UJAK

Essay About a Better Model for Media Structure in Spain

Theory of Media
Fernando Jess Garca Hpola

Contents
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 2 istory of Spanish Media .................................................................................................... 2 A Better Model of Public Television ...................................................................................... 4 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 7 Bibliograph .......................................................................................................................... !

1. Introduction In this Essay I!ll analy"e Spanish Media istory since the fall of the

Franco dictatorship in 1975, and Ill propose a better model of public television from my point of view.

2. History of Spanish Media #o Spanish $o%ern&ent has so far re'ected the $reat po(er of tele%ision to shape public opinion and or$ani"e the paradi$& of societal %alues) especially in classes (ith less education. The e*perience of thirty+si* year lon$ dictatorship hardly concei%able (ithout the support of censorship and ti$ht control of the &edia has helped raise a(areness of the i&portance of control. As early Spanish de&ocracy (as indicted abuse beca&e public broadcastin$ in fa%or of $o%ern&ent, in 1-./ had to be created by e*ternal pressures co&&ittee anticorruption pheno&enon parado*ically not repeated a$ain until 2001 (ith the 2opular 2arty. Althou$h radio en'oyed $reat autono&y fro& political po(er since the be$innin$ of de&ocracy 3(as funda&ental the role of SE4 2567) endin$ the &onopoly of the Spanish tele%ision T8E had to (ait to the late start of the chains pri%ate. In spite of the 2S9E in the early years had only tried to create a public tele%ision as a &ere social ser%ice itself) (as suspicious in losin$ political $round that pri%ate broadcasters could cause and therefore opted for a catastrophic &odel of en$a$e&ent (ith the&. So public tele%ision did not :no( deal (ith the pri%ate channels in 1--5 (hen &i&ic:ed the declines in ad%ertisin$ rates Antena 5 and Telecinco had in the pre%ious t(o years to turn the %iability plan T8E tryin$ to a&end the &ista:e of tryin$ (ill beha%e &ore li:e a pri%ate broadcaster ca&e too late) and failed.

The 2eople see&ed to understand that the influence of public tele%ision (as beco&in$ less priority bein$ thus curry fa%or (ith e*istin$ pri%ate channels or create ne( channels related to the $o%ern&ent. They (ere %ery $ood in the first tas:) not so &uch so as in the second) they had failures as pronounced as #et T8) 8eo T8 3concessions $ranted in 20007 or ;uieroT8. #o luc: in the fi$ht a$ainst So$ecable (as done (ith the support of 8<a =i$ital) but (on in the fa%or to the alle$ed threats Antena 5 in 1--. to Antonio Asensio to sell their shares to Telef>nica. In this line of pri%ati"ation of state co&panies not left in the hands of anyone T8E &ana$e&ent) althou$h it has been reduced to its audiences e%en they had a $ood po(er source. So he left public tele%ision in the hands of the Spanish Society 3SE2I7 by ?Broo& la(? of 2001. o(e%er) the $o%ern&ent

underesti&ated the threat that the press and the radio could introduce) and failed to control the& after the attac:s of 11M. Interestin$ly) the ne( socialist $o%ern&ent triu&phed at points (here the 22 failed and %ice %ersa achie%ed t(o ne( strin$s 3@uatro and Aa Se*ta7 related they create their ideolo$y) but could not 3or (ould not7 hold off the re%ie(s of e*istin$ societies. Any(ay socialist &ana$e&ent $a&e on T8 in your results (ere $ood but probably not in intention that hid behind, public tele%ision Buality (as achie%ed not by both the 2S9E and the interests of pri%ate channels ha%e lo(er ad%ertisin$ lea: that e%entually led to his pre'udice by the fli$ht of their audiencesC (as able to create an autono&ous po(er to purely econo&ic interests of T8E in the end (as ?%ery nice? but too passi%e) they fou$ht a$ainst telebasura and protected the child) (hich (ould ha%e been e*pected in a &ore conser%ati%e $o%ern&ent as the 22 and (here it had not yet acted. In short) I find that too utopian

&easure&ents (ere &ade) so&ethin$ to so&e lo$ical point in the pre+ crisis years happy. So&e accountin$ in &ana$in$ T8E had not co&e (ron$.

