Increasing the Citizens' EU Awareness E-Book

Hannah Cosse

• Herausgeber: GRIN Verlag
• Sprache: Englisch

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2008

Beschreibung

Master's Thesis from the year 2007 in the subject Politics - Topic: European Union, grade: 2,0, University of Münster, language: English, abstract: In the year of the 50th anniversary of the Treaties of Rome, and the 15th year after the (legal) creation of the European Union by the Treaty of Maastricht, European Integration slowed down considerably due to certain hindrances such as the rejection of the Constitutional Treaty, a low turnout at the last election to the European Parliament, and also the necessary revision of the main ‘future project’, the Lisbon Agenda. However, over the last 15 years we have witnessed a successful process of integration. Notwithstanding this successful story of economic integration and peace and security – one of the most important, but today often neglected attainments of the EU – the process of constant integration seems to have been too fast for the citizens of the European Union: although being legally ‘Europeans’ since 1992, the demos of the Union does not seem to feel connected to its newly gained political entity. Thus, the Union suffers from considerable democracy, legitimacy and ac-countability deficits. One reason - and characteristic at the same time - is the low participation and involvement of the Europeans in the political system of the Union. This assumption is the real starting point of this work. People need to participate to a greater extent in order to gain a more democratic political system in the EU and thus lay the basis for further integration, which is needed to cope with the arising challenges of the 21st century. But people can only participate in a system they know and knowledge about the EU is quite low. And there is no media attention and therefore a lack of European Publicity. This work analyses what kind of influence the European Commission can have on this sphere of problems, either by its media policy, or by its communication strategy.

Leseprobe

Table of Content

Master Thesis European Studies by Hannah Cosse

I. Introduction

I.1. Research Motivation

I.2. State of the Art in Research

I.3. Research Question, Methodology, Preliminary Remarks

II. The Framework

Chapter

II.1.a. Sources of (European) Publicity

II.1.a.1. The Media

II.1.a.2. The Communication

II.1.b. Developing the Framework

II.1.b.2. Types of European Publicity

II.2. Conclusion: The Publicity-Framework

III. Media Policy

III.1. A European Media System?

III.2. Development of European Media Policies

III.3. Media Concentration and Pluralism

III.4. Conclusion: The actual role of Media Policies

IV. Communication Strategy

IV.1. The Aims and Ways of Communication

IV.2. Development of the Communication Strategy

IV.3. Communicating with the Citizen?

IV.3.a. Commission s contribution to the period of reflection and beyond:

IV.3.b. White Paper on a European Communication Policy’

IV.4. Conclusion: Communication Strategy

V. Recommendations

V.1. Completing the Framework

V.2. Appraisal of Findings

V.2.a. The Influence of Media Policies on Awareness

V.2.b. The Influence of the Communication Strategy on Awareness

V.2.c. Conclusion of Appraisal

V.3. Recommendations

V.4. Conclusion: Recommendations

VI. Conclusion

Page 1

Page 2

Master Thesis European Studies by Hannah Cosse

Preface

Foremost I would like to thank Prof. Dr. Nico Groenendijk for supervising my thesis. His remarks, suggestions and friendly criticism were always a helpful incentive for further improvement and new approaches. I also appreciate the time Dr. Rik Reussing put into reading my work.

Furthermore I am grateful for the help of Sandra Voglreiter who enabled me to access the library of the ‘Erich-Brost-Haus’ research institute for journalism in Dortmund, which helped me to finally find a concise research topic. My preparation phase was also supported by a visit to the ‘Landesmedienforum NRW’ in Cologne, which Philip Pamme kindly suggested to me.

Moreover I appreciate and value all the time and nerves Annelene Bremer and Andrea Berghaus spent on reading and correcting my thesis.

Last but not least I am deeply grateful for all the support, motivation and re- assurances my family and friends gave me.

Page 4

Master Thesis European Studies by Hannah Cosse

List of Abbreviations

AIM

DG EBU EC EMS EP EPS ERG EU i2010 IGC MEP NGO NRA TEU TWF

List of Figures

Figure 1: Publicity in a Framework

Figure 2: Framework Figure 3: TWF directive 1989 Figure 4: TWF directive revised in 1997 Figure 5: Article 11 Freedom of Expression and Information Figure 6: The actual role of Media Policies Figure 7: Communication Strategy Dimensions Figure 8: Dimension of Commission’s Strategy Figure 9: Plan D - Initiatives at the Community Level Figure 10: White Paper on a European Information Policy Figure 11: Framework II Figure 12: Assessment of Recommendations

