Audiovisuals in the European Union with Competition Law perspective on the legal policies in charge

Abstract: Published Data from the European Investment Bank and the Audiovisual Observatory in EU implies that the U.S. made Audiovisuals has dragged down European Audiovisuals' market share in EU market. Apparently, the constant situation is rising up some concerns about the future of the industry and the cultural, social and economical externalities. Considering the double nature of Audiovisuals and their character and nature, two sets of wants and principles are recognisable in governing the field. The market principles are governing the economical facets and broader public principles are governing the cultural and social facets. The both said principles are harnessing the "motive" to grow in the industry and are hoping for a better balance and sustainability. Briefly, the quality and the process of balancing as a variable in relation to different wants and values can be discussed in two settlements. On one settlement, the focus is on the Industries' attempts, their urges to grow and gaining competitive positions in the market. Noticeably, this attempt has been taken via the two main trends of having a dominant positions and concentrations. Both trends are taking financial and economical consideration as a motive. By abusing a dominant position, an undertaking seeks to strengthen its dominant yet unstable market position. Regarding this, the refusal to provide media content is a noticeable and common form in audiovisuals. By concentrating through the value chain and with other undertakings at different or at the same market level, a company seeks to raise its efficiency and competitiveness by reducing risks involved and benefiting from the new facilities and potentials made by the network. Various discussions are initiated in this part. These discussions cover different topics such as the economical and financial rationale behind the businesses' trends, the competitive restraints that Anti competitive acts may cause, assessment of dominancy, assessment of an abuse, thresholds, market share, justifications etc. On the other settlement, the focus is on the Member states' attempts to help and support the industries' growth. Distinctly, the two main governmental supports take the form of exclusivity and special rights or State Financial Aid granted to undertakings. By granting exclusive or special rights, a member state seeks to strengthen the market position of a public undertaking (including but not limited to public TV-Broadcaster). This kind of interventions in the competitive market is aiming to support the public and humanitarian principles (e.g. provision of unbiased information to citizens). Considering the role of TV-Broadcasters in the value chain and the life cycle of media contents, governmental interventions by putting private sector in a competitive deficit may result in negative externalities. By granting State Financial Aid and injecting fiscal helps to specific sectors in the industry, member states are aiming to support the industry by strengthening undertakings' market position in comparison with their competitors' and to ease down the financial risks involved. Moreover, parts of these State Aid helps are devoted to supports for Cultural values and social principles. Different discussions are originated from the member states' policies in supporting the industry. Notably, these discussions are about competitive restraints, distortion of competition by public interventions, cultural and social concerns involved, proportionality of a State Aid measure, criteria introduced for the admissibility and legality of a State Aid, efficiency of these fiscal supports and set thresholds and justification. As can be seen, on the two settlements above, the main concern is keeping the balance between all the considerations. These EU considerations at the bottom line are derived from being aware of the double nature of Audiovisuals. Consequently, the published figures, narrating the market deficit of European audiovisual works in comparison with the U.S. made ones, are and were predictable.