You are in:
- Archives » 2006 » October 2006
Video Blogs Come Under EU's Eye
Here's one in the eye for free speech from the EU's Big Brother department: The EU wants to extend its broadcasting regulations to cover internet broadcasts such as YouTube and video blogs.
According to The Times, the proposal "would require websites and mobile phone services that feature video images to conform to standards laid down in Brussels."
Britain opposes the proposed directive, arguing that personal websites would need to be registered as a "television-style service" if it came into force. The EU's media commissioner - a species which is never shy of opportunities to extend its influence - claims that regulation would only subject video blogs and video sharing under EU laws on advertising, hate speech and child protection.
Britain's broadcasting regulator, Ofcom, also opposes the directive, which it says could scupper the development of new media companies in Europe.
The British use the example of a rugby club video site to counter the proposal. If, for example, a local sports team was to upload footage of the game - or drinking competitions taking place after - it would come under EU regulations as a provider of televisual material.
Plainly idiotic meddling, but not as far as the EU is concerned. Britain, the Times notes, already has a wide range of hate speech regulation in place, and has regulations in place to regulate online broadcasting output to include "feature films, sports events, situation comedy, documentary, children’s programmes and original drama."
Why does the EU need more? Unfortunately, the UK has only found one other nation willing to support its "compromise" on this directive (we don't know what the compromise involves). It is however confident it will pick up more support when the EU Council meets to discuss the measure in November.
The willingness of a large number of EU nations to effectively censor their new media businesses is worrying, not only for free speech reasons but for the principle that for the EU, heavy-handed regulation is more important that allowing a dynamic and competitive new industry to prosper.
Websites in any case can get around EU interference by transferring operations overseas. What does the EU propose to do about (say) a EURSOC-TV channel which broadcasts from the US or New Zealand? Block its signal? Censor the site, China-style?
