You are currently browsing the category archive for the 'European Parliament webTV' category.
As Ireland’s second vote on the Lisbon Treaty nears, concesssions won by the Irish government coupled with a resurgent civil society ‘yes’ movement could see the ‘No to Lisbon’ camp face an uphill struggle in the coming weeks
Source: EurActive [edited]
As Ireland’s second vote on the Lisbon Treaty nears, concesssions won by the Irish government coupled with a resurgent civil society ‘yes’ movement could see the ‘No to Lisbon’ camp face an uphill struggle in the coming weeks, experts told EurActiv.
Background:
Ireland rejected the Lisbon Treaty in a referendum in June 2008, effectively stalling the reforms contained in the treaty and causing widespread consternation among European politicians.
Following the result of the referendum, the Irish government conducted detailed research into why the public voted against the treaty and found concerns over military neutrality, the potential impact on Ireland’s corporate tax rates, workers’ rights and ethical issues related to the position of the family and abortion. Question marks over whether Ireland would lose its European commissioner were also said to be of concern.
Leaders meeting in Brussels in December 2008 agreed to find a legally-binding solution to clear up confusion over how the treaty would affect Ireland in the hope that this would allow a second referendum.
Following June’s European elections, where only one of Ireland’s 12 MEPs was elected on an anti-Lisbon platform, EU leaders reached a compromise in offering Ireland legally-binding guarantees on the Lisbon Treaty without requiring other countries to re-ratify the text.
The Irish government set Friday 2 October as the date for the second referendum.
There is a precedent for Ireland having a second vote on a European treaty, as two referenda were required to pass the Nice Treaty.
With the second referendum six weeks away, both pro and anti-Lisbon campaigns are grinding into gear.
While many of the 2008 arguments from both sides are being re-circulated this time around, experts told EurActiv that the political backdrop to this year’s referendum is profoundly different to that of last year.
According to the sources, who did not wish to be named given the politically sensitive nature of the current debates, many of the grounds for argument raised by the ‘no’ camp in 2008 are no longer in play, given that the guarantees and concessions granted to Ireland by EU leaders appear to have assuaged many of the fears expressed by Irish ‘no’ voters last June.
As a result, they indicated, the ‘no’ campaign could face an ‘uphill struggle’ to recreate its 2008 success.
Given the changed context, the ‘no’ camp will largely have to base its arguments on issues they feel have not been addressed by the EU guarantees, using, in particular, workers’ rights as a spearhead for its campaign.
Indeed, the combined ‘no’ campaign was launched earlier this week with a warning that the treaty would leave workers worse off and more exposed to spending cuts.
A profoundly undemocratic document, says ‘no’ camp
Speaking at the launch, Ireland’s sole anti-Lisbon MEP, Socialist Joe Higgins, argued that the Lisbon Treaty “is a profoundly undemocratic document, which seeks to turn right-wing economic policies into the only show in town”.
According to the MEP, if Lisbon is passed, “the EU Commission would uphold the right of big business to profit from public services, over and above the rights of workers to take action to defend these services”.
However, Andrew Byrne, Chief of Operations for pro-Lisbon advocacy group Ireland for Europe, dismissed the ‘no’ camp’s claims, arguing that its “scattergun approach” continues to falsely portray Lisbon as part of a “neoliberal economic agenda”.
According to Byrne, the ‘no side’ “will continue to misrepresent and distort the truth, playing on peoples’ fears and anxieties”.
Groundswell of groups adds legitimacy to ‘yes’ camp
But pro-Lisbon Byrne believes that despite what he sees as the fear-mongering on the ‘no’ side, the emergence of a plethora of civil society ‘yes’ bodies are giving a stronger legitimacy to the overall pro-Lisbon campaign.
“You only have to look at the number of groups out there to see that there is a groundswell of people who are not part of the normal political scene, who care about the future of the country and feel that Lisbon is a big part of that,” he said.
This “shows that there are people throughout Ireland who feel this issue is too important to leave to politicians and traditional groups”.
Byrne argued that the proliferation of civil society ‘yes’ groups “takes the wind out of the ‘no’ camp’s sails”, in that “it doesn’t allow the ‘no’ groups to paint Lisbon as merely an ambition of the political establishment”.
