The Austrian Constitutional Broadcasting Act – time for a change …

Posted on April 20, 2007 | Filed Under public services 

bvfgesetz_gr.jpgThe Austrian constitution contains a provision concerning broadcasting – the “BVG Rundfunk”. The provision is, in particular for the subject it regulates, let’s say, a bit outfashioned. It was developed 1974. In short, it ensures the objectivity and independence of broadcasting, requires that broadcasting shall be governed by more detailed rules to be set out in a federal law and states (anything but clear) that broadcasting is a public task. Finally it also defines the subject matter it regulates – (as I couldn’t find an official English translation of it, I will try myself):

“broadcasting is the transmission of representations of all kinds, in words, tone or pictures by wire or fixed lines (interpreted freely by the author) as well as the operation of the technical equipment for these purposes.”

This really wide definition of broadcasting at constitutional level (!), which literally covers anything transmitted electronically in a point to multipoint way, is still in force, albeit technological innovations like webstreaming and mobile TV and new services like youtube and joost. This causes absurd results and for the Austrian execution lots of problems. For the time being we take it easy (for Austria not so unusual) and just ignore it. But we also realize: it’s time for a change. At the latest we will have to adapt this constitutional provision when the audiovisual media service directive will have to be transformed. And this will be soon.

That’s why this week an Austrian research institute on the law of electronic mass media (REM) organized a workshop to discuss some fundamental questions with regard to the future of the Austrian constitutional provision on broadcasting, one of the most fundamental to be: do we still need such a constitutional provision at all, in particular a definition of broadcasting at constitutional level? For what? Very diverse opinions were expressed, but in the end there seemed to be one common denominator: in the future it will be necessary to guarantee at least the concept of public service broadcasting at constitutional level. The question still open is: in which form? Is it necessary to guarantee by the constitution the institution of a public service broadcaster or just the service itself?

About this Post
author: dragana | Permalink | | Print This Article |


Comments

Leave a Reply