure advertisers-who, in turn, could pressure broadcasters to air acceptable programming. This mechanism would better reflect community standards and encourage viewers to engage in a meaningful civic dialogue. The proposed regulation would also enhance economic efficiency, a new justification for media regulation not before considered by scholars.11 This Article's analysis questions the completeness of the currently dominant legal justification for indecency regulation, the public trustee doctrine. …

The Future of Radio Regulation: The Need for a Level Playing Field

Abstract: Congress and the FCC should free over the air broadcast radio from regulations that are not imposed on its competitors to allow it to compete with satellite radio and other media. Furthermore, the playing field is best leveled by deregulating down, rather than regulating up with new restrictions on satellite radio, local content included. While other unregulated competitors continue to steal away market share and advertising dollars, terrestrial radio broadcasting remains one of America's most heavily regulated media sectors. Volumes of FCC regulations apply to them that do not apply to any of the other new competitors or the numerous other multiple platform technologies which offer audio content. The two arguments supplied by the broadcast industry as reasons for regulatory intervention by Congress and the FCC however, are for the purpose of restricting the ability of satellite radio to offer local content, rather than comprehensive liberalization of the traditional terrestrial radio broadcast sector. Such arguments involve terrestrial radio's position as a carrier of last resort of local information, and regulatory disparity. Legitimate as those concerns may be, this is an opportunity for terrestrial radio to exploit its advantages in the local programming market over satellite radio operators, since it takes a significant investment in human infrastructure (reporters, producers, etc.) to provide a true local media presence. Regarding regulatory disparity, certainly as the lines continue to blur between formerly distinct media sectors and media technologies continue to converge, it will become increasingly difficult for policymakers to enforce the old regulatory regime. It is this marketplace scenario though by which the regulate up strategy will benefit neither terrestrial nor satellite radio providers, whereas the regulate down strategy would suit the level playing field argument of the broadcast industry even further.

Thinking Seriously About Cable & Satellite Censorship: An Informal Analysis of S. 616, the Rockefeller-Hutchison Bill

Abstract: Senate legislation introduced recently that aims to extend broadcast indecency regulations to cable and satellite providers, if passed, would represent the most significant congressional effort to regulate speech since the Communications Decency Act of 1996, and likely form the precursor to regulation of content on the Internet. The CDA was found unconstitutional, but with S-616 Rockefeller and Hutchison clearly are trying to avoid the same fate. The bill applies broadcast rules found constitutional in FCC v. Pacifica in 1978 to cable and satellite offerings because they are all ubiquitous. While this is a more nuanced argument for speech regulation than what we saw during the CDA debate it is precisely for these reasons that cross-media censorship must be rejected. The fact that new media outlets have grown in popularity and that millions of Americans voluntarily subscribe to them, are powerful arguments against speech controls, not for them. The First Amendment will be an empty vessel if a popularity-equals-pervasiveness doctrine is adopted. Shows like The Shield, South Park, and Nip/Tuck would be forced to migrate to premium tiers to avoid regulation, whereby viewers will have to pay significant sums of money to escape censorship in the future. Worth assessing is the findings section's pervasiveness rationale, which has never been applied to newspapers and the Internet, and would be constitutionally suspect for cable and satellite. Meanwhile mandates imposed on warning systems and filters deployed voluntarily by programmers might best be grouped under the theme hanging the industry with its own rope. Ratings systems are subjective, and government shouldn't have any say over them. Section 11 would exempt premium and pay-per-view channels, but what happens if S-616 forces popular content onto these networks and viewers follow? Would they then be regulated as well?

Comparative Notions of Fairness: Comparative Perspectives on the Fairness Doctrine with Special Emphasis on Israel and the United States

Abstract: The Article offers a comparative analysis of the manner in which different legal systems refer to mechanisms that are intended to ensure fairness, impartiality, and balance in mass media reporting and on issues of public importance, namely, the Fairness Doctrine and its non-U.S. counterparts. The article reviews several systems, yet focuses on those in Israel and the United States. The Israeli fairness doctrine was imported from the American system, where it was subsequently repealed. Despite this fact, the Israeli Supreme Court has left the doctrine intact. The prima facie contradiction between the obsolescence of the doctrine in its land of origin and its continued validity in Israel, is examined in several aspects, including different constitutional regimes and approaches, market size and economic constraints, as well as the differentiation between the diverse kinds of mass media and their regulation. The Article offers taxonomy of different legal systems' constitutional attitudes towards the fairness doctrine, and maps them along a scale, placing Germany at one end of the spectrum, and the United States on the other end. Finally, the Article also reviews the policy behind the possible reinstatement of the fairness doctrine in the American system, in light of the comparative analysis conducted throughout the paper. The Article explores how fundamental approaches of different legal systems may justify discrepancies in the manner in which they view and implement media regulation and in the manner government's role in ensuring the fairness of the mass media is perceived.