Post-Soviet Media Law & Policy Newsletter

I. Bulgaria parliament rejects Zhelev media law veto.

By Elisaveta Konstantinova

    Bulgaria’s socialist dominated parliament on Thursday overturned president Zhelyu Zhelev’s veto of a controversial radio and television law.
    “The radio and television law was re-voted in the original form with 126 votes for and 82 against from 211 deputies present,” said a parliament press official.
    Zhelev, citing numerous objections, sent the law back to parliament for further debate a month ago.
    Deputies from the anti-communist opposition Union of Democratic Forces (UDF) said they will request the Constitutional Court to block the law, which was passed in parliament in July after six years of often acrimonious debate.
    “The BSP is used to keeping a tight reign on information services. Journalism in state radio and television now is reduced to the state of servants,” said UDF deputy Emil Kapudaliev.
    The law envisages formation of a new National Radio and Television Council (NRTC) to control the electronic media. Zhelev saw the NRTC as too powerful and would infringe on the autonomy of local electronic media.
    Under the law, seven of the council’s 11 members will be appointed by parliament where the Bulgarian Socialist Party, composed mainly of ex-communists, enjoys an absolute majority.
    Socialist Prime Minister Zhan Videnov and Zhelev, a fierce opponent of the BSP cabinet, will each choose two members.
    The council will have a supervisory role and will elect the general directors of state television and radio.
    Zhelev saw the current make-up of the council threatening objective coverage of the state institutions by private and state-owned media.
    The council is empowered to cancel programmes or even to suspend licences of radio and television stations. Under the constitution, state television and state radio should be free and autonomous institutions, said Zhelev’s statement in which he vetoed the law.
    “The president is breaching the powers granted to him by the constitution,” BSP deputy and media commission chief Klara Marinova told reporters.
    Earlier this year, European Council media experts attacked the law, saying the council was too politicised and would take over powers traditionally in the domain of the legal system.
    The law forbids political parties, religious groups and trade unions to broadcast their own radio or TV programmes. It also enshrines the right of political parties represented in parliament to address the nation twice a month for short periods on state radio or television.
    In Bulgaria, each law passed by parliament comes in force after being ratified by the president. The president is empowered to veto each law once.
    Zhelev has returned nearly a dozen laws to parliament this year on grounds that they either contradicted the principles of a market economy or granted executive power to government institutions controlled by the ruling BSP.
    The parliament has disregarded most of Zhelev’s vetoes. A presidential election is due in October but Zhelev, who lost an American-style primary contest on June 1, does not intend to stand in it.

Reuters World Service, September 5, 1996

II. Assembly again passes vetoed radio-TV law.

    Parliament today passed again the Radio and Television Law returned by President Zhelyu Zhelev. A total of 126 MPs in the 240-seat parliament, mainly from the ruling Bulgarian Socialist Party, voted for the act; the opposition voted against.
    The president and the opposition will probably refer the matter to the Constitutional Court.
    President Zhelyu Zhelev returned the act, passed in July, objecting to its principles. According to the president, many provisions are inconsistent with the constitution. Some texts restrict the freedoms of expression and speech, prevent journalists from freely expressing opinions and pose the danger of censorship, he said. The president also pointed out the National Board for Radio and Television established by the act would be a partisan body, and that the law discriminates among the media on the basis of ownership: state-owned and private.
    The Socialist majority did not accept the president’s objections. Socialist and opposition MPs engaged in heated debates. The opposition emphasized the law runs counter to the constitution and the requirements of international media experts. The Socialists ruled out this criticism.
    Three parliaments worked on the law for six years. It is not perfect but states the basic rights and obligations of journalists in the electronic media, the chairman of the Parliamentary Committee for Radio, Television and BTA Klara Marinova said. MPs of the opposition Union of Democratic Forces countered, saying the law needed too many changes.
    Marinova also said opinions of journalists and media experts were taken into account when developing the law. According to the opposition, foreign experts made many objections to the law. The need to lay down the rules for the operation of the Bulgarian National Radio and Bulgarian National Television is obvious, Marinova also said during the debates.
    MPs of the ethnic Turks’ Movement for Rights and Freedoms said sooner or later the electronic media law will run counter to the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, and urged that ethnic groups in this country should be granted the right to have programmes in their mother tongue.
    The law, passed by parliament on 18th July, rules that information on the air should be comprehensive, reliable and objective, and news reports should be distinguishable from commentaries. A special text guarantees the plurality of opinions. The law also guarantees non-interference in individuals’ private life. It bans propaganda programmes and the promotion of unregistered religious groups. It provides for the establishment of a National Board for Radio and Television to monitor implementation of the law by radio and television networks and concession contracts signed by them.
    The 11-member board would elect and dismiss the managers and governing and programme boards of the national radio and television. The law also regulates the operation of other radio and television networks and the right to distribute radio and television programmes.
    So far electronic media have been regulated by interim statutes adopted under an agreement of the main political forces in late 1990.

