Between inde­pen­dence, state and market 

What is the role of the media in our society?

As the fourth estate, they play a very important role in demo­cracy, espe­ci­ally in refe­ren­dums and elec­tions, but also in other rele­vant issues. In-depth jour­na­li­stic work is essen­tial. Where the market cannot guaran­tee the diver­sity we want in the media land­scape, finan­cial support is needed from the public, the cantons or the fede­ral government.

Parlia­ment is curr­ently occu­p­ied with various aspects of media policy. What should press and news media funding ideally look like?

The important thing is that press funding ought to be provi­ded inde­pendently of the chan­nel and busi­ness model. Today, subscrip­ti­ons are widely regarded as the leading model for indi­rect press subsi­dies and paper prin­ting and ship­ping as the leading chan­nel for guaran­te­e­ing quality.

Indi­rect press subsi­dies subsi­dise the deli­very of news­pa­pers and maga­zi­nes. Do you regard that as problematic?

Yes, because it means we are inves­t­ing in the past, in preser­ving the prin­ted news­pa­per and the subscrip­tion model, instead of in the future, in the online sector, towards which the media of the future must orien­tate them­sel­ves. It also distorts compe­ti­tion by putting online media and busi­ness models that work without a subscrip­tion at a disad­van­tage. The finan­cing of the media company may be through spon­sors, adver­ti­sing reve­nue or other­wise. Even a medium that deci­des to make its content available to the public free of charge must not be disad­van­ta­ged. The funding of digi­tal media should be possi­ble in the same way as the tradi­tio­nal chan­nels. What counts is the content. The medium must produce rele­vant content.

That’s why you’re commit­ted to chan­nel-inde­pen­dent media funding. In a postu­late, you asked the Fede­ral Coun­cil to answer ques­ti­ons about future-orien­ted media funding.

Although Albert Rösti is respon­si­ble for the report – and we know the posi­tion of the SVP on the issue of media funding – I found the report to be very progres­sive. It is very forward-looking. It conta­ins what I perso­nally expec­ted from a report on media funding that is meant to be forward-looking. Even if the Fede­ral Coun­cil does not want to state its posi­tion clearly on a few key points, their analy­sis of the current state of affairs is extre­mely good.

What is the state of play today?

We are in the process of imple­men­ting it. The TTC‑N parlia­men­tary commit­tee has taken up certain points. In the Natio­nal Coun­cil, we have alre­ady discus­sed and adopted the commit­tee motion ‘Einfüh­rung kanal- und geschäfts­mo­dell­un­ab­hän­gi­ger Förde­rung elek­tro­ni­scher Medien‘’ [‘Intro­du­cing the promo­tion of elec­tro­nic media regard­less of chan­nel or busi­ness model’], which emer­ged from the postu­late report. Now it’s the turn of the Coun­cil of States – proba­bly in the winter session. It’s important to push this forward now. 

What is the time frame for imple­men­ting the first measures?

The points that have now been put forward and were alre­ady included in the last media package should be imple­men­ted rela­tively quickly. When it comes to online media, it may take a little longer. Last but not least, the initia­tive calling for the Swiss TV and radio licence fee to be redu­ced by almost half (the ‘SRG-Halbie­rungs­in­itia­tive’) also sends us a message. All these poli­ti­cal affairs are interlinked.

Do you see a consen­sus in Parlia­ment in favour of targe­ted support for media diversity?

In prin­ci­pal, I see a majo­rity. But the chall­enge lies in the details. It’s a complex matter. We would have to funda­men­tally rethink all media support. How do you create an umbrella over all media so that those who need it receive state support? At the same time, state support must not distort the market. The topic of the SRG [Swiss Broad­cas­ting Corpo­ra­tion] has now been added to the entire media funding package. The halving initia­tive is curr­ently caus­ing a lot of discus­sion, and one of the main issues here is that the SRG, effec­tively as a state player, is now start­ing to compete more and more with private media compa­nies. That should not be the case, and we must address this issue. Under­stan­d­a­bly and neces­s­a­rily, the SRG must now also invest in the online sector, because that is where the future lies. Howe­ver, there are private market provi­ders who see them­sel­ves at a disad­van­tage as a result. The SRG should not be preven­ted from ente­ring the online market, nor should it be possi­ble to have a state-funded player as an over­powe­ring compe­ti­tor on the market that would crowd out the small local media compa­nies. So we still have bigger ques­ti­ons that need to be clarified.

