26. 6. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 159/67 
entitlement to social security benefits for the full term 
of payment under the legislation of the Member State. 
3.3. In practical terms, the Committee believes that a 
Community citizen wishing to take up employment—or 
seek employment—in another Member State may well 
experience difficulty in finding out where he should 
apply for the necessary residence card. Member States 
should, in order to simplify the procedures and any 
language difficulties, have details available at appropri­
ate places such as passport, social security and labour 
offices, with competent staff available to advise. The 
relevant forms could be completed in either the host 
State or country of origin. 
3.4. The Committee regrets that long administrative 
delays are still being experienced by citizens moving 
within the Community entitled to, and claiming, social 
security benefits. It would strongly urge the Corn-
Done at Brussels, 27 April 1989. 
1. Introduction 
1.1. The Economic and Social Committee notes that 
(J) OJ No C 179, 17. 7. 1986, p. 4. 
(2) OJ No C 232, 31. 8. 1987, p. 29. 
(3) Doc. No 5858/89 of 10 April 1989 and Doc. No 5858/59 Corr. 
of 13 April 1989. mission to see that the formal commitment upon Mem­
ber States to deal swiftly with the totalization of calcu­
lation and payment of pro rata pensions, unemploy­
ment benefits and sickness and invalidity entitlements 
is properly exercised. 
4. Article 43(2) of the Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 
requires Member States to communicate to the Com­
mission, for information, the texts of agreements, con­
ventions or arrangements concluded between them in 
the manpower fields. In order to have a complete pic­
ture of the present situation and the additional steps to 
be taken to ensure the realization of European citizens' 
rights to move freely throughout the Community, the 
Committee requests the Commission to let it have, at 
an early opportunity, an updated and comprehensive 
report on the matter. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE 
the EC Council has been able, through this common 
position, to deploy efforts to strengthen the audio­
visual capacity of the Community, by promoting free 
circulation of programmes and stimulating creativity, 
production and distribution, in line with the convention 
drawn up by the Council of Europe. Opinion on the proposal for a Council Directive on the coordination of certain provisions 
laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in the Member States concerning the 
pursuit of broadcasting activities (!) 
(89/C 159/27) 
On 22 November 1988, the Bureau of the Economic and Social Committee decided, under 
the third paragraph of Article 20 of the Rules of Procedure, that an additional Opinion 
should be drawn up on the abovementioned proposal in order to update the Opinion adopted 
by the Committee on 1 July 1987 (2). 
On 13 April 1989 the Council drew up its common position (3) with a view to the adoption 
of a Council Directive on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation 
or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting 
activities. 
At its meeting on 25 April 1989 the ESC bureau appointed Mr Ramaekers rapporteur-general. 
At its 265th plenary session (meeting of 26 April 1989) the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion by a majority of votes, with 1 dissenting vote and 
4 abstentions. 
No C 159/68 Official Journal of the European Communities 26. 6. 89 
It is, in fact, because of the cultural aspects that cooper­
ation across Community frontiers is desirable and 
necessary. 
1.2. The Economic and Social Committee draws 
attention in this respect to the connection between more 
European cultural ventures in the field of film and 
television programmes and world-wide standardization 
for high definition television, in accordance with the 
EUREKA 95 project (l). 
2. General comments on the common position 
2.1. The Committee notes that the future Directive 
will cover only television broadcasting, to the exclusion 
of sound broadcasting. 
2.1.1. While it can agree to this new approach, the 
Committee would, however, stress that identical or 
similar standards, particularly regarding advertising, 
and criteria guaranteeing pluralism and the quality of 
information are concerns to be borne in mind when 
considering sound broadcasting, while having regard to 
the specific nature of that medium. 
2.2. The freedom to provide services in the form of 
retransmission of televised broadcasts is now guaran­
teed, subject to a safeguard clause allowing provisional 
suspension of the retransmission of broadcasts that do 
not conform to the Community provisions. 
2.3. In the context of the internal market the free 
movement of broadcasts represents the exercise of a 
fundamental freedom laid down in the Treaty, viz. the 
freedom to provide services. 
2.3.1. The Committee notes in this connection the 
Commission's concern to ensure the prevention of any 
acts which could be detrimental to this freedom or 
promote the creation of a dominant position and there­
by restrict pluralism and the freedom of information. 
The Commission should step up its monitoring in this 
area, and ensure compliance with Articles 85 and 86 of 
the Treaty. 
2.3.2. In this context the Committee would like the 
biennial reports provided for in Article 26 of the Direc­
tive to include a survey of trends regarding cultural 
diversity and pluralism. 