“We’re making the point to people that there is a new deal on the table and their concerns have been addressed. The loss of the Commissioner, for example, was a huge concern to people,” said Byrne.
The Ireland for Europe representative concluded that in his opinion, the ‘no’ camp is weaker this time around, but urged against “complacency,” among pro-Lisbon activists, arguing that all groups should remain active on the ground until the referendum.
Official vs.unofficial partnership with the EU institutions
Source : EurActiv [edited]
Please see the EuroElections add here : http://www.europarltv.europa.eu/YourVoice.aspx?action=view&PackageId=3aa717a9-86c7-48b6-af0d-3046a364b605
Online broadcaster YouTube and TV channel Euronews launched a new broadcasting service to “connect voters and candidates” ahead of next month’s European elections. ‘Questions for Europe’ is not the first time YouTube has hosted political messages. The White House, Queen Elizabeth II and 10 Downing Street all have official channels on the site, while YouTube has worked in partnership with local broadcasters for elections in Spain, Poland, Israel and New Zealand.
The ‘Questions for Europe’ projectexternal seeks to encourage candidates, constituents and experts “to engage in a dialogue through online video”. The project, which becomes active for the public later this week, primarily relies on user-generated content, inviting citizens to submit questions to candidate MEPs by uploading videos to a dedicated channel on YouTube, a popular online video community owned by US giant Google.
Euronews will broadcast a selection of the questions – and MEPs, think-tank representatives and other Brussels commentators’ answers to them – at the end of its half-hourly news bulletins, which reach 256 million households in 144 countries.
Echoes of MyBarackObama.com
The European Parliament and the EU executive already have their own YouTube channels, but Questions for Europe’s backers stressed that the new initiative was completely independent from the EU institutions’ preparations for the elections. “There is no official partnership with the EU institutions,” said Echikson, and “there is no official partnership with the candidates or political parties either,” added Euronews managing director and board member Michael Peters.
Asked what the motivation behind the project was, Echikson said “we remembered the Obama ‘Yes we can’ phenomenon, and thought, ‘Can we do this in Europe?’” “It’s too early to say whether this will take off like ‘Yes we can’. It’s an experiment. It’s something new,” he added. “The glossiest veneer isn’t always the most authentic in politics,” added Aaron Ferstman, director of political communications at YouTube. “Raw can be better sometimes, which is where YouTube comes in.”
‘Not a marketing exercise’
Refuting suggestions that the whole enterprise was simply a marketing exercise for all concerned, Peters said the project was “about giving concrete, professional answers to individual questions”. “It’s a question of educating people. We are trying to be a bit of a Wikipedia on the EU elections,” Peters said. “It’s about putting intelligent user-generated content on air.” “It’s also about having the right questions available at the right time when we’re interviewing MEPs. It’s not a question of using our partnership with YouTube in a marketing way,” he insisted.
Some observers present at yesterday’s launch suggested that the channel could become a Eurosceptic hub, as most public contributions to such initiatives tended to be anti-EU. “We’re not afraid of it becoming a Eurosceptic channel. We know that it will be mainly Eurosceptic, and we’re waiting for that. We need all points of view for it to be credible,” insisted Euronews’ Peters. “Please Eurosceptics, come to us,” he urged.
Positions:
“The upcoming European election will captivate European citizens and generate discussions from Portugal to Poland. Our news, online content, and soon YouTube videos in Euronews broadcasts all fuel impassioned political conversations,” said Michael Peters, managing director and a member of the board at Euronews.
“The Euronews-YouTube channel enables a global audience to delve into politics in a way that simply was not possible during the last [European] Parliamentary election,” said YouTube’s director of political communications, Aaron Ferstman. “In conjunction with Euronews, a leader in both television broadcasting and editorial programming, we are for the first time enabling voters from around the European Union to ask their potential future member of parliament a question in video form and hear the answer,” Ferstman continued. “One of the things that works most successfully for politicians is to upload frequently and be engaged,” he said. “YouTube can raise awareness of the EU elections. Many people don’t even know when the elections are, but everyone recognises the YouTube logo.”