3. A Better Model of Public Tele ision a%in$ re$ard to the $reat interest sho(n in political po(er in the early years of public ser%ice and ho( that interest (as $radually &o%in$ to(ard pri%ate channels) one (onders (hy the current crisis in T8E. I (ill not $o both econo&ic causes one side are ob%ious $i%en the current crisis and on the other hand spea: fro& i$norance. I (ill treat the root causes rather than sits on the need for public tele%ision. This is a Buestion so&e(hat analo$ous to (hy there are so &any libraries) and ho( should they be &ana$edD unless clearly li&itations co&e into play content. Indeed) the Spanish @onstitution reco$ni"es the funda&ental ri$hts of citi"ens to freedo& of infor&ation and e*pression) and both internal and e*ternal pluralis& of the &edia. A public tele%ision ensures these &ini&u& standards but is not the only for& if there is a proper le$islation on pri%ate channels) (hose nu&ber is no( too s&all to ha%e the di%ersity that e*ists on the Internet for e*a&ple. So) until there is a sufficiently lar$e nu&ber of channels that offer different %ie(s) public tele%ision beco&es necessary. The proble& then lies (ith the fundin$ that is &ade of it and the ris: of fairness and ali$n&ent (ith $o%ern&ent. The errors (hich I belie%e ha%e been done so far and (e can learn to count the& belo(, There is a library in each city by the physical proble& of ha%in$ hundreds of boo:s a%ailable and the a%ailability of a place of study and consultation. o(e%er pretend to ha%e a re$ional

tele%ision is illo$ical) unnecessary) and abo%e all a (aste of public &oney. The defense of cultural herita$e are no e*cuses for the per&anence of the re$ional channels) (hich are nothin$ &ore than an e*pression of territorial e$ois& that (e still li%e in a se$&ented Spain) (hich 'ust $oes a$ainst the essence of (hat public tele%ision. The initial success they had in the creation of the Third @anal Act 1-/5 (as not supposed to le$iti&ate their e*istence. So I see re$ional tele%ision as a dra$ on the Spanish public tele%ision. 9f course it can and should be re$ional channels) but should not be public.

Ee sa( the decline of T8E be$an (hen he tried to co&pete (ith the pri%ate tele%ision in the early -0s. The proble& ca&e fro& the hand of the intransi$ence (ith (hich the $o%ern&ent acted to le$islate (hen the ad%ertisin$ &ar:et of pri%ate channels. Ai:e(ise ad%ertisin$ current pri%ate tele%ision far e*ceeds the li&it of 12 &inutes per hour that (as set in the refor& of the Statute 320107 because they are &ore profitable returns than fines. Indul$ence in the shares of &er$in$ co&panies also threaten e*ternal pluralis& that supports Spanish @onstitution) lea%in$ the current scenario 2lanet Mediaset Froup and as sole ideolo$ical 3not econo&ic7 &onopoly of the Spanish tele%ision. Another &ista:e by $o%ern&ents (as that) di%ide the freBuency of the analo$ to di$ital) $i%in$ proportionally beca&e a &ultiple* 31+channel7 to the old pri%ate. Instead I (as supposed to ha%e $i%en fe(er as could be t(o) and ha%e free freBuencies left to ne( pri%ate channels that arise. It &ay not see& consistent) but

if today a ne( T=T in (hich the &a*i&u& channels (ere say 100 (ill be desi$ned (ould it be lo$ical to $i%e Telecinco and Antena 5 1G channels or else it (ould be lo$ical reser%e the& to other co&panies (ho (ant to enter the sectorD

