sou · GUB351 · 2007-01-01 00:00:00 — To avoid certain programme services being exclusively restricted to some operators, thereby forcing consumers to sign agreements with several operators so as to gain access to all the programme services they , we propose that a broadcasting licence for mobile television could be linked with conditions on an obligation, on a non- discriminatory basis, to offer transmissions to each operator wishing to provide a programme service to its clients. We further propose, in order to enable frequencies to be given for free television in mobile television, that a licence to transmit mobile television could be linked with conditions on the licence holder being required to offer transmissions as free television. The provisions of Chapter 6 of the RTVL on broadcast contents and of Chapter 7 of the same Act on advertising and other commercials are also applicable to television broadcasts to mobile reception de- vices. We consider that the different conditions for reception between mobile television and traditional television give cause to allow, to a certain extent, exemptions from the provisions of Chapters 6 and 7 of the RTVL with regard to mobile television. Our point of depar- ture has therefore been that regulation of the contents of television broadcasting that is especially adapted to mobile reception devices does not need to be as extensive as that applying to traditional forms of television. However, mobile television must comply with the requirements stipulated in the TV Directive and to enable Swedish accession to the TV Convention drawn up by , it should also follow the provisions of the Convention. We consider that the regulations of the TV Directive and the TV Convention mean that all the provisions on broadcast content in Chapter 6 of the RTVL must apply to mobile television in the same way as it does to other terrestrial television. Since it may be assumed that transmissions that are specially adap- ted for mobile television will contain a greater number of shorter television programmes, we propose that mobile television is exemp- ted from the application of the provisions of Chapter 7, Section 6 of the RTVL on minimum total advertising time on any given occa- sion. We also propose that advertising in mobile television may be broadcast to the extent that the TV Directive and the TV Convention allow advertising broadcasts, i.e., of a maximum of 15 per cent of broadcasting time per 24 hours but no more than 12 minutes during one full hour. We also consider that the provisions of Chapter 7 of the RTVL should also be applicable to mobile television. TV programme accessibility for people with disabilities According to the RTVL, conditions for licences to broadcast tele- vision programmes may involve the obligation to design the broad- cast in such a that programmes are accessible to people with disabilities. No equivalent provision exists for television transmissions that do not require licences, i.e. transmissions via satellite or cable. Conditions entailing the requirement for television programmes to be made accessible to people with disabilities are included in the broadcasting licences for SVT, UR and TV4. No such conditions exist for other broadcasters licensed to transmit terrestrial television. The Inquiry was instructed to consider the need for legislative amendments to improve access to television programmes for people with disabilities. stringent legislation for greater accessibility With the transition from analogue to digital transmission technology, there will be greater opportunities to make television programmes accessible to people with disabilities. Digital technology enables new methods for subtitling, both directly and inserted later. Conditions for creating accessibility for viewers with sight impairments will be improved through opportunities for audio description, in which a recorded voice describes what can be seen in the image of a tele- vision programme during natural pauses in the dialogue, and voice subtitles in which the subtitle in the picture is read aloud and trans- mitted to the viewer in the form of a separate sound channel. The greater technological opportunities to design accessible tele- vision programmes combined with the importance of people with disabilities being given the greatest possible access to programme con- tent, means, in our opinion, that requirements should be included in the RTVL to the effect that broadcasters are to make their broad- casts accessible to people with disabilities. We consider that greater accessibility is such an important aim that there is cause to legislate on the obligation for all those broadcasting television, irrespective of whether or not these broadcasts are trans- mitted under licence and regardless of the transmission technology used, to ensure that the programmes broadcast are made accessible to people with disabilities. However we consider that the provisions of the Fundamental on Freedom of Expression mean that without constitutional amendments it is not possible to prescribe such obligations for those broadcasting television programmes via wire. Under the Inquirys terms of reference, our task did not in- clude proposals for constitutional amendments. The proposals we present with regard to television programme accessibility for people with disabilities therefore include transmissions relayed by means other than wire, i.e. terrestrial and satellite transmissions. Since there are no objective reasons giving cause to exempt wire transmissions from the obligation to make television programmes accessible for people with disabilities, we believe however that there is reason to consider an amendment to the provisions of the Fundamental on Freedom of Expression on the possibility of limiting freedom of for wire transmissions. This issue could be appro- priately dealt with within the framework of the work of the