Annex 1: Meyer’s system of communication

Annex 2: Sources used for Information Annex 3: Media Policy Competence in Commission Annex 4: Internal Structure of DG Communication Annex 5: Seven Strategies for Information Policy 75 Annex 6: Article 255 EC

Annex 7: Structure of Plan D Annex 8: Plan D 77

Annex 9: Response to White Paper on a European

Annex 10: Degree of Europeanization

Page 5

I. Introduction 1 Hannah Cosse

I. Introduction

I.1. Research Motivation

In the year of the 50th anniversary of the Treaties of Rome, and the 15th year after the (legal) creation of the European Union by the Treaty of Maastricht, European Integration slowed down considerably due to certain hindrances such as the rejection of the Constitutional Treaty, a low turnout at the last election to the European Parliament, and also the necessary revision of the main ‘future project’, the Lisbon Agenda. However, over the last 15 years we have witnessed a successful process of integration: the creation of the single European market was completed by the introduction of the common currency, the Euro, and the Union has been enlarged to 27 member states. Notwithstanding this successful story of economic integration and peace and security - one of the most important, but today often neglected attainments of the EU - the process of constant integration seems to have been too fast for the citizens of the European Union: although being legally ‘Europeans’ since 1992, thedemosof the Union does not seem to feel connected to its newly gained political entity. The most recent Eurobarometer survey at the time of writing -Eurobarometer No. 67, July 2007- revealed that on average only 57 percent of all Europeans support the membership of their country in the European Union. Also voter participation in the European Parliamentary elections in 2004 was below 50 percent in almost all EU member states. Thus, the Union suffers from considerable democracy, legitimacy and accountability deficits. One reason - and characteristic at the same time - is the low participation and involvement of the Europeans in the political system of the Union. This assumption is the real starting point of this work. People need to participate to a greater extent in order to gain a more democratic political system in the EU and thus lay the basis for further integration, which is needed to cope with the arising challenges of the 21stcentury.

According to Robert Dahl, citizens need to be aware of and informed about the political system in order to participate in a democracy in an effective way.1This is where the democracy-problem for the EU starts: recent Eurobarometer surveys showed that knowledge about the EU, its system and its institutions is on the average quite low. Thus the citizens are not informed and therefore are not aware of the political system of the EU. Among the reasons for this flaw allegedly is the lack of media coverage about European topics.

1Dahl, 2000.

Page 6

I. Introduction 2 Hannah Cosse

The EU mainly attains media attention when there is a big EU event, as one of the most recent and broadest researches about EU media coverage showed. The objective of this ‘Adequate Information Management in Europe’2(AIM) project was to investigate - in a comparative study involving ten countries - the impact of mass media on the emergence of (a) European public sphere(s) in empirical, theoretical, and practical dimensions. Although the results - of course - differ between the ten countries, they show that media coverage about the European Union is low, which is seen as a hindrance for the emergence of a European Public Sphere.

Another term used for Public Sphere isEuropean Publicity3- which is the

aiming point of this thesis. But what is meant by it? Within the AIM research European Publicity was limited to media coverage about European topics. This definition of publicity has the advantage that it provides a basis for measurement: the quality and quantity of news about the European Union determines the level of European Publicity. This approach is one of the most common used ones in this field of research. However, as will be explained in detail in Chapter II of this thesis European Publicity must be regarded as a broader concept that also involves for example discourse and communication about European issues. Together they are the sources for European Publicity and allegedly the level of it has an influence on the citizens’ awareness of the European Union.

This interlinkage can also be further supported by the AIM research. Despite its too limited definition, the results still suggest a reason for the low level of citizens’ participation in the EU. If there is a lack of European Publicity with regard to media coverage about European issues; the level of awareness is considerably low. Accordingly people are not informed and cannot participate effectively; the EU suffers from a democratic deficit, and people reject the EU as a whole and show their discomfort for example by voting against the Constitutional Treaty. Therefore the institutions within the EU framework must engage in activities that raise the awareness of the citizens about the EU.

In the institutional framework of the EU there is a variety of actors involved not only in decision making but also in communication processes. The European Parliament is the institution of the citizens and the Councils (both the Council of Ministers and the European Council) represent the interests of the member states. However, the European Commission can be seen astheEuropean institution in the EU framework.

2AIM, 2006.

3Both terms are used in the academic literature. In this work publicity is used in most cases, but sometimes public sphere is used with the same meaning, scope and content.