Petition for the Prime Minister to inform all citizens and residents to vote in the European Elections on 4 June 09.
Source: Nath Henry
It is the Government’s duty to communicate the importance of these fast-approaching, and largely invisible, elections to all voters. The European Parliament is responsible with the Council of Ministers for passing legislation that affects us all. The Government is represented in the Council of Ministers. It is its job to inform us what it does and how important the European elections are for making the EU accountable to its citizens.
Thank you for adding your name online if you would like to support the petition.
Nath Henry
SIGN IT HERE: http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Date4Europe/
European Health Insurance Card
Protection Of Cultural Heritage
Human rights throughout the world
As unemployment is the priority campaign issue, it is absolutely clear that it is the areas associated with the daily and personal life of Europeans which are paramount.
Source: Eurobarometer [edited]
Background:
The European Parliament regularly commissions surveys on public opinion in the Member States. They are intended to give a better idea of the public perception of its activities and the perception within the European Union as a whole. The surveys provide valuable guidance for preparing and assessing its work and decision-making. The surveys tackle questions such as what the public expects from the European elections in June 2009 and the issues that they think should be given priority.
The results of this survey on the elections should be considered in the context of the current international situation. In fact, the survey’s fieldwork (January/February) coincides with highly-charged international events: the inauguration of Barack Obama, the launch of his first recovery plan, the situation in Gaza, etc.
There are a number of important trends to note:
Campaign issues:
Unemployment is by far the campaign issue which Europeans wish to see tackled as a priority during the European electoral debate. This result confirms the enormous concern of Europeans in the face of the present situation and that which is to come, especially as regards their personal situation.
Level of awareness of the elections:
The increase in awareness of the date is confirmed in comparison with the last two surveys. On the other hand, interest in the elections is not increasing and the likelihood of voting or not voting remains the same. The factors influencing the voter’s choice in the election (candidates’ experience both in the European and national domains, electoral program etc.) as well as the factors which cause them to abstain from voting are practically the same as those which were analysed in the EB/PE69 (Spring 2008).
The role of the EP:
Opinion is polarising gradually as we get closer to the election. Practically half of Europeans want to see it play a more important role while one sixth states the contrary. The number of “don’t know” answers is decreasing.
The EP and the expectations of European citizens:
The demand for greater protection of the consumer and of public health as well as a better coordination of economic, budgetary and fiscal policies are the issues citizens most want to see addressed as a priority by the EP. As unemployment is the priority campaign issue, it is absolutely clear that it is the areas associated with the daily and personal life of Europeans which are paramount. This leads to a demand for greater protection at EU level in the face of a crisis, the end of which no-one currently knows. In parallel, we note from these results that the international role of the EU is perceived as less important for European citizens. There is currently an increase in those who would like the Union to address, as a priority, their everyday problems. As regards values, the protection of human rights in the world is still in first place with a jump of 4 percentage points. The international context, marked by an intensification of certain conflicts and by increasing repression in many regions of the world, undoubtedly has a bearing on this. It is also presumably the reason why the defence of freedom of expression, evaluated for the first time, is found in 4th place (30%) of the values which the Parliament should defend as a priority.
Rethinking the European blogging competition 2009 launched by the European Journalism Centre in Brussels 26-27 Jan. 2009. The EJC brought 81 bloggers, representing all 27 member states, to Brussels for a kick-off meeting to launch a six-month blogging competition.
“Moses calling from Brussels: EUCommunication Policy…nul points”
There is no doubt that nation states are the dominant frame of reference and belonging for a vast majority of EU citizens. The question is IF and HOW an additional collective “Heimat” can be invented or constructed as a vehicle to legitimise the EU’s present and future goals.
It is not as difficult as it seems. What IS needed is talent, common endeavour and dedication. What is NOT needed are well-paid Brussels based civil servants “playing” at being journalists, or communication policy makers appointed by indifferent national governments achieving indifferent goals. Communicating Europe cannot be an automated procedure. You cannot simply push a button to win the hearts and minds of individuals.
Moreover, further European integration can no longer rely on citizens’ usually silent permissive consensus.