BTA news agency, Sofia, September 5, 1996

CROATIA

I. New media bill.

The lower house of the Croatian parliament on [26th September] continued its session with a discussion on a final media bill. Croatian Justice Minister Miroslav Separovic, who introduced the above-mentioned bill, said that the bill guaranteed freedom of the media, but also a responsibility for accurate and true information.
The bill also contains proposals by the representatives, as well as recommendations of Council of Europe experts. A proposal that a journalist be not obliged to pay damages for publishing false information if it is established that he/she worked in good will and had no reason to doubt the truthfulness of the information was accepted, as well as a proposal that journalists who publish value judgments also be not obliged to pay damages, Separovic said.

HINA news agency, Zagreb, September 26, 1996

CZECH REPUBLIC

I. TV-Nova leads Czech television ratings.

    By using different styles of TV journalism, private channel TV-Nova leads Czech television ratings, followed by public channel CT1 which recently increased its share of the audience and overtaken private broadcaster Premiera. CT2 is in last place. According to recent opinion polls, 66 per cent of viewers who have been through higher education expressed a preference for the objectivity of the public broadcaster’s news service, whereas most younger viewers opted for the news service of TV-Nova.
    In 1995, TV-Nova reported gross profits of $39 million, a 300 per cent increase from the previous year. Central European Media Enterprises (which holds 66 per cent of TV-Nova’s shares) will collect $9 million of that profit. TV-Nova features American-style programming comprising entertainment, action films, thrillers, crime series, etc. Although nearly 60 per cent of Czech viewers regard these programmes as their main source of entertainment, a recent opinion poll unveiled that 75 per cent are concerned that this sort of entertainment can have a harmful influence on children and teenagers, leading to a rising crime rate. As a result, there is a push for tougher controls on programming.
    Eastern European’s first multiplex cinema opened in Prague in the spring. It has eight screens, plus cafes, restaurants, and video shops. The three largest screens are equipped with Dolby stereo. However, due to a decline in cinema admissions (21.9 million in 1993 compared to 9.3 million in 1995), the Czech Film Fund cut its level of funding feature films by more than half in 1996, down to $500,000.

