Introduction
The present paper conducts extensive research on European media from a number of perspectives bringing out an overall picture of the European Union as it is found in the present. The paper begins its investigation from the days of communism, Cold War when propagandists saw their climax and surprised the world for what they did to make their selfish ends meet. The paper then conducts research on such media like television, film, cinema, music to investigate the present standing of media in Europe.
European Media with Relation to Communism
The collapse of communism from Eastern and Central Europe is a history-making incidence engraved in our memories. It holds significance both for the people living in the concerned communist countries and for the entire world as a whole. The wave of this collapse certainly had immediate and long-lasting effects on the lives of a number of people with regard to social, economic, and political outlook; furthermore, the fall of the Berlin Wall proved to be another big shot in the process of bringing change in every corner of life – something that started with the collapse of communism. If we look closely at this very ear, we will find that this span of time opened doors of opportunity to a number of people, then, on the other hand, it brought many to the ground as unemployment, increasing desperation, and poverty can be seen inclining on the canvas of the picture of that time. However, since then up to now, a number of things have changed; a number of milestones have been covered in this region of communism.
The mass media, in fact, have been instrumental in expediting the process of change up to the present times. For instance, today, the press in Europe now depends on advertising and subscription, something which was not possible before as the press was controlled and subsidized at that time. With changes in the trends of print media, broadcasting media, or electronic media have also changed their way of operation today in Europe. The emergence of new radio stations, TV channels is no more something to wonder about. According to Sparks (in Curran & Park, 2000) “Western” thinking and viewing media through the “communist” perspective are indeed very similar things (35). The crisis observed on one pole is the crisis for the other pole too. Looking back at the warmer days of communism to understand the evolution of media, the first and foremost thing that strike our minds is the heated use of different media in order to boost up propaganda war that was going on at that time between the communist block and the west of the United States of American, particularly, with other countries being on its side. If the communist block was looking at the world through such perspective as Press (Lenin, 1972); then, the western eye viewed the entire state of the affair through the lens of Four Theories of the Press (1956 and 1963). Overall the condition of media regulation of that time was that “The Soviet ideologists thought that the media system they presided over was all a jolly good thing, whereas the US ideologists thought it was all a shockingly bad state of affairs” (Sparks, 36, 2000). Although communist versions have lost their friends, the anti-communist versions of utilizing media to make ends meet have not only survived but have also confronted grave critiques upfront.
The author then, before moving onto the profound analysis of the way media were handled in the communist and anti-communist times, details three important points about the underpinnings of media in general. These three are (a) that economic effects and political effects on media bear different consequences; (b) all media taken as a whole have a collective symmetry, or are coherent wholes, something from core value system is what drives them toward some specific purpose or goal; (3) there is a tendency to perceive that the media work as subservient to the government policies and operations and not as something which is a primary mechanism by which a particular ruling is organized. According to the author, these three views have given so much inclination to arguments and debates about how media work and what their interventions are to the contemporary value system. However, these debates and arguments have blurred the actual state of affairs of media from the critical eye of the scholars, and it has been long the need to analyze seriously how media work for social power and change.
The writer then conducts an extensive discussion about the way Lenin thought of media, press, and other means of promoting what he wanted. He discusses his writings in connection with revolution and other emerging trends of that time. The writer argues that although what Lenin was writing about the press at that time is considered to be something coherent and with a plan, it is not the fact. According to the writer, there is no such pattern-based policy or vision of controlling and/or manipulating media either in Schrammist or Stalinist commentaries. As such, according to the writer, it is not creditable, as a great many writers have wrongly attempted, to carve out a theory of media control by researching the writings of Lenin of other people is not possible because there no such theory exists that can be brought out. However, what exists there is “selective quotation” which fairly justified that overtly controlled, completely politicized, and wholly propagandist media. Sparks (2000) states that the “Soviet Communist Theory of the Press” was said to justify the subordination of all media to the line of the party leadership” (38). However, what this entailed was not compatible with reality. For example, if it was possible to monitor the accurate picture of the scene of the press in 1936 Moscow, then it became dramatically different later in, say, the time of the 1980s. In such communist countries as Central and Eastern Europe, things were also very different from one another which was clearly manifested in the way media were used to monitor the state of affairs in these individual countries. Hence the extending dearth of uniformed monitoring was not rigidly possible and by the passage of time, it continued to be more and more complex. (Sparks, 2000, in Curran & Park, 36-37).
