Some ambiguities were well connected with the AMSD One of them was the temporality status of...
28
TELEPROMOTION OR TIME TRAVEL BEYOND THE 12 MINUTES LIMIT Some ambiguities were well connected with the AMSD One of them was the temporality status of telepromotion: 12 minutes or beyond? George Chirita Director ARCA
Some ambiguities were well connected with the AMSD One of them was the temporality status of telepromotion: 12 minutes or beyond? George Chirita Director
Some ambiguities were well connected with the AMSD One of them
was the temporality status of telepromotion: 12 minutes or beyond?
George Chirita Director ARCA
Slide 2
One way to obtain this result was to allow the advertising
content merge in a non-invasive way with the editorial content.
Therefore, product placement and telepromotion were pushed
forward... The first, by a clear definition and the second, by
removing the daily time limit for advertising
Slide 3
In 1993, Mr Pinheiro, the Commissioner for audiovisual at that
time, insisted to clarify that: "Telepromotion", as I have clearly
acknowledged, is a form of advertising which is lawful in principle
and subject to all the provisions on advertising contained in the
Directive. It is not accurate, therefore, to say that, by
definition, telepromotion" is incompatible with the Directive.
Slide 4
Stephan Loerke, director of WFA:"Too much advertising kills
advertising and undermines its effectiveness telepromotion supports
the program / there is no time presure on the audience "Normally a
telepromotion is done by the TV channel and the agency is not
involved. You see things that contradict the essence of the brand.
The style of the show can overshadow the brand positioning and
damage the brand. The programs brand can provide image for products
The telepromotion can be a useful format, suited to a product that
needs more explanation than a traditional spot provides
Slide 5
Slide 6
Clear definition: telepromotions are a form of television
advertising based on the interruption of studio programmes
(especially game shows) by slots devoted to the presentation of one
or more products or services, where the programme presenters
momentarily swap their role in the games in progress for one as
"promoters" of the goods or services which are the object of the
advertising presentation.
Slide 7
28. Hourly duration. It is worth reminding that teleshopping
spots fall under the hourly and daily limits set by Article 18 of
the Directive. In contrast, in its previously mentioned second
report on the application of the Directive, the Commission has
reminded that telepromotions that are other forms of advertising,
fall under the daily limits provided by the Directive. It follows
from Article 18(2) of the Directive that the proportion of
telepromotion spots (like teleshopping and advertising spots)
within a given clock hour shall not exceed 20 %. However, the
Article does not apply to telepromotion which is not presented in
the form of spots but during a programme. When broadcast in that
manner, following the case law of the Court, telepromotion must be
regarded as another form of advertising. It follows that the rules
on the hourly duration of advertising which apply to "advertising
spots" and "teleshopping spots" are not applicable to
telepromotion(30). 29. Article 18(1) of the Directive on the
authorised daily duration of advertising and teleshopping is
applicable to telepromotion spots and programmes. However, Article
18(2) of the Directive on the maximum hourly duration of television
advertising does not cover telepromotion presented during a
programme.
Slide 8
Everything is clear: The time line for non-spot telepromotions
does not ends at the 12 minutes hourly limit. It ends at the daily
time limit!!!
Slide 9
Joined Cases C-320/94, C-328/94, C-329/94, C- 337/94, C-338/94
and C-339/94, known as RTI CASE
Slide 10
Since it appears from the wording of the first question and the
observations made before the Court that 'telepromotions' are forms
of publicity which, by reason of their method of presentation, last
longer than spot advertisements, they may, in principle, benefit
from the option introduced by Article 18(1) of the directive of
increasing the percentage of transmission time devoted to
advertising. It follows from the above that the directive, and in
particular Articles 1(b) and 18 thereof, must be interpreted as
meaning that the expression 'forms of advertisements such as direct
offers to the public' in Article 18 is used in the context of the
Community rules, with regard to the possibility of increasing
maximum advertising time to 20% of daily transmission time, by way
of example. Consequently, it may also cover other forms of
promotion, such as 'telepromotions' which, like 'direct offers to
the public', require more time than spot advertisements on account
of their method of presentation.
Slide 11
Council Directive 89/552/EEC of 3 October 1989 and in
particular Articles 1(b) and 18 thereof, must be interpreted as
meaning that the expression 'forms of advertisements such as direct
offers to the public' in Article 18 is used in the context of the
Community rules, with regard to the possibility of increasing
maximum advertising time to 20% of daily transmission time, by way
of example. Consequently, it may also cover other forms of
promotion, such as 'telepromotions' which, like 'direct offers to
the public', require more time than spot advertisements on account
of their method of presentation.
Slide 12
One of the main achievements of the directive was claimed to be
the abolition of the daily duration limit for advertising.
......................................................!
........................................................!!
