Element 68Element 45Element 44Element 63Element 64Element 43Element 41Element 46Element 47Element 69Element 76Element 62Element 61Element 81Element 82Element 50Element 52Element 79Element 79Element 7Element 8Element 73Element 74Element 17Element 16Element 75Element 13Element 12Element 14Element 15Element 31Element 32Element 59Element 58Element 71Element 70Element 88Element 88Element 56Element 57Element 54Element 55Element 18Element 20Element 23Element 65Element 21Element 22iconsiconsElement 83iconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsElement 84iconsiconsElement 36Element 35Element 1Element 27Element 28Element 30Element 29Element 24Element 25Element 2Element 1Element 66
Convergence and the Regulatory Consequences

Convergence and the Regulatory Consequences

Increasing technical convergence presents media regulation with new challenges and calls into question traditional media law. The report by Winfried Kluth and Wolfgang Schulz gives an overview of problem areas and provides possible solutions, as commissioned by the German states and as a preparation for the Bund-Länder-Commission for Media Convergence.  

This report has been commissioned by the German states and gives an overview of the problems of the current legal system, which is confronted with the reality of media convergence. Not only does this affect legal regulations of the federal states, but also legal regulations of the federal government. Solutions for coordination and cooperation are needed in order to resolve conflicts. The problems discussed in the report are based on the current legal situation. In order to provide possible solutions for the 2016 Bund-Länder-Commission, relevant decisions by courts and authorities were analysed, empirical studies were factored in and an industry survey regarding convergence was evaluated.

The complete report is published in the series “Working Papers of the Hans-Bredow-Institut” [Arbeitspapiere des Hans-Bredow-Instituts], no. 30. (pdf for download). Furthermore, the report is the topic of episode 5 of the BredowCast.

show more

Project Description

This report has been commissioned by the German states, and it deals with convergence and its regulatory consequences. Increasing technical convergence presents media regulation with new challenges just as much as convergence in previously separate media branches. In principle, media law proceeds from regulation based on concepts by way of technical marks of difference. These technical criteria become blurred with increasing convergence and present less and less points of connection for modern media regulation.

One example of this regulatory concept being called into question is that of hybrid TV, where Internet and television content can be viewed on the same device. However, other developments are also challenging the conceptual categories of telemedia and broadcasting law.

Beyond that, questions arise about the harmonizing of the law on competition with that on media where competitive interests encounter each other, and about the securing of diversity. Our report thus intends to also serve as a preparation for the talks between federal government and the states on harmonising the respective legal regulations already in force. New questions of media law also arise when dealing with non-journalistic influences on public opinion, e.g.as regards intermediaries and media agencies.

Our report will analyse these regulatory areas and investigate them as to their potential for optimisation. Our analysis of the problem is based on assessing the decisions of courts and authorities, research analyses and information from the branches concerned.

Project Information

Overview

Duration: 2014-2014

Research programme:
RP1 - Transformation of Public Communication

Involved persons

Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Schulz • Dipl.-Jur. Univ. Kevin Dankert

Third party

Rundfunkkommission der Länder

Cooperation Partner

Prof. Dr. Winfried Kluth, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg

Contact person

Dipl.-Jur. Univ. Kevin Dankert
Junior Researcher Broadcasting & Regulation

Dipl.-Jur. Univ. Kevin Dankert

Send Email

MAYBE YOU ARE ALSO INTERESTED IN THESE TOPICS?

media and telecommunications law • regulatory approaches • regulation • Neue Regulierungsformen • power of opinion • co-regulation • Hybrid TV • telecommunications law • media law • convergence

Related projects and publications

Projects
Publications
Events
All
CI_BKM-EU_Medienkonferenz_Leibniz-Institut-fuer-Medienforschung_Hans-Bredow-Institut.jpg

Conference within the Framework of the German EU Council Presidency

Coherent Media Order: Accompanying the EU Media Conference 2020

The institute will provide scientific support for the media conference in the context of Germany's 2020 EU Council Presidency and is analysing in advance the requirements of a modern European information order.
Facebook_Leibniz-Institut-fuer-Medienforschung_Hans-Bredow-Institut_con-karampelas-1178814-unsplash.jpg

Rules in Digital Communication Spaces

Governance of Freedom of Expression

The social science case study gains access to Facebook's Content Policy Forum for the first time in order to examine how rules for the moderation of content, so-called "community standards", are developed.
Diss_Amélie-Pia-Heldt_WirkungderMeinungsfreiheit_Hans-Bredow-Institut.png

PhD Project

The Effect of Freedom of Expression in Social Networks

Is user-generated content on private communication platforms protected by freedom of expression? In her PhD project, Amélie Heldt focuses on the effect of the fundamental right on freedom of expression on the Internet.
Algorithmen-2_Hans-Bredow-Institut.png

Report for the German Bundestag

Algorithms and Opinion Formation

The Office of Technology Assessment at the German Bundestag (TAB) commissioned the Hans-Bredow-Institut with a report on the topic of "Algorithms in Digital Media and Their Influence on Individual Opinion Formation of Users".  
Die Kontrolle vorherrschender Meinungsmacht_Idee und Wirklichkeit.jpeg

Idea and Reality

Control Over Predominating Power of Opinion

One of the central goals of public media law is to prevent predominating power of opinion. All the more surprising that there is little consensus as to what it means.  
CI_Transparency-or-Opacity.jpg

Editorship

Transparency or Opacity

Martin Fertmann, together with Simone Kuhlmann, Fabrizio De Gregorio, Hannah Ofterdinger and Anton Sefkow, has published an anthology with contributions from legal scholars on the problem of transparency in automated decision-making processes. The anthology is available as an open access publicatio...
CI_JMS-Report_2022.jpg

Jugendmedienschutz-Report 6/22

Folgen der sich wandelnden Regulierungsansätze im Jugendmedienschutz

Dr. Stephan Dreyer, Sünje Andresen and Neda Wysocki have published an article in the current Youth Media Protection Report. In this article, they address the systematic changes in the legal protection of minors from harmful media and the associated control advantages for interaction and communi...
CI_Tiedeke_Statification.jpg

Understanding Digital Corporations as States?

Self-Statification of Corporate Actors?: Tracing Modes of Corporate Engagements with Public International Law

In order to understand the role of large digital corporations in international lawmaking on the internet from a jurisprudential perspective, Anna Sophia Tiedeke applies Michel Foucault's model of "stateification" (Étatisation). This article is published as an open access paper b...
CI_Gesetzessammlung16-19_Leibniz-Institut fuer Medienforschung_Hans-Bredow-Institut.jpg

Available for Download

Gesetzessammlung: Information, Kommunikation, Medien, 19. Auflage

The legal basis in the field of information, communication and media is changing so rapidly that the traditional book form often seems inappropriate for practitioners of the law as well as for publishers. A collection of laws is hardly on the market when, in all likelihood, the media treaty has alre...
CI_Mosene-Kettemann_Global-Media-Journal_Machtkritische-Perspektiven-auf-digitale-Emanzipationsgewinne.jpg

Saving the Digital World?

Machtkritische Perspektiven auf digitale Emanzipationsgewinne

In the Global Media Journal, Katharina Mosene and Prof. Dr. Matthias C. Kettemann look at the norms that could make the distribution of digital power more equitable.   You can download the article here (PDF, in German)   Abstract The internet has long ceased to be a utopian counter-draft t...
show more

Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter and receive the Institute's latest news via email.

SUBSCRIBE!