C Explanatory memorandum by Ms Blondin,
rapporteur for opinion
1. The subject of “violence and the media” is highly
complex in our modern society, where development and diversification
of the media are constant, while forms of violence against others,
whether adults or children, are multiplying. In this respect, I
should like to congratulate my colleague, Sir Roger Gale, for such
a careful consideration of this problem in all its aspects, making
a distinction between the stimulation of violence by the media (violence
which subsequently occurs in real life) and the violent depictions
and expressions in the media which are already in themselves violations
of human rights (such as cyber-bullying).
2. The report by the Committee on Culture, Science, Education
and Media also highlights the responsibility of the various stakeholders
concerned, including the State, the media industry, the education
system, families and children themselves, while specifying their
respective roles in this sphere. For example, the explanatory memorandum
does refer to children as being particularly vulnerable vis-à-vis
the media, while giving particular attention to violence against
children committed by adults who have seen violent depictions in
the media and in video games. However, some of these problems are
not expressed in the draft resolution, which does not emphasise
children’s particular vulnerability. On the other hand, the roles
of the media industry and the member States, as well as the interaction
required between them, are well addressed in the explanatory memorandum
and in the texts proposed for debate in the Assembly.
3. As a member of the Committee on Social Affairs, Health and
Sustainable Development, which has always given top priority to
questions connected with children’s rights, particularly in recent
years, I should like first to propose some amendments to the draft
resolution and recommendation which would make clearer the role
and vulnerability of children in a media context. This highly complex
subject, dealt with
inter alia during the preparation
of
Recommendation 1466
(2000) on media education and, very recently, in
Resolution 1986 (2014) on improving user protection and security in cyberspace,
could in theory be the subject of a new separate report. In the
meantime, however, it should at least be given a little more emphasis
in the present report, for the following reasons:
.1 With the development of the
Internet and other media, children are increasingly exposed to the risks
linked with these new technologies, such as child abuse images,
often produced based on sexual aggressions against children in disadvantaged
countries and for customers of richer countries (see
Resolution 1834 (2011) and
Recommendation
1980 (2011) on combating “child abuse images” through committed,
transversal and internationally co-ordinated action, and the explanatory
memorandum thereto).
.2 Children (up to the age of 18, as defined by the United
Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child) are to the fore amongst
today’s users of new media, with ever earlier access to the Internet
and mobile devices, and developing skills for media use at an increasingly
early age. The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) said,
already back in 2009, that children were spending approximately 43.3
hours a month on the Internet.
Note We
can assume that, given the increasing amount of IT equipment available
to households, these figures will now be higher in 2014.
.3 Some very interesting work has been done across Europe
on the effects of media use on children and their development, and
on ways of preventing children from coming into contact with violent
content at too early a stage. By way of example, French research
scientist Serge Tisseron, a doctor of psychology at the University
of Paris VII Denis Diderot, came up with the “3-6-9-12 rule” in
2007 and has subsequently carried out other relevant activities
in close co-operation with the French Government. The rule, now
familiar to children’s rights activists in Europe, recommends that
the following principles be applied to media use by children: 1)
no screens before the age of three; 2) no portable games consoles before
the age of six; 3) no Internet before the age of nine; 4) unsupervised
Internet use from the age of 12; 5) teaching children how to use
the media and supervising their media usage.
Note
.4 A large number of European countries have developed fairly
exemplary programmes to raise children’s (and their parents’ and
other educators’) awareness and teach them about the new media, notably
through classification systems. Without quoting examples, which
are now too numerous, it seems obvious that good practices could
be better spread through exchanges between all European stakeholders.
4. It also seems that it would be useful to propose some amendments
to the Culture Committee’s texts to make them more concrete and
to strengthen the “operational” part of the draft resolution, which
currently appears as a list of “principles”, whereas it already
contains some highly concrete and innovative measures.
5. Finally, the amendments proposed to the draft recommendation
are intended to alert the Committee of Ministers in this sphere
in a more encouraging manner. For many years, the Council of Europe
has been conducting activities in the field of human rights and
media, for example in the context of its Steering Committee on Media
and Information Society (CDMSI). Opportunities for co-operation
between governments and private stakeholders have already been explored
in depth, and co-operation put into practice under the Internet Governance
programme to which the explanatory memorandum refers. It quotes,
for instance, the Human Rights Guidelines for Internet Service Providers.
That work, which I do not wish to present in too much detail here,
affords a good basis for the work to be done at European level.
6. Following on from these general comments, and with the wish
to make a constructive contribution to the texts prepared by my
colleague, here are the amendments proposed to the draft resolution
and recommendation, together with the reasons for proposing them:
- Amendment
A is intended to add detail to the draft resolution about
the media concerned;
- Amendments B, C, D and then
G endeavour to consider children more specifically, recalling
their particular vulnerability in this context and the subtle way
in which they are involved in violent depictions in the media;
- Amendment E is
designed to strengthen the text of the draft resolution by calling
on the main stakeholders to take very concrete measures (and not
pursue “principles” which seem easier to ignore);
- Amendment F is
intended to complete the list of measures to be taken by member
States in order to prevent the violence conveyed through the media
and to raise awareness of their consequences amongst all stakeholders;
- Amendment H very
slightly reformulates the existing sentence in order to emphasise
the fact that the mere presence of violence in the media represents
a problem, without awaiting various potential consequences;
- Finally, Amendment I attempts
to specify the role of the Committee of Ministers and the governmental bodies
of the Council of Europe, which do not themselves make in-depth
assessments in this sphere, but are more initiators of such discussions
amongst other key stakeholders.