European Media Business & Finance, September 23, 1996

HUNGARY

I. Launch of private TVs and radios delayed.

    Under the media law passed last December with a six-party consensus, commercial TV and radio stations can be launched in Hungary in January 1997. However, the National Radio and Television Body (NRTB), which controls the state media, has not yet invited bids for the frequencies available for the purpose. The evaluation of the assets of Hungarian Television (HT) and Hungarian Radio (HR), a precondition for privatization, is still under way. It is another hindrance to privatization that the three public service media—HR, HT and Duna Television—are unable to settle their arrears in broadcasting fees, amounting to HUF 6 billion, or USD 40 million, and the government is unwilling to pay the bill either.
    Of the two HT channels (TV1 and TV2), the second one awaits privatization. So does a new frequency band, which will air a national programme. This band was formerly used by the Soviet Army stationed in Hungary. Once privatized, TV2 will be converted into a satellite programme. (Initially, this programme will attract less advertisers because satellite broadcasts can be received in much fewer households than cable programmes.) Losing its monopoly on the market, HT will have to face the competition of two commercial stations. The latter will be allowed to devote not more than 15 per cent of their broadcasting time to advertising, while the limit for HT will be 10 per cent.
    To date four consortia have indicated their interest in the privatization of the television: CLT-UFA, a joint venture of the German Bertelsmann and the Luxembourg company CLT; MTM Kommunikacio, the Hungarian partner of the Scandinavian SBS and the German Telemunchen; 2002 Kft., which represents the U.S. company CME; and the French TF1. None of the companies involved in these consortia will be allowed to acquire a share of over 49 per cent, while the Hungarian share should reach at least 26 per cent. In the absence of well-capitalized Hungarian partners, this stipulation causes much headache to the big international investors. *                *                *
    Due to the high costs and the relatively slow return of the investment, Hungary’s commercial banks are expected to play a crucial role in the privatization of the electronic media. The banks concerned include the Post Bank, which has already gained a firm foothold on the media market, as well as the Commercial and Credit Bank, and the National Savings Bank. The involvement of banks, as an indirect means of influencing the media, might be important for the political parties as well.
    The four consortia adopted different strategies and approaches which were summed up by a recent survey in the weekly “Figyelo” (1 August 1996). CLT-UFA hopes that its huge financial strength and international experience will help it win the tender. It increases the chances of CLT-UFA and TF1 that both bidders are prepared to provide production capacities and know-how, and invest in the supply industry. TF1, which signed a contract with a group of German investors, supposes that a French-German consortium will be undefeatable in the Hungarian media economy, which is orientating itself towards the European Union. It may increase the chances of 2002 Kft., a U.S. interest directed by a well-known Hungarian TV personality, that Hungary’s printed media are under strong German influence and it may be unfortunate to put the broadcast media into the same hands. According to the less capitalized competitors, money will not be the single decisive factor. MTM Kommunkacio, for instance, promised at several fora to establish a public service television of high standards. In view of their limited funds, both CME and MTM Kommunikacio may target the less expensive third channel.
    If all goes to plan, the Hungarian TV advertising market will be dominated by two pubic-service and two commercial channels. TV2 is expected to acquire a 40-50 per cent share in the advertising market, while the rest will be divided between TV1, the planned Channel 3 and Duna TV. At current prices, Hungarian TVs fetch a net sum of HUF 16 billion annually from advertising. It remains to be seen, however, whether there will be demand for so many ads as the capacity of the channels would allow. *                *                *
    The competition for the two radio stations that are up for privatization is expected to be less tough because in Hungary five times more people watch television than listen to the radio. The management plans to sell Radio Danubius, a commercial radio station, and repay its debt from the concession fee payable by the buyer. Furthermore, another national frequency band will be put into private hands.
    A recent proposal by the government for amending the media law challenged the very implementation of that legislation. Accordingly, the government would not settle the debts of HR and HT upon their conversion into public limited companies. As a consequence, the newly-formed private TV and radio stations would start operation with a huge debt stock. As a compensation, the government offered to remove the limit on advertising. The proposal is objected by the parliamentary opposition, the Alliance of Free Democrats, the junior coalition partner, and the NRTB. They argue that such a solution would endanger the independence of the public service media and prevent competition in the broadcast media market. The opponents of the plan believe that the channels will go bankrupt if the government does not enable them to start with a clean slate. According to other ideas, the debts of the three institutions would be settled by the State Privatization Co. Up to their debts, some pieces of real estate of the three media would remain in state ownership. The issue is expected to generate heated parliamentary debates next autumn.

MTI Econews, September 26, 1996

II. Media complaints committee set up.

    The National Radio and Television Authority has set up a complaints committee to safeguard the media law.
    The committee, which consists of 13 members, will examine complaints in groups of three members. From now on anyone can appeal in writing—Hungarians within 48 hours and foreigners within eight days—for any radio or TV programme to be checked which is suspected of biased information or any other violation of the requirement for balanced coverage. Those who violate the media law can be fined.

