Macedonian broadcasting becalmed
With the main stakeholders staying away, today’s launch of the Republic of Macedonia chapter in the Television across Europe: Follow-up Reports 2008 was a case of making bricks without straw.
Skopje, 3 November 2008
The management of MRT, Macedonia’s public service broadcaster, which has spent the last few years on the brink of collapse, was conspicuously absent. Neither the private TV stations nor the Ministry of Transportation and Communications felt they should join the debate at a moment when the audiovisual market faces fierce criticism for lack of diversity and independence.
The Broadcasting Council – Macedonia’s national regulator – did at least make an appearance, in the person of Faruk Omeragiq. His main contribution, however, was to announce that the Council would respond to the report in writing, in due course.
The report assesses the changes since 2005, when the original Television across Europe report was published. As well as analysing the profound difficulties facing the public service broadcaster, the report looks at broadcast regulation, the commercial sector, and editorial independence.
Gazmend Ajdini of the Media Development Center (MDC), a Skopje-based NGO, summarised the report’s findings, highlighting the government’s failure to implement legislation, the regulator’s lack of independence and efficiency, and MRT’s dire financial crisis.
Vesna Šopar, who wrote the report for the Open Society Institute, noted that the number of commercial broadcasters is rising, but the quality of content is not. She also criticised the failure to implement legal provisions on concentration and transparency of ownership.
Roberto Belichanec of the MDC called for legal mechanisms to implement the antimonopoly and anti-corruption provisions in the broadcasting laws. “Some media are linked in many ways, not because of money but because the owners are friends. We need legal provisions against such synergies.” This warning was strongly echoed by Violeta Gligoroska from the Skopje-based Foundation Open Society Institute, who said that continued refusal to implement legal provisions on concentration could create ideal conditions for a Macedonian Berlusconi to emerge.
Mr. Omeragiq criticised the tone of the debate, saying that it lacked serious discussion of specific recommendations. He added that the regulator has no power to change legislation. Mrs. Šopar replied that the regulator certainly can intervene in the legislative process, for example by putting forward recommendations.
Mr. Belichanec said that it is terrifying that the Broadcasting Council and MRT’s governing structure do not resist being politicised. “There is a chronic lack of courage in our society,” Belichanec said, adding that these two institutions are central to changing the mindset in Macedonian broadcasting. He accused the Broadcasting Council of lacking transparency. Meetings are public as long as nothing whatever is debated, but as soon as real business is on the table, the meetings are declared closed. Belichanec conceded that the regulator comes under intense pressure from the government, which has prevented it from doing its work.
Goran Gavrilov, who owns Radio Network Channel 77 and represents the Association of Private Electronic Media (APEM), said that the Republic of Macedonia needs to rebuild its regulatory bodies. Mr. Ajdini added that the country needs to build a regulatory model fit for the digital environment.
Mrs. Gligoroska said that digital broadcasting is not widely understood. Nobody speaks about how digitisation in general affects the media. All the discussions focus on broadcasting. “We need to see how this process affects the print media and the radio.”
Sally Broughton, representing the OSCE mission to Macedonia, said that most discussions of broadcasting have addressed the digitisation of terrestrial television. It was time, she believed, to pay more attention to distribution networks. Nor should debates necessarily be led by the regulator or the government; the industry itself should take a lead. “The onus is on private industry to find out what their business models will be.” The whole issue of ownership concentration should be analysed from the viewpoint of digitisation. This does not mean, however, that legal provisions on media concentration should not be enforced immediately.
Slobodan Belichanski, from the Broadcasting Council’s legal department, said that the Council is actively trying to encourage educational and cultural programming. The regulator wants to devote frequency space for an educational channel, for example.
OSI Skopje’s Gligoroska said that a record of the debate would be submitted to the main stakeholders in broadcasting.