For example, the Romanian system was up to present facts in a faithful exact way. The system operational in Poland, in contrast, went through a number of changes beginning from the 1950s in which it observed open and close policies for media monitoring making it a hodgepodge recipe. The Hungarian system, in addition, had undergone a long series of changes and processes of gradual liberalization which dated back to the unsuccessful revolution of 1956. Thus, it becomes crystal clear that the remark that there was a uniform media policy or system in the communist block. The second fact is that through geography and/or language these countries came in contact with other countries through radio waves (attempted to be jammed) and TV broadcasting. (Sparks, 2000, in Curran & Park, 37-39).
European Media and Post-Communism Era
Although capitalism was to make its emergence solid on the grounds of the world after communism, it was a different kind of capitalism in this very period, distinctive in a number of ways for the 1950s capitalism of the US. A salient feature of this wave was that a clear interrelationship between mass media and economic and political powers was evident. In this regard, the case of Hungary is presented where a long struggle for media policy regulation continued with ups and downs. However, taken on the whole, the time for media, after the demise of communism became of different nature and outlook. An emerging platform had politicians, businessmen, and other important pillars of society gathered and media became a tool of “routine interchange between the different groups in post-communist countries”. Moreover, these countries presented a state of misbalance in governmental operations and regulations of such grave areas as media and its link with politics and economics. As such for quite a long period, we see turmoil going on between the former communist tycoons, recently emerging capitalist powers, and the concerned governments. The governments of these countries aimed to use media to interfere with economic circles to avoid any wave of fluctuation for the stability of a country; as the governments became more powerful, media were also used to curb the impending emergence of monopolies; moreover, the improved sensibility of the post-communist time let governments use the media to protect the reputation of a number of figures that needed this protection. In this way, the European media became more and more liberalized and refined under the shade of capitalism and fading shadow of communism. Then it became that common sensibility saw a need for well-defined procedures so that media could be well regulated. AS such it was the Czech Republic to at first bring legal regulation for media broadcasting and grant a commercial license for broadcasting. And then gradually the entire scene changed and such organizations as Central European Television for the 21st Century (CET-21), Central European Media Enterprises Group (CME), and so on. Today, broadcasting, cinema, and other types of media in Europe are so differently monitored in the context of the twenty-first century that it is no more seen to be a past communist region. (Sparks, 2000, in Curran & Park, 37-39).
Moreover, today, it is also important to have a closer look at different media being operated in Europe for a clear understanding of the mid of capitalist waves around the world. In the upcoming part of the present paper, I would examine three genres of European media to analyze its overall state of affairs and reach an estimate as to which way the entire region is moving with regard to media.
European Cinema Industry
The Cinema industry in European regions is going through a gradual decline of the audiences. It is a state which has alarmed the concerned bodies because it is leaving grave marks on the face of the industry. Although serious attempts are being put to recover the already much-lost audience, there are complex issues at this end of the continuum to be seriously dealt with. The last months of the year 2005 did prove beneficial in recovering some of the lost audiences back to European cinema; it could not work out the negative tendency of the declining percentage of the audiences. A decided decrease in the cinema-going audience was seen in the Mediterranean Rim and Europe. 10.6% audience drop was observed at that time on average in the 19 countries of Western Europe. The drop is becoming more and more alarming as the figure declined to steady low curve in the year 2005. Major European markets are showing mixed results that display up and down in the number of audiences going to cinemas. A number of hypotheses have been constructed in order to understand this decline. For instance, using other media such as dvds, an increase in leisure habits of the people, and pirated versions of films have been put forward by the thinkers. Other thinkers see the situation in a different context. They scrutinize the quality of the films being produces lately. Both Hollywood and European films were labeled as being unsuccessful in drawing audiences in large numbers to cinemas. Bensi (2006) considers that it is worth mentioning that European cinemas in 2005 saw a decline or incline due to the quality of the films shown on the cinemas, films being either English or European in language. In attempts of addressing the tendency of decline in the cinema-going audiences, the issue of ticket price has also been considered as one of the variables that are capable of altering the numbers of audiences attending cinemas. Following is the quantitative illustration of the trends of cinema-going audiences and the increase in the prices of tickets. According to Bensi (2006), prices of cinema tickets, however, are not the only variable to influence the cinema-going trends of the audiences. is not the only. On the closer look, what comes to our notice is the fact that different markets played differently in the year 2005 with regard to attracting people to cinemas; there were such factors as big cities versus small towns that revealed different scenarios for this declining trend; moreover, the demand for the kinds of stars on the films that were shown in 2005. Last but not least, growing competition in the market is another factor that can be regarded as another variable that affected the number of audiences in the year 2005.