Hungarian Radio, Budapest, September 30, 1996

III. National commercial broadcasting delayed.

    The law on radio and television which came into effect in February defined a precise schedule for setting up national commercial radios and televisions. However, after a few months it became clear that the dates set for establishing the so-called dual media market, which includes competition of private and public radios and televisions, are only illusions.
    According to the media law, the National Radio and Television Body [ORTT] would have been obliged to invite offers for the licence of the Hungarian Radio-owned Danubius commercial radio’s frequency, and for another national radio channel in the modern CCIR [Western VHF/FM] band within 90 days of the law coming into effect, by 1st May at the latest. And within 30 days after this at the latest, by 1st June, it should have advertised Hungarian Television’s two frequencies and another national terrestrial television channel.
Up to one-year delay
    Nothing has yet been implemented from this, although it is already autumn. The ORTT is promising to advertise the conditions for the offers in October. If this comes true then the lengthy procedure laid down by the law will be started, which includes public hearings, finalizing the conditions, a 30-day deadline for submitting and 60 days for judging the offers. Therefore, the winners of the licences of private channels will only become known next April or May and, according to the experts, at least six months are needed before broadcasting can begin. Therefore, the new programmes cannot appear until the end of next year at the earliest. All this delays the changing of the domestic media sector by almost a year, at least compared to the stipulations of the law, although its conditions were considered unrealistic from the start by the experts. At any rate, this delay creates a new situation for private investors, the public media, the government, and legislation.
    The media law established the market conditions of the private sector from January: It limited the advertising possibilities of public radio and television (to about half the previous level). In exchange, it specified that Hungarian Radio, Hungarian Television, and Duna Television, which were placed under the supervision of a public foundation, had to receive state support equal to their broadcasting costs. Naturally, the legislators believed that a much cheaper operation of the public media would also be organized. At the moment, it is not known what can be achieved.
    As the announcement of invitation for offers is being delayed—the ORTT was slow in getting off the ground and the technical state administrative coordination necessary for the invitation of offers dragged on—the financial government found it unnecessary to give budget support for 1997 as stipulated in the law. However, at the last extraordinary government session, it was willing to enter into a compromise and it is possible that the media law will not after all be amended.
Negative result for broadcasting
    Professional and certain political circles believe that if the public media has to maintain itself from advertising and subscription fees in 1997, too, this could have a negative effect on privatization and the opening of the private sector. With the spread of satellite and digital broadcasting, the value of the expensive terrestrial channels is constantly decreasing, and the, albeit temporary, postponement of the limitations on advertising can harm the private sphere’s chances on the advertising market and forces the public media to have a commercial image. The near future has become a bit uncertain, no one knows when the “nice new media world” as designed by the law can come into existence.
    To apply Murphy’s Law, if a deadline of a law is missed once, then others will also be missed and, if a law can be amended once, then it can be amended again. It is to be feared that this will give doubts to foreign companies waiting for media, such as the US [Bermuda-based] CME, Germany’s Bertelsmann, Luxembourg’s CLT, or France’s TF1. It is to be feared because the hopeful domestic partners, including the MTM Communications or Tamas Gyarfas’s Nap TV [Sun Television], or even the financial investor Postabank [Post Bank], do not have the kind of capital to replace the investments of the major concerns. According to some, some interested economic and political forces are deliberately delaying the changeover of the media market to reduce the licence fees. It will take months before the truth comes out.

‘Nepszabadsag,’ Budapest, September 25, 1996

POLAND

I. President endorses radical reform of public television.

    The president approves the main directions of the reforms proposed by Polish Television’s board of management, journalists were told today by the president’s press spokesman Antoni Styrczula, after Aleksander Kwasniewski’s hour-long meeting with the chairman of public television, Ryszard Miazek.
    The president accepts “the aim, which is a professional, objective television liked by the viewers, but not hostile or opposed to anyone,” the spokesman explained.
    “The legal system in Poland guarantees the independence of the media, but in practice we are in the process of learning and making mistakes,” Styrczula quoted the president’s view on the situation in Polish Television. According to the president, there are instances of a lack of professionalism and objectivity in Polish Television, but in general “this television is slowly, slowly moving” towards meeting these two conditions.
    Ryszard Miazek said the conversation with the president was the longest of all the talks about the situation in Polish Television he had had recently with representatives of the political sector. Miazek, who had asked the president for the talk, briefed him about the direction of the reforms in Polish Television, which lead to “very radical changes in the structure of television, its operation and the structure of responsibility for it.”
    One of the results of the reforms would be that there could be a one-person board, not a five-person board as at present, Miazek revealed. These ideas, before they produce results, still have to be discussed by the board, the supervisory council and the National Radio and TV Broadcasting Council [KRRiT].