...........................................................!!! What
happened soon after AMSD was adopted?
Slide 13
The Audiovisual Media Services Directive states in recital 59
that the daily limit should be abolished. In fact, if we should
still have a 12 minutes hourly limit for all forms of advertising,
that meant that we will still have a daily limit resulting by the
addition of all 24 individual hourly limits - i.e. 288 minutes per
day, i.e. 20% of the daily time. This could violently contradict
the statement on the abolition of the daily limit, which was
strongly emphasised as one of the main features of the new
directive, in all documents accompanying the audiovisual media
services directive.
Slide 14
This is why we have to look for exemptions from the hourly
limit rule in order to be sure that some forms of advertising
manage to escape this hourly limit and benefit of the abolition of
the daily limit. The logic is simple: if the hourly limit applies
with no exemptions, then there is no abolition of the daily limit.
So, let us look for such exemptions
Slide 15
Actually, the directive states in Article 18.2 that the hourly
limit shall not apply to announcements made by the broadcaster in
connection with its own programmes and ancillary products directly
derived from those programmes, sponsorship announcements and
product placements However, the mentioning of sponsorship seems
senseless, since, according to the definitions in article 1,
sponsorship is nor television advertising, neither teleshopping,
but audiovisual commercial communication. Therefore, sponsorship
could not be an exemption to a rule which is dedicated specifically
to television advertising spots and to teleshopping spots. This is
why, in that respect, paragraph 2 of article 18 seems to be rather
a useful redundant reminder, but not at all effective in setting up
exemptions.
Slide 16
As for the announcements on own programs or ancillary products,
those were so far neither under the daily limit, nor under the
hourly limit provisions. This is why we can not talk about an
abolition of the daily limits for those kinds of announcements.
What still remains as a real issue is only the mention of the
exemption of product placement from the hourly limit. Consequently,
only the product placement can benefit of the abolition of the
daily limit. But, obviously, nobody intended so far to count the
minutes of product placement, neither by hour, nor by day in any
event, this is practically impossible. On the other hand, product
placement is not an advertising spot, therefore is a meaningless to
emphasise that the hourly time limit does not aply, since it aplies
only to advertising spots.
Slide 17
Telepromotion, together with some other forms of advertising,
as said in the European Court wording, is the exemption we are
looking for. Since we find a valid exemption for the hourly limit,
then the abolition of the daily limit becomes effective.
Slide 18
Two simple questions were addressed to the commission: 1. Does
the maximum hourly duration of television advertising rule cover
also non-spot telepromotion presented during a programme? And: 2.
The answer for this question is also valid in the case of other
forms of advertising?
Slide 19
We got a letter from the commission signed by Gregory Paulger,
the general director of media directorate with very clear answers
for our two questions:
Slide 20
non spot telepromotions which cannot be considered as
advertising spots as characterised above but are intrinsecally
longer form of advertising due to their content and way of
presentation, should not be subject to the 20% hourly limit of
transmission time provided for in article 18 of AVMS Directive.
This answer is also valid in case of other forms of advertising
Answer-of-Mr-Gregory-Paulger-on- questions-from-ARCA.doc
Answer-of-Mr-Gregory-Paulger-on- questions-from-ARCA.doc
Slide 21
The most important item for our issue in that court decision is
the mention made in point 27 27 As regards telepromotion, the
Commission states that its action is directed only against
telepromotion spots. This sets the Court rulling against Spain
strictly at the level of spot telepromotions. The Court decision
was not dealing with non-spot telepromotion
Slide 22
These have a brief duration, approximately one minute, which
cannot be regarded as a duration significantly longer than that of
conventional advertising spots. Further, telepromotion spots have
the characteristic of being stock announcements which, while they
may be associated with a particular programme, because of the
presence of certain actors and particular visual elements, are
entirely independent of those programmes. Further, they are
broadcast in advertising breaks and, like conventional advertising
spots, are designed to be re-broadcast, as they very frequently
are. If we list the antonyms of the words defining the
characteristics of spot telepromotions in the above wording of the
court, we have the description on non-spot telepromotions.
Slide 23
To be integrated in the program, and not autonomous To be
produced by the broadcaster as part of his program To be not stock
products, designed to be rebroadcast To be not broadcasted during
advertising breaks The duration is not relevant, but usually lasts
longer than advertising spots
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDRI2ViNH Xc
Slide 24
European Group of Television Advertising (Association of
Television And Radio Sales Houses) issued in the guide
Understanding the AVMSD - Practical guidelines on the
implementation of the Audiovisual Media Service Directive
Slide 25
. TELEPROMOTION duration IS NOT LIMITED in the following EU
contries: Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, czech republic, Estonia,
Finlanda, Irland, Italy, Lituania, Luxemburg, Olanda, Poland and
Spain