The following article explores the fragmented European self-contradictory communicative space and ways to overcome the solitude of being a pro-EU netizen, dealing with the sentimental pseudo-dilemma: national sovereignty versus European loyalty.
Dealing with the problematic term “e-participation” within the European online realm
Myth: The Internet could become the abstract, symbolic and, at the same time, tangible platform for European political activism.
Reality: Online mediatisation of self-perceptions in a post-modern era can be very problematic. Does joining Facebook groups and community platforms (e.g. www.thinkaboutit.eu), necessarily mean that you are engaged in political activism and can finally make a difference? On the contrary, it might end up being a theoretical oxymoron, an empty undelivered promise, a wishful rhetorical referent or an “empty signifier”. Questions about whether online identities are continuous with offline selves (interaction with the real world) are dominant and self-evident. This is a core issue in the emerging European e-agora: bridging the gap between digitally mediated virtual space and real, flesh and blood individuals who comprise physical communities.
Virtual environments are valuable as places where we can acknowledge our inner diversity. But we still want an authentic experience of self. One’s fear is, of course, that in the culture of simulation, a word like authenticity can no longer apply. (Turkle, 1996)[1]
As stated at the “European blogging competition” Event in Brussels “never have so many people written so much to be read by so few” [2]. Publishing articles on EU Elections using blogs and Facebook groups is like throwing a grain of sand into the Sahara desert.
It might end up being an autistic, hopeless self-repeated action, which might give you the false impression that you have done your duty as an active citizen. Alas, this is the same sand in which you proudly hide your head like a pan-European ostrich.
New media vs Traditional Media : a Pyrrhic victory
The feathers of that ostrich reminded me of the importance of putting both our feet on solid ground. Why spend taxpayers’ money on autonomous, self-selective, self-motivated bloggers from around EU, mostly Euro-enthusiasts, who participate a priori in a discussion originated by them, with them, for them within the context of social networking sites?
To avoid misunderstanding: why only do that? Why not buy advertising time from Public broadcasting networks (ERT Greece, RAI Italy, BBC UK etc.) or from Commercial private channels since – according to Euro barometer [3] – television is perceived as the preferred source for information, followed by daily newspapers, taking of course into consideration the rules regarding political advertising and broadcasting for elections which differ from state to state.[4]
Who will buy the advertising time? Politicians / parties within member states. Why them? Because they are democratically elected. Why not the European Commission? The argument has always been that any “broadcasting / advertising” by the EP or Commission would be tantamount to political interference in the domestic affairs of a member state.
So, why this all of the sudden shift of interest to New Media? Who is so naïve as to believe that the New Media alone will be the panacea for the communications and therefore democratic deficit of EU? No need to repeat that we DO need opinionated bloggers. Let me remind you that TIME’s Person of the Year 2006 [5] was the anonymous blogger and commentator of sites. Blogging is also of great benefit for the journalists of the traditional media. However, on top of that, we need effective channels of European mass communication.
Based on personal observation, the EU is over-represented [6] on the internet. The existential question is: who is listening and moreover who cares, “given the plethora of message-providers and the mounting traffic of content, among the most daunting problems arising is, firstly, that of infoflation (data richness), a term that synthesises the term information with that of inflation in order to highlight attendant problems of entropy”.[7]
Reality: By adopting a more moderate techno-enthusiasm, we might re-evaluate the significance and tremendous power of “officially” moderated, controlled, organised and managed television as we know it. I am not afraid to use the words “controlled and moderated” when referring to western media, which have never been the “sanctuary of impartiality and objectivity”, as they proudly proclaim, comparing themselves to the media from so-called developing countries.
- Is it too late to start in February implementing a communications strategy targeting the Euro-elections which take place in June, bearing in mind that such a strategy has to be implemented in common ways throughout the 27 member states involved?
Yes, there is no need to dispute the fact that blogging and in general the New Media played an important role in the recent American elections. However, we all remember that President Obama’s communication strategy reached its peak on Oct. 29, when the Democrats bought 30 minutes of prime time on major TV networks for a programme on air from 8 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. In the footsteps of Obama? Not really.[8]
Dealing with Self-perceptions: internalising external signals and messages with EU content is based on the originators of messages and mediation itself.