Inquiry concerning the freedom of the press and freedom of expression (Ju 2003:04). The provisions regulating the obligation to make television pro- grammes accessible for people with disabilities should be flexible so that the different technical and financial situations of broadcasters can be taken into account. It should also be possible to change the requirements from time to time, partly in case of change to an indi- vidual broadcasters situation, but also if technical developments give cause to alter the requirements or establish new requirements. At the same time, the provisions must be so clear and distinct that it is evident to each individual or company that transmits television programmes what specific requirements he or she must fulfil. We consider that clear and distinct yet still flexible regulations can be established by making the fundamental requirement on accessi- bility evident in the law itself, and also by instructing the Govern- ment or an agency appointed by the Government to issue more detailed provisions on the requirement. We therefore propose that a provision be introduced in the Radio and Television Act that requires those who transmit television programmes by means other than wire to design the transmissions in a that allows people with disabilities access to the programmes to the extent that the Government, or the agency appointed by the Government, pre- scribes. When determining the in which, and the extent to which, programmes are to be made accessible for people with disabi- lities, consideration is to be given to the broadcasters financial situation, the technical development of accessibility services in the field of television and the number of viewers who use the individual programme service. Although the proposal states that it is incumbent upon the Government or the agency appointed by the Government to publish the detailed provisions concerning accessibility, the Inquiry presents a number of guidelines that we feel should serve as the basis for formulating the provisions. We consider that the provisions should require broadcasters to provide a certain percentage of television programmes with subtitles, sign language interpretation, audio description and voice subtitling. In our view, the following final objectives should be prescribed: 90 per cent of transmissions are to be subtitled within eight years from the present date 2 per cent of transmissions – or four hours per week – are to be broadcast with sign language interpretation within eight years from the present date 10 per cent of transmissions are to have audio description within twelve years from the present 50 per cent of those programmes where languages other than Swedish are spoken are to be furnished with voice subtitles within eight years from the In addition, further short-term targets should be announced (such as annual goals) regarding the various accessibility services. The provisions should allow exemptions from the requirement, or in certain situations reduce the requirements regarding accessi- bility, for programme services from broadcasters whose financial situation is too limited to satisfy the requirements or whose trans- missions are only seen by a small number of viewers. Technical grounds may also exist for exempting certain types of programmes from the accessibility requirements, such as audio descriptions of music programmes and pure news programmes. The provisions should not contain regulations that require broad- casters to transmit programmes where the programme content is specially adapted to people with disabilities, such as news broadcasts that are adapted for people with minor learning disabilities. Instead, there should still be an opportunity for prescribing obligations of this kind in the licence conditions. We therefore consider that the current opportunity to combine broadcasting licences with conditions on the obligation to design transmissions so that they are accessible to people with disabilities should be retained. Chapter 8 of the RTVL contains provisions on the obligation for cable television network owners to relay certain television pro- grammes to residents. The obligations of network owners include providing, without charge, a specifically determined frequency in each municipality for transmissions of television programmes by one or more local cable transmission undertaking. The term local cable transmission undertaking refers to a legal person set up to operate local cable transmissions and which can be expected to allow different interests and opinion trends voice their views in the course of opera- tions. Local cable transmission undertakings may not broadcast advertisements. The remit of the Inquiry includes analysing the impact of digita- lisation on non-commercial television transmissions and whether the conditions for these transmissions can be improved through legis- lation. The remit also includes giving consideration to the activitys designation. Adjustment to the Directive We consider that the obligation to provide frequencies for local cable transmission undertakings should be adjusted according to Article 31 of the Directive. We therefore propose amending Chapter 8, Section 2 of the RTVL so that it applies to each individual broadcaster that owns or otherwise controls an electronic communications network used for relaying television transmissions to the general public by means of wire if at least 100 of the house- holds connected to the network use it as their primary means of receiving television transmissions. The requirement that network owners are to provide frequencies for transmissions from local cable transmission undertakings without charge means that the network operator may not charge a fee for the space in the network. However, the network owner is not obligated to pick up the signal for the transmissions from the local cable trans- mission undertaking, known