Co-Regulation Measures in the Media Sector: The study aims at providing a complete picture of co-regulatory measures taken to date in the media sector in all 25 Member States and in three non-EU-countries, as well as of the research already done. The study will especially indicate the areas in which these measures mainly apply, their effects and their consistency with public interest objectives. In this context, the study will examine how best to ensure that the development of national co- and self-regulatory models does not disturb the functioning of the single market by re-fragmenting the markets. The study started at the end of December 2004, the final report will be compiled by the end of December 2005. [...]
All interested parties are invited to comment on the draft. The authors will consider all comments which have been submitted by the 5th of February 2006.
Portugal: Broadcasting protocol (including advertising rules)
Model: Advertising-without-enforcement(-code)
Number of analysed questionnaires: 5
The basis for the analysis is just five questionnaires but from various actors, thus they form an adaequate basis for assessment. However, there is no evaluation report available for the public since the system has only been established rather recently. Evaluation is complicated by the fact that the protocol does not only serve different policy objectives but also has a specific role in balancing the sphere of activity of public service broadcasters and private broadcasters especially as regards financing.
Only one expert is opposed to the assumption that the incentives for the broadcasters to participate are sufficiently high. For the other process objectives the picture is divided. However, the metioned strengths and weaknesses mainly reflect the different interests of the respective experts within the system. Three out of five experts state the system lacks transparency and openness, the majority is uncertain about its sustainabilty.
On the appropriateness of the protocol the views of the experts are devided. However, they largely applaud the governments? participation and regard the power of ICS as sufficient and as are the obligations to be fulfilled by the private braodcasters.
Apart from one expert all agree that more legal intervention would not be beneficial especially because the system in place involves negotiation and therefore more flexibility than legal enforcement.