Myth: The EU is a monolithic, bureaucratic monster. EU politics are not sexy.
Reality: Pirandello could give the answer: “It Is So (If You Think So)” [9] . How many of us really believe that British, German or Italian politics are more “attractive” and “glamorous” compared to EU politics? Let’s try to answer this question honestly. And please exclude Carla Bruni or Berlusconi’s hair colour. Why is political discourse within member states “hot” but “old-fashioned” and “boring” in the EU? Because a bunch of honorable and well-respected (?) journalists in each member state – depending on the degree of national or their boss’s euroscepticism – say so! As the BBC Brussels correspondent Mark Mardell [10] remarked at the TH!INKABOUTIT event “there are pan-European issues to be broadcast, but I am not sure if the media will decide to promote them”. Tony Barber [11] from the Financial Times mentioned that one pan-European issue to be addressed in the future is the economic crisis, which according to him will influence the debate over Euro-elections.
Issues such as citizens’ identification and association with EU were also raised, but nobody had the answer, apart from a few ideas suggested by the BBC correspondent: “an EU president for instance (as this is proposed by the Lisbon Treaty) will help people to associate themselves with the faceless EU [12]. The EU president could mobilise the EU citizens.”
Bloggers’ meeting with MEPs and EU officials at the EP
JMECE Lab had the chance to ask Steve Clark from the WebComm Unit of the EP to comment on the following remarks made by focus group participants. That focus group [13]was recently convened in conjunction with Professor Juliet Lodge in a relatively poor north-east port, Hull, UK.
“The EuroparlTV website was regarded with the same disinterest. One student said he would find it more useful if such a channel were done by an independent company instead of the European Parliament. The EuroparlTV website was seen, in the words of students, as “propaganda.”" Mr. Clark, who spoke at the Brussels Event about the “EP online: web communications now and in the future”, denied that the EU is trying to proselytize or disseminate propaganda, underlining the fact EU citizens are not “stupid” and they understand when they are being brainwashed. He also seemed familiar with all the arguments against this new initiative, the web based parliamentary TV.
Finally, bloggers from around Europe joined three MEPs, Christopher Fjellner (EPP), Richard Corbett (PES) and Jules Maaten (ALDE) in a stimulating discussion on web, bloggers and networkers. Dr. Richard Corbett, one of the first blogger MEPs, noted that he does not allow comments on his blog because of the potential misuse of that feature by other parties, which would use his e-space to promote their own interests. The reactions by members of the audience interrupted the discussion: “no comments, means no Blogging!” Dr. Corbett had to clarify that “all comments are welcome via e-mails”. However, the “instant response” feature of blogging is in this way erased.
The discussion was moderated by Mrs. Marjory van den Broeke, Head of press at the Parliament, who referred to herself and her colleagues as “civil servants”. What the EU needs is talented trend setters and dedicated opinion leaders [14], not Eurocrats, who aim to create “a common sentimental basis”, “a special feeling of co-belonging” starting from 9 to 5 everyday, except weekends [15]. The EU is a sui generis political organisation, which needs individuals who can be engaged in the creation of a common European public sphere “in the making”.
Rhetoric Question for homework!
Is it too late to start in February implementing a communications strategy targeting the Euro-elections which take place in June, bearing in mind that such a strategy has to be implemented in common ways throughout the 27 member states involved?
Notes:
[1] Turkle, S. (1996). Virtuality and its discontents: Searching for community in cyberspace. The American Prospect,24, 50-57.
[2] http://cincypg.org/node/29 / The New York Times’ statement on blogging.
[3]http://www.euractiv.com/en/enlargement/eurobarometer-eu-citizens-badly-informed-enlargement/article-111414
[4] For more on that issue check the Euro election books by Juliet Lodge and Val Herman, especially Direct elections to the European Parliament. London: Macmillan.,1982.
[5] http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html
[6] The core question is NOT whether to create one more common communicative e-space, as suggested e.g. via the European Parliament’s webTV, but to gain more visibility for the existing ones and – from DG Communication’s point of view – to analyse the innumerable contributions by netizens so far. In addition to that, as Raymond Frenken, creator EUX.TV (a web-based channel with EU content http://eux.tv), mentioned a web- based TV channel is not profitable, unless you have a lot of daily hits. European politics won’t attract attention.