as a take away obligation; instead, the costs that arise for sending the transmissions to the network owners distribution centre are to be paid by the local cable transmission undertaking. We do not consider that a statutory take away obligation should be introduced since regulation of this kind would have an un- reasonable impact on smaller network owners and would involve a risk that the increased operating costs of the cable network resul- ting from a take away obligation would ultimately be passed on to the households connected to the network. The ongoing digitalisation of the cable networks means that there will be room for more programme services in the networks. This could justify increasing the network owners obligation to provide frequencies for transmissions from local cable transmission under- takings to include more than one channel. With few exceptions, only a limited amount of the broadcasting time that local cable transmission undertakings presently have is used to distribute programmes produced in-house in premiere broad- casts. Accordingly, there seems to be no lack of transmission capacity for those wishing to express their views and ideas in a broadcast by a local cable transmission undertaking. We therefore consider that at present it is neither imperative nor necessary to increase the net- work owners obligation to provide frequencies for transmissions from local cable transmission undertakings. Networks with analogue and digital transmission technologies At present, the major cable networks, at least, are entirely or partially digitalised. The cable operators that control the digitalised networks do, however, transmit television programmes with both digital and analogue technologies. The provisions on the obligation to provide frequencies for trans- missions of television programmes from local cable transmission undertakings contained in Chapter 8, Section 2 of the RTVL can be interpreted as a right for the broadcaster using both analogue and digital technologies for transmission to choose whether the local cable transmission undertaking is to be assigned analogue or digital transmission frequencies. We consider that transmissions from local cable transmission undertakings should be able to be received by all households con- nected to the network in which they are broadcast. To the extent that the network owner, or the broadcaster otherwise in control of a cable network, gives households connected to the network the opportunity to receive certain programme services with analogue technology, there is, accordingly, reason to require that broadcasts from local cable transmission undertakings are included in the ana- logue selection. We therefore propose that those network owners that retransmit television programmes using both analogue and digital technologies are to be obligated to provide analogue frequencies for broadcasts of the local cable transmission undertakings. However, we do not consider that there should be a requirement that cable transmission undertakings must be assigned digital fre- quencies. A local cable transmission undertaking is not obliged to transmit programmes throughout the day, every day. Where a cable trans- mission undertaking has chosen to refrain from part of the capacity of the channel reserved for its broadcasts, it has been considered possible to let one or several commercial broadcasters use the unused space. Representatives of local cable transmission undertakings have pointed out that the shared transmission space can lead to the risk of confusion between commercial and non-commercial programme activities. One of the aims of the provision on the obligation to provide frequencies in cable networks for transmissions from local cable transmission undertakings is that even those with limited financial resources must have the possibility to broadcast television pro- grammes. We therefore do not consider it reasonable to place re- quirements on cable transmission undertakings to transmit a specific minimum number of hours per day or per week. The lack of a requirement regarding minimum broadcasting time means that the transmission frequency reserved for the local cable transmission undertakings broadcasts is unused insofar as the cable company does not use it. For the network owner to be able to make efficient use of transmission frequencies in the network, we consider it reasonable that the owner be given the opportunity of allowing one or more commercial broadcasters take over the frequency that a local cable transmission undertaking does not utilise. Despite the negative consequences for the local cable transmission undertaking that may ensue from a shared channel, we therefore consider that it should still be permitted for the network owner to allow commercial broadcasters to take over unused capacity. The role of local television in the terrestrial network Digitalisation of the terrestrial network provides scope for additional programme services. There is thus reason to consider whether part of this space should be set aside for local, non-commercial tele- vision. In our opinion, this issue should, however, be determined by the Government and the Swedish Radio and TV Authority in connection with the approval of licences. Thus, we do not consider that provisions should be included in the RTVL that entail a certain amount of space in the terrestrial network being allocated to local non-commercial television. The term given to these activities We propose that the term local cable transmission undertaking be replaced by local cable TV association, as this term better reflects the fact that the legal persons operating these activities are largely non-profit associations. Licences to broadcast community radio The term community radio refers to local sound radio broadcasting for associations. Licences to broadcast community radio can, under Chapter 4, Section 4 of the