2006, in comparison to the year 2005, proved to be far more fruitful with regard to the number of audiences heading toward cinemas in Europe. In 2006, on average, there was a steady increase in the number of audiences: 5.6%. In this issue of 2007 of Media Salles journal, Wolff also argues that there are a number of factors that affect admission to cinemas. There are two kinds of these affecting factors:
- are those noticeable only in an extended period of time;
- are those factors that can be examined on a year-to-year basis because they are of an incidental kind.
An example of long term affecting factor is the use of pirated DVDs. This kind of cause is not only unnoticeable at face value but also does affect the admission tendency indirectly as well as the overall industry. The author also points out to the factor of leisure time habits of people to be affecting the admission to cinemas. However, on the whole, in the year 2006, the pertinent factor was also the quality films being shown in the European cinemas especially from the mainstream US market. According to Wolff (2006), quality films (comparison of yearly charts of top-20 films) alone can prove high turnover of cinema-going people as is shown in the chart below which tells us that if in 2005 admission to cinema decreased, the key player were the kinds of films being shown in European cinemas; moreover, the charts shows that admission increase in the year 2006 exhibits an upward movement of admission to cinema curve mainly because of the quality of the films being shown.
2007, was another year for the European Union in which downward movement of cinema-going people was reported on the figures. In 2007, the drop was recorded to be 1.3% in the twenty-seven of the European Union countries. However, an analysis of country by country figures gives a rather different picture about the year 2007. It is that the UK was the major market for the cinema sales, gaining a +3.7% in the overall run for the sales of cinema tickets; the UK recovered most of its cinema-going audiences that it lost in the year 2006, confirming its status as the second-largest cinema selling market in Europe. However, Germany, Spain, and France saw a decline in this year too. In the year 2007, Germany’s decline was so harsh a blow on its face that it slashed back to the position that it held in the year 1995, losing 11 million tickets in the open market. Spain also lost 6 million spectators in 2007. Italy, on the other hand, is one country of the European Union which is showing steady inclination in the number of its cinema-goings spectators. According to Brunella (2008), Italy improved to almost 12% in the year 2007 which is a positive sign for this country. One reason for this successful turnover of the audiences to the Italian cinemas was due to the making of Italian films. Moreover, in 2007, such small countries as Ireland, Western Europe, also see growth in the figures as Ireland improved to 2.9% in 2007; Greece also moved up to the positive figure of 7.7% in the same year. Other areas of Europe like Central Europe, Eastern Europe, and the Mediterranean Rim also show fluctuating figures, Turkey is one on the top of the list of droppers (Brunella, 2008).
