trabucom

Transparency as an element of good governance – across both business organisations and public institutions – constitutes a key component in the stability and credibility of public and private sectors within virtually any economy, and hence, within the Spanish economy also. This is generally true of all sectors and particularly so for the audiovisual sector. This maxim has been reinforced over the last two decades – both by public institutions with the public profile of the European Ombudsman, for example, and in documents drawn up for the private sector, such as the Aldama Report in Spain. If we combine this theoretical doctrine with the general conviction that is oft-quoted in an abundant casuistry by the Spanish Constitutional Court, that the audiovisual sector in particular contributes to the creation and formation of the free exercise of public opinion and institutional guarantee of democratic systems, the hypothesis upon which this Report is founded – that transparency and good governance adopted by public and private audiovisual workers, guarantee the stability and credibility of the audiovisual sector and allow for true plurality whilst contributing to the formation of a truly free exercise of public opinion – can be easily deduced. Hence: the greater the (audiovisual) transparency, the greater the profundity of democracy. Audiovisual transparency perceived as such would necessitate accountability for the correct compliance of the (democratic) function carried out by sector workers. Based on this hypothesis, we have sought to determine to what extent the audiovisual sector has adopted the approach to transparency proposed in this study, understands its true importance and acts coherently with this idea. For which purpose, the following conceptual frameworks have been established and are listed in sequence: 1) what the concept of audiovisual transparency means to us; 2) it’s bearing on the right of access to information held by audiovisual institutions and companies; 3) practices within the Spanish audiovisual sector that are conducive to transparency.Based on this conceptual framework, we have compared real practices in the audiovisual sector with a view to identifying: 1) the sector’s perception and understanding of said conceptual framework; 2) the possible divergences and inconsistencies between what transparency ‘ought to be’ and what it ‘is’, as well as possible reasons – both endogenous and exogenous – for the attitudes of Spanish audiovisual workers; 3) the circumstances which lead the legislator to strengthen opacity and its prevalence in the Spanish audiovisual sector; 4) the areas in which the sector outperforms the legislator in the carrying out of transparency practices in the absence of any legal obligation thereupon, adopting the principles associated with good corporate governance.

The analysis of these two scenarios – how the law 'ought to be' and how the sector 'is' in practice – is undertaken during the field work that has been carried out for the purposes of this report and, to which end, has been divided into the following two categories: 1) distributing an assessment survey to Spanish audiovisual workers and, 2) undertaking analysis of institutional and corporate web pages belonging to Spanish audiovisual sector workers. The survey, distributed electronically to Spanish audiovisual workers, comprised 55 questions in which the worker was asked to (1) define transparency in terms of its components; (2) indicate the extent to which they considered their own actions and attitudes to be transparent; (3) describe their expectations for transparency in the audiovisual sector, which would be indicative of the level of commitment that each audiovisual worker would be prepared to take on. Each worker identified the Their feedback has enabled us to create graphs illustrating information on the sector as a whole as well as information that has been broken down according to which of the following three categories each worker belongs: regulatory and monitoring bodies, listed companies and unlisted companies operating in the audiovisual sector. In the event of any feedback that was found to be of particular significance, the elements of reflection on transparency – components, requirements, measures, etc. – were analysed on an individual basis and the corresponding graphs illustrate the response levels for each individual group of audiovisual sector workers.The units of measurement used are expressed predominantly as percentage. In other instances, the group has attributed an optimal value to an appropriate response, which has allowed us to relativise each worker’s response. Unsurprisingly, the evaluations carried out on the audiovisual sector are akin to the conclusions reached by the group over a two-year period and allows for discussions of a scientific nature. Prior to the electronic survey being carried out, telephone contact was established in order to identify each participant by name, surname and job title. The survey was sent with an email message outlining the project, the research objectives and how best to approach each question. Field work was carried out in stages and entailed the following:1) Identifying research study participants. This stage entailed the identification of audiovisual sector workers who would participate in the study. 1,750 workers were selected representing: a) public regulatory bodies and consultants operating in the audiovisual sector; b) public companies operating in the audiovisual sector; c) private companies operating in the audiovisual sector – differentiating between television (national, autonomous and regional) and radio broadcasters, producers, distributors and cinema exhibitors. The 1,750 workers were then narrowed down according to the following discretional criteria: business volume, amount of public funding, social relevance and sector representation. At the same time, we obtained personally identifiable information from the selected group by means of various sources (Agenda de la Comunicación, Internet, public databases). The selected workers were put through an additional selection process in which those representing public and private institutions whose information is available to the public or which is completely correct were favoured. 2) Drawing up a survey to measure the level of transparency in the audiovisual sector. As expected, the survey comprised 55 questions organised into sections as described previously. 3) Distributing the assessment survey and receiving the survey completed by audiovisual sector workers who expressed interest in participating in the field study.4) Evaluating the audiovisual sector’s response level. All assessment surveys sent to various workers with a view to determining the level of transparency in the audiovisual sector enable us to provide certain information and conduct preliminary guesswork: a) no response was given by public audiovisual companies; b) of the private companies that responded to the survey, the majority are owned by media groups that are listed on the stock exchange – the number of unlisted private firms comes in at one per cent lower; c) this lower figure may be attributable to a lower level of internalisation of transparency and information practices, which listed companies are more accustomed as a result of the legal obligations they are placed under.5) Assessing the quantitative and qualitative information received from the institutions/companies that responded to the survey. The final results were processed and the information provided by field study participants subsequently dissociated. The analysis of all sector workers’ websites sought to identify the consistency - or inconsistency, where applicable - between statements made by workers with regard to their transparency and how they achieve it in practice. Websites have been considered to be the window to both public and private institutions that are legally bound to upload certain information. We analysed 120 websites corresponding to regulatory and monitoring bodies operating in the audiovisual sector, audiovisual councils, associations and federations, as well as public and private audiovisual companies. The elements analysed corresponded to three areas of interest: corporate/institutional information and documentation, overall transparency of workers, website usability. Nineteen different elements were analysed to determine the extent to which information and documentation is available to the public. Twelve individual elements were looked at during the evaluation process in order to determine whether or not companies are transparent and, finally, four variables were considered in order to establish the level of usability for each audiovisual website. Further details of which can be found in the corresponding graphs. Whilst listed companies appear to have greater overall transparency and make more company information/documentation available, unlisted companies generate websites that are more 'user-friendly'. It is important to mention that both the results obtained from the assessment surveys and those obtained from the websites that have been analysed have been dissociated from the worker in question for the purpose of maintaining confidentiality. The structure of this research is aligned with the following set of questions with which we have sought to raise the profile of the Spanish audiovisual sector and highlight any concerns and eradicate indifference: Why must the Spanish audiovisual sector be transparent? The Spanish audiovisual sector: Does it understand the meaning of transparency? Is this sector considered to be transparent? Is it transparent in practice? What does informative transparency mean for those working within the Spanish audiovisual sector? The right of access to information: Does is favour transparency in the audiovisual sector? Does the Spanish audiovisual sector guarantee the right of public access to information? Which specific areas of the Spanish audiovisual sector must transparency be seen in? How are corporate entities affected by transparency in the audiovisual sector? When are audiovisual policies transparent? Is there a relationship between transparency and right of access to sector information and documentation and good governance within the audiovisual sector? How are audiovisual workers able to achieve greater transparency? Is the Spanish audiovisual sector able to increase its levels of transparency over the next five years? And finally, we have set out Ten Commandments as a guide to achieving transparency in the audiovisual sector.






