ľ¹Ï¸£ÀûÓ°ÊÓ

For media and journalism to thrive, they need three things: freedom, funding, and help in finding a future. That’s the argument of a new report from the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, addressed to the European Commission. One of the authors is Professor Madeleine de Cock Buning, Professor of Copyright and Media- and Communication Law at Utrecht ľ¹Ï¸£ÀûÓ°ÊÓ. The other authors are Prof. Rasmus Kleis Nielsen and and Robert Gorwa, both connected to Oxford ľ¹Ï¸£ÀûÓ°ÊÓ.
 

Summary

In this report, we identify some policy options available for the European Commission and for European Union member states should they wish to create a more enabling environment for independent professional journalism going forward. Many of these options are relevant far beyond Europe and demonstrate what democratic digital media policy could look like. 

We argue that, to thrive, independent, professional journalism needs freedom, funding, and a future. To enable this, media policy needs (a) to protect journalists and media from threats to their independence and to freedom of expression, (b) to provide a level playing field and support for a sustainable business of news, and (c) to be oriented towards the digital, mobile, and platform-dominated future that people are demonstrably embracing – not towards defending the broadcast and print-dominated past.

The three preconditions come in order of priority:

• Without freedom, no amount of funding or investment in the future will ensure independent professional journalism. Given the established threats to free expression and media freedom in some European Union member states, it is clear that these issues have to be addressed first in these countries before any other measures can find long-term success. Of the options we review in the report, addressing the implementation gap between what elected officials have committed to on paper and what governments do in practice, especially around protecting free expression, media freedom, the protection of journalists, and genuine independence for public service media and media regulators, will be the first step. The second step could be to link access to EU funds to performance in an annual rule of law review that includes a focus on free expression and media freedom.
• Without funding, independent professional journalism will wither away. Given the rapid decline of legacy businesses, this funding will have to come from a combination of a new, digital, business of news and various forms of public support, including for independent public service media and non-profit media. Although private-sector news media have represented the majority of investment in journalism in the past, in most cases will continue to do so in the future, and are essential for providing a diverse range of outlets, the risk of market failure, especially among some local and niche audiences, is significant. Of the options we have reviewed, the three most promising policy responses are: (a) the reform and potential expansion of existing forms of support for private-sector media so they better support the digital future of journalism, and not just its offline past; (b) a recognition of the role that genuinely independent, adequately funded, public-service media operating across all platforms can have (provided they have a clear role and remit, and avoid crowding out private competitors); and (c) rapid reform to ease the creation and funding of non-profit news media.
• Without a future for independent professional journalism, we risk leaving European democracy worse than we inherited it. Forging that future is primarily a task for the profession and the industry itself, a task premised on developing forms of journalism, media formats, and products that people find genuinely compelling and valuable. We have already begun to see some impressive and creative efforts, even as the pressures both reporters and news media businesses face are intense. But policymakers can play a role as well. Of the options we have reviewed, three stand out: (a) making sure that all active in the digital marketplace compete on a level playing field; (b) providing public funding for innovation in journalism and news media to help with the transition; and (c) securing a more accountable, intelligible, and transparent platform-mediated environment through the promotion of multi-stakeholder oversight mechanisms, media literacy projects, and data access for independent research.

Silver bullet
We have not identified a silver bullet, and indeed, we do not believe there are any. Those looking for an easy solution will not find it; but that does not mean that there are no options. The steps we discuss here do not represent a one-size-fits-all model (subsidies for media would arguably be counter-productive and illegitimate in countries with low press freedom, high levels of corruption, and problems of media capture). But we hope they can command broad political support to create a more enabling environment for independent professional journalism while limiting the risk of regulatory uncertainty and of further politicising the media.

Holistic approach
To make a real difference, policymakers need to move beyond the tendency to address the issues facing independent, professional journalism indirectly or through fragmented and piecemeal steps, and consider adopting a more holistic approach focused on taking a number of steps that together can help create an environment where independent professional journalism can succeed. Doing that will not be easy, and they will not be cheap, but the options we identify here are primarily about holding individual governments to the commitments they have made through Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union as well as their broader commitments under international human rights law, and the policies we discuss would be cheaper than what the European Union already spends on subsidising agriculture, or its member states on subsidising fossil fuels. Given the European Union’s budget of more than €160bn, and member states’ combined public expenditure of more than €7 trillion, funding this is essentially a question of political priorities.

Policy choices
The report identifies a number of real policy choices that elected officials can pursue, at both the European level and at the member state level, all of which have the potential to make a meaningful difference and help create a more enabling environment for independent professional journalism across the continent while minimising the room for political interference with the media. We hope it can serve as a useful starting point for a discussion of the role of media policy in European democracy (and beyond) going forward and thus help ensure we develop 21st century media policies for a 21st century media environment.

The authors
One of the authors is Prof. Madeleine de Cock Buning, Professor Copyright and Media- and Communication Law at Utrecht ľ¹Ï¸£ÀûÓ°ÊÓ and Professor of Digital Politics, Economies and Societies Cluster at the European ľ¹Ï¸£ÀûÓ°ÊÓ Institute's School of Transnational Governance. The other authors are Prof. Rasmus Kleis Nielsen, director of the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, and Professor of Political Communication at the ľ¹Ï¸£ÀûÓ°ÊÓ of Oxford, and Robert Gorwa, PhD student at the Department of Politics and International Relations, ľ¹Ï¸£ÀûÓ°ÊÓ of Oxford.

The report
The full report can be read at  Download a Dutch summary here.
Madeleine de Cock Buning is available for interviews on both the content and the broader themes it addresses: government subsidies for journalism, content mitigation, technology platforms, antitrust policy or press freedom in Eastern Europe and beyond.