model of “cultural exception” in the globalization process
of motion picture industry»
Monique Dagnaud >>> Download the communication (french)
CNRS, CEMS, France
Why is the french model of « cultural exception » so
peculiar ? This is what will be discussed in this paper.
Geostrategies of the motion picture industry in various countries
(like the United States, India, Japan, European countries, France
in particular) are quite similar when under several aspects :
-they developp both a film industry and a TV-programmes industry.
Sometimes, the distinction between these two kinds of
works is strict like in France, sometimes, the bounderies are
more flexible, like in England. But, beyond that specificity, countries
with a tradition of film industry, naturally produce also TV-fictionnal
works, documentaries and variety shows. Sometimes one is favoured
to the detriment of the other, but a powerful broadcasting industry
is the consequence of a powerful film industry.
-Films and TV-programmes are produced for the domestic market, this
mass culture is developped with the aim of reflecting a national
identity and of strengthening social ties. Domestic identity inprint
these works, though they can be also under the influence of a broad
range of foreign cultures. Two rules must be mentioned :
first, to achieve a good domestic market share in theaters, a country
must have a substantial production of films ; secondly, the
motion picture industry is sustained by the States, more or less
according to each country.
-Any country with a substantial films production hopes it can export
it. Why ? Because films are powerful vectors to spread
out national ideas and values, life styles, and all the goods which
are associated with them. In a way, a film industry is the best showroom
for a country : it can boost its trade and its tourism business.
But, the power of influence though the film industry is inequally
distributed. In some countries, theaters mostly programme nothing
but domestic films, in other countries, theaters provide a broad
range of cultural choices. Some countries export, other countries
do not export. One can observe four models :
-domestic cultural homogeneity ; high level of exports = United
-domestic cultural homogeneity ; low level of exports = India
-domestic cultural diversity ; high level of exports = Japan
-domestic cultural diversity ; low level of exports =France
This framework for analysis helps to understand the French policy
of cultural exception. So, in France, film industry and, to some
extent, TV-programmes industry, belong to artistic and cultural
activities, vectors of national identity ; they are focused
on the domestic market, and more on cultural than on economic goals.
They are intended to boost and nourish domestic imagery and the social
ties. There major aim is the protection of a national identity rather
than the conquest of foreign markets.
«What is at
stake in Internet regulation, the Spanish case »
Guillermo Lopez Garcia >>> Download the communication (French)
University of Valence, Spain
Digitalization’s extent thus as the irruption of Internet
as alternative medium for the transmission of information and opinions
or the commercialization of cultural products, has altered in a remarkable
way as much the markets of the communication as the entertainment
and culture industry. In synthesis, both are changing now from a
hierarchic and unidirectional model, where the message issuer concentrates
the power, to a multidirectional one, much more «equalitarian» and
promoter of pluralism. Confronted to the emergence of new competitors,
the economic agents traditionally settled in those markets have used
a great number of legal barriers occasionally in a manifestly abusive
way and, also, relying in conceptions not easy to coordinate with
public principles such as the protection of the freedom of speech
and pluralism promotion.
Obviously, these changes have also affected the role that has to
play the State as regulator of the information flow. We will try
to evaluate the performance, not only of big mass media groups but
also of the spanish Administration, related to the new panorama outlined,
often too guided by criteria and attitudes that we can understand
only under circumstances that are no longer in place.
« The FCC’s
role in the structuring of the CMI in the United States »
Juan-Carlos Miguel de Bustos
>>> Download the communication (Spanish)
University of Pais Vasco, Spain
Along its history, the FCC has equated the diversity of sources
(ownership) with the diversity of viewpoints. This idea is based
on the economic thought that the more the suppliers of a service,
the more the different products and the smaller the prices in the
The rationale for the policy of limiting ownership is to protect
the industry against domination by a few, assuming that different
owners imply different formats and different viewpoints.
There were no philosophical changes in the proposal put forward
by the FCC in June 2003, but it did imply structural changes, comparable
to those of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. In this proposal,
two new elements appear, or better, are amplified.
On the one hand, it was strongly protested, as proved by the millions
of messages sent to the Congress of the US or to the FCC, and by
the fact that it was brought before the Court by some representatives
of the civil society. The tribunal stopped the proposal.
On the other hand, there is the increasing role that tribunals are
taking in the regulation of the media in the USA. The FCC must justify
the changes it proposes in an efficient way. This efficiency needs
empirical evidence, which is not always available. This takes us
to the issue of the definition of diversity. Diversity and pluralism,
as other hyperconcepts like public service, are difficult
to define and, consequently, hardly measurable.
Whatever happens, that is, what the FCC proposes and (as it will
be likely protested by media groups or by the civil society) what
the Court later establishes will constitute a new stage in the strategy
of the FCC.
in the service of industry »
Me Agnès Tricoire
Lawyer in the Court, expert in intellectual property, France
>>> Download the communication (french)