*	Publicacations
*	Conferences



		Transparency as an element of good governance – across both business organisations and public institutions – constitutes a key component in the stability and credibility of public and private sectors within virtually any economy, and hence, within the Spanish economy also. This is generally true of all sectors and particularly so for the audiovisual sector. This maxim has been reinforced over the last two decades – both by public institutions with the public profile of the European Ombudsman, for example, and in documents drawn up for the private sector, such as the Aldama Report in Spain. If we combine this theoretical doctrine with the general conviction that is oft-quoted in an abundant casuistry by the Spanish Constitutional Court, that the audiovisual sector in particular contributes to the creation and formation of the free exercise of public opinion and institutional guarantee of democratic systems, the hypothesis upon which this Report is founded – that transparency and good governance adopted by public and private audiovisual workers, guarantee the stability and credibility of the audiovisual sector and allow for true plurality whilst contributing to the formation of a truly free exercise of public opinion – can be easily deduced. Hence: the greater the (audiovisual) transparency, the greater the profundity of democracy. Audiovisual transparency perceived as such would necessitate accountability for the correct compliance of the (democratic) function carried out by sector workers. Based on this hypothesis, we have sought to determine to what extent the audiovisual sector has adopted the approach to transparency proposed in this study, understands its true importance and acts coherently with this idea. For which purpose, the following conceptual frameworks have been established and are listed in sequence: 1) what the concept of audiovisual transparency means to us; 2) it’s bearing on the right of access to information held by audiovisual institutions and companies; 3) practices within the Spanish audiovisual sector that are conducive to transparency.Based on this conceptual framework, we have compared real practices in the audiovisual sector with a view to identifying: 1) the sector’s perception and understanding of said conceptual framework; 2) the possible divergences and inconsistencies between what transparency ‘ought to be’ and what it ‘is’, as well as possible reasons – both endogenous and exogenous – for the attitudes of Spanish audiovisual workers; 3) the circumstances which lead the legislator to strengthen opacity and its prevalence in the Spanish audiovisual sector; 4) the areas in which the sector outperforms the legislator in the carrying out of transparency practices in the absence of any legal obligation thereupon, adopting the principles associated with good corporate governance. The analysis of these two scenarios – how the law 'ought to be' and how the sector 'is' in practice – is undertaken during the field work that has been carried out for the purposes of this report and, to which end, has been divided into the following two categories: 1) distributing an assessment survey to Spanish audiovisual workers and, 2) undertaking analysis of institutional and corporate web pages belonging to Spanish audiovisual sector workers. The survey, distributed electronically to Spanish audiovisual workers, comprised 55 questions in which the worker was asked to (1) define transparency in terms of its components; (2) indicate the extent to which they considered their own actions and attitudes to be transparent; (3) describe their expectations for transparency in the audiovisual sector, which would be indicative of the level of commitment that each audiovisual worker would be prepared to take on. Each worker identified the Their feedback has enabled us to create graphs illustrating information on the sector as a whole as well as information that has been broken down according to which of the following three categories each worker belongs: regulatory and monitoring bodies, listed companies and unlisted companies operating in the audiovisual sector. In the event of any feedback that was found to be of particular significance, the elements of reflection on transparency – components, requirements, measures, etc. – were analysed on an individual basis and the corresponding graphs illustrate the response levels for each individual group of audiovisual sector workers.The units of measurement used are expressed predominantly as percentage. In other instances, the group has attributed an optimal value to an appropriate response, which has allowed us to relativise each worker’s response. Unsurprisingly, the evaluations carried out on the audiovisual sector are akin to the conclusions reached by the group over a two-year period and allows for discussions of a scientific nature. Prior to the electronic survey being carried out, telephone contact was established in order to identify each participant by name, surname and job title. The survey was sent with an email message outlining the project, the research objectives and how best to approach each question. Field work was carried out in stages and entailed the following:1) Identifying research study participants. This stage entailed the identification of audiovisual sector workers who would participate in the study. 