[7] Sophia Kaitatzi-Whitlock 2008, Web 2.0 Interactive: the rise of popular agency and its impact, (unpublished paper part of a lecture at LSE, May 2008 available on line: http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/informationSystems/newsAndEvents/2008events/whitlock.htm)
[8] http://adage.com/campaigntrail/post?article_id=131618
[9] Così è, se vi pare!
[10] http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/
[11] http://blogs.ft.com/brusselsblog
[12] One can argue that the reason, after all, for making the EU faceless in the first place was to encourage policy solutions in the common interest of the whole EU rather than a specific member state.
[13] The two focus groups with young British vocational education students met at Hull College on 14 January 2009. The first group comprised 12 participants, all male, with a median age of 23 years old. The second group was formed by 10 students (8 males and 2 females), their median age being 18 years old.
[14] See an interesting effort to “use” public figures to communicate EU: the well known in Europe Greek-French journalist Nikos Aliagas promoting EU environmental policy http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=glNHqBuGv-0&feature=related .
[15] I would also like to mention a comment by a journalist in charge of unloading new texts on Europe.eu site during a confidential discussion we had in Brussels. He remarked “these texts which I write for Europe.eu are so boring, that I myself don’t want to read them again!”
the “e-Parliament” concept aims to get people involved in politics using their
Source: European Parliament
The role that the internet can play in parliamentary democracy was explored this week when 400 people gathered in Brussels for the annual “e-Parliament conference“. Ways in which new web developments can be used to get people more involved in politics were discussed by 400 delegates from around the world.
In practical terms, the “e-Parliament” concept aims to get people involved in politics using their computers. It involves things like electronic access to documents, online discussion forums and the live broadcast of parliamentary debates online.
The recent success of the Obama presidential bid in mobilising first-time voters was mention by at least one speaker at the event held in the Parliament’s Chamber on 25-26 November. German Socialist MEP Mechtild Rothe told the conference that every parliament around the world needs to think about new technologies to “empower citizens, achieve transparency and think about participation in a new way“. She also said it could allow younger people to feel they had a greater say in how decisions were taken.
The role of youth was taken up her by Romanian colleague Silvia-Adriana Țicǎu who said that the whole concept of e-democracy could be extended to engage children with European politics through things like interactive online cartoons.
She stressed that with the European elections 7 months away now was the right time to be thinking about these issues and said the “budgetary and human resources must be ensured”. The recent launch of EuroparlTV and the ability to watch debates and meetings live online on the parliament’s website have been steps in this direction.
The possible misuse of technology was taken up by the Speaker of Egypt’s Parliament Ahmed Fathi Sorour in his remarks to delegates. Anders Johnsson, the Secretary General of the Interparliamentary Union, said that new technologies could help with fighting corruption and overcoming public apathy.
Finally, the head of the Pan-African Parliament Gertrude Mongella told those gathered that African parliaments “lack the financial means and expertise” to introduce it. She said a general lack of dialogue between people in general society was a key problem for Africa.
Jeremy Rifkin
Is there a European dream, comparable to the American dream of freedom and independence? Definitely, argues social historian and thinker Jeremy Rifkin in this EuroparlTV interview: Europe’s dream is about quality of life for all, and therefore it is much more communal than the American dream.
Click here to watch the interview from Europarl TV – Your Parliament.
DebateEurope (http://europa.eu/debateeurope/index_en.htm) is the official forum of European Union with thousands -not to say million- posts.
EUtube (http://www.youtube.com/EUtube) is the official platform created by EU to host official videos being produced by the Directorate General Communication and not only.
So, the core question is NOT to create on more common communicative e-space, as suggested e.g. via the European Parliament’s webTV, but to gain more visibility for the existing ones and – from DG Communication’s point of view – to analyse the innumerous contributions so far…
Europe is over-represented especially on line. The question is: who is listening and moreover who cares?
Here is a recently released video from EUtube (right to the target) about Climate Change:
Recent Comments