Why do we even need state media funding?

That depends on how you define public service. And the key ques­tion is: where does the market play a role and where does it not? I am a libe­ral poli­ti­cian. When­ever possi­ble, it should be hand­led by the private market. The state should only inter­vene as long as it is needed.

And this is the case with the media?

We have to ask oursel­ves honestly how strong a role the market still plays in order to obtain both regio­nal and natio­nal infor­ma­tion of a certain quality and depth. The market plays its part in prin­ci­ple, but it plays on a diffe­rent instrument.

Meaning?

We’re talking about inter­na­tio­nal plat­forms and fast media coverage, which tend to remain super­fi­cial. Although they gene­rally provide infor­ma­tion about what’s going on, there is a lack of in-depth rese­arch on a parti­cu­lar topic, parti­cu­larly in the case of local events, such as regio­nal elec­tions. The market is not strong enough here. Willing­ness to pay for this service is decli­ning. I see this in young people. They are very well infor­med, but they often remain very much on the surface. They are seldom willing to read a media article from A to Z, unless it is a topic that inte­rests them in particular.

Is the youn­ger gene­ra­tion growing up in a media envi­ron­ment that does not meet their needs?

I wouldn’t say that. Most media outlets have a good online offe­ring. The problem is that young people are not willing to pay. That’s why I came up with the idea of media vouch­ers for 16- to 25-year-olds. Vouch­ers would let them actually learn the diffe­rence between media that are available free of charge and those that cost money. They would learn to gauge the value of the two types. Howe­ver, it is not only up to the young. The media must also adapt.

What can they do?

You need an offe­ring that works differ­ently in terms of struc­ture. Let’s take Spotify as an exam­ple. When all the music was available online and the music indus­try was on the brink, the indus­try had to reor­ga­nise itself. And the solu­tion was convin­cing: one login, one plat­form. With Spotify, young people are willing to pay their first five francs out of their pocket money. The media land­scape does not yet offer the kind of access to and hand­ling of services in the way that would be neces­sary. In my opinion, we need a plat­form where I can pay a monthly amount and put toge­ther what inte­rests me from the various media titles. It’s diffi­cult when I have to buy a subscrip­tion for every news­pa­per or log in every time to pay a franc for an article I want to read. The hand­ling is still poor. I hope there will be some innovation.

Isn’t there a risk that govern­ment funding will delay the deve­lo­p­ment of the media because it reli­e­ves the pres­sure to respond promptly to social and tech­no­lo­gi­cal deve­lo­p­ments? Indi­rect media subsi­dies may also keep certain prin­ted publi­ca­ti­ons alive that are no longer econo­mic­ally viable or sustainable today.

I agree with you whole­he­ar­tedly on this point. I also rejec­ted the media package. We should invest in the future and support the media in their trans­for­ma­tion into the digi­tal world. If we support the big media compa­nies with things like early and Sunday deli­veries, we will compete with online media exactly where they have their natu­ral advan­tage. Support for the funding of prin­ted publi­ca­ti­ons is an outda­ted model. Of course, there is still a part of the popu­la­tion who consume print media, and we have to let that conti­nue. We don’t want that banned. But if state funding wants to streng­then diver­sity in the coun­try, digi­tal media should be promo­ted, espe­ci­ally local start-ups. This is where most of the support should go, and not to the big estab­lished corpo­ra­ti­ons, which then have even less incen­tive to move forward in the digi­tal sector. 

In that case, wouldn’t it make sense to link the funding to a chari­ta­ble model, for example?