PAP news agency, Warsaw, September 30, 1996

II. KRRiTV allots two large regional TV licences.

    The National Radio and Television Broadcasting Council [KRRiTV] has granted two licences for the transmission of supra-regional television programmes. They have been received by two companies: Nasza Telewizja [Our Television], which will transmit a programme in the centre of the country, and the TVN company, which will broadcast in the north of the country. Antena 1 will not receive a concession. The KRRiTV took this decision by five votes to four.
[Reporter]     The Nasza Telewizja company, which is to broadcast in central Poland, was established by seven Polish businessmen. [Video shows list of seven names—”Nasza Telewizja shareholders: Henryk Chodysz, Janusz Wojcik, Janusz Goscimski, Leonard Prasniewski, Tadeusz Przezdziecki, Lech Jaworowicz, Iwona Buchner”; on-screen map shows coverage as Warsaw, Siedlce, Chelm and Lodz provinces.] They have announced a television for the family, one in which everyone will find something for themselves. They will place stress on news and features programmes, on a local level as well, and also advice programmes. They do not wish to show violent or indecent programmes.
    The TVN company of Mariusz Walter is to broadcast in northern Poland. The shareholders in this company are Central Media Enterprises [CME, a Bermuda-based American company investing heavily in broadcasting in eastern and central Europe] and ITI TV Holdings, and in the future Miroslaw Chojecki and Gabriel Meretik’s NTP will join as well. [Video—on-screen map shows coverage as Szczecin, Gdansk, Poznan, Bydgoszcz, Torun, Olsztyn and Suwalki Provinces]. TVN has announced a programme directed towards the active viewer and with a high proportion of Polish-originated material: information, advice and also entertainment programmes.
    Marian Terlecki’s Antena 1, which had announced a programme directed towards the young viewer and with intellectual ambitions, did not receive a licence.
    [Boleslaw Sulik, KRRiTV chairman] Nasza Telewizja has a greater financial potential behind it than Antena 1. Apart from that, I will also not hide from you the fact that I was one of the authors, if not indeed the main one, of the idea of a federated network. And, for me, a role was also played by an expressed willingness to cooperate between themselves by particular applicants. In my contacts with the applicants I encouraged talks between them. . . .
[Reporter]     The formal licences will be issued in a month, at the earliest, after the preparation of frequencies [as heard].
    The KRRiTV has already granted supra-regional licences to Telewizja “Wisla,” in southern Poland, and to Canal +, operating in 13 cities. [Video—on-screen maps show coverage as follows: Telewizja “Wisla” : Opole, Katowice, Czestochowa, Cracow, Bielsko-Biala, Nowy Sacz, Tarnow, Rzeszow and Zamosc Provinces; Canal+: Szczecin, Gdansk, Olsztyn, Bydgoszcz, Poznan, Warsaw, Lodz, Wroclaw, Opole, Katowice, Bielsko-Biala, Cracow and Rzeszow].

TV Polonia satellite service, Warsaw, October 15, 1996

III. Radio trends outlined at Warsaw conference.

    “Music and Media” is the slogan of a two-day conference devoted to the latest trends in public and private radio broadcasting, which opened in Warsaw on Tuesday [22nd October].
    The conference is accompanied by a presentation of state-of-the-art broadcasting equipment and auxiliaries.
    Apart from public radio, at present there are in Poland three nationwide private radio networks, 110 local private broadcasting stations and 42 radio stations run by dioceses, the National Radio and TV Council (KRRiTV) officials reported.
    The KRRiTV officials pointed out that advertising, including TV and radio advertisement, is on a Western level in Central and Eastern Europe. Nonetheless, this sector still has to expand now that the media have entered the commercial market and are no longer subject to political intrigue.