3. Specific comments 
3.1. The Committee notes that the common position 
is largely in line with its earlier Opinion, in that the 
(') Cf. Opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision on High 
Definition Television (cf. this OJ, p. 34). promotion of European programmes no longer takes 
the form of uniform quotas but respects the specific 
situations in the Member States under flexible and 
adaptable arrangements. 
However, it will not be possible to achieve the objective 
of encouraging the production of television pro­
grammes unless all broadcasters abide by the rule that 
a majority proportion of their transmission time is to 
be reserved for European programmes. The Committee 
would question whether the proposed system of reports 
is an effective guarantee thereof. 
3.2. The new provisions allow certain Member 
States to take account of their linguistic and cultural 
ties with third countries, as recommended in the Com­
mittee's Opinion. 
3.3. The Committee notes with satisfaction that the 
common position now provides for a right of reply for 
any natural or legal person whose legitimate interests 
have been damaged by an assertion of incorrect facts 
in a television programme. It points out that the intro­
duction of this right, which was not initially provided 
for in the Commission's proposal for a Directive, had 
been advocated in its earlier Opinions. 
3.4. The Committee would also stress that the com­
mon position no longer has any provisions on copy­
right. It observes that in its earlier Opinion it rejected 
a partial solution as an unsatisfactory approach and 
called for comprehensive regulation of copyright in a 
separate Community instrument of general application. 
Such a Directive, which should also cover satellite 
broadcasting and confirm the principle of voluntary 
collective bargaining, should be adopted as soon as 
possible. 
The Directive would also have to rule out any recourse 
to statutory licensing; moreover its entry into force 
would have to be coordinated with the Directive on 
television broadcasting. 
3.5. In any event, the problem urgently needs to be 
resolved. Any delay will result in damage to the legit­
imate rights of copyright holders, particularly in the 
form of video copying (2). 
4. Specific comments on advertising 
4.1.1. The Committee notes with satisfaction the 
(2) See the Committee Opinion on the Green paper on copyright 
(OJ No C 71, 20. 3. 1989, p. 9). 
26. 6. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 159/69 
introduction of the concept of 'surreptitious advertis­
ing' and the definition of 'sponsorship'. 
4.1.2. It wonders, however, about the consequences 
of excluding direct offers to the public from the defi­
nition of 'television advertising'. 
4.1.3. It wonders whether it would not be expedient 
to apply Articles 12-16 of the present Directive to them 
and trusts that these new marketing techniques will be 
regulated in the near future in the interests of legal 
certainty. 
4.2. The Committee notes that the Member States 
may lay down stricter or more detailed rules in the 
areas covered by the Directive. 
4.2.1. It wonders, however, what this facility will 
really mean in the face of competition, which is liable 
to result in a lowering of standards. 
4.3. As regards the protection of minors, the 
Council's common position basically accords with the 
Committee's view that interruptions for advertising in 
children's programmes should not be in line with the 
Committee's recommendation. The common position 
also prohibits advertising that directly exhorts minors 
to buy a product or a service by exploiting their inex­
perience or their credulity. 
4.3.1. The Committee is pleased that the Directive 
expressly prohibits subliminal techniques. 
4.4. It notes that the common position takes account 
of its Opinion in that it prohibits advertising for tobacco 
products and for medicinal products and medical treat­
ment available only on prescription. 
4.4.1. As far as over-the-counter medicinal products 
are concerned, the Committee wonders whether it 
Done at Brussels, 27 April 1989. would not be expedient to induce presenters to rec­
ommend viewers to seek the advice of a doctor or a 
pharmacist in the case of prolonged use. 
4.4.2. It is pleased that the common position lays 
down that television advertising must not include any 
discrimination on grounds of nationality and takes 
account of the importance of protecting the environ­
ment. 
4.5. As regards the quantitative limits for advertising 
fixed in the common position, the Committee regrets 
that the Council has exceeded the threshold of 10 % 
recommended in its earlier Opinion. 
4.5.1. It would also like philosophical and political 
programmes to be treated in the same way as religious 
programmes, i.e. interruptions for advertising should 
be prohibited. 
5. Conclusions 
5.1. The Committee would stress once again the 
importance of Community action to support the pro­
duction of original programmes in the Community. 
5.2. The Committee regrets that the Commission 
has not adopted the idea put forward in its earlier 
Opinion (*) of an independent transnational complaints 
committee to examine abuses, particularly in advertis­
ing, and it reserves the right to have its say when 
the Commission's monitoring arrangements make it 
possible to evaluate the effects of the Directive on 
European audiovisual production and the competitive­
ness of the European programme industry. 
(!) ESC Opinion (OJ No C 232, 31. 8. 1987, p. 31). 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE