Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I too wish the Minister well in his recovery. As my colleague, Deputy Catherine Murphy, has said, the issue of concern about media ownership is nothing new. The concentration of ownership of the media in Ireland has been a constant point of concern. The NUJ has been raising this issue over a period of approximately 40 years and it has been a feature of the political agenda since the mid-1990s and rightly so because we should be concerned about it. The protection of a free and pluralistic media is a key component of a functioning democracy. This principle is enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. While some progress has been made in addressing the matter in recent years, our media markets remain among the most concentrated in the OECD. Recent research conducted on behalf of the EU Commission found that our media plurality is at high risk of an over-concentration of ownership. This is specifically due to an absence of clear legal barriers and any kinds of thresholds of maximum media ownership. I believe all sides of the House will acknowledge that Deputy Murphy has done very important and Trojan work on this issue. The aim is to progress the Bill she has brought before the House this afternoon. That does not necessarily mean that everybody has to agree with every word in it but need merely to accept the principle underpinning the legislation and on that basis, we are seeking support for the Bill.

As it stands, responsibility for this area is divided between the BAI, the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission, CCPC, and the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment. However, it is the Minister who has the final say on the approval of media mergers. The Bill does not interfere with this distribution of power in any way. It extends the remit of the Minister and provides far greater scope to the Minister’s regulatory function on existing media arrangements. While the BAI and CCPC play a key advisory role, neither their remit nor skillsets are necessarily aligned with the important public interest. We have seen them adopt a strictly economic approach in the past. For example, as Dr. Roderick Flynn has noted, during its discussions of Communicorp’s 2008 acquisition of Emap’s radio holdings, the CCPC’s predecessor, the Competition Authority, exclusively focused on the potential impact on the radio advertising market. Consideration of the 9% holding by Communicorp's owner in Independent News and Media was explicitly excluded on the ground that the newspaper advertising market was entirely separate to the radio advertising market.

With this in mind, the centrality of the public interest within the provisions of the Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2014 was a positive step forward. The Act grants the Minister the authority to draw up guidelines on media mergers and to outline the criteria against which their potential impact is to be judged. Crucially, it also gives specific consideration to ensuring diversity of ownership in defence of the public interest. The current guidelines set 20% shareholding in a media business as the upper limit for a significant interest and a potential threat to the public good. However, transactions have taken place in the past which exceed this threshold. The Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom cites the lack of a legally specified maximum threshold on cross-media ownership as a point of concern in Ireland. Furthermore, it suggests that decisions taken prior to the introduction of the 2014 Act have facilitated a concentration of media across the print and radio sector in particular. As a result we must consider how we can rebalance this situation to protect the public good. In the age of fake news and alternative facts, never has protecting a free and diverse media been of greater public importance. This is not to say there is necessarily some nefarious intent behind all such mergers and acquisitions. For the organisations involved, the economic logic of expanding their reach is sound. Reproducing or repurposing existing content costs a fraction of its initial production. Businesses seeking to take advantage of economies of scale is the natural result of a poorly regulated market. That has to be accepted.

The impact of this behaviour has the potential to be hugely damaging. If allowed to continue unabated, the number of media platforms may remain constant but the scope of the views represented within them may become increasingly limited. We know all too well about the impact that a lack of dissenting views can have. In the years leading up to the economic crash, for example, the property bubble was often ignored or even denied outright. All too often the narrative of a soft landing was put forward. However, it is important that we do not solely judge the impact of concentrated ownership on the editorial line of a platform alone. We must also be cognisant of its influence on the resulting business model.

The attitude of media owners to the importance of quality journalism plays a key role in determining their output. Increasingly the public interest value of output plays second fiddle to viral content generation and advertorial pieces. Reduced public service content and editorial resources inherently lead to less coverage of public bodies, local authorities and the Parliament. This content, which may have little value in attracting revenue, plays a vital role in holding those in positions of power to account.

If the marketplace of ideas is to survive, it is vital that we ensure there is space for alternative interpretations to be expressed. We cannot allow a small group of companies to dominate the media across all its platforms. We believe that to achieve this, media mergers must be assessed on their cumulative influence across all aspects. The Bill proposes that we accomplish this by amending section 28A of the 2002 Act to include consideration of the combined digital reach across its platforms. While the Minister may currently give consideration to these factors when assessing a potential merger, placing this provision on a legal footing puts beyond any doubt the need to assess media companies on the sum total of their influence. To allow the current situation to continue unchallenged is to do a disservice to the public, and allows a clear threat to a fundamental pillar of our democracy to stand. The importance of a free and pluralistic media cannot be overstated.

This Bill from the Social Democrats is limited in its scope but it clearly sets down a marker which should be supported by Members on all sides of this House because we know that the importance of a free and pluralistic media is central to our survival as an open and free parliamentary democracy. I therefore urge Members on all sides of the House to support the Bill.

See this speech in context