The T8E (ithout ad%ertisin$ (e ha%e e*perienced in recent years had not aroused the suspicion of its co&petitors if it had not had the Buality pro$ra&&in$ that has ta:en a(ay audience. Hapatero &easures (ere %ie(ed fa%orably by lar$e pri%ate co&panies for alle$ed rise in de&and for ad%ertisin$ (ould result in the& not ha%in$ a public tele%ision and to co&pete in that arena. But (hat has happened in recent years has been a lea: of a channel that audiences not only pro%ided top series and &o%ies but also offered the possibility of not ha%in$ to endure tedious 20 &inutes of co&&ercials. The &odel really (ould li:e Telecinco and Antena 5 is the sa&e as ha%in$) as Busta&ante hi&self says) "some professors of economics and neoliberal extremist (ho remained with remarkable honesty that public television is the best television that does not exist." This stance is debatable but it is not illo$ical and ser%es its o(n reasons, public tele%ision that actually &o%es no &ore eBuity than the ta*es that is subsidi"ed is a dead capital that $enerates no profits and does not sti&ulate the econo&y) the refutation principal to do is that besides &athe&atics and countable accounts also social ser%ices are i&portant) so&ethin$ that I fir&ly belie%e.

!. Conclusion 9f these four para$raphs I e*pose) Eill deduced a &odel that creates an econo&ically %iable public tele%ision Buality pro$ra&&in$) $ood hearin$ and that does not conflict (ith the econo&ic interests of pri%ate co&paniesD In &y opinion yes. The subsidy that the state &a:es T8E see&s unfeasible $i%en the ti&es) but the presence of publicity threatens the i&partiality of public tele%ision left in the hands of the Spanish pri%ate sector. The solution is therefore that the creation of the content of T8E is &ade by their o(n pri%ate channels) as an additional ta* 3or to replace the e*istin$7. It really (ould not be a %ery lar$e econo&ic cost to the& because once they (ere handed this content public tele%ision) the picture (ould beco&e of the pri%ate channels. In addition) ha%in$ to be each and e%ery one of the& you ha%e to collaborate in the creation of T8E) the econo&ic stru$$le itself pre%ent the ali$n&ents bet(een the&. @ould be $ranted econo&ic aid to s&all businesses not decided disad%anta$e co&pared to lar$e+it is clear that the contents of Interecono&<a 3I could not thin: of another s&all chain to &a:e an e*a&ple7 &i$ht not be as spectacular as Telecinco. And (hatIs best, Buality public tele%ision in (hich the contents (ere hetero$eneous and econo&ic be achie%ed. Ser%e 2ublic Tele%ision &etaphor that I concei%e is li:e a 6or&ula 1 race) in (hich the %arious bodies 3pri%ate broadcasters7 not only co&pete for the pri"e of bein$ first) but for overcoming while marketing their brand in the media market. This could be a cere&ony at the end of the year in (hich the pri"e for best tele%ision series and &o%ies that (ere created for T8E (as $ranted. And all this (ithout for$ettin$ that this (ould be a

bi$ boost for the Spanish cine&a. In short this is a perhaps so&e(hat utopian &odel) but &ade possible by technolo$ical ad%ances to co&e) and allo( a $reater nu&ber of channels that pro%ide tele%ision in their ideolo$ical and the&atic di%ersity as a $ood &eetin$ point for public debate and reflection.

". Biblio#raphy + Fi'>n 9li%a) JosJ Mi$uel 31--.7. Aos 2aradi$&as en las @iencias de la @o&unicaci>n. Barcelona, 2aid>s. + 2eter Foldin$ 31-.17. The Mass Media. Aondon, Aon$&an. TM + S. #KE Jr. Joseph 3200/7. The Powers to Lead. #e( Kor:, 9*ford Uni%ersity 2ress. TM + Eolf) Mario 31--17. Aos Efectos Sociales de los Media. Barcelona, 2aid>s IbJrica.