How are the European Parliament, the European Commission and other parts of the European Union supposed to interest people and explain their work?
How are the European Parliament, the European Commission and other parts of the European Union supposed to interest people and explain their work? The question lies at the heart of a debate MEPs on the Culture Committee held 27 April. Danish Liberal Morten Løkkegaard has drawn up a report, which says that embracing new media forums like Facebook and Twitter is the way forward.
Speaking at the meeting in Brussels where he presented his report he said, "there is a wealth of information in the EU but no communication. We need to approach this on the citizen's level, a bottom-up approach, not from the top down."
He stressed that "new social media on the internet is where the conversation takes among young people who are used not only to having access to the media but to responding to it, sharing and using information, he said. It is an ideal platform for telling the "new European story".
"Be where conversation takes place"
To reach these audiences, Mr Løkkegaard explained, "one must be where the conversation takes place", i.e. Facebook, Twitter or other online social networks.
He said the Parliament had been a "frontrunner" in this respect, since it launched several social media platforms last year to promote the European elections. But he also recommended promoting private-public partnerships as "the private sector has a lot of knowledge and experience in social media".
French Centre Right MEP Jean-Marie Cavada regretted the "arrogance of EU institutions (that) do not explain things clearly". Instead, he stressed, "social forms of media are very horizontal and a good idea".
"The institutional and technological setting has never been better... there is no overarching European public sphere at present, but there are very lively national public spheres," Mr Løkkegaard pointed out. To solve this problem we need to start from the bottom, and the leaders - governments and European leaders need to take responsibility, he said.
To get more European news in national media, he called on governments to draw up guidelines for EU coverage in public service broadcast media.
Falling media interest in Brussels?
"An experiment, of course,", he said. "we want more stories in the media. This would put more pressure on the media at home to send more journalists to Brussels". He was worried about the decreasing of the number of accredited reporters in Brussels. According to International Press Association President, Lorenzo Consoli, in 2005 there were around 1.300 journalists accredited to the EU, but now there are only 800.
Italians Socialist Silva Costa agreed that there should be "a mention of the EU in public service contracts. That would make a substantial contribution." But her German colleague Petra Kammerevert warned: "There is nothing wrong with appealing to broadcasters to cover more EU affairs but member state guidelines are the start of a slippery slope".
Dispute over a "task force" of independent journalists
Mr Løkkegaard also proposed to set up an EU "task force" of independent journalists, free of editorial control, who would produce daily EU news coverage to be published on different platforms and channels in accordance with journalistic news criteria.
Ms Kammerevert voiced concerns: "It would serve nobody's future interests buying up editors and newspapers. There is a spirit in your report that seems to blur the divisions between us and the independence of the media".
"I wouldn't dream of interfering in editorial lines," Mr Løkkegaard responded. He asked MEPs to take the ideas "in good spirit" and "not as an attack on journalism in any way whatsoever". The Culture Committee will vote on the report 2 June.