PAP news agency, Warsaw, October 22, 1996

IV. Polish TV losing independence, opposition says.

By Marcin Grajewski

    Poland’s biggest opposition party on Tuesday accused the ruling leftist coalition of trying to grab control of public television, the country’s main source of news, and use it in the campaign for elections next year.
    Last week’s sacking of the chief of one of television’s two channels was a further sign the coalition aimed to steer programmes during the parliamentary election campaign, said Andrzej Potocki, spokesman for the Union for Freedom (UW).
    “The electoral campaign is coming closer and the coalition wants to subordinate public television to itself,” Potocki told Reuters.
    A dominant group in television management, linked to the two ruling coalition parties of ex-communists and Peasants, fired First Channel director Tomasz Siemoniak on Friday—prompting nine senior editors to quit in solidarity.
    Siemoniak said he had been fired by political appointees and alleged: “They want to root out all programmes which do not fall in with the political views of their protectors.”
    But Prime Minister Wlodzimierz Cimoszewicz firmly denied on Tuesday any attempts to influence the television.
    “The government has not, does not and will not exert any pressure on internal decisions in the television,” PAP news agency quoted Cimoszewicz as telling reporters.
    The head of the television has said the sacking was merely over Siemoniak’s failure to carry out agreed guidelines.
    The latest uproar is part of a sequence that has already aroused concern in Washington and other Western countries over public television—seen as a vital element in a democracy only established with the 1989 fall of communism.
    In February, after President Lech Walesa’s defeat last year removed a counterweight to the ruling left, the right-leaning head of the television Wieslaw Walendziak quit, alleging pressure from the two parties rooted in the communist era.
    His successor, Peasant party member Ryszard Miazek, was then quoted as making remarks about the role of journalists which prompted anxious enquiries from senior U.S. officials concerned over democratic progress in a country seeking NATO membership.
    Foreign Minister Dariusz Rosati returned from talks in Washington saying: “I heard concerns that the new television leadership might conduct a purge of staff.”
    Miazek said at the time that he had been misquoted.
    Since then, however, some hard-hitting current affairs programmes associated with the former management have been scrapped and, last month, the management aroused a storm by deciding not to take programmes made by outside companies.
    “I think that people who are not associated with the current coalition will now be systematically eliminated,” Potocki said. “The implications of such a move would be the disappearance of objectivity and an independent television.
    His concerns were echoed by Marek Jurek—a former right-wing politician who is now a member of the National Radio and Television Council (KRRiT), the broadcasting watchdog.
    Jurek called for the cancelled programmes to be restored.
    KRRiT was meeting on Tuesday to discuss the situation in the television.

Reuters World Service, September 3, 1996

SLOVAKIA

I. CME strengthens East Euro hold with Slovakia launch.

    Central European Media Enterprises (CME) strengthened its grip on the eastern European television market when it launched Slovakia’s first national commercial television station, TV Markiza, Aug. 31 at 7:00 p.m.
    The launch of TV Markiza pushed the number of private national broadcasters that CME controls in the region to four—TV Nova (Czech Republic), ProTV (Romania), PopTV (Slovenia) and PulsTV (Berlin).
    The company-based in Bermuda and made up primarily of U.S. executives—is looking to expand even further as it is in the running to grab terrestrial broadcasting licences in Poland, Hungary and the Ukraine.
    “Nothing until 1997,” CME President Len Fertig told European Media Business & Finance at the gala party celebrating TV Markiza’s launch. “We’re waiting for Poland and Hungary. We’ve had three launches in nine months. We need to take a break.”
    CME has invested $33 million into the Slovakian venture so far. By the end of the year, its investment in the entire eastern European region is expected to top $200 million.
    “Of course Markiza will find the necessary investment,” said TV Markiza’s Pavol Rusko. “We can’t have high investment in the first part and not in the second.”
    The high level of initial investment, however, means that profits for the company will be farther down the line.
    “I suspect it will take several years to recover the level of investment,” Fertig said.
CME’s Strategy
    CME’s success in the region is predicated on finding the right local partners—ones that have enough pull with the local governments to obtain the necessary broadcasting licences. In turn, CME funds the operation, giving its local partner the majority of the voting stock.
    In Slovakia, for instance, CME owns 49 per cent of the Slovak Television Company’s voting interest and 89 per cent of its economic interest. The local partner, Markiza-Slovakia traded its Slovakian connections for a piece of the TV Markiza pie.
    “CME put in all the capital,” Fertig said. “Markiza put in the expertise and the use of their licence.”
    Once a licence is procured, CME attacks the entrenched state broadcaster with a barrage of Hollywood movies, game shows, sports and news. Most of CME’s stations also air adult movies late at night.
    Most of CME’s markets only feature a state broadcaster. CME has virtually no competition from private commercial broadcasters in its respective markets.
    This strategy has been successful in virtually every market CME has entered. Nova TV boasts a 70 per cent audience share in the Czech Republic; Pro TV has higher ratings than any commercial channel in Romania; and PopTV has brought in high ratings in Slovenia.
Problem Spots
    Despite its overwhelming success in parts of eastern Europe, CME has encountered some problems in recent months.
    First, the company confounded industry observers by trying to tackle the German market—which already has formidable competition in the commercial broadcasting sector. CME’s successful strategy has been to take on state broadcasters—not entrenched commercial ones as it seems to be trying to do in Germany.
    Earlier this year, CME was forced to revamp the Berlin station’s programming strategy to become a more youth-oriented channel. But the going still is tough as many of the programming and production deals already are wrapped up by other German broadcasters.
    “We have re-shifted the programming,” Fertig said. “Our partners still aren’t happy with what’s going on. We’re in for the long haul.”
    CME also has run into legal troubles in Slovenia this summer. Scandinavian Broadcast System went to court in an attempt to stop CME from obtaining a controlling interest in broadcast station Kanal A—which owns one-third of the station through convertible debt. U.K. and Slovenian courts currently are deciding the matter.
    More hardships could be on the horizon as CME is running into stiff competition for the licences in Hungary and Poland. Some analysts believe the company may start to feel a backlash from some countries that do not want it to become the Rupert Murdoch-like dominant broadcaster in the region.
Programming Matters
    To be a programming success, CME must adhere to local licensing laws mandating a set level of local production that must be aired. In Slovakia, the law dictates that a minimum of 40 per cent local production, a maximum of 49 per cent of non-European production and a minimum of 10 per cent of programmes for children must be aired.
    “We’re going after the local market,” said Arthur Goldblatt, managing director of CME Programming Services Inc. “We’re going with a totally local production slate. It’s difficult to acquire the rights. It’s a tough, competitive market.”