Page 7

I. Introduction 3 Hannah Cosse

Also called the ‘Guardian of the Treaties’, the Commission is the institution that has the most European perspective in its activities. Furthermore the Commission in Brussels is the head of a decentralised communication body with delegations in all member countries. These delegations are among the main channels of communication between the EU and for example journalists in the member states. Moreover the Commission issues most press releases. Therefore it is chosen as the relevant actor in this thesis. However, raising the awareness of the citizens is not an easy task, but still the Commission has at least two opportunities.

Obviously European Publicity cannot just be created for example by simply regulating media content. Media is a communication device between the Multi-Level-Governance system and the citizens; by top-down and bottom-up communication publicity emerges, which is as explained above a requisite for awareness. However, the relation among media coverage and publicity is difficult to influence by the European Commission.4Foremost, because the freedom of the press is one of the most important democratic rights that is always protected by the highest barriers in a democracy. Therefore the Commission - fortunately - has no direct impact on the content of the media. However, it has different impacts on publicity; and therefore on the awareness of the citizens: by itsMedia Policiesand by itsCommunication Strategy.Why these two examples are chosen will be explained in the following. Later in this opening chapter a presentation of the research related state of the art will further support the argumentation that led to this choice. Finally this discussion will lead to the setting up of the research design of this thesis.

In the first place, Media Policies must be included because television and print media are still the primary sources of information for the Europeans, as recent Eurobarometer data suggests. The European Commission is the main actor in issuing media policies in the European Union. However, media policies basically remain in the hands of the member states. Jurisdiction about media policy is regarded as one of the most important national competences, because it is often regarded as part of cultural policies, and more important, the media system is perceived as part of the cultural identity of a country. Thus, cultural policies and most media policies remain at the member state level. But still the European Commission exercises its market competences for example by controlling monopolies and thus supporting media diversity. Hence, the European Union (and its Commission) sets the framework in which media operate.

4The approach of analysing the role of media coverage for publicity has been the focus of Cosse, 2005, unpublished.

Page 8

I. Introduction 4 Hannah Cosse

Media policy by the EU began in the 1980s on the initiative of the European Parliament. The aim was to connect the citizens to the Union. However, this goal was not really reached. First attempts to create a European type of media such asEurope TVfailed. Still it was the starting point for European media policies. TheTelevision without Frontiers directivewas the first regulative outcome of European Media Policies. It can still be seen as the most important European media policy instrument and one that also influences media content to a certain extent. The directive was created in order to set up common rules for advertising, the protection of minors and to secure a minimum share of European productions on European screens.

Since this regulative start of media policies the attitude and aims changed. The most recent developments in media policies are related to the buzzword ‘Information Society’. Under this label media policies are redirected to cope with technological innovations and also the convergence of the media. So far the so called media revolution - especially with regard to the developments in information and communication technologies - has not really been taken into account in the research about EU media policies.

The real starting point of the activities related to the information society was the adoption of the i2010 initiative (European Information Society 2010) in June 2005. It is built around three policy priorities: (1) creating an open and competitive single market for information society and media services within the EU, (2) increasing EU investment in research on information and communication technologies (ICT) by 80 percent, (3) promoting an inclusive European information society to close the gap between the information society ‘haves and have nots’.

After the adoption the responsible Commissioner for ‘Information Society and Media’, Viviane Reding, gave herself 18 months of time to review the current media policies. This period is now over and changes have been made especially with regard to the audiovisual content and telecommunications directives. At the time of writing the directives are either just adopted by the EP or will be adopted soon. The new regulations are the current ‘hot topics’ in media politics.

However, the described field of media policies is too broad for full coverage in this context. Therefore the main focus of this work will be in the first place on the development of media policies in general in order to assess the importance of the Commission’s role. In the second place the elaborations will focus on the Commission’s role in the field of media concentration and pluralism. This focus is chosen because it is the field in which the Commission might have its strongest competences related to the internal market and as pluralism of media is the most obvious impact on democracy, because of the need of plurality of sources of information.

Page 9

I. Introduction 5 Hannah Cosse

The second field in which the Commission has an influence on publicity is where it creates information, communication and discourse itself: its own Communication Strategy. In the first years of the Commission’s existence the public was basically neglected. Although first attempts to include it into the work of the European Union were already made in the end of the 1970s and throughout the 1980s, communication by the Commission really started for the first time after the Danes had rejected the Maastricht Treaty - so, about 15 years after the first elections for the people’s representation in the Union, the EP, and also after the legal creation of the citizenship in the same treaty that was rejected in Denmark in 1992.