However, delving deep into the situation reveals a different aspect of all which is happening in European cinema. According to Brunella (2008), with regard to infrastructures in the European market, a great many screens in Western Europe are still showing a stable state, whereas, in the Mediterranean Rim and in Central Europe the signs of growth are registered. Movie theaters’ typology, at the present time, is continuously changing “with an increase in screens located in complexes housing over 8 screens” (2). A noteworthy comparison is given that as compared to 2005 and 2006, there was an increase in the multiplexes screens in 2007. In 2005 and 2006 the number of screens in the multiplexes was 11,393 which went up to 11,910 in the year 2007. Analyzing the geographical setting of the region, Brunella (2008) reports that multiplexes are opening more in those areas where this trend is still new for people, thus receiving a warm response from them. The main markets for this phenomenon are Poland (7 new openings in 2007), Italy and Turkey (4 new openings in 2007, in each country), and other such small locations as Croatia and Greece. France and Ireland also show a positive tendency in this regard along with Spain, though at the lowest side on the list. However, there are also some closures: 2 closures took place in Italy, and in Spain, these were four in number. This is because of the mounting competition in the market. The following table illustrates the entire statistics of multiplexes in Europe’s five major markets:
Brunella also discusses the construction of multiplexes worldwide and reveals that globally this trend is mounting high up to the present times. It is important to note that in the year 2007, the number of digital screens globally met a doubling figure in a practical sense. In other words, in 2007 digital screens rose from 2,864 to 5,830, which is something that tells us of the future trends in the cinematic nature of the world. The major portion of this growth of the multiplexes has been reported to take place alone in North America – especially the United States of America; in the US, there were 1,957 digital screens in the year 2006 which rose up to the figure of 4,576 in 2007, in merely 12 months. “This is 78.5% of the world’s total projectors fitted with DLP Cinema or 4K technology and over 10% of US screens. In the same period, Europe advanced from 529 to 830 installations, with a 56% increase” (Brunella, 2008, pp. 2-3). The following table shows the worldwide expansion of the multiplexes:
Looking at the global picture from this angle reveals that multiplex in the coming thing in the future will rise more and more. However, one thing is quite clear the US is standing prominent in this area as well.
European Media and the Audiovisual Market
Because of economic pressure and technological advances, West European broadcasting was deregulated in the decade of the 1980s. This deregulation led to an immense increase in the number of TV channels in that region. Media companies had diverse opportunities at their disposal due to the market’s opening to the commercial interest at the same time programming material being great in demand. These media companies became actively involved in marketing across borders. Presently, Germany is the biggest and most lucrative market that attracts foreign companies. More attractive Germany’s broadcasting market became after the introduction of digital TV in the year 1996 accompanied by further freeing of proprietorship regulations.
Transnational broadcasting has been made possible today because of the diffusion of the technology of cable and satellite broadcasting. In Europe, like some other countries, this transnational broadcasting has become inevitable. As a result, a number of issues such as lack of frequencies lost the grounds. With supranational pressure building, and new companies pushing into the market, the governments of this region were compelled to bring deregulation to their broadcasting sector. Back then US companies that regarded other countries like European Union to be their secondary market only, moved in to make their profits. Germany was seen as the most lucrative market because of the largest population and the strongest advertising sector (Holtz-Bacha, 1997, pp. 39-42). Since then the European regions attracted outside audiovisual related companies and the world saw a boom in this industry in Europe. However, the trend continued until the time when the European Union brought into force some laws and regulations that aimed to limit other countries’ audiovisual traffic from entering the European borders. The major impact of these limiting laws is certainly felt on the face of US-based companies more than any other country in the world.
Laws by European Union in the Audiovisual Market
Looking at the present scenario of Europe’s audiovisual market, it is known that US-based firms have been highly affected by the laws limiting outside traffic into Europe. Except for the commercial aircraft industry of the US, the entertainment industry collects more revenue by selling products outside the US. The total earnings of the US are backed up greatly by the entertainment industry which has now become an important point of strength of the US economical development generating profits and jobs. As such, European Union is the region from where US companies drive more profit home. The annual trade surplus of the US in the year 1989 that was extracted from the European market alone was half of the total earning of the US entertainment industry: $2.5 billion. US domination of the movie market can also be seen in this region. US television is watched a large portion of total percentage in Europe. In contrast, the European film industry and TV channels do not enjoy such status in the US. This, in the overall picture, had led such countries as France to think that by this way US is affecting the typical culture of the country because different idioms and floods of US images are entering their borders which must be stopped. Moreover, the expansion of the European market is also a challenge for US-based companies (Kessler, 1995).
Back then a long period of talks continued through hot and cold times until it was proposed that to continue to enjoy the profits from the European Union, the US companies had to lend technical assistance to the European officials so that they can also contribute positively to the growth of their own industry. However, since then so much has changed and the present environment presents a different picture.