European Media Business & Finance, September 23, 1996

II. Slovak Radio angered over closure of Radio CDI.

    The 96.6 MHz frequency has now been silent for two weeks, following a Slovak Radio and Television Council decision. The listeners of Radio CD International [private Austrian radio], which used to occupy this frequency, are no longer able to enjoy it.
    Radio CD International used to be transmitted by Slovak Radio. We told you last week that the two sides had opposing views on this problem. The press conference of the Slovak Radio and Television Council left some issues unresolved and they did not concern only Radio CD International.
    The Slovak Radio management therefore gave another press conference this morning. Alena Michalicova and Juraj Rybansky report for “Radiozurnal”:
[Rybansky]      Jan Tuzinsky, director-general of Slovak Radio, said at the beginning how very effective and lucrative the agreement with Radio CDI was: not only because of the direct Radio CDI financial contribution but also because of its willingness to help Slovak Radio with a number of broadcasting problems. They were bad, said Jan Tuzinsky, as the fees which Slovak Radio had to pay to Slovak Telecommunications for transmitting its broadcasts were so high that Slovak Radio could have built and run its own broadcasting network for that amount.
    The director-general also spoke of the decision of the Slovak Radio and Television Council to divide the frequency spectrum. This would be disadvantageous for Slovak Radio because, for example, Radio Devin’ s programmes—which cost more than others—would not be audible in large parts of Slovakia.
    The Slovak Radio and Television Council has been putting pressure on Slovak Radio to broadcast on mediumwave, which the commercial sector does not want as it is expensive and not really suitable for broadcasting artistic programmes.
    Vladimir Holan, programme director of Slovak Radio, added that while in the advanced world public media were favoured for their irreplaceable role in spreading information on science, culture and the arts and were allocated the best frequencies and granted other advantages, the situation in Slovakia was the opposite: the public media were disadvantaged, as a low number of transmitters and their low capacity clearly illustrated. This forces Slovak Radio to work on the measures mentioned earlier, and to carry out commercial activities in order to earn money.
    Director-general Jan Tuzinsky spoke again about the discrepancy between the decision of the Slovak Radio and Television Council and the law on the Slovak radio budget which takes into account the income from broadcasting Radio CD International. He also rejected other conclusions of the council on the violation of the law by Slovak Radio. . . . Furthermore, he said, Slovak Radio was controlled by the Radio Council, which had approved Radio CD International broadcasts and the Slovak Radio and Television Council could intervene only if Slovak Radio broadcasts violated the law by, for example, disseminating pornography, advertising alcohol and so forth, which was not the case. . . .

Slovakia 1 radio, Bratislava, September 16, 1996