COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Executive summary of the ex-post REFIT evaluation of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive 2010/13/EU Accompanying the document Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2010/13/EU on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services in view of changing market realities
Date: 2016-05-25
Institutions: Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology, European Commission
Subjects: advertising, audiovisual industry, audiovisual production, broadcasting, child protection, distance selling, provision of services, regulation of telecommunications, services of general interest

EN 

   EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 25.5.2016  SWD(2016) 171 final   COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Executive summary of the ex-post REFIT evaluation of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive 2010/13/EU Accompanying the document Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2010/13/EU on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services in view of changing market realities  {COM(2016) 287 final} {SWD(2016) 170 final}  
 
 
Background 

The  EU  regulates  audiovisual  media  services  (originally  only  traditional  TV,  later  also  on-
demand services) since 1989. The objective of the regulatory framework is to facilitate free 
movement  of  services  across  borders,  protect  consumers  and  promote  objectives  of  public 
interest,  particularly  cultural  diversity  and  media  freedom.  The  regulatory  framework  was 
amended twice over the years.  

The  last  amendment  was  in  2007  and  resulted  in  the  Directive  currently  in  force,  the 
Audiovisual  Media  Services  Directive  (AVMSD).  It  aimed  to  modernise  and  simplify  the 
rules  for  broadcasting  services  and  introduce  minimum  rules  for  on-demand  audiovisual 
media services.  

After  a  few  years  of  application  of  the  Directive,  and  in  the  light  of  the  Regulatory  Fitness 
Programme  (REFIT),  the  Commission  decided  to  evaluate  its  performance  and  to  examine 
whether it remains  fit-for-purpose, delivers  on its objectives at reasonable costs, is relevant, 
coherent and has EU added value. 

In the EU's Digital Single Market strategy, adopted in 2015, the Commission also announced 
a review of the Directive in the light of developments in the market, technology and viewing 
patterns. The REFIT evaluation is part of the evidence base feeding into this review.  

The REFIT evaluation of the AVMSD has been carried out in the course of 2015 and covers 
the Directive, from the last revision in 2007 up to 2015.  

Methodology 

As  part  of  this  evaluation  the  Commission  assessed  the  Directive  against  a  number  of 
indicators  pursuant  to  Better  Regulation,  namely  effectiveness,  efficiency,  relevance, 
coherence and EU added-value. The Commission also looked for scope to simplify the rules, 
where possible, without undermining the Directive's objectives.  

Robust economic data to support the assessment has been difficult to find. Statistics and other 
quantitative data on the compliance costs stemming from the Directive either do not exist, or 
are  confidential  and  can  therefore  not  be  used.  Other  data,  for  example  on  the  number  of 
viewers  and  on  viewing  patterns  in  on-demand  audiovisual  media  services  and  in  other 
services  offering  audiovisual  content,  do  not  exist.  To  corroborate  the  findings  of  the 
evaluation, the evaluation process has therefore built on other sources, including three public 
consultations, structure dialogues, external studies and monitoring reports. 

Findings 

Relevance:  

While  the Directive's objectives are still valid, market developments and changes in viewing 
patterns  have  led  to  some  of  its  rules  being  outdated  Consumers  increasingly  watch 
audiovisual  content  on-demand  and  online,  yet  video-sharing  platforms  and  on-demand 

2 

 
 
 
 
service providers are either not regulated or subject to lighter regimes. As a result, consumer 
protection is not adequately ensured and broadcasters are put at a competitive disadvantage.  

Effectiveness:  According  to  the  Directive,  providers  must  abide  only  by  the  rules  of  their 
country of establishment while being free to provide services across the EU (this is referred to 
as  "the  country  of  origin  principle").  This  approach  has  been  perceived  to  be  an  effective 
regulatory framework by most stakeholders. It has brought legal certainty by subjecting media 
service providers in the EU to the legislation of one Member State only and has allowed for 
economies of scale for providers. 

Regarding  cultural  diversity,  the  evaluation  found  that  while  the  Directive  has  enhanced 
cultural  diversity  by  effectively  supporting  the  promotion,  visibility  and  distribution  of 
European  works  in  the  EU,  there  is  scope  for  enhancing  cultural  diversity  in  on-demand 
services as compared to broadcasting services. 

On  media  freedom  and  pluralism,  the  evaluation  found  that  the  Directive's  rules  have  been 
partly  effective.  While  they  have  contributed  to  the  overall  objectives,  the  differences  in 
independence  and  effectiveness  of  national  regulators  across  the  EU  have  reduced  their 
impact. The very diverse regulatory structures of national regulators may have hampered the 
effective application of the AVMSD and have a negative impact on pluralism, media freedom 
and the level playing field. 

EU added value: The evaluation found that the Directive constitutes a corollary to the free 
circulation  of  audiovisual  media  services  offered  by  providers  under  the  jurisdiction  of 
Member  States.  The  increase  in  the  level  of  harmonisation  brought  by  the  AVMSD  has 
contributed to the general and specific objectives of the Directive.  

Efficiency:  The  Directive  has  partially  proven  to  be  an  efficient  regulatory  framework. 
Within the REFIT context, the evaluation identified scope for simplification and deregulation, 
specifically  of  the  procedures  that  support  the  application  of  the  country  of  origin  principle 
(i.e.  the  criteria  determining  jurisdiction  and  the  derogation  and  cooperation  procedures 
limiting freedom of reception and retransmission in specific cases) and some of the rules on 
commercial communications.  

Coherence:  The  evaluation  also  found  that  the  Directive  is  consistent  with  the  general 
principles of EU law and with other EU legislation and policies, with the exception of the lack 
of  rules  on  the  independence  of  regulators  which  is  at  odds  with  the  rules  in  other  EU 
domains. 

Lastly,  based  on  the  fact  that  the  quantitative  evidence  which  led  to  the  conclusions  on 
effectiveness and efficiency is limited, the evaluation also found that an effective system for 
monitoring the application of the Directive is lacking and should put in place in the future. 

3