Public blue screens going private?

TALLINN - If there is one thing that all parties can agree on
regarding Estonia's public television, it is this: There is
definitely a problem with it. How to resolve that problem and what is
the exact nature of the problem are other questions entirely.

Eesti Televisioon, or ETV, has had a tumultuous recent history. In
the past six months, the company saw all but one of its board members
resign, its funding cut by nearly 30 percent, significant staff
dismissals and most recently, talk of privatization. The national
television company has suffered under poor management, some say,
while others write it off as a casualty of budget negotiations.

"The problem today is that ETV is not fulfilling the goals of a
government owned TV company," said Heiki Kranich, deputy chairman of
the Reform Party and an advocate of ETV's privatization. "They are
showing second rate soaps, not the goal for what tax payers should be
spending their money on."

Kranich suggested on Jan. 17 to turn the company over to private
hands, hopefully bringing an end to the turmoil surrounding the
public broadcasting company. Blaming budget cuts, the station has
cancelled several programs since the beginning of the new year. One
of the program's cut from the line-up, direct, live transmissions of
selected Parliament sessions, caused the most recent controversy.

The opposition parties in Parliament slammed the decision to drop the
broadcasts and said the ruling three party coalition's pledge of
creating a more transparent government has remained empty since the
March national elections.

"In a situation of ever increasing alienation of power from the
people, stripping the voters of the possibility to directly observe
the activity of the law makers is to be viewed as another step in the
country's movement toward an information blockade and lack of
openness," a statement released by opposition parties said.

The triple alliance, consisting of the Reform Party, Moderates and
the Pro Patria Union, claimed the program was scrapped for economical
reasons, not political.

"Whether or not live transmissions are to be made from Parliament
should be left for the program council of ETV to decide, and the
decision should not be made on the political level," Pro Patria Union
MP, Andres Herkel, told the Baltic News Service.

Herkel, who is also a member of the Broadcasting Council that
supervises and regulates public television and radio, added that
there were many arguments for and against the direct broadcasts, "but
these are not political, but connected with the budget of ETV."

Center Party MP, Peeter Kreitzberg, said the final shot has not yet
been heard regarding the live transmissions.

"I believe the broadcasts will be back," he said. "Many elderly have
a lot of time to see the program, it is cheap, it costs less than one
percent of the budget." Kreitzberg also said that as a member of the
opposition, live broadcasts are an important part of publicity and
propaganda. Otherwise, he said, many ideas would not get air-time in
mainstream media.

But ETV acting director general, Tiina Kangro, wasn't as confident
about keeping the broadcasts. She said the program was not popular
and was costly to produce. Furthermore, the company has already
designed a program to replace the daily transmissions to possibly
begin airing in February.

Kangro said in lieu of the live transmissions, ETV will tape
Parliament sessions and show highlights during a 25 minute Saturday
afternoon show, when more viewers are at home.

Privatizing public television is not popular among other members of
the three party alliance, nor is it an official Reform Party opinion.

"My personal opinion is that privatization is the best solution. It
is not the official position of the Reform Party. Obviously, the
results of our discussions must be made by consensus," he said. "But,
it is necessary that the discussions have started."

Other MPs in the ruling coalition have voiced their concern over the
idea of selling off the company in order to save it. In fact, most
MPs oppose privatization.

"Almost everybody is against it," Kreitzberg said. "This channel has
its own specific function which couldn't be a private channel. There
are other solutions."

Marju Lauristin, head of the Parliamentary Moderates faction, told
Eesti Paevaleht: "Mediation of Estonian culture and fulfillment of
social tasks cannot be left up to private channels alone, they are
too heavily dependent on market rules and may go bankrupt."

"Nothing of this sort will happen during this coalition. This is not
for the Reform Party to decide on its own," she added.

ETV's budget problems started about a year ago when the company
decided to scrap commercial advertising and instead get a lump sum
compensation from private channels for refraining to air commercials.
But after a few months, ETV began to run advertisements once again
because the private companies were consistently late with their
payments.

Lauristin, who is also a respected media professor at Tartu
University, said the ruling parties' politicians will meet again next
week to discuss the television service. In her opinion, the law that
defines public broadcasting needs to be amended.

Politicians will also discuss expanding the Broadcasting Council to
include more diverse political representation. Currently, the
Broadcasting Council includes two members of Parliament, both from
the governing coalition - Herkel and Paul Eerik Rummo, of the Reform
Party. Members of the triple alliance will discuss expanding the
seats on the Broadcasting Council to include members of the
opposition as well.

Changing the make-up of the Broadcasting Council requires a change in law.