1,750 workers were selected representing: a) public regulatory bodies and consultants operating in the audiovisual sector; b) public companies operating in the audiovisual sector; c) private companies operating in the audiovisual sector – differentiating between television (national, autonomous and regional) and radio broadcasters, producers, distributors and cinema exhibitors. The 1,750 workers were then narrowed down according to the following discretional criteria: business volume, amount of public funding, social relevance and sector representation. At the same time, we obtained personally identifiable information from the selected group by means of various sources (Agenda de la Comunicación, Internet, public databases). The selected workers were put through an additional selection process in which those representing public and private institutions whose information is available to the public or which is completely correct were favoured. 2) Drawing up a survey to measure the level of transparency in the audiovisual sector. As expected, the survey comprised 55 questions organised into sections as described previously. 3) Distributing the assessment survey and receiving the survey completed by audiovisual sector workers who expressed interest in participating in the field study.4) Evaluating the audiovisual sector’s response level. All assessment surveys sent to various workers with a view to determining the level of transparency in the audiovisual sector enable us to provide certain information and conduct preliminary guesswork: a) no response was given by public audiovisual companies; b) of the private companies that responded to the survey, the majority are owned by media groups that are listed on the stock exchange – the number of unlisted private firms comes in at one per cent lower; c) this lower figure may be attributable to a lower level of internalisation of transparency and information practices, which listed companies are more accustomed as a result of the legal obligations they are placed under.5) Assessing the quantitative and qualitative information received from the institutions/companies that responded to the survey. The final results were processed and the information provided by field study participants subsequently dissociated. The analysis of all sector workers’ websites sought to identify the consistency - or inconsistency, where applicable - between statements made by workers with regard to their transparency and how they achieve it in practice. Websites have been considered to be the window to both public and private institutions that are legally bound to upload certain information. We analysed 120 websites corresponding to regulatory and monitoring bodies operating in the audiovisual sector, audiovisual councils, associations and federations, as well as public and private audiovisual companies. The elements analysed corresponded to three areas of interest: corporate/institutional information and documentation, overall transparency of workers, website usability. Nineteen different elements were analysed to determine the extent to which information and documentation is available to the public. Twelve individual elements were looked at during the evaluation process in order to determine whether or not companies are transparent and, finally, four variables were considered in order to establish the level of usability for each audiovisual website. Further details of which can be found in the corresponding graphs. Whilst listed companies appear to have greater overall transparency and make more company information/documentation available, unlisted companies generate websites that are more 'user-friendly'. It is important to mention that both the results obtained from the assessment surveys and those obtained from the websites that have been analysed have been dissociated from the worker in question for the purpose of maintaining confidentiality. The structure of this research is aligned with the following set of questions with which we have sought to raise the profile of the Spanish audiovisual sector and highlight any concerns and eradicate indifference: Why must the Spanish audiovisual sector be transparent? The Spanish audiovisual sector: Does it understand the meaning of transparency? Is this sector considered to be transparent? Is it transparent in practice? What does informative transparency mean for those working within the Spanish audiovisual sector? The right of access to information: Does is favour transparency in the audiovisual sector? Does the Spanish audiovisual sector guarantee the right of public access to information? Which specific areas of the Spanish audiovisual sector must transparency be seen in? How are corporate entities affected by transparency in the audiovisual sector? When are audiovisual policies transparent? Is there a relationship between transparency and right of access to sector information and documentation and good governance within the audiovisual sector? How are audiovisual workers able to achieve greater transparency? Is the Spanish audiovisual sector able to increase its levels of transparency over the next five years? And finally, we have set out Ten Commandments as a guide to achieving transparency in the audiovisual sector.

		Index