Farid Sufian Shuaib Assistant Professor Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah of Laws International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) First International SEARCH Conference Sheraton Subang, May 2009

Introduction Competition law and the media Intra-media and cross media ownership in Malaysia Malaysian Law Methods in achieving media pluralism Disqualification Public and Private Ownership Accumulation of interest Cross-media ownership Concluding remarks 2

rely on the mass media for our daily consumption of information, knowledge and opinions freedom from interference of the state in the running of the media However, in discussing ownership of the media, the state is calls to regulate concentration of media ownership State intervention is justified to serve the interest of free speech by ensuring diversity and plurality of ideas and sources of information 3

Competition law aims at preventing monopoly power because: corporation with monopoly will charge excessive pricing have no incentive to produce quality product Prevent newcomers free communication principle provide the public forum in democracy information regarding the policy and performance of the government Contraindications for competition law media convergence and economy of scale 4

takeover of Utusan Melayu in 1961 newspapers that seem to be independent would be “turned-over” through ownership control - Nanyang Siang Pau “the powers that be are always portrayed in a positive light while differing and dissenting views are either distorted or throttled” cross-media - the newspapers, free-to-air television stations and paid-to-air televisions – Media Prima Bhd

not impose restriction on intra-media and cross-media monopoly Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984 that governs printed publications does not have any provision Communications and Multimedia Act 1988 that governs other media contains only vague provisions on anticompetitive conduct “a licensee shall not engage in any conduct which has the purpose of substantially lessening competition in a communications market” 6

The Act does not provide the need to ensure diversity and freedom of expression as considerations in anticompetitive conducts or monopoly However, it is arguable that cross-media mergers – as conducted by Media Prima Bhd – could be interpreted as an anticompetitive conduct promotion of civil society “where information-based services will provide the basis of continuing enhancements to quality of work and life” as one of the national policies to be achieved under the Act 7

Disqualification Eg: to prohibit political party from owning the mass media – English law Public and Private Ownership Media corporation -a commercial company interested in producing services that could provide handsome return offset by providing a public body that have no need to satisfy commercial interest and economic survival BBC-editorial set up is specifically design to be free from the political and commercial pressure RTM1 and RTM2 no guarantee of editorial Minister -meant to be the mouthpiece of the government 8

Accumulation of interest – prevented from accumulating interest base on market share by referring to its readership and audience – Mergers of newspaper may be restricted base on a given average circulation of copies per day – Australia and UK – Cross-media ownership – occurs when the same person or corporation own or have control over more than one medium for instance of the press, television and radio – The prohibition may be absolute or it may depend on the readership and audience of the medium 9

Mass media is too important an entity to be left alone to the market forces. To ensure that it could perform its role in state governance and free speech, competition law is used to attain diversity of opinions and ideas. In this regard, Malaysian laws are sorely lacking. 10

11 THANK YOU