The funding should not be linked to a busi­ness model. We must design the laws in such a way that funding is also right for the future. There are subscrip­tion-only models, then there are models with adver­ti­sing where I can switch off the ads by purcha­sing a subscrip­tion, and in a few years, there may be new models again. Of course, we need to make any support degres­sive – and we have always done so with the propo­sals on media support. This ensu­res that smal­ler compa­nies can profit more than the large corpo­ra­ti­ons. A start-up needs more support, espe­ci­ally at the begin­ning. After all, we want to promote diver­sity. We need to imple­ment the support in detail in such a way that we create the right incen­ti­ves to achieve our objectives.

Which media titles do you consume?

Actually, I consume all media. I focus mainly on the regio­nal media in Basel. And, of course, it’s impos­si­ble for me to consume all media every day. That’s where I set prio­ri­ties and check whether there’s anything that affects me or my commit­tee work and that I should engage with in grea­ter depth. I see it as my duty as a poli­ti­cian to keep myself infor­med across all media.

And which chan­nel do you use to consume the media?

For me, ever­y­thing that’s available digi­tally is all the same to me.

How would you rate the offering?

I’m very well served in Basel-Stadt. In addi­tion to Tamedia’s Basler Zeitung and CH Media’s BZ, we have at least three online media outlets that offer excel­lent local coverage. They report on elec­tions, refe­ren­dums and other local events. All three are finan­ced differ­ently and publish online. It would be nice if other regi­ons in Switz­er­land also had such diversity.

Today, as a poli­ti­cian, you can commu­ni­cate with your elec­to­rate yours­elf via various chan­nels. Do inde­pen­dent media even add value for you as a politician?

An inde­pen­dent media land­scape means that there are media titles with a certain poli­ti­cal tinge. And that’s a good thing. But that is why we abso­lut­ely need diver­sity. In addi­tion, we have the SRG, which we expect to report with as much poli­ti­cal neutra­lity as possi­ble, and to put the argu­ments of all parties on the table. 

Has the media land­scape chan­ged since the begin­ning of your poli­ti­cal work? Has it become more diffi­cult for a party to get its messa­ges across in the media because pola­ri­sa­tion favours more extreme parties?

Media coverage has deve­lo­ped in paral­lel with poli­ti­cal events. With the streng­thening of some poli­ti­cal parties or parlia­men­tary groups, the media are also incre­asingly focu­sing on their opini­ons, which are in demand among the popu­la­tion. When I star­ted to be invol­ved in poli­tics at the natio­nal level, the envi­ron­ment was a bit more progres­sive and cosmo­po­li­tan. It was shaped by more ecology, more women in poli­tics, more open­ness, and it was more forward-looking. After the pande­mic and the war in Europe, that has really chan­ged. I’m noti­cing grea­ter levels of closed-minded­ness and a more conser­va­tive direc­tion. People are with­dra­wing. They want to protect them­sel­ves more, set them­sel­ves apart more; they are more afraid and have less money. This will change the elec­tion results and media coverage. There may be fewer readers inte­res­ted in nuan­ced posi­ti­ons. Media reports are ther­e­fore more likely to focus their coverage on the poli­ti­cal extremes. 

Do you use the various media chan­nels differ­ently? Are you more cautious when it comes to online media, for example?

I haven’t chan­ged. As a lawyer, I was trai­ned in this early on. That’s why I’ve always been aware that when I say some­thing, I’m saying it to the public. The online chan­nels on which we can commu­ni­cate have certainly chan­ged. The switch from Twit­ter to X has meant a major shift. Face­book is also less suited to poli­ti­cal state­ments these days. While Insta­gram is still used by ever­yone, moving to TikTok means swit­ching to a chan­nel that is less suited to in-depth content. Over­all, it is beco­ming harder to decide which chan­nels we oursel­ves want to use to commu­ni­cate. For me, the leading chan­nel is LinkedIn.

What about tradi­tio­nal media?

When a topic is covered in the media, it is still very valuable. I can then share this on social media along with a perso­nal comment. I’m sure the public percei­ves this differ­ently than if I were to just express my perso­nal opinion.