Why is must-carry such a contentious issue in many countries?
The business briefing organised by Broadband TV News and Telenor Satellite Broadcasting in Bucharest on February 13 highlighted just how much of a problem it is in Romania. There, cable operators are required to distribute more than 30 channels, including the public broadcaster’s services and a large number of mostly obscure commercial stations.
DTH platforms, on the other hand, do not have to carry these channels but if they do have to pay for them.
Although no speaker was willing to say so in public, in private they acknowledged that the problem exists on a political rather than economic level. Arguably, the solution will therefore also have to be political.
John Rossiter, general manager, Sony Pictures Television Networks Central Europe, made the interesting point that must-carry is becoming more and more of an issue in other markets. This, in his view, is a trend that has become apparent since the beginning of the global financial crisis in 2007/8 and is linked to channels looking for more revenue sources due to the slowdown in the ad market.
Speaking specifically about Romania, Catalin Marinescu, the president of the regulator ANCOM, conceded that the current situation acts as an impediment to competition. He also called for international agreements pertaining to must-carry.
So what does Europe have to say about all this? A good starting point is probably a report published by the European Audiovisual Observatory in late 2012. Entitled Must-carry: Renaissance or reformation?, it explained that the must-carry issue in Europe is dominated by Article 31 of the EU’s Universal Service Directive, in the first instance, as well as certain precedents set by European case law.
The report added that must-carry obligations “can only be imposed on networks that are the principal means to receive radio and television broadcasts for a significant number of end-users”. Networks also have the right to expect remuneration from must-carry channels and must-carry regulation should be technology neutral.
There have already been high profile cases of the European authorities getting involved in national must-carry disputes in countries such as Belgium and Germany. Could the same happen one day to Romania?
