How to Secure the Freedom and Diversity of Expression
January 2009
The Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications’ Telecommunications Council is considering the establishment of a new Information & Telecommunication Law to make legal systems fit in the ongoing fusion of telecommunications and broadcasting. However, terrestrial broadcasters are strongly opposed to the proposed revision of the law, which have “siloed” rules for each layer of communication services such as transmission infrastructure and content. Among them, content regulation that is directly connected to the freedom and diversity of expression has become a major topic of discussion. The author summarizes what has been discussed on this issue by topics, and examines the challenges to come.
Specific arguments regarding the content regulation include how to reorganize the handling of content, which has been regulated separately depending on transmission channels such as broadcasting and telecommunications, and to what extent it should be regulated (scope of regulation), whether the provisions of the regulation, such as rules for programs, should be altered (content of regulation), and who should be the regulatory body, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications as it is now or an independent administrative committee such as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) (regulatory body). Furthermore, some argue that conventional regulation on broadcasting activities including the principle of mass media deconcentration and local license system will affect the diversity and pluralism of the freedom of expression, depending on the direction of the system reform. This article reviews the progress of the debates over the convergence of telecommunications and broadcasting to summarize what is being discussed about the content regulation at the Telecommunications Council by topics. Based on the summary, the author identifies the concerns of broadcasters which will be impacted by the revision of the law and issues to be addressed before finalizing the bill and examines the direction of the debate which should be concluded before the projected submission of the bill to the Diet in 2010.