Recently a study reveals that the competition between the US and the EU is still going on the media front. The study examined the media behavior of the EU to examine how they react to the things going on in the US; in this case, they studied the recent coverage of media to the presidential candidate, Obama, and Clinton. The democrats, as the study revealed, appeared to have 10 percent more coverage in Europe than the other block.
European Coverage of U.S. Presidential Candidates
30 Days of Media Coverage
United States Coverage of U.S. Presidential Candidates
30 Days of Media Coverage
This study reveals one thing clear the EU is watching closely the moves the prospective presidential candidates make now. This is because of the growing concerns of the EU in global matters with respect to the circumstances taking place in the EU. Moving along the same line of European media, we also find that the music industry of the EU also shows a different climate than before.
Today, Internet copyright also seeks directives taken by the EU. It seems that wishes to remain persistent with the stance taken on Directive on Cable and Satellite Transmissions; in this directive, it was decided “to apply the law of the country of emission or the law of the server” (Gervais, 2001, p. 1363). For the Cable and Satellite Directive, the EU held that if the broadcasting company was situated in a third country with a lower protection level (but its uplink with satellite existed in a Community Member State), then the communist state would be regarded as the point of origin from where the transmission is being aired. Now the matter has switched toward Internet transmission. It is argued that if the EU holds similar procedures for Internet-based transmission, the same will happen to it. The study by Gervais shows that if the right procedures are adopted, like the EU directives, big markets such as Canada, the US, and other countries can also ensure secure music transmission over the Internet. Here it is important to note that the EU stands to be a role model for other countries which simply tells us of the conscious efforts that the EU is putting to stabilize its media and move through competition toward healthy prospects.
Current Facts about Digital Music Market in the EU
European Union is one of the places in the world where, not surprisingly though, the distribution of digital music, television shows, and movies, have given rise to a number of critical matters. The executive division of the European Union, the European Commission, recently threw a warning that there were serious issues present in 27 of the European Union countries with regard to the distribution of digital music. The concerned person, Viviane Reding, a commission of EU to oversee issues related to media, said that by the mid of 2008, she would attempt to bring forward proposals that would make online music business feasible as well as easy for people; so that, cross-border activities for digital commerce could also be streamlined. In a statement, she said that the content sector of Europe suffers due it the fragmentation of the regulation that the union has brought. Moreover, she viewed the situation as not consumer-friendly to access copyright material because there was a lack of clear-cut and well-defined regulation. She also pointed toward serious disagreements amongst different stakeholders over basic matters, e.g., copying digital material (Pfanner, 2008).
The spokesperson pointed out serious consideration that needs common attention. For example, she said that “the need for content distributors to secure individual licenses to films and other copyrighted material in every country in which they plan to do business”. Moreover, there are observations that the commission is planning to initiate efforts so that rights-holders, along with movie studios, can acquire licenses that have validity in a multi-territory situation like the EU. However, there are no observations as to how the commission is aiming to meet these goals either now or in the coming time which clouds its status in the critical eye. Critics are pointing out a number of concerns present especially in small countries. The concerns are of the people of these countries as well as of the politicians. The major point here is that they fear that if movies from other countries are allowed in their countries, their culture would be affected. Here the major point of interest becomes the movies created in Hollywood (Pfanner, 2008).
Pfanner points out the time when different media companies, providers of telecommunications services and facilities, and other stakeholders battled hard over the matter of royalties for those who held the copyright, the battle focused on one point: how to legalize digital music for pan-European usage. Moreover, “Some artists and politicians have objected to a European Commission move two years ago to ease pan-European music licensing by requiring collecting societies, which used to have national monopolies, to compete with each other across boundaries” (Pfanner, 2008). There are other issues as well that make it difficult for the European music market to completely take advantage of the digital media out there. For example, there is a problem with the system of windows. This system can vary from country to country in their operations. For instance, in the UK movies are released on windows the same day as they are released in the United States of America. However, in some countries of the EU, it took months to release a movie. However, such stakeholders as Warner Brothers are in an effort to do the same for the EU countries. Thus in the overall picture, content business appears to be a tricky one in the EU, something that both the outside companies and the local ones must take care of.
