After years of preparations, the Broadcasting Commission of the Länder wants to set the text of the new media state treaty this Friday. The legislation should finally be equated with broadcasters and online providers such as Google or Facebook.
The Internet has led many regulations of broadcasting law to absurdity. If the media authorities of the federal states once managed to limit the transmission frequencies to a handful of multibillion-strong broadcasting corporations, anyone can now go directly on the air with a mobile phone and an Internet connection. Of course, smart TVs have long been integrating Internet content, TV broadcasters are offering apps and streaming portals. With the reform of the broadcasting state treaty is now to become a media state treaty.
Here are the most important questions and answers on the topic.
How is the new regulation?
The Broadcasting Treaty is constantly being revised to adapt it to the new conditions of the media landscape. In recent years, private broadcasters in particular have complained that they have enormously high licensing requirements and stringent regulations, for example on advertising times, compared to the Internet competition. It is also said that broadcast regulators have too few options for action, for example when influencers on YouTube or Instagram shamelessly operate surreptitious advertising. In addition, by September 2020, the European Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) must be transposed into German law.
more on the subject
Will all creators soon need a broadcasting license?
No. In fact, the situation is even improving for many web video makers. In 2017, the well-known streamer Peter Smits and his group PietSmiet had a very public debate with the media regulators, because they classified the offer PietSmiet TV as broadcasting and therefore insisted on a license requirement. In the meantime, some games streamer have actually received such a license.
The Media State Treaty is intended to introduce a de minimis threshold: anyone who reaches an average of fewer than 20,000 simultaneous users with their program is completely exempt from the obligation to register. Even YouTube creators or Twitch streamer with hundreds of thousands or millions of subscribers rarely reach that level.
But they are not off the hook: the media authorities demand that the operators of channels register, so that they can be held responsible if they violate laws, for example. This can be expensive or even lead to the shutdown of the offer: For example, Tobias Schmid, director of the North Rhine-Westphalia Media Agency, has already introduced network blockages should providers oppose the German regulators.
Even classical media could benefit from the new regulation: The Berlin Administrative Court, for example, recently ordered the publishing company Axel Springer to apply for a broadcast license for the "Bild" livestream.
What does the law mean for platforms like YouTube?
Legislators have established a new concept for platforms such as YouTube, Facebook or Instagram. In the future, providers will count as "media intermediaries". The new name brings new responsibilities.
Thus, the Internet platforms should not discriminate content providers. This could mean, for example, that Facebook is unlikely to hide the contributions of US presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren, in which she complains about the alleged partiality of the platform, in front of the users.
It is even more stringent that offers "that particularly promote the diversity of opinion and offerings" should be emphasized. Thus, the old dispute, who has a right to the first program slots on TV, raised to the digital level. It should be ensured that offers such as public broadcasting are not hidden in the depths of a platform, while the start pages are dominated only by make-up tutorials and prank videos - or only partisan news offers. How this new regulation should work in practice is still largely unclear.
More on SPIEGEL +
Does Google have to become more transparent?
In order to rule out discrimination, providers should be able to request information as to why their content was placed in a specific way in the offer of a media intermediary. Since the category of media intermediaries also include search engines, in particular Google has filed opposition: First, it is already very transparent, which concerns information on the search engine placement, it is said by the company. And you can not disclose the exact algorithms, otherwise you open all the doors to abuse.
Worrying about the platforms is also the duty to mark so-called "Social Bots". This should make election manipulation more difficult. But whether such bots actually have a significant impact is unclear. It is also uncertain how platforms should check whether there is a bot behind an account. In studies on this subject, people were repeatedly misidentified as bots.
comment
Is something changing for TV channels?
The classical broadcasting and in particular the private TV stations belong clearly to the winners of the new media-Staatsvertrags. On the one hand, regulations are loosened for broadcasters: for example, private broadcasters should be able to advertise in the children's program and distribute their advertising times more freely throughout the day. On the other hand, broadcasters should be protected from the fact that SmartTV providers, for example, overlay the television signal in order to display advertising.
What's next?
Since the federal states are responsible under the Basic Law for legislation in the media sector, not the Bundestag, but each individual parliament will vote on the law. A mammoth legislative process that is expected to take half a year.
Although the process is well-tuned, success is not guaranteed. Schleswig-Holstein, for example, had left the joint State Treaty on Gaming in 2011.