RTVL, be given to non-profit associa- tions linked to the broadcasting area and to parishes and associations of parishes in the Church of . However it is not possible to issue community radio licences to religious communities other than the Church of . In connection with the processing of a legislative matter per- taining to more stringent demands for local connections when ap- proving community radio licences to non-profit associations, questioned whether there were grounds for discriminating in favour of the Church of compared with other religious communities in the text of the law (Govt. 2003/04:182, p. In the presented after the statement by , the Government announced that the question of enab- ling registered religious communities to obtain community radio licences will be deliberated upon in due course. After this question was presented to the Inquiry, we have under- taken to review it without special supplementary terms of reference. The Inquiry considers that there is no objective reason to discri- minate in favour of the Church of compared with other religious communities with regard to the right to broadcast com- munity radio. We therefore propose that Chapter 4, Section 4 of the RTVL be amended so that it would be possible to grant licences to broadcast community radio to all registered religious communities and registered organisational sections of registered religious com- munities. These concepts include both the Church of and its parishes, church associations and dioceses and other religious com- munities and organisational sections of religious communities that have been registered under the Act on Religious Communities. For a non-profit association to obtain a licence to broadcast com- munity radio under Chapter 4, Section 4 of the RTVL, the associa- tion must have links with the broadcasting area. We consider that the same thing should apply to registered religious communities and registered organisational sections of registered religious communi- ties. In 1989, approved Convention on (the Television Convention)1. signed the Convention in 1989 but has not yet ratified it. The Con- vention contains regulations for programme content in television broadcasts in general, for advertising broadcasts and for programme sponsorship. The Inquiry was instructed to analyse the consequences of a Swedish accession to the Convention and to present proposals for the legislative amendments necessary for the Convention to be rati- fied. In connection with our deliberations on certain advertising issues in the interim report Adapting the Radio and Television Act to digital technology (SOU 2005:62), we have considered the consequences of a Swedish access to the Conventions advertising and sponsorship provisions and have presented proposals on amendments to the pro- visions of the RTVL concerning advertising and sponsorship that are necessary to ratify the Convention. In this report we discuss issues related to accession to the other provisions of the Convention. The RTVLs regulation of the television broadcasts that come under Swedish jurisdiction are based on the provisions of the Television Without Frontiers Directive (TV Directive). Like the TV Directive, the TV Conventions regulation of the issue of jurisdiction is based on the transmitting country principle. The criteria for when a broad- caster is considered to be established in a state that has acceded to the Convention are the same as those of the Directive for establish- ment in an EEA state. The difference between the Convention and the Directive is that there are a number of states that have ratified or are able to ratify the Convention but are not bound by the EEA agreement and are thus not included in the provisions of the TV Directive. Furthermore, not all the provisions of the Convention 1 Convention on , , 5.V.1989, ETS no.132, with a supplement according to ETS, no. See appendix 10. regarding broadcast content are completely identical with the con- tent provisions of the Directive. We therefore propose that Chapter 1, Section 2 of the RTVL be expanded to include a provision signi- fying that the transmitting country principle and the criteria that apply under the TV Convention are to apply with regard to issues regulated in the Convention. In order to emphasise that the TV Directive takes precedence over the TV Convention, we propose that the new provision only be applied in those cases where the applicability of the RTVL is not determined in accordance with Chapter 1, Section 2. Transmissions relayed through wire Television programmes transmitted or relayed in Swedish cable net- works are intended to be received only in . These trans- missions can therefore not be regarded as being of such a transfrontier nature as is required for the TV Convention to be applicable. We therefore consider that the fact that some of the Radio and Television Acts provisions do not include television programmes transmitted via wire does not in itself represent an obstacle to Swedish access to the Convention. Article 7 of the TV Convention contains provisions on the content of television broadcasts. These provisions entail, inter alia, limita- tions in the right to broadcast programmes containing portrayals of violence, pornography or indecent representations. We consider that the democracy provision in Chapter 6, Section 1 of the RTVL, the provision in Chapter 6, Section 2 of the same Act on limitations to the right to broadcast programmes with intensive portrayals of violence of a realistic nature or with pornographic pictures and the provision of Chapter 7, Section 3 of the RTVL, prohibiting people with a prominent role in programmes dealing mainly with news or current affairs from appearing in advertise- ments, together with the provisions we proposed in Chapter 2, are sufficient to fulfil the provisions of Article 7 of the TV Convention. The right of reply or its equivalent