It is not possible to overlook music industry facts and figures when we examine the EU for the share in the music industry. According to a recent study, it was surprisingly noted that European Union presents a rather complex outlook for business in the music industry. A study done by Jupiter Research (2003), tells that the European music industry is growing by the day as the profits are multiplying: In Europe, “digital music revenues rose from €10.6 million in 2003 to €46.3 million in 2004 and will reach €836.0 million in 2009, or 8% of the European music market” (Jupiter Research, 2008). Although this is the case in the European music industry, it is not in compliance with what was claimed by the people concerned about the business figures of these years of the European music industry. However, great claims could not be met as the launch of Napster and iTunes in the UK and other European continental countries did not boost up to as much height as was expected.
There are certain issues in the European music market. For example, there is the case of Apple which faced impediments in this market. One important point in connection with iTunes going into Europe is its pricing scheme which has to go through a spell of attack by consumers. Now the problem comes again in the shape of European Union regulation that requires that each European Union country must be sold music at the same price as in other countries. Another problem is the red tape practices in many businesses in the EU. Another challenge that dulls the music business in European Union is the practices of piracy and downloading done illegally. Apple faced problems on all these grounds. Moreover, Apple went through hard times while trying to catalog local music databases. All these impediments slowed down consumer interest in the product Apple was so enthusiastic to sell in the EU music market. It is important to note that still in the present time, CD music sells more than any other media of music. Thus iTunes and Napster must take these things into account for better prospects from the EU music industry (Jupiter Research, 2008).
Conclusion
European media has gone through a number of turmoil, modifications, and challenges up to the present day. In the past days, when communism ruled this region, the territory stood to be the leader in media initiatives and impressed the entire world. Although defamed for its specific drive of media at that time, it is clear that Europe individually contributed massively to the development of media of the world as the US became its furious counterpart in the Cold War time putting more effort than it could have without indulging into the cold battle.
Then the time came that the EU became sort of isolated from the world due to political, economical, and developmental factors. Then it had to let outsiders grab its market share. If Hollywood takes a major portion of European media today, it links this victory to the same time of the past when Europe was struggling to look for relief on the national front. However, today the effects of the same turmoil are still felt.
Although it is right to suggest that today Europe is well in the competition of media with the rest of the world, it faces new challenges as the countries of this region join hands together on the platform of the European Union or Euro Zone. Thus, there are such countries as Poland that need back-up by other countries to stand to be strong enough to fight in the growing global competition. EU’s directives in television and music show that this region is becoming tougher than before for the outside products and companies to enter. By the passage of time, this competition seems to mount. European media have now come to a stage where it is difficult to mold them by another country.
With the passage of time, it is hoped that media will prove to be significant for the overall growth of the world intellectual economy and something that happened in the past will not be repeated so that the world is saved from such evils as the Cold War.
Works Cited
Curran, J., & Park, M. J. (Eds.) De-Westernizing media studies, (2000). London: Routledge, pp 40-65.
Bensi, P. (2006). “Cinema-going in Europe in 2005”. European Cinema Journal: Media Salles. (2) iss. (xi). International Edition.
Wolff, J. P. (2007). “An explanation that proved to be right: recent developments of cinema attendance”. European Cinema Journal: Media Salles. (2) iss. (viii). International Edition.
Brunella, E. (2008). “Drop in European audiences, but with exceptions the slow growth of European multiplexes continues almost 6,000 digital screens throughout the world”. European Cinema Journal: Media Salles. (1) iss. (x). International Edition.
Holtz-Bacha, C. (1997). “Development of the German media market: opportunities and challenges for U.S. media firms”. Journal of Media Economics. 10 (4). 39-42.
Kessler, K. L. (1995). “Protecting free trade in audiovisual entertainment: a proposal for counteracting the European Union’s trade barriers to the U.S. entertainment industry’s exports”. Law and Policy in International Business. 26 (2), 563-611.
Market IQ (2008). European media favors the Democrats more than does U.S. media. Web.
Gervais, D. J. (2001). “Transmissions of music on the Internet: an analysis of the copyright laws of Canada, France, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States”. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 34 (5), 1363+.
Jupiter Research (2008). The hills aren’t alive with the sound of digital music. Web.
Pfanner, E. (2008). “Apple sizes up Europe’s movie-rental market”. Herald Tribune. Web.